I am the same.I pay a kings ransom for Sky Sports, and I am now forced into paying some more hard earned if I want to watch Man U v Newcastle later. Thieving b@stards
Wasn't it split up into separate packages supposedly to benefit the viewer, so that no one broadcaster could have a monopoly?I don't really mind the concept of having to pay a premium to see the Premier League on TV. What i think takes the biscuit is how it's now broken up, so I potentially have to subscribe to 3 different providers if I want access to the same product this season. That's astonishing as a concept and I'm close to just cancelling and being done with it.
Yeah supposedly, and that's quite a nice idea in theory isn't it. I'm generally anti monopoly.Wasn't it split up into separate packages supposedly to benefit the viewer, so that no one broadcaster could have a monopoly?
But Sky never showed all the games when they were the sole provider. There were always games that went without coverage, so you weren’t getting the full league anyway. Do Sky show less games now than 5 years ago?Yeah supposedly, and that's quite a nice idea in theory isn't it. I'm generally anti monopoly.
But it just doesn't work to have 3 providers in a single competition (which a Premier League season is, of course, it shouldn't ever be split into "several packages"), and none of those providers are allowed to show all of it. It's akin to having a long drama series made, where you need a subscription to Netflix plus a subscription to Amazon Prime plus a subscription to Sky to see the series. It's quite absurd!
You can cast to the TV for free, or have I misunderstood?I pay £18 for Sky football which Is ok (I cancel in the off season) and EE give me BT sports for free on my phone, not ideal but fine for the odd game (I could pay a tenner a month to cast to the TV if the mood took me)