sky sports.

Got anything else on your mind that isn't about the Warriors? If you do, this is the place to post.
fozzieskem
Posts: 6494
Joined: Sat May 14, 2016 10:54 am

sky sports.

Post by fozzieskem »

Dont know if anyone has seen this,but complete revamp on the way re pricing and the way you watch sport on sky..

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/ ... lf-cricket
endoman
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 7:22 pm

Re: sky sports.

Post by endoman »

Here's hoping there's a cheaper option for something without Football.
Nezza Faz
Posts: 1933
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 10:05 pm

Re: sky sports.

Post by Nezza Faz »

endoman wrote:Here's hoping there's a cheaper option for something without Football.
Yes, agreed - I suppose if every type of sport gets its own channel, then the true worth of RL will be known, and crucial in future broadcast contract negotiations ?
User avatar
Fujiman
Posts: 3126
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 1:19 pm

Re: sky sports.

Post by Fujiman »

Why would they change things to make less money? It's all about maximising what they've got and squeeze more money out of Joe public.
Nezza Faz
Posts: 1933
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 10:05 pm

Re: sky sports.

Post by Nezza Faz »

Reading between the lines they've lost between 10% - 15% of subscribers in the last 12 months, mainly due to new streaming options coming like 'Amazon','Netflix',etc. coming onto the scene.

It means people could possibly then "downsize" their choice of channel instead of being compelled to take the full Sports package, which costs a small mortgage.

This would enable both the RFL and Sky to analyse and monitor the tv subscriber users in actual numbers, even gauging the popularity of each of the SL teams at the same time and force the broadcaster to pay more to the RFL, provided the numbers of course stack up in favour of RL viewership.
User avatar
Fujiman
Posts: 3126
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 1:19 pm

Re: sky sports.

Post by Fujiman »

Nezza Faz wrote:Reading between the lines they've lost between 10% - 15% of subscribers in the last 12 months, mainly due to new streaming options coming like 'Amazon','Netflix',etc. coming onto the scene.

It means people could possibly then "downsize" their choice of channel instead of being compelled to take the full Sports package, which costs a small mortgage.

This would enable both the RFL and Sky to analyse and monitor the tv subscriber users in actual numbers, even gauging the popularity of each of the SL teams at the same time and force the broadcaster to pay more to the RFL, provided the numbers of course stack up in favour of RL viewership.
They already know how many people watch rugby, I'm sure Bilko has commented on it in the past. We have a long term deal already in place so it won't make any difference unfortunately.
Nezza Faz
Posts: 1933
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 10:05 pm

Re: sky sports.

Post by Nezza Faz »

Quote Fujiman:

"They already know how many people watch rugby, I'm sure Bilko has commented on it in the past. We have a long term deal already in place so it won't make any difference unfortunately"


- That's true Fuji, but it places our game in the stark spotlight if we don't deliver the viewing figures in the future, especially with the next tv deals.

Important for the attraction of Advertisers and business model to the relevant monies the RFL can expect to attract, in direct comparison to other sports.

moto748
Posts: 4626
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 5:30 pm

Re: sky sports.

Post by moto748 »

Sky Sports is a microcosm of everything that's wrong with the world.


The scum.
josie andrews
Posts: 35725
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:17 pm
Location: Wigan
Contact:

Re: sky sports.

Post by josie andrews »

There's something goin on at the minute bout a takeover
The culture secretary has said she is "minded to" refer Rupert Murdoch's 21st Century Fox takeover of Sky to the competition watchdog.
Karen Bradley's decision is a blow to the media mogul's hopes of having the £11.7bn deal waved through without further scrutiny.
Mr Murdoch already owns 39% of the satellite broadcaster.
An earlier attempt to take over Sky was abandoned in the wake of the phone hacking scandal.
Ms Bradley told the Commons that Ofcom's report into the deal found it risked the Murdoch family having "increased influence" over the UK's news agenda and the political process.
Not got the link but it's on BBC business news for full story
Anyone can support a team when it is winning, that takes no courage.
But to stand behind a team, to defend a team when it is down and really needs you,
that takes a lot of courage. #18thMan
User avatar
Wigan_forever1985
Posts: 6568
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: sky sports.

Post by Wigan_forever1985 »

maybe should be careful what we wish for re cheaper packages. My understanding is we are on "the other" channel that sweeps up the sports sky doesn't care about. So Football (x2), Cricket, Golf get their own channels and the Arena channel is used for everything else.

Im guessing this may have a direct impact on how they share their money out too, so being part of the "everyone else" channel may affect how much money we get off them, me thinks this is a ploy to better compensate the amount of money they spend on certain sports
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure
Locked