"Virtual SPFL season ticket" on its way from Sky

I'm trying to understand what they're proposing here. Sky are allowing clubs (eg Rangers TV) to live stream our matches, if we pay for virtual STs, to help clubs out financially. So presumably the price of those VSTs would give a fair proportion to Sky - who are also accepting a vastly reduced and over 5 years penalty payment for early season closure.

What the feck are they going to charge punters for this to make it viable and how will they deal with those of us already having paid for an actual ST? You would hope/assume they wouldn't have the gall to charge us again for something we've already paid to see in the flesh.

I'm defo not paying more money to watch streaming - which is not the most reliable at the best of times - while they've got my ticket money for my seat already and they've also got a lot of additional money from punters who have chosen to sign up to MyGers.

Really need to see the details of this.
 
g87 said:
You wont have to pay the money to sky, the headline is misleading.
Click to expand...

I struggle to see why this would be a goer at all if Sky aren't getting a share. They're writing off a huge chunk of money the SPFL owe them, allowing the remainder to be paid over 5 years AND allowing all this additional broadcasting to happen for nothing? No chance.
 
So the narrative is Doncaster deserves a pat on the back for negotiating down the the rebate due to sky which what packaged into the vote as the only way no liability would be due? FFS, surely one of these low life chairman would have something to say about that? Nheil will probably treat himself to a pay rise!

For what it’s worth, I’d take the virtual season ticket until we can be back at Ibrox, I wouldn’t be looking for a credit unless we miss the whole season.
 
It's about time the TV deal is took off the table and clubs themselves are allowed to show there games on club TV channels bring back Rangers TV on satellite boxes and show all the games there the rest of the clubs to deserve to piggy back on the Old Firms pull.
 
Forfar_Bear said:
IIRC James Bisgrove mentioned in one of his interviews how they need to provide value to ST holders should they not be able to attend in the season, and providing them a stream of the game was mentioned.

I would assume, 5a 'Virtual' ST,, would effectively be the same as the already paid for ST.
Click to expand...

There is no way a virtual ST is of the same value as a normal ST.

A worldwide Rangers tv package and a VPN could see you watch all Rangers league games for little more than £230 last season.

Also not every ST holder would need a virtual ST as many will live in the same household or have family or friends that they can have over or visit to watch the game.

It is a massive quandry for the club as they will want to retain as much ST money as they can.
 
Delboy Trotter said:
Here’s a mad idea, why don’t the club credit the following seasons season ticket cost with the amount of games we miss out on this season

I’m not interested in any vouchers for stadium tours or soccer schools
Click to expand...

Because that will dilute the funds needed to run the club next season.
 
So apparently it was only null and void that would have resulted in handling back Sky £5.5 million but now it comes out after the vote to hand them a tainted title all Scottish clubs face having to pay Sky back £1.5 million, I am sure all those idiots that voted this through are proud of themselves.
 
Wait- Bheast fans will get to watch Rangers vs St Mirren free because they have paid for a Bheast FC season ticket ?

Er naw.
 
Bluenose1979 said:
I'm trying to understand what they're proposing here. Sky are allowing clubs (eg Rangers TV) to live stream our matches, if we pay for virtual STs, to help clubs out financially. So presumably the price of those VSTs would give a fair proportion to Sky - who are also accepting a vastly reduced and over 5 years penalty payment for early season closure.

What the feck are they going to charge punters for this to make it viable and how will they deal with those of us already having paid for an actual ST? You would hope/assume they wouldn't have the gall to charge us again for something we've already paid to see in the flesh.

I'm defo not paying more money to watch streaming - which is not the most reliable at the best of times - while they've got my ticket money for my seat already and they've also got a lot of additional money from punters who have chosen to sign up to MyGers.

Really need to see the details of this.
Click to expand...
Not sure sky will be involved in the streaming it will only be for games they aren't showing. So they will have away games and 4 home games. The other home games will be on the virtual season ticket
 
Duranman said:
Rtv would need to up its game big time if this were to happen. I feel for those that have no other way to see us play. I had to watch all of our games on it from November to February this year as I was recovering from surgery.

