Closed Doors Live Streaming.

[Falkirk09Bairn]

8 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

I take my 2 boys to Dens, we would all watch it together, that would be a whopping £2 less ticket sales.

What about the group of say half a dozen friends who go together? Meeting up in a house with beers? Be plenty of groups doing that. 

[johnnydun]

Just now, Falkirk09Bairn said:

What about the group of say half a dozen friends who go together? Meeting up in a house with beers? Be plenty of groups doing that. 

Give the Bobby's a call. It's c***s like that spreading Covid-19.

[baw heid]

I do think this is a good short term fix  However the away club should be able to buy the right to stream and then make it available for their supporters to watch the game on their own site. That way teams would get the revenue from their own fans  Should mean that the revenue stream is the same home and away. If the wonders of technology  can not manage this then a 80/20 split could apply

[ecto]

6 hours ago, Poet of the Macabre said:

There’s absolutely zero chance this would be a success by the way. Nilch, nada. The numbers after a couple of weeks would be tiny, especially if they were insane enough to charge anything like £20.

A total non-starter.

This is spot on

[johnnydun]

3 minutes ago, baw heid said:

I do think this is a good short term fix  However the away club should be able to buy the right to stream and then make it available for their supporters to watch the game on their own site. That way teams would get the revenue from their own fans  Should mean that the revenue stream is the same home and away. If the wonders of technology  can not manage this then a 80/20 split could apply

Why would they want to? 7 out the 10 clubs would make more by keeping the away fan's subscriptions from the home games.

[CallumPar]

Personally, I’d rather we waited until fans could go back. However, I’m not sure that’s a feasible option. I would pay for the live stream, simply because it helps support the club and it’s better than nothing. But for me, it is nowhere near as good as being at the game and isn’t worth as much money.

There are also issues with waiting until fans are allowed back. Say that doesn’t happen until January and the 18 game season goes ahead. From August, clubs have to contribute towards furloughed wages. Where is that money going to come from? At least streaming games would provide some revenue, to potentially keep clubs alive and keep players in jobs. I’m sure they could sell virtual programmes, half time draw tickets and perhaps offer other perks like voting for man of the match and opportunities to sponsor the live streams.

There’s also the issue discussed by several others, regarding friends/family who would usually go together, they’re not all going to pay for individual streams, which definitely reduces the potential revenue/budgets significantly, compared to fans being in attendance.

It’s something that should be looked into, but obviously set up costs for some clubs would be higher than others, to provide a quality product. The last thing clubs need is more costs just now. However, there’s no guarantee fans will be allowed in stadiums at all next season and it’s important to have contingencies in place and look at all possible options.

[DA Baracus]

31 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

But you can still have the boards round the ground and advertising on the stream.

Hospitality could be allowed in small numbers by the time the season starts.

You could but will sponsors pay the same sums for pitchside boards they usually would? Streams will miss out a lot of them (most notably in the stand the camera is in). I doubt they would pay the same sums. Some won't be in a position to pay.

How much do you think advertisers would be willing to pay for adverts on a stream? 

Hospitality might be allowed in small numbers, but not the usual numbers. So a substantial loss is still being made.

[DA Baracus]

2 minutes ago, CallumPar said:

At least streaming games would provide some revenue, to potentially keep clubs alive and keep players in jobs.

It would do no such thing. It would rapidly accelerate the death of clubs and the loss of jobs.

[johnnydun]

2 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

You could but will sponsors pay the same sums for pitchside boards they usually would? Streams will miss out a lot of them (most notably in the stand the camera is in). I doubt they would pay the same sums. Some won't be in a position to pay.

How much do you think advertisers would be willing to pay for adverts on a stream? 

Hospitality might be allowed in small numbers, but not the usual numbers. So a substantial loss is still being made.

I have no idea what advertisers pay now or what they would be willing to pay.

Again, it's all about the losses but nothing about the things that wouldn't need to be paid for fan filled match days.

[Alert Mongoose]

I don’t think the players would be on the scrap heap. They would surely just move to Iceland/Ukraine/Thailand (insert other below average league) until we were back up and running.

[TheScarf]

Anyone who would pay more than a fiver to watch their team play online is a mentalist who should be lobotomised.

[johnnydun]

3 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Anyone who would pay more than a fiver to watch their team play online is a mentalist who should be lobotomised.

Even if it meant keeping your club afloat and being the only way you could watch your club?

[TheScarf]

2 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

Even if it meant keeping your club afloat and being the only way you could watch your club?

There’s no way The Caley, even with Dundee FC’s Scot Gardiner at the club, would charge over a tenner a head. 

They know no one would pay that. They’d find other ways to stay afloat.

[johnnydun]

3 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

There’s no way The Caley, even with Dundee FC’s Scot Gardiner at the club, would charge over a tenner a head. 

They know no one would pay that. They’d find other ways to stay afloat.

Great! Please tell us these 'other ways'? These are exactly the alternatives we are all looking for.

Edited May 23, 2020 by johnnydun

[krusty The Clown]

1 hour ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

This would only work if you as already had the equipment installed - I don't think there will be many teams in the Championship who would have the resources to do this.

 

It's a complete non-starter for most clubs.

 

 

 

 

Hub stadiums are surely the option. 

Would allow the clubs and leagues to reduce the costs of installing the technology and would allow for a much higher standard of output than relying on individual clubs doing it on their own. 

 

[DA Baracus]

Just now, krusty The Clown said:

Hub stadiums are surely the option. 

Would allow the clubs and leagues to reduce the costs of installing the technology and would allow for a much higher standard of output than relying on individual clubs doing it on their own. 

 

And now do clubs pay their squads? 

[Highland Capital]

12 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

Anyone who would pay more than a fiver to watch their team play online is a mentalist who should be lobotomised.

There seems to be some people who think that fans should be cash cows to save their clubs no-matter what.  I support Caley Thistle, but I certainly won't be fleeced by them.  

[Shadow Play]

Surely nobody leads such a sad life that they would spend every Saturday afternoon watching a live stream of their team playing in an empty stadium?  By all means pay a tenner every week to your club but to actually make time to sit and watch the game?  Surely not?

[johnnydun]

Just now, Highland Capital said:

There seems to be some people who think that fans should be cash cows to save their clubs no-matter what.  I support Caley Thistle, but I certainly won't be fleeced by them.  

Scot Gardiner has fair installed the The Rangers fan mindset in Inverness.

[rb123!]

8 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

They know no one would pay that. They’d find other ways to stay afloat.

Trying to sneak in the back door to the premiership and calling for a null and void season doesn't count.