December, 2017

Radio Times: Boxing Day TV

The last of these annotated Radio Times “guides” for this Christmas.

By now, everyone is a tiny bit fed up with one another. Walks are being talked about, and others are busily trying to hoover up bargains online. And everyone generally feels sorry for Next employees who are forced to be there in time to open up at 6am. Why? I mean, really, why?

On TV, all the ads are for holiday companies and furniture stores in retail parks. But there are also a few programmes that catch the eye.

Click here to read a nice large version.

And a final reminder that there are more of these where this one came from, with an archive stretching back nearly ten years.

Radio Times: Christmas Day TV

Happy Christmas!

Thanks to the regular readers of this blog, and anyone who visits at this time of year, just because they’re desperate to find something to watch on TV. I mean, what were you going to do otherwise? Watch that dodgy sounding Will Smith film on Netflix? Binge watch The Crown? Argue over whether to watch Coronation St or Call The Midwife? Or watch none of the things you actually want to watch today, and instead look forward to catching up with them on iPlayer when you’re not having to be deferential to your family?

While there have been lots of articles about how we don’t all watch the same things at Christmas any more, tell that to the millions who’ll end up watching Mrs Brown’s Boys (No – I don’t get it either, but I do understand that others like it). Or Strictly. Or Doctor Who. Or Victoria. Or Bake Off.

Anyway, here are my selections.

Click here to see a nice large version.

And in case you didn’t know, I’ve been doing these for a few years now!

Pixel 2 – Review

Note: I’m calling this a review, but frankly, it’s still early days, and there’ll be lots of things that come out in the wash further down the line. So think of these more as some initial thoughts. Not that any of this stuff prevents other sites posting reviews after less than a week’s worth of use.

I’ve now had this phone well over a month.


As my recent post about the pains of upgrading an Android phone made clear, I’ve recently bought a new phone. The Google Pixel 2.

When Google first started making* their own hardware, they concentrated on both providing a pure Android experience at an affordable price. I have previously owned a Nexus 5 and no fewer than three Nexus 7s. But the Nexus line has sadly long gone, and Google these days is about producing premium devices to show off what they can do.

So what about the Pixel 2?

Well let’s get the first issue out of the way. There is no headphone socket. That’s still a particularly user-hostile thing to do. I use my phone nearly all the time with a pair of headphones. And while I’ve used a variety of wireless headphones over time, they all need regular recharging and invariably you find yourself losing audio when you’re out and about. I actually tend to carry a spare pair of wired headphones just in case. In any event, I’m still enjoying the HTC Hi-Res Earphones that came with my previous HTC 10.

It’s true that the Pixel 2 ships with a headphone dongle, that has a nice snug fit to plug existing headphones into. But this only seems to come in white. I chose a black Pixel 2, and use black headphones. The dongle is white. Which means that after a few weeks sitting in coat, jacket and trouser pockets, it becomes more of a pale grey. I’ve already had to clean mine with an alcohol wipe a couple of times.

The dongle is also quite large. There’s a sizeable bump emerging from the USB-C socket that it plugs into, and it necessarily needs a solid female 3.5mm jack adapter. Combined, these mean that you have unruly lumps and bumps coming out of the phone which can get caught on things when you slide the device into your pocket. Some wired headphones come with 90 degree connectors to allow them to plug in flush to the phone. That’s going to make no difference here. Indeed those headphones are likely to make things worse creating an awkward L-shaped thing to place in your pocket.

The audio quality is excellent, although I don’t think it’s quite as good as my HTC 10 was. Google has dropped the price of these USB-C/Headphone jack dongles from £20 at launch to £9 now (matching Apple’s price for its equivalent Lightning/Headphone Jack dongle), and I’ve already bought a couple of spares because I know these will need them. One of these has already found its way into my cable-case.**

The Bluetooth functionality itself looks good, being Bluetooth 5.0+ LE, although I’ve not fully explored the Bluetooth range. My Beyerdynamic Byron BT headphones seem to work reasonably well, although they do sometimes connect slowly (as they also did with my HTC 10). On the other hand, my Sony MDR-1ABT headphones connect flawlessly, and because both phone and headphones support LDAC, they sound great.

I’ve also recently started using a pair of wireless Zolo Liberty+ Bluetooth headphones. They similarly connect flawlessly, and since both the phone and the headphones use BT 5.0, the connection is stronger than previous small Bluetooth headphones I’ve tried.

