RamsTV Subscription increased by EFL

[MickD]

On 21/06/2021 at 09:53, Charlotte Ram said:

Highly unlikely any overseas subscribers will cancel, why should we?

£25/month incredibly reasonable for seeing most of the games on Rams TV, the ones that are on sky are shown on ESPN+ so I only miss cup games.

I would pay twice the new amount gladly and watch the games on my phone iPad or TV, great value indeed.

DAZN is available in Canada for $20 a month.  All prem, many Championship and other games.  RTV overpriced by far.

[MickD]

22 hours ago, ThePrisoner said:

But the £25 isn't for domestic fans, it's for those outside the country. So theoretically anyone in the UK shouldn't be paying £25... officially anyway. So the value is there for those international fans who do have the games shown in their country. Sky doesn't enter the equation really.

Yes it does.  When on Sky in the UK we don't get RTV in Canada.  Some months we only had 3 games for our money.  I'm out.

[Beetle]

I had a season ticket this year and got alot of games on RamsTV as part of having the season ticket. Every game I did not get included I paid an extra £10 to watch and thought it was good value. I would pay £10 a game next season for games I cannot attend no problem.

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

I just want to go to the real games. Don’t much care for RamsTV. Not seen hardly any games this year.

If you see several games per month for £25 that does not seem too bad. If it were just one it would be a little pricy considering the football may well be a stinking pile of ????.

[baiano27]

I subscribed to Rams TV when I was overseas but I wouldn't have continued at £25 a month. You can analyse it on a per game basis as being cheap but not only were many matches on sky/ classified as the international match I also couldn't watch any evening games as it was in the middle of the night. Sometimes I'd only get 2 games a month which I don't think are worth £12.50 each. I don't even think £10 is good value.

It won't happen here but I like my MLB subscription which for £150 a year I get all my teams matches as well as any other team if I'm really bored. 

[Dimmu]

So this is how it feels like to when you're disappointed with EFL.

First time for everything, right?

[Spanish]

1 hour ago, Beetle said:

I had a season ticket this year and got alot of games on RamsTV as part of having the season ticket. Every game I did not get included I paid an extra £10 to watch and thought it was good value. I would pay £10 a game next season for games I cannot attend no problem.

Guess that you won’t get the chance, post COVID it will be back to overseas only

[San Fran Van Rams]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

They are trying to increase club revenues by bringing a service up to a reasonable price, why are they not acting in the best interests of the clubs?

They are not acting in the best interest of the fans, granted. 

That's not what they're doing though is it? What they're actually doing is forcing a high price for non-iFollow clubs TV which will reduce their subscriptions in an attempt at forcing clubs to sign up to the iFollow platform from which I assume the EFL takes a larger share of the revenues (seen it quoted that only 80% of revenues from iFollow go back to the clubs). 

Be interested to see any pricing analysis that was done, although I'd assume they didn't do any (considering their ineptitude, x2 is quite easy maths i suppose).

[ariotofmyown]

1 hour ago, Dimmu said:

So this is how it feels like to when you're disappointed with EFL.

First time for everything, right?

This is how it feels to be lonely

This is how it feels to be small

This is how it feels when you're disappointed with the EFL.

Rooney don't know what he's done

Academy kids don't know what's wrong with Mel

[DCFC1388]

2 hours ago, MickD said:

Subtract all the Sky games and you are well short of value at 25.00. I will not be paying that amount.

I did originally ask if it included all games or not so based the price off all games being included

[David]

11 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

They are trying to increase club revenues by bringing a service up to a reasonable price, why are they not acting in the best interests of the clubs?

They are not acting in the best interest of the fans, granted. 

The point is, this should be the clubs decision to raise the price if they wish, not be forced into it.

Would you be happy if they started to control ticket prices? Sorry fans but the EFL have decided we must charge £50 a ticket for this game whilst then signing TV deals with Sky for peanuts.

International fans are frustrated as it is paying a monthly fee where games can be pulled when shown on TV, games which might not even be on TV in their country.

It’s also been pointed out that £25 is a lot of money in other countries, highly doubt the EFL have stopped to consider this with their blanket 100% price increase.

[G STAR RAM]

33 minutes ago, David said:

The point is, this should be the clubs decision to raise the price if they wish, not be forced into it.

Would you be happy if they started to control ticket prices? Sorry fans but the EFL have decided we must charge £50 a ticket for this game whilst then signing TV deals with Sky for peanuts.

