We'll be even less popular with Eddie and Stevo

[markill]

I've still not seen any mention of how big the deal is anywhere. I suspect this is because Sky got the rights on the cheap. Anyone got any info?

In total its around £200m. That BBC article breaks it down and the trade press papers give it coverage today too

[jobo]

To be honest i think IL is way out of line, Sky for all the faults of the broadcasting team of eddie and stevo, sky themselves how ploughed a healthy amount of money into our game and do their bit IMO to promote us including roping in stars from other sports to advertise our game such as bradley wiggins in the past and mark webber this year.

I cant see anyone else giving us that much time, BT are much more interested in football and yawnion

I agree with you about Sky. Their coverage of RL over the years has been superb but it's all based on commerciality and filling long hours of a 24/7 operation. Without the sports stations, how many people would pay a subscription and without subscribers, the advertisers would disappear. At the moment we have BT mounting a challenge and there are others waiting in the wings so to sign on for a extra 5 years is bad business.

[cpwigan]

I've still not seen any mention of how big the deal is anywhere. I suspect this is because Sky got the rights on the cheap. Anyone got any info?

The current deal is worth £127 million but, despite the increase of around £73m,

Therein lies the issue. An increase but on the cheap!

[Kaii]

TBH the only problem with sky is that they've treated this sport like a red headed step child for too long, the world cup proved that there is an audience and now they want to keep us. They've done nothing to promote the sport what so ever so they don't deserve it, premier on the other hand did a fantastic job of the wc and they have the nrl, origin, nines etc.
I'm a season ticket holder go home and away so don't need sky for our games. Plus any other i can stream from wiziwig so it doesn't really effect me, i would of paid for premier though but not sky

[Richymac]

This is stupid but I would love to see one of the three o'clock kick offs on the sunday on BBC every week that would really drum up interest

[Owd Codger]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/26023136

You are totally missing the point WF

Il is earning HUGE respect from me. He is arguing that RL is undervalued and selling itself too cheaply and to make matters worse cannot react to favourable market conditions for X years (Too many)

It is akin to you selling your 200K house for 150k AND/OR taking 150K over several year installments irrespective of the fact your 200K house is predicted to become worth 250K or more in 5 years time.

RL is screwed because the democratic voting process means that you can throw the leftovers from a stale loaf of bread at 99% of the clubs and they will say thank you very much!!

Spot on, cpwigan!

[Wigan_forever1985]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/26023136

You are totally missing the point WF

Il is earning HUGE respect from me. He is arguing that RL is undervalued and selling itself too cheaply and to make matters worse cannot react to favourable market conditions for X years (Too many)

It is akin to you selling your 200K house for 150k AND/OR taking 150K over several year installments irrespective of the fact your 200K house is predicted to become worth 250K or more in 5 years time.

RL is screwed because the democratic voting process means that you can throw the leftovers from a stale loaf of bread at 99% of the clubs and they will say thank you very much!!

I understand your point but look at it from this way;

Using your analogy I see it like selling a house WE think is worth 200k for 150k. However if the only other bidders wouldn't give you 30k for it then suddenly it becomes an issue of what do you take?

Other than SKY who else is there;

BT - an "emerging" broadcaster and will take years to get a foothold in the market if indeed they ever do - many have tried few have succeeded. During this time they are ploughing massive amounts of money into their rota - problem is rugby league is still considered niche market so they aren't interested they are only concerned with the big pulls, Football, Rugby Union and probably cricket and golf before us.

BBC/ITV/FIVE - I don't think I need to say anything about these our treatment by BBC has been getting worse and worse. FIVE would be the only channel that could get on board but they would not want to pay anything in the region of what sky are

most the other sport channels require a sky subscription anyway so we the consumer would still be no better off and it would only serve to lower the viewing figures and cut off any hope of picking up extra casual fans to boost the games reach.


Its all well and good IL claiming the game is worth more but its only worth what people are willing to pay. Who is going to pay more than what sky are?

Sky is still the biggest player in town and they still have the biggest catchment area.

If we really want to get what our game is "worth" we need to use SKY. No one will give us more exposure the problem is that for years and years we have never capitalised on that and we have failed to grow the game off the back of what is pretty damn good coverage.

[cpwigan]

The problem WF is if you tie the game down for a long time (too long?) to a contract such as this then you have no opportunity to test the market which is becoming more and more favourable to sports.

[Wigan_forever1985]

Granted you could argue it stops us from being able to get more money should rugby league take off and become wildly popular in the coming years which unfortunately I cant see happening.

However on the flip side you could argue if you don't take sky up you put their nose out of joint and in a few years time rugby league will still be un-desirable to the lesser channels so sky will them have us by the short and curlys and really be able to offer us nothing.

Im not saying that its the best deal in the world and that sky are angels and the saviour of rugby league but we have to face facts nobody wants us, we struggle to even find a sponsor for our sport.

Sky have kept up their end of the bargain and they give us plenty of air time and plenty of coverage.

Like I said if I were the RFL I would look to say right we now have 7 years, lets put together a sustainable growth plan so by the end of year 7 Rugby league is a desired sport from all broadcasters and we can start playing some of them off against each other.

In the modern climate and especially with what is happening re: teams going bust we need SKY like I say BT is probably the main competitor but they are still in infancy if we got into bed with them now and they fold in 3-4 years time then we could be in serious problems. Sky isn't going anywhere its the market leader and will provide us steady money.

Our game is worth more you know it I know it IL knows it. However its important to remember worth is subjective, and like I say something is only "worth" what people are willing to pay for it

[ian.birchall]

IL has blasted the RFL for agreeing the new Sky deal. Says it makes no commercial sence to tie into a further 5 years when there's still 3 years left on the current deal. I for what it's worth, agree with him 100%

It is no use IL moaning now, if he didn't want the deal he should have voted No even if some of the other clubs were desperate to get their hands on a paltry £300k, not much more than a weeks wage for Rooney which puts into perspective the obscene amounts of money that Sky pay football.