Interestingly, I am running into some issues with my Roberts ECO4BT DAB radio that acts as my kitchen radio at home. This is a nice sounding workhorse radio with Bluetooth connectivity, that I never had any problem with connecting to with my previous phone. I still haven’t bottomed out the issue in this instance, since re-pairing the phone will work once. I wonder if the phone is trying to pass audio in a codec that the radio won’t accept as it gets trapped in a reboot/reconnect sequence. I had no other Bluetooth issues, pairing the phone with various headphones and Garmin devices, a Google Home Mini and an Amazon Echo. It also works nicely with my long-in-the-tooth Sony Smartwatch 3.

I really bought this phone because it has the best camera on any smartphone, and I can completely believe that. With 12.2 MP rear camera (the front camera is mostly irrelevant to me), with an F1.8 lens, and capable of shooting 4K video at 30 fps, or slowing down motion to 240 fps (in 720p), this camera ticks many boxes. It uses a combination of optical and electronic image stabilisation, all of which leads to very good imagery coming out of the phone.

The default camera app seems straightforward, without much in the way of bells and whistles. There’s a portrait mode which does all sorts of algorithmic fakery to create bokeh (aka blurriness beyond the subject) that a wide open lens on a camera with a larger sensor would do naturally. The overall thinness of phones, alongside the size of the image sensors and, well, physics, mean that you have to cheat if you want to replicate the effects that larger cameras can create. But the F1.8 lens does mean that it works well in low light.

As important for me is the ability to shoot RAW photos. The default app doesn’t do that, but third party apps do allow it – Lightroom CC Mobile in my case.

There’s also an astonishing smartburst mode that shoots around 10 frames a second continuously. All those shots become available, but software will try to identify the best based on things like people smiling and having their eyes open. I think I only noticed a tiny delay in buffering when I reached 124 shots! And that was only fractional. Fantastic for catching fast moving action.

One small thing I noticed was that if you shoot a short burst of photos, then you can turn them into an animated GIF or video fairly easily. But if you shoot a long series of photos, the app decides that you can’t turn that into a longer GIF or video which is a bit annoying.

However, each regular photo you shoot also comes as a Motion Photo if desired, and you can turn that into a short video as well.

Let it snow…

A post shared by Adam Bowie (@adambowie) on

The camera also has a super slowmo mode allowing you to take high speed footage at either 120fps (1080p resolution) or 240fps (720p resolution).

(NB. The above example was shot in very poor lighting conditions, so does not show off the imagery to the best extent.)

The Augmented Reality (AR) Stickers are silly but, kind of fun too.


“These are not the commuters you’re looking for…”

The phone runs very smoothly with a healthy 4GB of RAM paired with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 processor. The OLED screen is beautiful, and the resolution means that someone with as many apps as I like to have, can get them into folders across a couple of screens, along with a few choice widgets (mainly weather related). With my HTC 10, the bigger font size meant a limited number of folders could be displayed at any given time, which I found frustrating, as it meant pages and pages of apps. But in fact, the default Android app drawer makes access pretty fast. And apps seem to install very fast indeed.

The full Android Assistant is built into the Pixel 2, and it can be launched in a number of ways. Voice is probably the easiest, or long holding on the home button – which isn’t actually a button. But you can also squeeze the phone in the lower part of it, and it’ll launch. Entertainingly, when I asked the assistant in the Google Store concession in Curry’s PC World on Warren Street (essentially Google’s flagship store in London), they struggled to get it to work. But it does seem to work fine. Whether it’s actually useful is a moot point. In any case, you can set the Google Assistant to launch from any screen including the lock screen. It can also be summoned by a double press of a standard wired headset’s multi-function button.

The fingerprint reader is excellent, and positioned on the back, is much better placed than phones that place them on the home button. It just makes one-handed unlocking very easy indeed. It must have taken me less than 10 seconds to register each finger that I wanted to register. It’s worth going into Settings > System > Languages, input & gestures to turn on Swipe fingerprint for notifications. It’s a quick way to get access to your notifications drawer, and I wouldn’t have found out about it had someone else not pointed it out. It makes it astonishingly handy for one handed use.

