Premier League terminates £160m per year deal for coverage rights with China

[Salou]

39 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

Yep. I think people are underestimating this Huawei politicing by the Chinese Government. I wouldnt be holding my breath for any new chinese tv rights deal and certainly not at the price that PPTV paid. I believe it was the single biggest payment by any overseas rights holder. It's not just the loss of 160m for last season, it's the whole 560m+ over the 4(?) year period.

they paid 12 times more than the previous deal...i would be surprised if anyone else comes close to that with everything going on.  China will just pirate it or get someone to offer a fraction.

 

Overseas rights are a much bigger deal for the big clubs as they are more weighted towards those that finish higher up the table (not significantly much but it moves away. from the collective rights of the domestic deals)

[Chocoholic]

 

In all reality, why would the PL terminate it unless they thought they could easily replace it with another deal? It would appear they're trying to give the impression they're the ones calling the shots. Not quite.

[dockers_strike]

16 minutes ago, Chocoholic said:

 

In all reality, why would the PL terminate it unless they thought they could easily replace it with another deal? It would appear they're trying to give the impression they're the ones calling the shots. Not quite.

Not sure I agree with harris that the broadcaster terminated the deal rather than the PL. The broadcaster failed to pay 160m because of the covid19 situation affecting the PL games. They wanted to extend the deal with the PL beyond 2022. This was in the public arena about 6 weeks ago.

 

The PL said no way and  pay what you owe. When the broadcaster didnt pay, the PL said fuck off and the agreement is terminated.

 

I guess it depends where you stand.

 

 

[VladimirIlyich]

16 hours ago, Scott_M said:

Or spent money that you thought you had coming in?

But Uncle Uzzy will sort that out lad.

[Barrington Womble]

20 hours ago, Lee909 said:

From the Independent 

 

Sounds like PPTV used the 160ml as leverage to extend the deal

The Premier League was paused on 13 March before being concluded later in the year due to the Covid-19 outbreak, with the expected payment from PPTV subsequently not arriving on time. It’s understood that the Premier League deemed this as a breach of contract on PPTV’s behalf, and following subsequent talks, it rejected a contract extension offer through to 2025.

 

 

You would suspect the premier league have something lined up if they've knocked back an extension which could have resolved the situation. I've got to say though my 1st reaction was the same as @dave u that they'll just pirate it. 

[elvis]

13 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

You would suspect the premier league have something lined up if they've knocked back an extension which could have resolved the situation. I've got to say though my 1st reaction was the same as @dave u that they'll just pirate it. 

Nothing surer

[Colonel Bumcunt]

On 03/09/2020 at 23:49, Chocoholic said:

 

Am no expert on contract law, but I'm more than sure that if you sign a contract then you have to honour it or a High Court judge will definitely find in favour of the party that acted in good faith. 

Is pretty mad that the PL then came out and openly 'terminated' that deal, and any chance of winning such a case. 

 

[dockers_strike]

40 minutes ago, Colonel Bumcunt said:

Am no expert on contract law, but I'm more than sure that if you sign a contract then you have to honour it or a High Court judge will definitely find in favour of the party that acted in good faith. 

Is pretty mad that the PL then came out and openly 'terminated' that deal, and any chance of winning such a case. 

 

Yes, you could take the other party to the High Court. However, the chances of getting Chinese company owners to come over from China for a hearing in the UK might not be that great in the circumstances. Even then, you have the time to get the court hearing, which isnt immediate, then await the decision. And seeing as the Chinese company defaulted on the 160m payment, it isnt certain they'd abide by the UK court's decision anyway.

 

That doesnt even take into consideration even if the Chinese company did all that, that they didnt appeal.

 

The simple fact of the matter is, if this was a UK company in default, the PL Board may have gone to court. Or they could say, you know what, fuck it? You havent paid up, we'll just rip up the contract.

 

The reality is, the dispute is with an overseas company which adds in other complications and considerations so in the end, I guess the PL Board decided to go the route of least opposition and terminate.

 

 

 

 

[Colonel Bumcunt]

20 hours ago, dockers_strike said:

Yes, you could take the other party to the High Court. However, the chances of getting Chinese company owners to come over from China for a hearing in the UK might not be that great in the circumstances. Even then, you have the time to get the court hearing, which isnt immediate, then await the decision. And seeing as the Chinese company defaulted on the 160m payment, it isnt certain they'd abide by the UK court's decision anyway.

 

That doesnt even take into consideration even if the Chinese company did all that, that they didnt appeal.

 

The simple fact of the matter is, if this was a UK company in default, the PL Board may have gone to court. Or they could say, you know what, fuck it? You havent paid up, we'll just rip up the contract.