International fans are frustrated as it is paying a monthly fee where games can be pulled when shown on TV, games which might not even be on TV in their country.

It’s also been pointed out that £25 is a lot of money in other countries, highly doubt the EFL have stopped to consider this with their blanket 100% price increase.

Yeah all fair comments. 

Appears I have given my opinion without knowing the full ins and outs.

[David]

13 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Yeah all fair comments. 

Appears I have given my opinion without knowing the full ins and outs.

It’s ok, I’ve been doing that for the last 11 years ?

[Floppy Sausage]

£25 might not be a lot of money, but to double the price is just wrong. We also live in a world where you need a subscription to wipe your backside, so £25 on top of the other 975 subscriptions I currently have adds up. I have cancelled mine and will go back to audio commentary instead. The radio Derby commentary is better anyway, but obviously without the pictures.

[David]

33 minutes ago, Floppy Sausage said:

The radio Derby commentary is better anyway

[SunnyRam]

14 hours ago, mossjram said:

cancelled  , quiet months anyway was happy to let it ride now feel taken advantage of,  not worth the money compared to products offered by  BT SKY... EFL playing fans commitment to their clubs not the actual product (which is largely rubbish to non fans of clubs, poor replays/commentary/no aftermatch interviews, no pre match interviews,... all feels like a third rate product), why not charge 50 do they think 25 is a sweat spot     

Completely understand the frustration with the EFL price increase, but you can't compare RamsTV to the likes of Sky, BT and so on. These are billionaire satellite TV companies, whereas RamsTV is a small independent online streaming service. Compare it to the likes of clubs that use Ifollow and then see.  

[Ghost of Clough]

14 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

As easy as it is to wade into attacking the EFL, are they actually doing anything too bad here?

Isnt one of MMs gripes with them that they are not getting a good deal for their members?

If so, Id say charging £12-50 a month to watch matches (which cost fans over here £40-00) is underselling the product.

Is £12-50 a month really going to have people turning off? Its the equivalent of putting £3 on a match ticket which people would probably not even notice.

If the money is going to the club too I don't see what all the fuss is about?

Money was a major factor, but so too was how short sighted the EFL were with signing the Sky deal. The world is moving away from standard TV services provided by the likes of Sky, and moving towards subscription services such as Netflix and Amazon.

The Sky deal is worth about £100m per season (shared between all three leagues), working out at about £2.5m for a top Championship club. In recent seasons (probably not last season), we'd be on Sky 15 times, pulling in about 400,000 viewers each time - 40p per viewer.

 

Back onto the streaming deal... As has been shown time and time again, high prices results in illegal streams. With the changes over the last 10 or so years, illegal downloads of music and movies is now almost non-existent. Availability and cost to the customer has been slashed, with overall income shooting up. 
By doubling the cost, I wouldn't bet against more than half ending their subscriptions. Some people would have previously left their subscription running over the summer out of convenience. There's no chance of that now - paying £50/75 to watch nothing other than maybe 3 or 4 pre-season games isn't going to happen.

Also, every game on Sky is unavailable to watch outside of the dark market countries. Typically, that leaves 30 games through a season which are available. It's not far off being better to just pay for single games.

Don't Sky charge £25 pm? With that you can watch every Derby game and lots more. Sadly, it makes RamsTV poor value for money in comparison. The change will undoubtedly reduce the amount of income for clubs via streaming services.

[Spanish]

23 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

 

Don't Sky charge £25 pm? With that you can watch every Derby game and lots more. Sadly, it makes RamsTV poor value for money in comparison. The change will undoubtedly reduce the amount of income for clubs via streaming services.

Sky is not formally available outside UK, Overseas RTV should not be available to those resident in UK.  RTV has increased by 300% since it started.  I suppose it doesn't help paying for watching tripe for most of the season.

[Ghost of Clough]

4 minutes ago, Spanish said:

Sky is not formally available outside UK, Overseas RTV should not be available to those resident in UK.  RTV has increased by 300% since it started.  I suppose it doesn't help paying for watching tripe for most of the season.

That makes it even worse. You have the option of watching two thirds of the games I can whilst paying the same amount or not watching at all.

[Spanish]

16 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

That makes it even worse. You have the option of watching two thirds of the games I can whilst paying the same amount or not watching at all.

personally it is not the money, its more the feeling that they can ramp up the prices because I have no alternative, 300% in what is it 3 or 4 years.