The picture is awful, the main commentator is far too loud and from what I gather they have connection issues as it is.

Servers would need a hell of an upgrade to cope with all the extra traffic.
Click to expand...
This big time, I was trying to watch Rangers TV last season via an I.P address hidder and had to stop using it as the games where unwatchable. I had to watch via other means as the streams kept on buffering so hopefully Rangers try and get their own channel on Sky like they had years ago as all our season ticket holders online would not work.
 
it really is only a matter of time before everyone has a VPN and uses RTV or even another non-Sky/SPFL stream.
i have been saying for years that these league deal models are doomed o fail eventually and it can only be good news for really well supported clubs like ourselves.
 
barrheadbear said:
Because that will dilute the funds needed to run the club next season.
Click to expand...

Well in that case the club should consider selling a player to offset some of the cost

We all want a successful team on the park but Im sorry, there comes a point where the fans can’t be taken the piss out of indefinitely.

The £25 voucher for 5 remaining home games was an insult especially in the current times.

To take full ST money off of us knowing we’d miss probably half the season due to the virus, and not compensate us for missed games would be robbery in all honesty and unless fans are adequately compensated, there will be a hell of a lot of angry fans
 
BlueLedbetter said:
Not sure sky will be involved in the streaming it will only be for games they aren't showing. So they will have away games and 4 home games. The other home games will be on the virtual season ticket
Click to expand...

No, Sky won't necessarily be involved in the streaming, but for this deal to even be required they must have to allow a change in the rights agreements, etc around games so they can be made available in the UK to fans live.

The point remains, why Sky would make a series of concessions to the SPFL's benefit without any kind of return, and indeed a multimillion pound loss on what they are entitled to?
 
An article with very little substance almost written to covertly include the money owed to Sky.

Unbelievable that the season was called so early with such a relatively large fee for not completing the season. In particular, with many leagues, such as in England, now resuming. Surely, any loss of money from no fans for the remaining games would have been less than the Sky charge for non completing the season?!
 
Walters80 said:
Makes sense as a lot people won't buy a season tickets to potentially only see about 10-20% of the games they've paid for.

A PPV option for non ST holders might bring in a fair amount over the season as well.
Click to expand...
This. It should be part of the season ticket with any other home games available to others for purchase on a game by game basis.
 
cooprfc said:
You're absolutely right mate. Every other club in the world has come out and told us what they are doing and Rangers haven't.

Nobody knows at the moment.
Click to expand...
WTF. I don’t think a single club anywhere in the world knows what’s going to happen in October/ November etc. Why are you digging up Rangers?
 
Delboy Trotter said:
Well in that case the club should consider selling a player to offset some of the cost

We all want a successful team on the park but Im sorry, there comes a point where the fans can’t be taken the piss out of indefinitely.

The £25 voucher for 5 remaining home games was an insult especially in the current times.

To take full ST money off of us knowing we’d miss probably half the season due to the virus, and not compensate us for missed games would be robbery in all honesty and unless fans are adequately compensated, there will be a hell of a lot of angry fans
Click to expand...

Cannot disagree.

The club should be engaging with the support. We all want a successful team on the park and every £ from the support helps achieve this.

Some within our support have already stated that they will happily give the club their full ST money for the coming season no matter what they receive in return but the club just cannot assume that every fan feels the same way.

I suppose we will just have to wait and see what the club offers.
 
Would it only be for home games? And would it include Old Firm games? Can't see Sky letting people watch games that are on Sky on anything else.
 
JeffreySpauIding said:
Would it only be for home games? And would it include Old Firm games? Can't see Sky letting people watch games that are on Sky on anything else.
Click to expand...

This is my fear ,some directive from the SPFL to put the kybosh on RTV in some way.

Could they for example say you can’t broadcast any RTV games this season ,it has to be on sky platform .

