With the clubs not on iFollow they can still watch live - e.g. Villa http://www.myoldmansaid.com/what-villans-are-missing-out-with-ifollow/ Compared to Hull City Tigers' response https://www.hullcitytigers.com/news/articles/2017/201718-tigers-tv-live-streaming-update/
He didn't decline. He almost went but Silva threatened to walk because he was losing too many good players, Assem turned up, sent Ehab to bed early and called the deal off.
Wasn't Ehab being his usual **** self, accepted the offer then pulled it, just to be a prick? He's such a ****ing dick.
I am reliably informed that Silva had the right hump about the Salibur deal, which he believed Ehab had deliberately sabotaged.
Either of these wouldn't surprise me in the slightest, yet the Allam's will still surprisingly have their defenders, pretty amazing really. There are none so blind...
Interesting sentence. It's too expensive but even so there's not enough money in it for us (based on us having rubbish numbers of oversea fans: paraphrased from earlier paragraph). Unlike the hugely supported Burton.
Was there any need for us to leave the FLi agreement? Why did we leave (apart from generic answers of owner bellendery)?
I guess I meant what was their excuse for leaving, was it ever justified? Actually, you know what? I'll just stop asking. It doesn't get any better.
Go on then, seeing how my ‘exaggeration’ rattled you enough for you to cry out, on average, how many overseas fans will pay to watch, specifically, Burton? I assume you must have a decent idea of the projected figures.
"And you'll never guess what she said....." "....and then I said... (looks around and whispers behind hand.)" Only joking. Of course I believe every bit of unsubstantiated gossip on here like everyone else.
Because their website was the worst bag of **** on the interweb? We could have employed a 5 year old to do a better job with geocities. That's probably why. I bet it cost an arm and a leg as well.
To make their own pretty website. Only the thing is, it looks a hell of a lot like Burton's website..
Even clubs still in the agreement have much better looking websites now. I doubt it cost much at all if it's the basic template provided to even bankrupt clubs.
The old Player system was crap, but this is a new system, so that's not really relevant. The service itself didn't cost the club anything, we just got a percentage of the income from Tigers Player subscriptions (it was very low), though there's obviously some cost in coming up with our own content (though we'd be doing that regardless of what online services we were offering).
iFollow would not have used our team name (Hull Tigers) so international fans would be confused and consequently not sign up.
