Sky again | Page 2 | Vital Football

Sky again

Red Wimp

Vital Champions League
#22
I don’t mind us on Sky for a couple of reasons. Obviously it means we’re being successful. And I get to see some of the players in HD . Last time we were on I was like I didn’t realise he looked like that.
 

Skip155

Vital Champions League
#23
It’s good having multi-cameras too. I think it’s good for a change.

edit - if they do multi-cameras. I can’t really remember.
 

Huntsward

Vital Reserves Team
#25
It’s good having multi-cameras too. I think it’s good for a change.

edit - if they do multi-cameras. I can’t really remember.
I've watched the last two Sky televised games on iFollow and they've had the multiple camera angles so I assume the Sky video stream has been provided for the iFollow stream. Obviously not all the other Sky stuff that goes with it, but a nice addition over the usual single camera view
 

LA_Imp

Vital Youth Team
#26
I don't think the club are ever going to turn down a game being shown live on TV, due to the money it brings in, which is likely more than they would earn from iFollow. So unfortunately as we've been so successful it's just going to happen more often as the season draws to an end. Sorry to say, you'll just have to live with it, they can't predict which games will be shown at start of the season in the lower leagues as no neutral would want to watch Fleetwood vs Gillingham with nothing to play for.
I understand this point of view but I think it is fundamentally flawed. What occurs is that iFollow take fan money for a promised product through a subscription service, in this case EFL games broadcast through iFollow. At the point of sale there are X number of EFL games that the contract covers. Then after the point of sale, the product changes and the number of games is reduced. This is probably illegal, it just has not been challenged yet.

I am not sure where the fault lies with this, clubs, iFollow, Sky, the EFL, or a combination of all of the above. But the situation needs to change. Either eliminate subscriptions, or deliver what was purchased. With any other product or financial transaction the purchaser, in this case the fan, would be entitled to an automatic refund. I should not have to "live with" having paid for something only for that to be rescinded. This is not about individual match day purchases.
 

Merthyr Imp

Vital 1st Team Regular
#27
I understand this point of view but I think it is fundamentally flawed. What occurs is that iFollow take fan money for a promised product through a subscription service, in this case EFL games broadcast through iFollow. At the point of sale there are X number of EFL games that the contract covers. Then after the point of sale, the product changes and the number of games is reduced. This is probably illegal, it just has not been challenged yet.
I've no idea whether this covers what you're talking about or not, but in the iFollow Terms & Conditions, there is this paragraph:

2.3. For match footage shown on a live basis (certain geographical territories only) not all your chosen Club’s matches will be available for viewing on a ‘live’ basis. This is due to, amongst other things, restrictions with television broadcasters.

Terms and Conditions - Lincoln City (weareimps.com)
 

Huntsward

Vital Reserves Team
#28
I understand this point of view but I think it is fundamentally flawed. What occurs is that iFollow take fan money for a promised product through a subscription service, in this case EFL games broadcast through iFollow. At the point of sale there are X number of EFL games that the contract covers. Then after the point of sale, the product changes and the number of games is reduced. This is probably illegal, it just has not been challenged yet.

I am not sure where the fault lies with this, clubs, iFollow, Sky, the EFL, or a combination of all of the above. But the situation needs to change. Either eliminate subscriptions, or deliver what was purchased. With any other product or financial transaction the purchaser, in this case the fan, would be entitled to an automatic refund. I should not have to "live with" having paid for something only for that to be rescinded. This is not about individual match day purchases.
Further to Merthyr's post "Some fixtures maybe subject to holdbacks due to broadcasting rights in your country" from https://www.weareimps.com/ifollow/faqs/ Besides, as an expat, have you not sorted yourself out with full UK TV like the rest of us?
 