 

The reality is, the dispute is with an overseas company which adds in other complications and considerations so in the end, I guess the PL Board decided to go the route of least opposition and terminate.

 

 

 

 

I appreciate all that mate, but it's not entirely clear if they have other obligations or people connections to businesses in the UK, which would make it more difficult for them to ignore our courts.

 

[Dougie Do'ins]

On 03/09/2020 at 15:04, dave u said:

There's no way the games are not going to be shown in China, so presumably they'll just pirate it like the Saudis were doing?

First thing I thought of. The PL could well have played right into the Chinese hands here. 

[VladimirIlyich]

8 hours ago, Dougie Do'ins said:

First thing I thought of. The PL could well have played right into the Chinese hands here. 

Its not as if the Chinese aren't doing well out of replica shirts.

[Lee909]

UEFA now saying about massive rebates of between 20/30%. 

 

Sounds like we will be back to only oil clubs competing 

[Dr Nowt]

'Shrewd fiscal management from FSG here, tightening the purse strings when this was in the post. Come on you Reds!'

 

Post that and pretend they're your own thoughts. Fiver in it for you and I'll let you watch when I next fist your wife.

 

Best, 

 

JWH

[dockers_strike]

The Premier League is ramping up measures against streaming services ahead of the coming season, in a bid to completely block out all illegal online viewing of top flight matches.

Time and resources have been poured into finding the best companies to work with in order for the Premier League to make this possible.

And now a Scottish tech company is driving the push to leave IPTV illegal streamers locked out and help the Premier League protect its brand, as report the Daily Record.

The company, Vistalworks have developed a cutting-edge software tool that warns users of the high risk dangers of signing up to reduced price services that provide live streams and video on demand.

The project has been in the pipeline for some time, with the Premier League trying to clamp down on streaming services season by season.

During the 2018/19 campaign the division blocked 210,000 live streams and over 360,000 clips of its matches.

It is now hoped that the new pop-up tools due to be implemented will deter online users from continuing to source and use high-risk streaming platforms.

Vistalworks chief executive Vicky Brock told the Daily Record: 'Lockdown has led to a rise in people accessing illicit IPTV, and we expect to see that increase further with the return of English Premier League football.

'Our checker alerts people using sites like eBay to search for cut-price streaming products that what they’re looking at is both dangerous and illegal.

'IPTV sales can end up with consumers’ sensitive information being placed in the wrong hands, which in turn can lead to identity theft and fraud.'

Trading Standards have also backed the move by the Premier League, noting the steep rise in ads for streaming services during the coronavirus lockdown, with many people indoors trying to stream the return of live football.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8718887/Premier-League-makes-crackdown-illegal-streams-ahead-new-season.html

[Scott_M]

On 08/09/2020 at 13:01, Lee909 said:

UEFA now saying about massive rebates of between 20/30%. 

 

Sounds like we will be back to only oil clubs competing 

Excuses, excuses! 

[Barrington Womble]

On 10/09/2020 at 16:04, dockers_strike said:

The Premier League is ramping up measures against streaming services ahead of the coming season, in a bid to completely block out all illegal online viewing of top flight matches.

Time and resources have been poured into finding the best companies to work with in order for the Premier League to make this possible.

And now a Scottish tech company is driving the push to leave IPTV illegal streamers locked out and help the Premier League protect its brand, as report the Daily Record.

The company, Vistalworks have developed a cutting-edge software tool that warns users of the high risk dangers of signing up to reduced price services that provide live streams and video on demand.

The project has been in the pipeline for some time, with the Premier League trying to clamp down on streaming services season by season.

During the 2018/19 campaign the division blocked 210,000 live streams and over 360,000 clips of its matches.

It is now hoped that the new pop-up tools due to be implemented will deter online users from continuing to source and use high-risk streaming platforms.

Vistalworks chief executive Vicky Brock told the Daily Record: 'Lockdown has led to a rise in people accessing illicit IPTV, and we expect to see that increase further with the return of English Premier League football.

'Our checker alerts people using sites like eBay to search for cut-price streaming products that what they’re looking at is both dangerous and illegal.

'IPTV sales can end up with consumers’ sensitive information being placed in the wrong hands, which in turn can lead to identity theft and fraud.'

Trading Standards have also backed the move by the Premier League, noting the steep rise in ads for streaming services during the coronavirus lockdown, with many people indoors trying to stream the return of live football.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-8718887/Premier-League-makes-crackdown-illegal-streams-ahead-new-season.html

Is it me or does that make it sound like the premier league really want to crack down on IPTV but don't know how to? It'd be like having signs up by the stalls by the ground, "if you buy off these guys, we'll tickle you as you walk in to the ground"