It’s also worth noting that double tapping the power button can be set to launch the camera. And if you have multiple camera apps, you can choose which launches.

When I first got the phone, one curious thing I came across was the way the phone seemed to handle WiFi networks that require some further signing in before you have full internet access. I think we’ve all had issues where we’ve taught our phones to use something like BT Openzone or The Cloud, with our phones latching onto the network, only to lose all connectivity until we sign in. It can be very annoying if the phone doesn’t seamlessly login in the background. The default behaviour on my Pixel 2 seems to be to continue to utilise 4G if the WiFi network isn’t offering internet connectivity. This is fine in theory, but can lead to problems when you’re signing into a some networks. My work WiFi network is especially secure, needing both a specific app and a security certificate to access. I found myself turning off mobile data to force the phone to behave properly when signing into such a system. Even opening up the Developer Settings where there’s a switch that should change this behaviour didn’t really work. However, during the course of owning the phone, Google has send out Android 8.1.0, and that seems to have sorted out some of the errant WiFi behaviour.

One thing I hadn’t clocked ahead of time, despite reading reviews, is that the screen is always on, in that it permanently displays that time and date, and depending on your settings, will briefly display notifications. I know other phones do this, but I’ve not had one before. I actually find this very useful. We are just talking about white lettering on a black background that looks otherwise as if the phone is turned off. And importantly, the display does not seem to impact on battery life.

Call quality is good, and it’s nice to discover that the phone alerts you to numbers that it believes are suspected of spam calls (“Were you in an accident…?” “Have you claimed your PPI…”). It’s unclear to me whether this is a Pixel 2 specific thing, or an Android O thing.

I bought the 128 GB model because, sadly, there is no Micro SD card slot on this – or any other Google phone. While I’m only really at about 50% full as I type this, once I’d installed all my apps, downloaded some music for offline listening, and got a full range of podcasts sitting on the device, I know that it’ll fill quickly. Podcasts are my “problem”, since as I’ve written before, I subscribe to more than I can listen to, and I don’t have them automatically delete.

So far, battery life has been exceptional, but since I’m only a few weeks in, that is fairly meaningless. The question will be how close to zero the phone is getting in terms of charge in 18 months’ time. Android O does seem to be quite aggressive in killing background apps that are eating power. And once you drop below the default 15% battery level, you can enable battery saving which places red bars at the top and bottom of the screen to alert you to your reduced power status.

The included 18W charger is very fast recharging the phone, although there’s no wireless charging (something that only seemed to be a “thing” when iPhones started offering it. Nobody seemed very interested when my old Sony Xperia had it).

There have been a few smaller issues along the way. The phone has, at times, randomly rebooted itself. This seems to be a known issue. But it has happened a handful of times that I’ve noticed. Google promised a fix. and at time of writing, I can’t say definitively whether the update to 8.1.0 has fixed it, but I’ve not noticed any more reboots.

And I did have an issue with audio via USB-C on one single occasion when my headphones just weren’t registered by the phone and the sound came out of the phone’s speaker instead. I had to reboot to quickly sort it out (fortunately, reboots are really fast).

I do question how strong USB-C sockets are in the longer term for those who listen to a lot of audio. Say what you like about the 3.5mm jack, but it was a solid and robust fit. Once inserted, the jack had little opportunity for movement, whereas the rectangular shape of USB-C sockets feels like it’ll be less stable in the longer term. Time will tell.

Android 8.0 seems to have added lots of little bits and pieces here and there. WiFi can be set to turn on automatically when you’re in a particular area. This is useful when you’ve turned off WiFi for some reason and forget to turn it back on. You can also turn on “Now Playing” which lets the phone silently identify music playing in the background at any time. It’s like Shazam without actually having to open the Shazam app. The song details come up on the lockscreen (Obviously, there are potentially privacy issues with having your microphone “live” pretty much all the time). Many of these features will be available to any phone if and when they get Android 8.0. That in itself is an issue with Android of course, with phone manufacturers and network operators being responsible for pushing out updates. My phone is unlocked and not tied to a contract to avoid these things.

Overall, I’m very satisfied with my purchase. The camera alone makes it worthwhile. The phone isn’t a giant compared to today’s monsters. But that means I can use it one handed, and it will fit in my pocket comfortably. It actually feels very slightly smaller than my previous HTC 10. However, there is no getting away from the fact that losing the headphone socket is a terrible thing.

