Eames

Except that he wants a "Top" English Club. Which we ain't. And he wants to be in London. Which we ain't. Apart from that we would have got him......

You know what fair play to her. I wouldn't be able to do it. That us one scary tattoo she's got directly above her clearing in the woods.

I don't know why I care - I won't be getting it. Just curious really.

So will it be a full nuts out iPhone 5 or will it be a 4G, or a 4lite?

Or several orgasms and a large cleaning bill........

The current deal is in year 2 of 3. The recent ruling essentially makes that deal illegal (if rubber stamped but the High Court) so it would have to be re-negotiated now.

I've never said they can. Yep - a PAN EURO rights deal, thats what I said. Sky doesn't have to broadcast even though it owns the rights. Sky can sell these on where appropriate. The status quo won't change. The next TV negotiation (due about now as luck would have it) will all go to Sky. It will cost them more money, but protects their market. Yes they will because the rights allow permission to broadcast. If Sky own the rights to broadcast Europewide (which they don't at present) only Sky customers will be able to access football in Europe. The European element to the rights is worth **** all compared to the UK rights and the worldwide element. Always better to defend the status quo rather than risk the uncertainty. The PL will keep Sky happy because they need them and their money. If you think this ruling will bring about cheaper football you are sadly mistaken. Sky will either: a) pay less for the UK rights because they are now devalued as an asset. buy a new Pan Europe package and subcontract thus protecting their UK income. what they won't do is reduce their prices to pubs or domestic customers.

The premier league was formed based on the collective selling of broadcast rights. Why would the clubs vote in a majority to break that up when it would only help the biggest few? Then look at option A. Sky buys ALL the rights on a pan European basis and then re-sells them, to other broadcasters. The price will be the same via Sky or any other European provider. How will they sell the permier league in contries like Spain and Germany who have their own strong leagues or in countries like Poland or Hungary where wages are much lower for the same price they are currently selling it in the UK? They will have to keep the prices lower there to get sales. Do you really think that will happen? Anyone using a "foreign" system at present will be able to do so, but they will have to pay an increased price for their service because the ultimate rights holder will be Sky - who will then license to a 3rd partty across Europe. Sky get paid whatever happens, and if there is an appetite for Premier League football across Europe (which there clearly is since its already being broadcasted) the money will still roll in. If Sky hold the pan Euro rights, they can refuse to sell those for the 3pm saturday games thus essentially making the use of a foreign system redundant anyway.

The premier league was formed based on the collective selling of broadcast rights. Why would the clubs vote in a majority to break that up when it would only help the biggest few? Then look at option A. Sky buys ALL the rights on a pan European basis and then re-sells them, to other broadcasters. The price will be the same via Sky or any other European provider.

Why would it affect SKY at all? The PL will either sell Sky the total pan European rights for them to subcontract out thus ensuring the status quo OR deal with all the clubs separately and snap up all the rights that way. SKY wont lose anything and the clubs can't afford them to.

So all of the above then.........

Welcome to the end of the PL TV Rights settlement. Coming soon - clubs selling their TV rights seperately - OR the European Super League....? Take your pick. Its a ridiculous decision.

:shock: Does he interact with females? Or leave the house? Or bottle his piss? :shock:

Surely people don't ACTUALLY do that...? :shock:

Thursdays. (The NEW Friday afterall).

Risso takes Shillz to task over poor grammar

Frozen prawns in the curtain poles on your last day.....

I know what you mean B6 - it does have that impact on me. I also had splitting headaches when I decided to cut back from the 6 double espresso's a day. Never had the jangly nerves but the irritability and the headaches were ridiculous.

There's a joke in there about 'blowing Lurpak's trumpet', but for the life of me I can't see it. I think you'll find that's a trombone.[/pedant]

They don't even feature on my radar... I have absolutely no feelings about Coventry at all. To hate them, I would have to firstly recognise them as being remotely worthy to be considered a rival to Villa.... and I just don't.

This may be slightly OT but what the hell it made me laugh..... John Pienaar on 5Live this morning to random Scouse lady: JP: Which party do you think form the next government? SCOUSER: Labour, everything was better under them. I believe we can get that bach... JP: So what do you think about Ed Milliband? SCOUSER: I don't know who he is. Never heard of him JP (slightly incredulous): Ed Milliband, Leader of the Labour Party....?! SCOUSER: Oh. Is that who it is. (Embarassed laugh)

Yeah she's fine. Red and blotchy but fine. Guess she just fancied a birthday trip back to her birthplace......

Of course the 4 hour stay in A&E last night following the allergic reaction to substances as yet unknown is the down side to kids..... :-(

I may be wrong but the people on Dale farm are in fact paying taxes.. The tax payer however will the paying the £18m the council wasted in the botched removal the dirty imbred etc part of your post is just pure ignorance really , perhaps you'd be happy if we rounded them up and put them in camps ? Presumably they will be paying VAT etc, but as for council tax I'm not sure. I'm no expert but if the Council assert that the dwellings are illegal because there is no planning permission, they surely can't charge council tax on that basis either? The caravans and other mobile structures won't need planning and again, to the best of my knowledge don't attract rates either...... there is a traveller site a few miles away from me , my mate has a fire service business and had to go there and do fire risk assessments , check they had extinguishers etc (they pretty much have to comply with all the health and safety bollocks that I have to with my business) He relayed to me in conversation that they were paying council tax (least they told him they were) ... they even have a liaison woman within their community who is responsible for making sure all the children go to school ... true they may be paving the odd drive way for cash and not declaring it but then when I had my kitchen refitted the other year I paid the sparky and plumber cash .. in exchange for them passing on some of their saving to me :winkold: ..so again they are nor necessarily any different from Jo public in that regard either My job brings me into contact with quite a few travellers. There are two general categories. 1) proper gypsies. Spotless houses, and I mean I'd eat off their floors clean. a bit rough and ready but generally hard working honest (as honest as the rest of us) people who choose a different lifestyle to me, but have lovely manners and kids. And 2) dirty scummy pikeys. Who would flog their own granny, knick anything that isn't nailed down and abuse the benefits system drugs and all sorts. These can generally be found in most council estates. Who lives at Dale Farm? I don't know.