"Virtual SPFL season ticket" on its way from Sky

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...

Derisory? I hope to God that's the end of it and unless you change your view you dont renew until you can guarantee access to the ground

Fans should not expect any visits to Ibrox this season and if we do, it's a bonus.

The club needs our support now more than ever before.
 
Smkz23 said:
So would season ticket holders have to buy a virtual season ticket on top of their actual season ticket?
Click to expand...
That on top of a Sky subscription,they having a laugh. Football needs punters through the gate,I've watched some of the German games and the atmosphere is non existent and people want to be there watching the team.
 
If Sky have cameras at every game now, is there an excuse for no VAR? you have a battalion of qualified officials sat doing %^*& all due to no Championship games, sit in an office socially distanced and make the correct calls. Would certainly answer the cheats or incompetents or both question.
 
My reading is Rangers will be allow to show all games not on Sky to RTV to UK&NI viewers. So effectively our home games outside of the OF games.
Say for example the club charges £10 a game for this to non-STH, there will also have to be recognition that even if these games are given free to STH, there is still a massive value gap for someone like myself paying £580 for my seat. The club will argue that fans are paying to support the club and keep their seat for when games restart, but I think they will need to do more to give some extra value back to STH.

Another big issue is illegal streams etc - Rangers will need non-STH to actually buy the streams and not get them from other sources.
 
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...

I find it bizzare more people aren't raising this issue.
 
Bigbluebear1971 said:
Derisory? I hope to God that's the end of it and unless you change your view you dont renew until you can guarantee access to the ground

Fans should not expect any visits to Ibrox this season and if we do, it's a bonus.

The club needs our support now more than ever before.
Click to expand...

Why don’t the club come out and say that? It’s not a question of support as we have the most loyal fan base as has been proven over the years. If the club comes out and provides clarity or potential solutions to hypothetical situations then the club will have my full financial support regardless of how much football I see at Ibrox. I feel as if we as a club need to get ahead of this situation and show some vision as opposed to sitting back and waiting for things to unfold.
 
Is RTV capable of hosting 45k additional viewers on top of the normal subscribers?

Ufa away was a shambles.
 
g87 said:
It is a cost to sky tho as they paid for UK exclusive coverage of televised SPFL football, but in reality they arent getting that. So are entitled to be compensated.
Click to expand...

They paid for rights to a very small amount of the games, 90% would not have been shown on Sky.
 
So a ST holder would need to then buy this as well? What if you don’t have Sky, would you then need to pay a subscription to them to get the access to start with?
 
EndOfDays said:
They paid for rights to a very small amount of the games, 90% would not have been shown on Sky.
Click to expand...

But the Sky TV rights also apply the geo-restriction around the games in the UK, making the games more exclusive (in theory). Hence why folk use VPNs as a workaround.
 
The burgh bear said:
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.
Click to expand...
I would hope Rangers would bring about a major upgrade to RTV as I'd sooner subscribe to that,at least the club would get the money.
 
Bluenose1979 said:
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.
Click to expand...

The alternative is their isnt a viable financial structure for the league which means zero content for them
 
Bluenose1979 said:
But the Sky TV rights also apply the geo-restriction around the games in the UK, making the games more exclusive (in theory). Hence why folk use VPNs as a workaround.
Click to expand...

True but its not taking a single viewer away from Sky outwidth the games they would have shown.

Not sure if £1.5M is reasonable.
 
Bluenose1979 said:
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?
Click to expand...

Because otherwise their wont be a league season for them to show. Clubs needs gate money to survive. If sky dont allow this then they arent getting any content.
 
Bluenose1979 said:
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.
Click to expand...

It does as he has asked whats is there to stop this. Losing their season ticket will stop a lot of people doing that. Clubs have fans in an emotional string.
 
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...
Plus ST holders knew, and I’m one of them, of the risks before handing their cash over for next season when we had no idea what would happen.
 
EndOfDays said:
True but its not taking a single viewer away from Sky outwidth the games they would have shown.

Not sure if £1.5M is reasonable.
Click to expand...

No, but it makes a potentially relatively cheap and selective non-Sky option readily available to viewers to access games they specifically want and reduces the value of the Sky Sports subscription. That's the bottom line in why these rights restrictions exist in the first place. Reduce the availability of the product elsewhere and drive up the value and monopolise the content they select to show live.
 
cooprfc said:
It does as he has asked whats is there to stop this. Losing their season ticket will stop a lot of people doing that. Clubs have fans in an emotional string.
Click to expand...

Yeah, fair point, but if the "benefit/reward" of it is just the emotional blackmail of you'll lose your seat in the future if you don't then it'd be another slap in the face after the £25 voucher nonsense and laughable as a reward for loyalty.

Instead it'd reinforce the notion that the club doesn't value ST holders loyalty and is simply taking their money and couldn't care less if they renew because someone else will just take their place.

A poor message IMHO.
 
Bluenose1979 said:
No, but it makes a potentially relatively cheap and selective non-Sky option readily available to viewers to access games they specifically want and reduces the value of the Sky Sports subscription. That's the bottom line in why these rights restrictions exist in the first place. Reduce the availability of the product elsewhere and drive up the value and monopolise the content they select to show live.
Click to expand...

