Fulham website, typical useless nightmare.

[Logicalman]

......

......

........  The point is FFCtv just don't care and they share that with a lot of others and that IMHO just ain't good enough.  I rather give my £5 to some homeless person.

And so, each to their own.

We would all like value for money, it's just life we live, we make the best of what we have and get and leave the rest for others to be concerned about.

[jarv]

Thank you all for the replies. The conclusion I have reached is there are 2 types of people using (or trying to ) fulhamtv.

1. some computer savvy smart people.

2. some computer not so savvy, ie...me.

I will keep trying and hope someone from above sends a lightning bolt to me with a wealth of computer knowledge.

In the meantime, I will scroll down the printed events in a game and get my Fulham progress and news on here. I will slo keep my eye out for positives about Fulhamtv, especially for people like me.

[grandad]

As I said earlier, I have not had any problems apart from the odd buffering but that may be due to my low bandwidth. I have been using FFCTV from here in Spain since it started & for 5 quid a month is is great value. Listening to GJ is like sitting next to your best mate in the stands.

[Bill2]

As a true computer professional I find it very disheartening to read comments such as FFCtv is no worse or even better than some other content provider services as if that justifies anything.  The EFL's own content provider branding has terms of service (and EULAs) that state they do not provide 'an individual service' or 'guarantee any content provision' and does not offer money back for breakdowns, service failures, or any other complaints a user may have.   They offer you access via your account name and password and that is all even if it fails to work for you.

In other words these are buyer beware services that offer no protection at all from the moment you agree payment via your details and unless you cancel your subscription with sufficient notice for them to administer your wish before next payment they will keep on taking your money with no obligation to provide a service to you at all.   

All these services provide minimum (and sometimes optimal) specifications for your equipment but still do not give any guarantee to provide a service good, bad, or indifferent.   They'll take your money even if you tell them to cancel the subscription because their online site has bugs and doesn't work properly. 

This has been allowed to happen because politicians have allowed this incredible laxity to be a part of EULA and terms of service through their ignorance of computer and digital technology/software and the power of the big player companies who want to take everything they can 'legally' get from you in return for providing services which carry no guarantee at all.

And as an added note no computer connection to the internet is free from potential malware interference and you should carry maximum protection on your device at all times unless you know exactly what you are doing.

I'm unsure, from this, whether you feel that the statement regarding 'FFCTv is no better or worse than other content providers' is justified given the current poor level of service provided by much larger providers, or not.

XFinity and AT&T have very similar wording to the EFL's own content provider branding you mentioned, and therefore no such content provider appears to provide a fool-proof service. In my own experience, I have less issues when using FFCTv than I do when using ESPN+ on a week by week basis, especially when it comes to logging problems, as it needs to be linked via another providers account to run correctly.

As I mentioned before, you get what you pay for, and the cost of FFCTv is less than other providers, for the same issues we each come across. And you're quite correct in saying that no connection is free from malware, and that goes for mainstream content as well.

I use a lot of content provider sites from free to premium as do almost all computer users - examples are too numerous to list, and strictly speaking, even FOF is a content provider (all the wonderful stuff lifted from  elsewhere).  My disparaging comments about EULAs and T-o-S come from my background as I have always the best is what you aim for and I have stood firm against a large number of companies (including Apple, Microsoft and IBM) for what I call 'cheating customers'.  Unfortunately those who accompanied the crusade against the big guys failed miserably because politicians were too ignorant to listen.

None of this relieves FFC, or its providers, of a duty to provide fit for purpose content.  Imagine turning up at Craven Cottage and watching five players on one side against eleven on the other because of a communication breakdown somewhere - what would your reaction be if it happened not just once but regularly?

Computers are not mystical creatures of immense sophistication but they do need credible people to write software, design sites and provide facilities and hardware that actually work every time. The only things that stop stuff working every time  is the drive to make profit at the expense of the satisfaction of a customer and that was outrageous in my childhood and should still be outrageous now.  £5 per month for something that doesn't do what it claims is not the point.  The point is FFCtv just don't care and they share that with a lot of others and that IMHO just ain't good enough.  I rather give my £5 to some homeless person.

I can only agree with the above in respect of how poor FFCtv are, but surely I buy this service via FFC and they are purely the contracted out service provider, so FFC should be giving this 3rd party a serious talking to about its level service to the fan community. Either sort yourself out or you will be shipped out.

[toshes mate]

I use a lot of content provider sites from free to premium as do almost all computer users - examples are too numerous to list, and strictly speaking, even FOF is a content provider (all the wonderful stuff lifted from  elsewhere).  My disparaging comments about EULAs and T-o-S come from my background as I have always the best is what you aim for and I have stood firm against a large number of companies (including Apple, Microsoft and IBM) for what I call 'cheating customers'.  Unfortunately those who accompanied the crusade against the big guys failed miserably because politicians were too ignorant to listen.