LA_Imp

Vital Youth Team
#29
Further to Merthyr's post "Some fixtures maybe subject to holdbacks due to broadcasting rights in your country" from https://www.weareimps.com/ifollow/faqs/ Besides, as an expat, have you not sorted yourself out with full UK TV like the rest of us?
My interest in TV is pretty much what can I stream, and LCFC (loving LCFC this season, but don't really care too much about the rest of UKTV or US TV to be honest). I am probably way behind many on here in my TV access.

I figured the language in the contract might provide some protection for iFollow but I think it is open to a lot of criticism. I have no problem with the language if you are paying on a match by match basis. Totally legit and nobody is out money. But when you are purchasing a subscription you need to know what you are purchasing at point of sale, if that changes the onus is on the seller, not the buyer.
I clicked on the part of the website that talks about unavailable matches and this was the language given:

"Whilst the doors remain shut to fans, or with limited spectators allowed through the turnstiles, an arrangement exists whereby all matches that are NOT LIVE on Sky Sports will be available to stream by Clubs on iFollow (or Club equivalent service), for a match pass price of £10."

There is no mention of subscription services to iFollow, and when I looked up the schedule of unavailable matches Lincoln v Oxford was added, but clearly that was not posted earlier, despite subscriptions being sold.

An equivalent example would be if you bought a season ticket, some qualifying language was included in the Terms and Conditions of the season ticket, then half way through the season they said all seats would be given to local school children and the match would not be available for season ticket holders. Fans would rightly say they had paid their money and this was unacceptable, yet for some reason that logic is what is applied to subscription purchasers of iFollow.
 

LA_Imp

Vital Youth Team
#31
I think you have a point.

Time to find a pro bono litigator. Shouldn't be difficult in America! 😉
Haha maybe I'll make it my side hustle. I'll rope in myself, MichiganImp, and the 7 other Imps stateside for a class action lawsuit that will shake the foundations of International Football. I anticipate ripple effects similar to the Bosman ruling.

I will have to study for, and take the Bar first, so please be patient.
 

Huntsward

Vital Reserves Team
#32
My interest in TV is pretty much what can I stream, and LCFC (loving LCFC this season, but don't really care too much about the rest of UKTV or US TV to be honest). I am probably way behind many on here in my TV access.

I figured the language in the contract might provide some protection for iFollow but I think it is open to a lot of criticism. I have no problem with the language if you are paying on a match by match basis. Totally legit and nobody is out money. But when you are purchasing a subscription you need to know what you are purchasing at point of sale, if that changes the onus is on the seller, not the buyer.
I clicked on the part of the website that talks about unavailable matches and this was the language given:

"Whilst the doors remain shut to fans, or with limited spectators allowed through the turnstiles, an arrangement exists whereby all matches that are NOT LIVE on Sky Sports will be available to stream by Clubs on iFollow (or Club equivalent service), for a match pass price of £10."

There is no mention of subscription services to iFollow, and when I looked up the schedule of unavailable matches Lincoln v Oxford was added, but clearly that was not posted earlier, despite subscriptions being sold.

An equivalent example would be if you bought a season ticket, some qualifying language was included in the Terms and Conditions of the season ticket, then half way through the season they said all seats would be given to local school children and the match would not be available for season ticket holders. Fans would rightly say they had paid their money and this was unacceptable, yet for some reason that logic is what is applied to subscription purchasers of iFollow.
It hasn't changed. The T&Cs have been in place all season. It's annoying, admittedly. But they haven't mis-sold anything. It's always been the case that should Sky choose to show the match, the game may not be shown on iFollow, depending on the jurisdiction and territory.
 

PerthImp

Vital 1st Team Regular
#33
Tired of these Sky games to be honest. I pay for an iFollow subscription with a certain expectation and then after the fact broadcasting rights get changed. Identify them at the start of the season or factor in subscriptions for iFollow.
Hear bloody hear - fed up with it. About time these contractual shenanigans put the fans first instead of big business.
 