Then again if that was the case Sky would have to supply all the cameras etc if they went that way
 
So it’s clear Sky have now asked for a sum of 5.5M back as a penalty for not completing the 19/20 season. Rangers made that clear in their subsequent dossier regarding a potential liability being paid and were entirely correct. Add in BT’s claim and 10M won’t be far off what the SPFL need to pay back.

Meanwhile a paid mouthpiece is scribbling about virtual season tickets.
 
Last edited:
Blue Tack said:
This is my fear ,some directive from the SPFL to put the kybosh on RTV in some way.

Could they for example say you can’t broadcast any RTV games this season ,it has to be on sky platform .

Then again if that was the case Sky would have to supply all the cameras etc if they went that way
Click to expand...

The article specifically states the clubs would be live streaming on their own channels. That's the whole point of the proposal as reported.

This would just mean Sky allowing a change in the rights agreement for games so they can legally be streamed and charged for by the clubs in the UK.
 
Maybe I’m over simplifying things but if sky had a £5.5m claw back option why the hell did we not just do what they did in England and finish the season behind closed doors?

The only real obstacle would have been contracts expiring but surely teams in the top league could have worked around it.

The whole thing is baffling
 
Doncaster and co can go fûck themselves,I’ll be going Rangers tv and anything our club advertises in the best interest of Rangers.
 
For all that I hate the SPFL, this is a good idea. In fact it’s such an obvious idea that even they couldn’t miss it though no doubt they will still %^*& it up.

I’d always assumed that some sort of virtual season ticket and/or pay per view matches would be introduced. Many of the bigger clubs have had the capability to do this for years, as is attested by our many (many) fellow bears who find themselves on frequent business trips at 3pm on Saturdays. I had wondered if broadcasting restrictions would just be lifted on clubs doing thus within the U.K. I presume that TV companies’ desire to hold a monopoly might have contractual implications there though. It does have to be accepted that, especially after the last update, RTV’s ability to stream games in a useful manner is also significantly lower than the TV companies. Obviously the companies will be taking a cut of the profits but I could see it being a pretty decent way for the club to get some cash. Any deal should be staggered too. Larger teams should get a higher % of the sales because we draw higher crowds. That isn’t being unfair to smaller clubs. It’s just stopping sky pocketing all the cash. They should get a similar amount from every game.

The teams that will be badly hit will be those without capacity to stream. I don’t know how many that applies to in the SPFL. I also really don’t care. Screw them. I might have a little sympathy for the lower league clubs and would be ok with some of the proceeds helping to keep their lights on next year.
 
JD1872 said:
Maybe I’m over simplifying things but if sky had a £5.5m claw back option why the hell did we not just do what they did in England and finish the season behind closed doors?

The only real obstacle would have been contracts expiring but surely teams in the top league could have worked around it.

The whole thing is baffling
Click to expand...

Would the Scottish Government allow it?
 
Walters80 said:
Makes sense as a lot people won't buy a season tickets to potentially only see about 10-20% of the games they've paid for.

A PPV option for non ST holders might bring in a fair amount over the season as well.
Click to expand...
Yes but if its PPV who gets the money is it rangers or is it the SPFL
 
Killer Bob said:
The thing which might annoy some , even if this feed is free to ST holders, it will likely be cheaper for non-ST holders (say 10 quid a game ppv) vs average ST cost per game (30 quid)
Click to expand...
I think there will be some sort of other incentive to ST holders.
 
Hmm. Wonder If this is how Sky will go about trying to block VPN viewing abroad.

Maybe they know how many viewers both them and Us have who nip across the channel every weekend to watch games.
 
Killer Bob said:
The thing which might annoy some , even if this feed is free to ST holders, it will likely be cheaper for non-ST holders (say 10 quid a game ppv) vs average ST cost per game (30 quid)
Click to expand...

Perhaps if it also includes away games (which wouldn't be on ST) then that would be some compensation - assuming ST holders do get it for free.
 
barrheadbear said:
Clubs, as you would expect, want to keep as much of your ST money ss possible, giving any refund will be the last thing on their mind.