None of this relieves FFC, or its providers, of a duty to provide fit for purpose content.  Imagine turning up at Craven Cottage and watching five players on one side against eleven on the other because of a communication breakdown somewhere - what would your reaction be if it happened not just once but regularly?

Computers are not mystical creatures of immense sophistication but they do need credible people to write software, design sites and provide facilities and hardware that actually work every time. The only things that stop stuff working every time  is the drive to make profit at the expense of the satisfaction of a customer and that was outrageous in my childhood and should still be outrageous now.  £5 per month for something that doesn't do what it claims is not the point.  The point is FFCtv just don't care and they share that with a lot of others and that IMHO just ain't good enough.  I rather give my £5 to some homeless person.

I can only agree with the above in respect of how poor FFCtv are, but surely I buy this service via FFC and they are purely the contracted out service provider, so FFC should be giving this 3rd party a serious talking to about its level service to the fan community. Either sort yourself out or you will be shipped out.

Absolutely true that FFC need to clearly state what they expect of the provider.  We don't know how many companies tendered for the contract if any.  We don't know how the company behind FFCtv was chosen.  We do know there have been complaints raised at FST meetings but, as mentioned by others, there have been improvements made although I, for one, still consider the service provided and the ethics behind the provider company are seriously poor regardless of prices charged.  The mitigating factor may well be that there is no competition for contracts like this but if that is true then there is something seriously wrong with the whole way EFL and PL handle live and recorded coverage within the UK/Ireland and overseas (two entirely different problems to be resolved much better than thus far IMO). 

[perry geyton]

Don't pay - stream. The club is trying to profit from you without even offering a decent service. It's on ESPN in the U.S and championship games are not ubiquitously televised.

Look, it is decent service, okay? They have their own production crew and have improved significantly over the years. On top of that, it is of tremendous value to be able to watch non ESPN+ broadcasts. Yes, you sacrifice quality and amazing ESPN production, but you get GJ commentary on top of the field action. I remember when all I had to stay connected was GJ commentary. Now, I get to see my club and the great commentary to go along with it. It's completely worth it. I'll only get to be at CC as a bucket list experience, so I'll never be a STH, meaning I won't pay the significant amounts that those who are lucky to have that experience. So, I will gladly invest my time and money into my club - who are making a commendable effort in trying to bring the best product possible.

On a serious note - it's is decent and has improved over the years is pretty poor. Why hasn't it just been done properly in the first place, after years of sorting things out it may have been more cost effective to have just done it to the high and required standard at the beginning.

For a Premier League/Championship club (championship is 5th richest in europe) and with a billionaire owner - multiple times over, you'd think it'd be relatively routine to provide a good/reliable service.

I used to pay hundreds of dollars a month for cable service, and I suffered more outages, poor transmission, even worse 'customer service' in the cable service than I have found in the FFCTv service. I pay less for the yearly subscription to FFCTv than I did on a monthly basis for cable, and that was without the 'extras' like Netflix etc, so, when one speaks of "it'd be relatively routine to provide a good/reliable service" then the same should be asked of AT&T & XFinity in the US who rake in thousands more times income that the whole Championship TV services do each season.

If you don't want the hassle/cost of XFinity or AT&T then you have the choice to go elsewhere, the same goes for FFCTv.

I don't grumble about the various streams I have used to access (what some call illegal) content, when it fails me, I get what I don't pay for. Horses for courses and all that, but to claim that FFCTv does not provide a routinely good/reliable service is just plain incorrect, any more than to claim any of the cable providers in the US do the same.

What I'm getting at is that there is a professional and very reliable standard that can and does exist.  If at the most basic level it was a fulham internal streaming operation the costs could be covered to the point there would never be issues, like there shouldn't be.

If you paid an excess for a poorer service, that's not because a better standard doesn't exist, it means you paid for a poor service.

You have no idea what you are talking about, best leave it to people that use it successfully and live abroad

It's a fantastic service and worth every single penny to me

[LittleErn]

Can I assume, from the absence of any information to the contrary on the web-site, that tomorrow's Carabao Cup game won't be available on FulhamTV ? (in the UK).

[Deni On T'Crossbar]

Can I assume, from the absence of any information to the contrary on the web-site, that tomorrow's Carabao Cup game won't be available on FulhamTV ? (in the UK).

Unfortunately it won't be as the EFL don't allow it. Not available to international fans either as it wasn't picked by the broadcasters.

There'll be the usual GJ live audio and I'm guessing the 90 minutes/extended highlights will be available to FFCTV subscribers the next day.

[love4ffc]

In the States, ESPN has the TV coverage rights.  Sadly, tomorrows matches only have two that ESPN has picked up.  Everton and Aston Villa   :031:

Thank God for GJ  049:gif