* They don’t really make phones of course. They outsource them to third parties. In this instance, the Pixel 2 is made by HTC, while the Pixel 2 XL comes from LG. Google recently announced that they were effectively “buying” part of HTC’s smartphone team, so perhaps future devices will all be manufactured by HTC.

** I must write about this at some point.

Premier League TV Rights – 2019-2022

The new Premier League TV rights auction for the UK has just got under way, with bids due in at the end of January, and the results announced in early February. Such are the scale of these rights now, that the announcement tends to be made to accommodate the stock market. If a PLC is spending several billion pounds on something, this is “of note.”

Where do we stand, and where are we likely to go?

At first glance, there really doesn’t feel like an enormous growth left in the UK market. Last time around, the value of UK live rights rose a colossal 70%, from £3bn to £5.1bn!

This increase in cost didn’t come without consequences. Subscribers to both Sky and BT have seen increases in their subscriptions, while Sky in particular (who’s packages increase the most in value), has cut costs elsewhere, reducing some coverage – notably tennis.

But different players have different needs from Premier League football.

Sky

As the bid from 21st Century Fox for complete ownership of Sky continues to navigate regulatory hurdles, Rupert Murdoch himself is selling out to Disney. While the Disney deal itself will need to overcome any US regulatory concerns, the general feeling is that it will get through unscathed (While it shouldn’t involve the US President, Trump is reportedly more concerned about the future of Fox News than anything else, and Murdoch keeps ownership of that). Meanwhile, the prospect of Sky News being a Disney property rather than a 100% Murdoch owned, is probably more palatable to more people. The separation organisationally from the unsavoury practices at Fox News is probably helpful too. There perhaps remains a question of when the various deals go through, so that waving the Sky deal through before the details of the Disney deal have been finalised might be problematic.

But returning to the Premier League, for Sky the rights are an important – not to say critical – part of its overall offering. Sports also remain an important part of Disney’s offering.

ESPN has for many years been a substantial revenue generator, but of late it has began to suffer. So-called “cable cutters” don’t all want ESPN. It had been regularly bundled into all basic cable offerings, taking a substantial share of a household’s monthly cable bill, regardless of whether that household actually wanted to watch sport. As such, it became a cash cow. That’s still the case, but as younger subscribers choose their digital offerings in a piecemeal way – Netflix here, HBO Now there – ESPN was beginning to miss out. It was losing overall subscribers, and has of late announced a series of redundancies to cut costs.

In part to bolster that, Disney has picked up Fox’s regional sports networks as part of the Fox acquisition, qne they provide very solid ratings revenues.

The problem with all sports for broadcasters is that in large part, they are not actually owned by the networks. Every few years, the rights are put out to tender, and the rights owners tend to expect big increases.

That extends from the Premier League to the NFL, the IOC, the ICC, the NBA and so on. Sport has become disproportionately important because for the most part, the value is in live rights, and an audience that advertisers love being unable to skip the built-in advertising.

Sky needs the Premier League, and it has to pull out all the stops to maintain the crown jewels of the packages offered. But at some level there will be a red line beyond which it doesn’t make sense to bid.

BT

BT is in a slightly different position, as it built its TV offering as much as anything to support its broadband proposition. This has developed further when BT trumped Sky to buy Champions’ League and Europa League rights. Unlike previous minority rights holders of Premier League football, BT was clearly a serious player with serious cash available. By offering sport initially free, and later at a discount to its broadband customers, it was able to stem the flow to other broadband providers.

In TV terms, BT does still feels like a smaller player in the wider marketplace.

There may be a slight shift at BT now, as it develops a stronger TV offering built around IP delivery, but the company is really in the business of running wires and cables into your home.

Sky and BT Making Up

Interestingly, Sky and BT have recently reached an agreement to properly wholesale their packages to each others’ customers. While BT Sport has been available to Sky customers since launch, viewers had to deal separately with BT to view the channel on their Sky box. The new agreement will make it easier for Sky customers to add BT Sport to their existing Sky package, buying it directly through Sky. In return, BT will make available Sky’s Now TV offer via its own BT TV platform. That effectively provides a mechanism for BT to offer the full range of Sky Sports channels through its platform.

