Jump to content

Streaming - Success or Not


Do you think we will have more people streaming the Daggers game than we would expect to have had in the ground?   

89 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think we will have more people streaming the Daggers game than we would expect to have had in the ground?

    • Yes
      34
    • No
      46
    • Not sure
      9


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, ewalsh said:

@Flea So, do you think the streaming should be cheaper or more expensive? 

While fans ARE NOT allowed in the ground I think streaming should be free for EVERYONE. Each club should then go to the league and say ‘x amount watched the game, we need x X £9.99 for that’. Since it was the leagues call to start without fans then they should foot the bill. Again, the league stated it would not start without fans then gave back word. It is not the clubs fault, however the league moved the goal posts (albeit with an assist from the government). 

Once fans are allowed in, then I’d say £99 for a full seasons worth of streaming (home games) and £6.99ish on a game by game basis (or for away games) would be fair. 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It's crazy unfair but lines have to be drawn somewhere. You're not supposed to visit your gran because doing so puts her at increased risk. You're allowed to carry on working because, well, socie

I’d say so seeing as the only one that doesn’t seem to think it was a success is someone who didn’t watch it.

If they iron out the first timer glitches I'll be happy to pay a tenner.  Not because i think it is great value but because i want to watch my team and financially support them at the same time.  If i

1 minute ago, Flea said:

While fans ARE NOT allowed in the ground I think streaming should be free for EVERYONE. Each club should then go to the league and say ‘x amount watched the game, we need x X £9.99 for that’. Since it was the leagues call to start without fans then they should foot the bill. Again, the league stated it would not start without fans then gave back word. It is not the clubs fault, however the league moved the goal posts (albeit with an assist from the government). 

Once fans are allowed in, then I’d say £99 for a full seasons worth of streaming (home games) and £6.99ish on a game by game basis (or for away games) would be fair. 
 

 

Aaaah I understand now :) fair enough. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Flea said:

While fans ARE NOT allowed in the ground I think streaming should be free for EVERYONE. Each club should then go to the league and say ‘x amount watched the game, we need x X £9.99 for that’. Since it was the leagues call to start without fans then they should foot the bill. Again, the league stated it would not start without fans then gave back word. It is not the clubs fault, however the league moved the goal posts (albeit with an assist from the government). 

Once fans are allowed in, then I’d say £99 for a full seasons worth of streaming (home games) and £6.99ish on a game by game basis (or for away games) would be fair. 

Given it some thought and I can't agree that the streaming should be free. It's not the product you thought you were purchasing but it's a product nonetheless and it does have value as all those who paid for access are testament to.

As the product on offer has changed, you have a choice to actively refuse to use the codes and instead ask for a full refund of the season ticket. That's how consumer laws work and the club will, I'm sure, abide by that. A consumer need not accept a substitute product, even if it is delivered to them (this changes of course if the substitute product is actually used by the consumer).

I think, as one of those who paid a tenner on Saturday and who would probably end up shelling out £400 this season if this situation continues right the way through, that I would be annoyed if season ticket holders got it all for free and then got a season ticket for next season as well. I'm sure others wouldn't care less. This is the balancing act that the club has been left to manage thanks to stupid people, the government, and the Conference (which, I am convinced based on the evidence, is a 2-3 man team in some crap office on an industrial estate just off the M25).

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Hoddie said:

Given it some thought and I can't agree that the streaming should be free. It's not the product you thought you were purchasing but it's a product nonetheless and it does have value as all those who paid for access are testament to.

As the product on offer has changed, you have a choice to actively refuse to use the codes and instead ask for a full refund of the season ticket. That's how consumer laws work and the club will, I'm sure, abide by that. A consumer need not accept a substitute product, even if it is delivered to them (this changes of course if the substitute product is actually used by the consumer).

I think, as one of those who paid a tenner on Saturday and who would probably end up shelling out £400 this season if this situation continues right the way through, that I would be annoyed if season ticket holders got it all for free and then got a season ticket for next season as well. I'm sure others wouldn't care less. This is the balancing act that the club has been left to manage thanks to stupid people, the government, and the Conference (which, I am convinced based on the evidence, is a 2-3 man team in some crap office on an industrial estate just off the M25).

My current belief however is that you, as a non season ticket holder, shouldn’t be paying £9.99 at the moment either. My understanding is the game just gone was free to ST holders however future games won’t be. 

I don’t know how true it is but I believe that most clubs will be valuing streaming at £9.99 and telling ST holders that each game they watch they will have that amount deducted from what they paid from the season ticket. At the end of the season any left over money is refunded, or pushed forward when buying another ST (so if it was to work here, you watch 21 games, call it £210, each ST holder would either get £90 back or off their next ST) 

If fans were allowed in then charging you would be fair as you would have the choice of attending in person or online (and I get that isn’t much of a choice atm when you are hundreds of miles away, but you get the point).

At the moment there is no choice - you either stream the game or miss it. 

Streaming should stick around now in my opinion - however it should be an extra choice for fans, not something they have to use as an only choice of seeing a game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Flea said:

While fans ARE NOT allowed in the ground I think streaming should be free for EVERYONE. Each club should then go to the league and say ‘x amount watched the game, we need x X £9.99 for that’. Since it was the leagues call to start without fans then they should foot the bill. Again, the league stated it would not start without fans then gave back word. It is not the clubs fault, however the league moved the goal posts (albeit with an assist from the government). 

Once fans are allowed in, then I’d say £99 for a full seasons worth of streaming (home games) and £6.99ish on a game by game basis (or for away games) would be fair. 
 

