IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Game Outcome Uncertainty in the English Premier League


  • Dominik Schreyer
  • Sascha L. Schmidt
  • Benno Torgler


Despite the increasing internationalization of marketing activities by professional sporting clubs, previous research exploring the role of game outcome uncertainty (GOU) in spectator demand has been exclusively conducted within national contexts. As a consequence, very little is known about the preferences of international television (TV) spectators watching games from abroad. Hence, this study analyzes all 571 English Premier League (EPL) games broadcast in Germany between the seasons 2011-2012 and 2015-2016 in order to explore whether TV demand for transnational football games is affected by GOU. In line with the prominent uncertainty of outcome hypothesis, the results of this analysis reveal a significant and positive relation between German EPL demand and GOU. This result, however, is not consistent for male and female spectators.

Suggested Citation

  • Dominik Schreyer & Sascha L. Schmidt & Benno Torgler, 2018. "Game Outcome Uncertainty in the English Premier League," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 19(5), pages 625-644, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jospec:v:19:y:2018:i:5:p:625-644

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. J. James Reade & Dominik Schreyer & Carl Singleton, 2020. "Echoes: what happens when football is played behind closed doors?," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2020-14, Department of Economics, Reading University.
    2. J. James Reade & Dominik Schreyer & Carl Singleton, 2020. "Eliminating supportive crowds reduces referee bias," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2020-25, Department of Economics, Reading University.
    3. J. James Reade & Dominik Schreyer & Carl Singleton, 2020. "Stadium attendance demand during the COVID-19 crisis: Early empirical evidence from Belarus," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2020-20, Department of Economics, Reading University.


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jospec:v:19:y:2018:i:5:p:625-644. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (SAGE Publications). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.