Still think Sky getting £1.5M for allowing us to show games they wouldnt have been showing anyway is a bit much.

Most countries get paid money when they broadcast games, we have to pay money out for the privilege of doing it.
 
EndOfDays said:
Still think Sky getting £1.5M for allowing us to show games they wouldnt have been showing anyway is a bit much.

Most countries get paid money when they broadcast games, we have to pay money out for the privilege of doing it.
Click to expand...

They're getting £1.5m when they should be getting £5.5m mate... it's a reduction of the penalty payment for not finishing the season according to the article.
 
Bluenose1979 said:
Yeah, fair point, but if the "benefit/reward" of it is just the emotional blackmail of you'll lose your seat in the future if you don't then it'd be another slap in the face after the £25 voucher nonsense and laughable as a reward for loyalty.

Instead it'd reinforce the notion that the club doesn't value ST holders loyalty and is simply taking their money and couldn't care less if they renew because someone else will just take their place.

A poor message IMHO.
Click to expand...

Let's wait and see how it plays out. Every club in Europe in the same boat.
 
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...
"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..."

Is that part of the potential liability that the clubs weren't told about before the Good Friday vote ?

Is good old Neil ( and Pete ) also negotiating with BT Sport wrt potential claw back ?

"...failure to complete the 2019/20 campaign...." but surely the 2019/20 campaign was complete, after all didn't the SPFL award the various championships to various clubs ?
 
IbroxForever said:
So sky are writing of £5.5m? Not a chance.

So the spfl way of paying this £5.5m back to sky is for fans to pay them it back in terms of a virtual season ticket?

This joke of a ceo and sky are taking the piss out of fans, the worse bit is so many fans will fall for it and get doncaster out of jail.
Click to expand...
I thought this was why the SPFL were going to give Sky the sponsorship of the league..?
 
Supercoop11 said:
I thought this was why the SPFL were going to give Sky the sponsorship of the league..?
Click to expand...

Never heard this but that might make some sense. Give them a sponsorship deal worth a few million for fck all because the SPFL can't afford to pay them the money, then try to negotiate this deal where clubs can sell virtual tickets for streams of games to try and claw back a shortfall.

Honestly, the business handling of this league is utterly farcical. Why the fck Doncaster has survived his role this long with where he has taken it in his time is beyond perplexing.
 
No interest in recouping money for season books and if anyone is buying a season ticket for this year knowing games will be BCD for some of it to then ask for a refund is a brass neck in my opinion
 
Deal now confirmed according to SSN.

It will be interesting to see the detail and what the club thinks of the deal
 
Ke55y said:
No interest in recouping money for season books and if anyone is buying a season ticket for this year knowing games will be BCD for some of it to then ask for a refund is a brass neck in my opinion
Click to expand...

People weren't given a great deal of choice to be fair. Some us were auto-renewed with a letter telling us how important our loyalty was, etc but without any detail whatsoever of what the club's plans were for these scenarios.

Refuse to renew and folk are guns blazing because the club needs support, renew and you're not entitled to expect some kind of genuine reward for that loyalty in uncertain times or to have the "brass neck" to decide that actually you want to be able to say you're not getting what you paid for and non ST holders may even be getting a better deal in the short term.

Until we know the details, there's little question that supporters have been taken for granted with this IMHO.
 
The Underfaker said:
www.skysports.com

Scottish Premiership set for August return with new Sky Sports deal

Sky Sports to show up to 48 games a year; virtual season tickets for 2020/21
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com
Click to expand...

Scottish Premiership clubs will create a 'virtual season ticket' for the 2020/21 season, providing an alternative source of matchday income while social distancing measures prevent fans from attending matches. During the 2020/21 season, each Premiership club will be able to sell a package to season ticket holders to watch all home games.
Click to expand...

... details will need to come out fast on this as that line doesn't read well at all.
 
The problem with streaming football via the internet is that British internet quality is up there with third world countries.

It would be an absolute disaster watching the usual pixelated quality and constant lagging that streaming of football entails.

Already spent £600 on a product I know I won’t get to use so the thought of being asked to fork out again for a virtual season ticket will be taking the utter piss.
 
BlueLedbetter said:
I'd imagine it will be free to season ticket holders surely?
Click to expand...

You'd have assumed that - but that line suggests the exact opposite. It may be simply needing clarified or clubs may choose to give it for free, but that seems to defeat the purpose of allowing additional revenue streams if it's only available to ST holders.

Hopefully just a very poorly written line.
 
Marfc_84 said:
Just casually glossing over the fact we know for certain we owe SKY millions now for unnecessarily finishing the league early? Something we were told was entirely untrue?

Should only be one club accountable for paying that fine.
Click to expand...
Only £5.5m to award the title to the filth.
 
So I’ve got a s/t st Ibrox, SKY Sports (which has had fućk all on it for 3 months).

And ve to buy an add on package for Rangers games on TV.

Fućk off.
 
BlueLedbetter said:
I'd imagine it will be free to season ticket holders surely?
Click to expand...
It has to be free to season ticket holders , it is out of order and disgraceful if renewing season ticket holders are asked or expected to pay more money to watch home games out with the existing sky deal.
 
If it's only behind closed doors til Christmas then surely it'll be a half virtual charger we need?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top