 

You keep harping on blaming the league for starting the season without fans, but it was the clubs who were pressing for the season to start as they are all paying wages with barely any income-should we have waited until spring?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is though the league had to make the decision to start without fans. Otherwise, clubs would have ended up with no income whatsoever and you'd be seeing more cases like Bury and Macclesfield. Or alternatively, clubs end up refusing to pay players to ensure that they don't suffer through the lack of income due to the season not starting and as a result families end up going hungry.

Of course all of us would have preferred to have watched Saturday's game at The Shay as opposed to on tvs and laptops. But right now, it's the only viable option. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, shayman v said:

You keep harping on blaming the league for starting the season without fans, but it was the clubs who were pressing for the season to start as they are all paying wages with barely any income-should we have waited until spring?

The NL took the decision to go ahead with an October start during September. This was on the premise that league capacities had been set and some pilot events were scheduled in. The government then unexpectedly decided not to allow fans into stadiums and it was too late for the NL to do an about turn. Stop blaming the NL, these are unprecedented times and we need to be try to be positive. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing that we forget is that committing to the season forced the government to put a much needed support package in place. 

If we were still in a long, protracted pre-season without income I don't think there would have been any support package. The clubs would have quietly gone under. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We now have Covid running riot in universities quite predictably IMHO yet we are unable to have 1000 to 1500 in the Shay:rolleyes: It's inevitable as the situation deteriorates the students will have to return home spreading the bug even further in the process.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we all want to watch live football. Flea is interesting in that he has followed Halifax Town the length and breadth of the country so he is at one end of the spectrum.

I would always prefer to watch live football but am more phlegmatic about it than Flea who is more dedicated than I am in terms of physically following the team.

I will be quite happy to have a refund of my season ticket and buy a season ticket pass to watch home games streamed at a discounted price to the £9.99 per game. At the end of the day it is just a question of being pragmatic about it. Having said that I fully understand why someone would much prefer to watch live football and the current rules make little sense but having gone down the 'elite football' route we are where we are.

Ultimately we all enjoy watching the football at the Shay no matter how bad it is because Halifax Town are our team and thank god I'm not a plastic supporter of a plastic team. I've enjoyed over 50 years of this and no pandemic will stop me watching my team even if I can't be there. The few highs have far outweighed the lows. How boring would it be to watch your team win every week?

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Not sure who it was but someone asked what other clubs were charging for streaming. A quick google around all 23 clubs came up with the following info.

Eastleigh £7.99    
Boreham Wood £9.99 Price increased
Halifax Town £9.99    
Dover £8.00    
Sutton £9.50    
Maidenhead £10.00    
Kings Lynn £12.00    
Woking £12.00    
Solihull £7.50    
Dagenham £9.99    
Bromley £9.99    
Wealdstone £9.99    
Barnet £10.00    
Weymouth £9.99    
Yeovil £9.99    
Torquay £9.00    
Chesterfield £10.00    
Notts County £12.00    
Hartlepool £9.99    
Stockport £7.50    
Aldershot £9.99    
Altrincham £9.99    
Wrexham £10.00    

 

Interestingly, a number of clubs are asking fans if they wish to pay extra and top up the payment to the equivalent match day price for in the ground. Notts County, Wrexham to name a couple.

Edited by ITMAN
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/5/2020 at 8:43 AM, ITMAN said:

Yes, there were some very weird results this weekend. Liverpool getting a beating and then Leicester, conquerors of Man City last week, go and lose at home 3-0 to West Ham. Must be a nightmare for the bookies to try and keep a handle on.

Maybe it does go to show that the presence of fans do have an influence on matters on the pitch - often not for the better! The amount of goals flying in right now (not to mention high scoring penalty shoot outs) seem to indicate that forwards are much more uninhibited when playing without the pressure of the watching fans. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Che Bentos said:

Maybe it does go to show that the presence of fans do have an influence on matters on the pitch - often not for the better! The amount of goals flying in right now (not to mention high scoring penalty shoot outs) seem to indicate that forwards are much more uninhibited when playing without the pressure of the watching fans. 

Some players blossom playing to the crowd but disappear without an immediate audience , some players wilt under the pressure of close contact with criticism from fans,  think that is what we are witnessing.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/7/2020 at 11:17 PM, ITMAN said:

Not sure who it was but someone asked what other clubs were charging for streaming. A quick google around all 23 clubs came up with the following info.

Streaming Costs per Club
   
Eastleigh £7.99
Boreham Wood £8.99
Halifax Town £9.99
Dover £8.00
Sutton £9.50
Maidenhead £10.00
Kings Lynn £12.00
Woking £12.00
Solihull £7.50
Dagenham £9.99
Bromley £9.99
Wealdstone £9.99
Barnet £10.00
Weymouth £9.99
Yeovil £9.99
Torquay £9.00
Chesterfield £10.00
Notts County £12.00
Hartlepool £9.99
Stockport £7.50
Aldershot £9.99
Altrincham £9.99
Wrexham £10.00

 

Interestingly, a number of clubs are asking fans if they wish to pay extra and top up the payment to the equivalent match day price for in the ground. Notts County, Wrexham to name a couple.

Just sorted out my streaming’s ticket for tomorrow and I have been charged £9.99 whereas the list above says £8.99. Is the list wrong or have I been robbed?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/4/2020 at 11:50 AM, ITMAN said:

Yes, but for teams such as Yeovil who averaged 2,951 last season then I would hope to get more than 424 game passes bought.

could play out well for us playing well supported teams early doors on streaming

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...