Perhaps the most interesting detail from the ruling at Chesterfield Crown Court that saw a gang of five sentenced to a combined 30 years behind bars for providing illegal streams of Premier League games was that they had at least 50,000 subscribers.
That audience size underlined the scale of the problem because they are just one of many groups providing such services to fans - via Amazon Fire Sticks, other apps or encrypted websites.
The quintet, led by London-based Mark Gould, were jailed for conspiring to fraud and money laundering with the court hearing that they made an estimated £7m.
It is a big-money problem in which any football fan can get their hands on the pirated material with just a little bit of asking around. They are being sold down your local pub, by word of mouth and via WhatsApp.
And in some instances cost just £50 a year, or 5% of what it costs for a UK-based fan to have subscriptions to Sky, BT and Amazon Prime.
The Premier League’s frustration and determination to clamp down is easy to understand, with the broadcasters putting pressure on as they argue that the billions they pay for rights is being squandered as black market alternatives spread in every village across the land.
Yet what is often ignored is that the Premier League has a ready-made alternative that can significantly ease the issue: they can join the host of other leagues and sports by taking things in-house. It will not completely stop piracy but it can ensure it is not so widespread.
Fans of baseball, basketball and American football can buy annual subscriptions directly from the big leagues for between £100 and £150 a year which gives them access to every game live and on demand - similar to Amazon’s two rounds of fixtures a season in the UK. There are also packages which enable supporters to purchase a pass for their team only.
There are some blackout restrictions involving local teams - if you live in Kansas, say, the live broadcast of Royals baseball games will be shown on a local network with the leagues then making the full game available afterwards - but it has proven a success for the leagues themselves.
Among some club executives, there is a feeling that the Premier League will eventually reach this stage but the problem is right now the numbers suggest it is still not as lucrative as milking old-fashioned broadcasters for every penny. To make it viable the Premier League would need to have a certain number of subscribers and they are not entirely confident that the profit margin would be greater.
Unsurprisingly, some American-owned clubs are strong in favour of the eventual move to an "over-the-top" subscriber model and the Premier League is on record as saying it will move into that space down the road.
“I’m not saying it will happen in the next cycle, or when it will happen, but eventually the Premier League will move to a mix of direct-to-consumer and media rights sales,” league chief Richard Masters said in 2020.
“There is risk associated with it. Sports competitions like the Premier League have been successful in seeking partnerships with established broadcasters and having to secure funding as its model. Secured licensed revenue and direct-to-consumer revenue are entirely different strategies – the transition from one to the other, if and when it ever happens, would be a big moment.”
In the last international rights cycle, the Premier League considered rolling out a trial in Singapore that would have mirrored the MLB, NBA and NFL approach. But they decided against it and signed a bumper new TV deal for the region.
Former Crystal Palace owner turned pundit Simon Jordan weighed in a couple of months back by arguing that the Premier League should embrace “the Netflix of football” and while his numbers were plucked from thin air there was plenty of sense to the point.
He said: “Charge 100 million people around the world who would easily subscribe to it £9.99-a-month, which is no great shake in terms of cost, you’d be generating £10-12billion a year.
“You look at the £3billion a year that they’re currently getting and that has associated costs, so of course there’s a point in question that the league should be getting off its backside and moving through the gears.”
The blackout is another factor. Its raison d’etre is admirable and, at the time of introduction, was an eminently sensible move to protect the lower leagues. But that is now a dated concept and the EFL’s own streaming service undermines the very principle.
The main consequence of the blackout now is that even if a die-hard fan of a particular club pays four-figures a year for Sky and BT, they are still going to be missing out on a large chunk of their team’s games with the only way of getting live access by illegal means.
Several months back police said they would begin knocking on the doors of customers and deliver warnings to cease using these services. But it is the providers who are being targeted by the Premier League.
And while the five sentenced on Tuesday will rightly serve their time, the wider reality is many of the 50,000 subscribers will be moving on to the next subscription in the understandable determination to trim outgoings during a cost of living crisis that the game’s decision-makers have little interest in assisting with through their own greed.