Commentators have suggested that the pair have reached this agreement in part to mitigate the chances of the pair outbidding one another in the upcoming auction. While I doubt they’d collude (which may be illegal anyway), it’s likely that the status quo would suit both parties just fine. The pair do potentially face some opposition however…

Sidenote: One curious consequence of the Disney takeover of Fox (and in turn Sky), is that BT currently has a deal with ESPN for much of its US sports programming. In essence this leaves Disney with at least a small foot in both camps.

The Packages

Note: This is based on published information. Precise details of first picks is likely to appear in the tender documents which aren’t ordinarily made publicly available.

Under this contract, we will be up from 168 matches to 200 of the 380 total Premier League fixtures being broadcast live on UK TV.

Previously, there were five packages of 28 games, and two packages of 14 games. BT won the rights to 28 Saturday 1730 fixtures, as well as a further 6 midweek matches and 8 Saturday matches. Sky won all the remaining fixtures.

This time around the seven packages are built somewhat differently, with Saturday evening primetime being added into the mix, as well as some intriguing midweek packages.

2019-2022 Packages
Package A: 32 matches on Saturdays at 12:30
Package B: 32 matches on Saturdays at 17:30
Package C: 24 matches on Sundays at 14:00 and eight matches on Saturdays at 19:45
Package D: 32 matches on Sundays at 16:30
Package E: 24 matches on Mondays at 20:00 or Fridays at 19:30/20:00 and eight matches on Sundays at 14:00
Package F: 20 matches from one Bank Holiday and one midweek fixture programme
Package G: 20 matches from two midweek fixture programmes

Packages A and B are the same as before, but increase from 28 to 32 games. Package C had previously been exclusively 2pm fixtures, but now has eight primetime Saturday night games.

Package D tends to be the most valuable package, in the past containing the majority of first picks (in other words, broadcasters can put the biggest matches in this slot, other considerations such as police advice notwithstanding).

Package E now gets some 14:00 Sunday games as well as Monday and Friday night football.

But, beyond an overall increase in fixtures and the Saturday night slot opening up, it’s packages E and F that see the biggest changes. Previously these were a mix of mid-week and Bank Holiday fixtures throughout the season. But under this auction they will account for four individual programmes. For example, when there’s a full midweek fixture list, all games are usually played on a Tuesday and Wednesday. But by offering rights to all these games in a given week, any one viewer can only really watch two of them, since multiple games take place simultaneously. So while there are 40 games in total across the two packages, there are potentially only 8 opportunities for a viewer to watch a game, with the other 32 happening during one of those 8 timeslots

So while it’s technically innovative, you wouldn’t expect this package to go for a vast amount of money compared with the others. It’s fewer games than other packages for starters. But it also seems squarely aimed at getting streaming services involved.

Both Sky and BT would be able to offer this choice – they both did or do similar things with Champions’ League group stages. But a decent number of the games are not fixtures a broadcaster might ordinarily choose to televise – think of those matches towards the end of an average edition of Match of the Day.

But if this is aimed at getting digital players involved, it would seem to require an awful lot of marketing for just 8 opportunities to watch on as few as 7 individual days.

The Premier League can only really show all its fixtures in midweek slots because there’s a blackout during Saturdays at 3pm to support the wider football world. But I wonder whether by 2022, we’ll see every Premier League game played outside the 3pm Saturday window? That would enable all matches to be shown live, and perhaps a 2pm Sunday slot having the majority of fixtures.

Potential New Entrants

A bit like the broadcasters, different digital groups have different reasons to use video. Are they looking to increase dwell time on their services, are they looking to grow their user numbers, or are they looking for something else altogether?

Sport isn’t out the question with streaming services, bringing with it loyal fans. But it also brings issues with having a robust technical backbone, and excludes those who don’t have solid broadband.

Furthermore, only UK rights are being sold. While the UK remains an important market for most of the big players, being able to offer streaming to multiple territories is preferable to global operators. The Premier League, of course, sees greater value in selling international rights in different territories to different operators rather than bundle them all together.

What is certain is that the Premier League is desperate for one or more of these companies to enter the market. If Sky and BT would be prepared to stick with the status quo and only offer modest increases in their bids compared with last time, it would take a third party entering to push bids upwards. The only possible existing TV group who might be persuaded would be Discovery via its Eurosport channel. But it’s just not clear that the rights make sense for that brand. While Discovery has spent big on the Olympics, it doesn’t have much of a UK footprint at all in football beyond various secondary UEFA and FIFA competitions.

