Sky remains the home of Premier League football

[dms05]

I'd always thought BT's sole strategy was to broadcast content over copper/fiber rather than compete via terrestrial/satellite. So acquiring a transponder(s) on Astra2 doesn't make sense for BT (even if they can find one available and Ofcom give then a broadcasting license using a new encryption technology). BT's reasons for investing in PL football is to promote their own web based platform as a competitor to Sky's well established satellite distribution. It will be interesting to see how the BT challenge goes as ESPN couldn't make a serious dent on Sky's position when they chose an identical distribution network to Sky. All that seems clear is the customer will have to pay more with two subscriptions to receive pretty well what he's getting today from a single supplier.

[AdamBrunt]

I'd always thought BT's sole strategy was to broadcast content over copper/fiber rather than compete via terrestrial/satellite. So acquiring a transponder(s) on Astra2 doesn't make sense for BT (even if they can find one available and Ofcom give then a broadcasting license using a new encryption technology). BT's reasons for investing in PL football is to promote their own web based platform as a competitor to Sky's well established satellite distribution.

Surely letting Sky's userbase add a BT channel to their existing setup (guaranteeing quality of picture) rather than insisting they switch ISP AND having no control over the quality of the stream once it enters the subscriber's property is perfectly sensisble. Restricting subscribers to one way of watching is what caused OnDigital to go belly up when they had some of the rights.

It will be interesting to see how the BT challenge goes as ESPN couldn't make a serious dent on Sky's position when they chose an identical distribution network to Sky. All that seems clear is the customer will have to pay more with two subscriptions to receive pretty well what he's getting today from a single supplier.

The key difference between BT and ESPN is that BT have practically got 50% of the 1st picks whereas ESPN got none of them. That will be a big draw for BT.

All that seems clear is the customer will have to pay more with two subscriptions to receive pretty well what he's getting today from a single supplier.

This is true. Currently, as said above, ESPN have rubbish games so there is not so much of an incentive to subscribe to their service.

[Fryingpan77]

l myself got priced out of sky sports, the packages where to expensive for me. Used to like watching the footy. If BT is well priced, I might be tempted.

[Scubbie]

Just to add my 2 pennies to this thread, BT Vision is only available on BT's Broadband. Some other ISPs can also access it, such as Post Office Broadband.

It will be fun to see how BT plan to make their new PL matches available to people, but it is some time away yet so there is enough time to get all this resolved.

[deadman1984]

i think its good that sky is keeping the football rights mostly to sky customers otherwise if bt had all the games i wouldn't be happy lol

[dms05]

Two weeks on from the initial announcement and an interesting analysis in the the Daily Telegraph under the headline "BT Vision will lose £240m on its gamble to buy into Premier League football coverage, analysts have claimed." BT 'to lose £240m' on Premier League bet - Telegraph

"They also cautioned that the "quantity and quality" of BT's football games would be "a long way behind" BSkyB's and that BT would effectively be forced to wholesale its rights to BSkyB for economic reasons."

BT themselves have said "....the games would serve as a "calling card" to help it sell other services, such as its super-fast fibre broadband, and also stem the flow of customers moving their internet and telephone services to BSkyB and Virgin Media."

All of which sound like we will have to pay twice to receive the football we are currently receiving by paying once.