Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh
You do realise the the streamers "reducing potential costs by sharing the burden" would be a cartel, which is illegal?
|
I don’t think so, and the article this subject links to does not mention such a thing.
Why is this any different from Sky making their channels available to other providers such as Virgin? How is it different from multiple studios being involved in the making of one film?
The costs would be shared because several providers form a partnership and share both the costs and the profits, and consumers benefit by having to pay less in subscriptions. Everybody wins.
---------- Post added at 17:25 ---------- Previous post was at 17:21 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
The only user in denial here is you, OB.
Sky aren’t “hogging” all the rights - they’re bidding (like everyone else) in the open marketplace and monetising those rights from end users. Something that a “streamer” has been unable to do on any meaningful level for sports rights.
Your contention that they will have to break the law - as Hugh points out above - to make a return on sports rights speaks volumes as to the challenge.
Sky of course monetise their rights through streaming in addition to their own platform, and retailing through third parties such as Virgin Media. The market is well developed.
|
No, jfman. You are the one in denial here. So much so that you frequently resort to this sort of pedantry to try and make a point which we all know is becoming harder to argue as time goes on.
Despite the argument you and Hugh are making that it is against the law, the arrangement is already happening!