Facebook

Facebook notably did bid for Indian Premier League cricket rights for a large number of territories, but the deal the IPL eventually did with Star India (also being sold to Disney as part of the Fox deal) included global streaming rights, so they lost out.

You wouldn’t count out Facebook from bidding for Premier League football, but the challenge for them is that these are UK rights. While Premier League football potentially offers increased dwell time on the platform, assuming that the games are broadcast free to viewers, there’s relatively little in it for Facebook in terms of gaining new subscribers.

However Facebook is investing in premium video, and they have money to burn, so a bid isn’t out of the question.

Google/YouTube

YouTube has bought sports rights in the past – cricket immediately springs to mind. Google is constantly evolving its offerings, with a rumoured reversioning of its music offering in both audio and video terms, due to be launched soon.

As with Facebook, Google doesn’t face any problems in being able to afford rights, but it’s not clear what it really gains for them. YouTube is already phenomenally successful, and Google’s reach is nearly complete.

Again, that doesn’t mean that they wouldn’t bid, it’s not entirely clear why they would.

Apple

Apple is also making a play to develop a premium video offering, but it hasn’t as yet entered the sports arena. It’s platform is much less developed in the UK, and if made available exclusively via Apple apps or devices, any bid would curtail audiences a bit.

It seems much less likely that Apple would bid compared with other digital players.

Amazon

Amazon may be interested. Their model is slightly different, and they’ve not yet achieved the prestige in the video marketplace that others have. They’re certainly jealous that Netflix has developed stronger video brands than they have. The recent acquisition of The Lord of the Rings rights shows their ambition in this area – spending $250m on the rights alone to make a series, before they spend a single cent on production.

Notably they have now bought a range of tennis rights, outbidding Sky for the men’s ATP tour rights, as well as buying US Open rights. However we should be careful here. The entire ATP rights package cost Amazon less than Sky pays for a single Premier League fixture.

Tennis feels like a toe in the water for Amazon. They also stream Thursday night NFL games – something Twitter did previously, but outside the US you may not have noticed (games happen after 1am local time in the UK, and 2am in central Europe). It should also be remembered that Thursday night NFL is the least valuable package, and Amazon shares the rights with CBS and NBC in broadcast.

Amazon certainly has the technology to offer streaming, both via its Amazon Prime Video platform, as well as Twitch, potentially allowing it to reach a younger audience.

As such, it feels the likeliest bidder of all the digital platforms, even if the strange nature of packages F and G don’t really seem to make sense for anybody.

Twitter

Twitter has played with live streaming, offering everything from an alternative election night programme with Buzzfeed, to eSports and, as mentioned above, some NFL games last season.

Of all the digital players, it feels like Twitter perhaps has the most to gain in terms of getting new sign-ups from something like this. However it’s not trivial to get Twitter video onto your TV set.

As a company, Twitter is a scale lower than other digital businesses (see also Snapchat, who I’ve not even considered here), and so cost may be an issue.

Netflix

This feels to be the least likely digital bidder. Their business has not been built on sport, and as mentioned above, the real problem with sport is its lack of repeat-ability. If you’re paying £10m+ for a property, then they want to sweat that asset over a number of years. The value of a live match is a one-time thing, and really doesn’t seem to fit their model.

Outcome

We’ll find out the answers to all these questions in a couple of months’ time. Would the Premier League leave Sky and/or BT without games or a severely reduced offering? If the money was right, then yes. How would pubs show games “broadcast” on Twitter? Someone’s phone hooked up to a TV set?

Just because these businesses have the cash, it doesn’t mean that it makes sense for them to bid for rights. There has to be a reason. It might be adding value to a wider package such as Amazon Prime; it might be growing the number of users, or increasing a site’s dwell time. But many of these services are doing quite nicely already.

I can’t see BT and Sky increasing their bids at anything near the level they’ve previously managed. The value just isn’t there. Sky has managed to diversify its offering with originals and exclusive deals with providers like HBO. Renewing that HBO deal feels almost as important as doing another Premier League deal.

In the end, it’s probably best not to second guess these things too much. All will become clearer in February when consumers will discover just how many subscriptions they need to get the full range of Premier League football on television.