ImpAlaska

Vital Squad Member
#34
It hasn't changed. The T&Cs have been in place all season. It's annoying, admittedly. But they haven't mis-sold anything. It's always been the case that should Sky choose to show the match, the game may not be shown on iFollow, depending on the jurisdiction and territory.
Unfortunately I agree, I knew what I was signing up to. Annoying, but the only way to change it, is for us to be crap again. Not a price I'm willing to pay.
 

PerthImp

Vital 1st Team Regular
#35
I don't think the club are ever going to turn down a game being shown live on TV, due to the money it brings in, which is likely more than they would earn from iFollow. So unfortunately as we've been so successful it's just going to happen more often as the season draws to an end. Sorry to say, you'll just have to live with it, they can't predict which games will be shown at start of the season in the lower leagues as no neutral would want to watch Fleetwood vs Gillingham with nothing to play for.
It’s not about the club turning down live games, which bring in much needed income, at least for me. It’s about us exiled fans being able to see them when we signed up for “every league game live” on I-Follow. It’s also about the bulk of people being able to see the games, including those in a number of third world countries who have never even heard of Lincoln. 🤬 while those with first world TV coverage cannot do a legal deal to include a fe fans.
 

PerthImp

Vital 1st Team Regular
#36
I've no idea whether this covers what you're talking about or not, but in the iFollow Terms & Conditions, there is this paragraph:

2.3. For match footage shown on a live basis (certain geographical territories only) not all your chosen Club’s matches will be available for viewing on a ‘live’ basis. This is due to, amongst other things, restrictions with television broadcasters.

Terms and Conditions - Lincoln City (weareimps.com)
Yep - fully aware of this, but my argument remains, why can’t the big boys sit down and sort out a deal which is in the fans interests instead of the big TV companies and their legal agreements, which can be changed if people have the wit and intelligence to do it.
 

LA_Imp

Vital Youth Team
#37
It hasn't changed. The T&Cs have been in place all season. It's annoying, admittedly. But they haven't mis-sold anything. It's always been the case that should Sky choose to show the match, the game may not be shown on iFollow, depending on the jurisdiction and territory.
Then those T&C are completely unenforceable. If suddenly Sky decided they were going to show all matches tomorrow, should everyone who bought a year long subscription be directed to the T&C and be told, sorry no games for you? Just because it is written down when you sign the contract, does not automatically assume legality.

What is the answer to the simple question - when you took my year long subscription payment what am I receiving?

If the answer includes that it changes if a third party decides to broadcast a game, then established and automatic refunds need to occur for subscribers, or the subscription service needs to end. Anything else is misrepresentation.

I refer you back to my analogy about denying season ticket holders access to a live match because the club decided they would rather local school children come in to build youth fan support for as many games as they deem appropriate.
 

LA_Imp

Vital Youth Team
#38
Unfortunately I agree, I knew what I was signing up to. Annoying, but the only way to change it, is for us to be crap again. Not a price I'm willing to pay.
Like you ImpAlaska, I'm a Lincoln City fan so will do what I can to watch the Mighty Imps. But I disagree that the only way to change it is for us to be crap again. It can change if iFollow, the EFL, and clubs put the fans before big business as PerthImp has said.
 

PortMacImp

Vital Youth Team
#39
As with others I find the situation annoying. To have games syphoned off onto Sky does disregard iFollow subscribers. The fact the Imps will receive much needed revenue from this arrangement is some consolation at least. What I will do is try to avoid the score of the game and watch the full replay later on iFollow. I know avoiding the score is hard to do but it would be even more painful to hand over a payment to Murdoch to watch the game live.
 

PerthImp

Vital 1st Team Regular
#40
Unfortunately it’ll never change as long as the people running TV companies, who have absolutely no interest in, or knowledge of, the clubs and their lifelong loyal fans rather than their own business positions and money. I understand this is now COMCAST in the case of Sky, while Foxtel in Australia is such a convoluted mess it would take an eternity to sort out their contractual intricacies.