Streaming Revenues

Looks like the EFL might have actually done us a favour if the league one streaming revenue is distributed in the same way as league two.

According to the Colchester chairman:
“The way it works currently is that the home team keep all of the revenue for the tickets they sell through their own website and they also get the revenue for the first 500 that buy via the away team. For example: for Saturday’s game against Bolton, we sold 452 iFollow passes, (so we keep all of the revenue from those), and Bolton sold 2252 iFollow passes, (of which we get the revenue from the first 500).”


What’s people’s thoughts? Have to say if I’m reading it right then it’s going to help up massively. Doubt we’ll see the figures we’re selling but it’s got to be one of the highest in the EFL.
 


It’ll probably be different in our league. Everyone keeps the first 2000, then an even share of the rest or some other utter bullshit.
 
Looks like the EFL might have actually done us a favour if the league one streaming revenue is distributed in the same way as league two.

According to the Colchester chairman:
“The way it works currently is that the home team keep all of the revenue for the tickets they sell through their own website and they also get the revenue for the first 500 that buy via the away team. For example: for Saturday’s game against Bolton, we sold 452 iFollow passes, (so we keep all of the revenue from those), and Bolton sold 2252 iFollow passes, (of which we get the revenue from the first 500).”


What’s people’s thoughts? Have to say if I’m reading it right then it’s going to help up massively. Doubt we’ll see the figures we’re selling but it’s got to be one of the highest in the EFL.

League One had a vote and it was agreed that Wycombe get the first 90% of all streaming revenue.
 
Looks like the EFL might have actually done us a favour if the league one streaming revenue is distributed in the same way as league two.

According to the Colchester chairman:
“The way it works currently is that the home team keep all of the revenue for the tickets they sell through their own website and they also get the revenue for the first 500 that buy via the away team. For example: for Saturday’s game against Bolton, we sold 452 iFollow passes, (so we keep all of the revenue from those), and Bolton sold 2252 iFollow passes, (of which we get the revenue from the first 500).”


What’s people’s thoughts? Have to say if I’m reading it right then it’s going to help up massively. Doubt we’ll see the figures we’re selling but it’s got to be one of the highest in the EFL.

I've not paid for a stream this season and won't unless someone tells me that SAFC gets all / majority of the income.
If it's spread around they can forget it

Ordinarily I'm all for sharing the love but last season's vote to end the season killed that for me in this league
 
Looks like the EFL might have actually done us a favour if the league one streaming revenue is distributed in the same way as league two.

According to the Colchester chairman:
“The way it works currently is that the home team keep all of the revenue for the tickets they sell through their own website and they also get the revenue for the first 500 that buy via the away team. For example: for Saturday’s game against Bolton, we sold 452 iFollow passes, (so we keep all of the revenue from those), and Bolton sold 2252 iFollow passes, (of which we get the revenue from the first 500).”


What’s people’s thoughts? Have to say if I’m reading it right then it’s going to help up massively. Doubt we’ll see the figures we’re selling but it’s got to be one of the highest in the EFL.

Thats quite decent that mind. League one and two are meant to be the same so that should be how our streams work. I know in the championship its the team that sells the stream that gets the money (so the "big" club would get the lions share whether at home or away). This is a bit fairer but should still see safc get a canny wedge more than most of the rest. If Bolton are selling over 2000 then you'd expect us to be hitting 5000 easily enough. So around £50,000 for home games and £45000 for aways. Obviously a fuck load less than we were getting with fans in the ground, and still a major issue with our wage bill, but I don't feel like we're having the piss ripped out of us at least. Thought they were going to say it's 50/50 or some such bollocks
 
Whatever the formula, SAFSee generates more for the club than IPTV does.

Yet "fans" come on here saying they "support" the club via their IPTV stream.

Just saying.....
If it is shared across the clubs then I understand that view. I’d do the same. Not funding other clubs with money that should be ours. If it works as in that above link the. I totally agree with you.
 
Interesting question. I paid for a stream on Saturday but might have to rethink aways if the opposition get pretty much all the money - for all but the more sporting clubs at least. Which clubs with us in ending the season and salary cap again?
 
IPTV and DHgate.
Some people refuse to put any money in the club and its been like that for a long time.
I’m against IPTC but pro DHGate. I don’t believe that £10 a match is too unreasonable and happily pay it (on the assumption the money is going into the club), but I believe that £50 plus postage for a T-shirt I only ever wear for working from home or going to a match is daylight robbery.

If DHGate and the like didn’t exist I wouldn’t buy one at all, so it makes no difference to the amount of money I put into the club. I have spent plenty on other things in the club shop over the years.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top