Much like with the EPL (if you also want to see CL, EL and FA Cup aswell) you still need both Spark and Sky.
so basically spark are cherry picking events and sports, not to create a competitive market and help the end viewer, cos this doesn't, but to increase their own profits.
It's almost like they are a business or something...
I have no dice with them trying to make money, but just hope that the muppets who start crowing about how awesome this is actually realise that this is going to hurt us the viewers in the pocket and probably not improve anything.
Monopoly = high prices with minimal effort put into the service.
Monopoly broken up = good for consumer.
Sky used to charge $100+ per month for very limited coverage. Games were often delayed (remember how the A league used to be not that long ago? And the EPL always had a handful of games delayed before PLP took it over and changed peoples expectations). You used to have minimum sign up periods too.
Now you can get sky sports now for $40 per month, and spark sport for $20 per month. All EPL games are live on spark, sky has also increased the number of competitions it covers in response to the competition for rights. The cricket is going to feature games on free to air for the first time in over 20 years (I think?) and the women’s game is going to be covered better than it ever has before.
You can also watch sport live or on demand anywhere and on any device.
So sport is cheaper and has better, more extensive coverage. How is that worse exactly?