| Premier League - rant (sorry) 19:13 - Dec 16 with 1558 views | sevebalo |
As I started to read about the proposal that the next PL auction will see games on Friday nights as well, primarily I assume as a means of boosting the number of matches to spread between bidders, I started to get angry.
How is getting multiple bidders (two) to bid for a block of different games in any sense competitive and therein beneficial to the consumer by driving down costs - this being the purpose of competitive markets?
If the competition authorities declared that "in a bid to increase competition", supermarkets must bid for, say:
(1) which days of the week they can open, wherein their rivals will not be able to open on said days, or perhaps
(2) which towns they can operate in, wherein their rivals must not have any presence
In either instance, it's just nonsense. This is not competition and in fact it achieves the opposite objectives. You get bidders to pay more for the premium slots (weekend or big population) and the consumer loses in terms of choice (be it days open, or proximity to your home) and, on the basis that bid costs need to be recouped, almost certainly expense.
Yet, unless I am mistaken, this is exactly the scenario with the PL rights, is it not? True competition would only exist if multiple providers show the same matches and compete with each other to 'win' the hard-earned £ or $ of the consumer.
As consumers we equate the quality of production/analysis/pundits/teams with the cost. Andy Townsend/Stoke vs Leicester at the 'value' end and for arguments sake, Gary Neville/Chelsea vs Man City at the other.
I understand why things happen the way they do and I confess, despite my irritation, I don't necessarily have a better option. But conceptually, it's just barmy the way it is.
Thoughts? |  | | |  |
| Premier League rant on 19:33 - Dec 16 with 1550 views | sevebalo |
I also thought of a third, probably more directly comparable analogy. If supermarkets bid to exclusively sell certain foods. To get the full three course meal you have to go all of them = watching all of your clubs matches. [Post edited 16 Dec 2014 19:38]
| | | |
| Premier League - rant (sorry) on 19:33 - Dec 16 with 1549 views | wessex_exile |
Perhaps slightly off-topic, but I firmly believe the major supermarket chains are in cahoots over where stores are located, who gets which towns etc - I'm sure there's some sort of fishing analogy about anglers agreeing not to over-fish small ponds? |  |
| |
| Premier League - rant (sorry) on 20:48 - Dec 16 with 1534 views | Barsidepete |
| Premier League - rant (sorry) on 19:33 - Dec 16 by wessex_exile |
Perhaps slightly off-topic, but I firmly believe the major supermarket chains are in cahoots over where stores are located, who gets which towns etc - I'm sure there's some sort of fishing analogy about anglers agreeing not to over-fish small ponds? |
Good point, Wessex. But some towns refuse to have another Tesco or Sainsbury's, for instance, because it cannibalizes local merchnts ... those other few Friday games (generally in the Championship, right?), seems on par with the Prem's ambitions... having said that... compromises other smaller local merchants, street corner stores... (my point was clear but unclear)
The NFL moved from a so-called special Monday Night game, the long-standing tradition, to NBC with a Sunday night game, to that ridiculous Thursday night game we are now subjected to here.
Money talks, I guess. Friday Night Prem Football. Go on then.  [Post edited 16 Dec 2014 20:55]
|  |
| |
| Premier League - rant (sorry) on 20:49 - Dec 16 with 1531 views | BFG |
 |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