However I am sure Rangers know that a virtual ST in no way equates financially to the cost of a normal ST, probably not even worth half. Also not every ST holder would need one a virtual ST, a family or friends might only need one. This will be a massive headache as the club try to think of added value that they can offer that fans believe is worth the cost of their full ST.

Can only hope the club comes up with better ideas than the derisory £25 voucher as compensation for the 5 homes games remaining of last season.
Click to expand...

Best post so far on this, I’ve purchased three season tickets in total for myself and two of my children. What’s to stop someone purchasing only one virtual season ticket at hypothetically half the cost of a normal season ticket and then inviting everyone over to watch the match. Really unfair. All I’m looking for at this stage is a bit of clarity from the club. Answers and potential solutions to the hypothetical situations that may arise.
 
SouthsideBlue said:
Best post so far on this, I’ve purchased three season tickets in total for myself and two of my children. What’s to stop someone purchasing only one virtual season ticket at hypothetically half the cost of a normal season ticket and then inviting everyone over to watch the match. Really unfair. All I’m looking for at this stage is a bit of clarity from the club. Answers and potential solutions to the hypothetical situations that may arise.
Click to expand...

Social distancing rules may stop it. Plus, if you don't buy your ST, you won't have your seat when we do get back.
 
Blue Tack said:
Surprise surprise its from Jhackson

Neil Doncaster is still in talks with the SPFL and clubs could be allowed to stream games to supporters while they're being played behind closed doors.


Football starved fans across the country look set to be offered the chance to buy virtual season tickets - as the SPFL close in on a revolutionary new broadcast deal with satellite giants Sky.

Record Sport understands crisis talks between the league’s chief executive Neil Dungcaster and TV bosses have reached an advanced stage as they prepare to begin next season behind closed doors.



We told how, as part of the discussions, Sky could be willing to write off a potential £5.5m claw back claim for the failure to complete the 2019/20 campaign - with Doncaster attempting to negotiate a greatly reduced penalty sum of £1.5m, with payments spread over the next five years.

Now we can reveal the talks have also explored ways that Scotland’s cash strapped clubs might be able to create some sort of vital matchday revenue even although their turnstiles could remain locked for months.


It is believed Sky - who snapped up exclusive SPFL rights for the next five years in a deal worth £150m - understand the need for clubs to be able to raise extra cash as the game in this country battles to survive the financial ramifications of the COVID crisis.

And they accept that allowing matches to be live-streamed into the living rooms of fans around the country could help provide a financial lifeline.


Doncaster’s plan would allow each club to live stream matches using their own online channels to virtual season ticket holders.

One Premiership chairman told Rhecord Sport: “We are waiting for the exact details of how such an agreement would be structured but we are told more information will follow shortly as the discussions between Neil Dungcaster and Sky are at an advanced stage.
Click to expand...
Sky/BTsport would NEVER attempt to reclaim anything for non-delivery of games. If they did, every subscriber could reclaim their full subscription by stating they only subscribed for football.
 
cooprfc said:
Social distancing rules may stop it. Plus, if you don't buy your ST, you won't have your seat when we do get back.
Click to expand...

I don't think this has any bearing on the point being made to be honest.

The question is when you've got a family of say one adult and two kids buying STs to see games and then another family of same numbers paying for the VST and getting essentially the same thing but at a notable difference in price, where is the real benefit/reward to the ST holder? Especially given SR's rather patronising letter to us all about our loyalty and rewarding us for it?

It will be very interesting to hear more detail about this whole concept and the price point to be honest.
 
cooprfc said:
Social distancing rules may stop it. Plus, if you don't buy your ST, you won't have your seat when we do get back.
Click to expand...
That’s part of the reason of why I’ve renewed, to keep the seats, they’re in Govan Rear near the halfway line and are more expensive than the others so the cost is a lot more. A virtual season ticket would be one price. A lot of people will stop sticking to the social distancing rules and the restrictions are also being eased. I feel that the communication could be better from the club around this, even just a simple acknowledgement of how the fans are feeling around this. The £25 voucher was just slipped in under the radar and that’s fair enough as nobody knew last season that Covid 19 would happen, however it’s a different set of circumstances this season.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top