New TV deal

[DaveO]

Do Sky actually want a sport worth watching? Pay peanuts, get monkeys.

They will pay what they think it’s worth based on the number of viewers, advertising etc.

The demand clearly isn’t there to warrant a bigger deal.

You can see with other sports Sky are willing to pay the money and promote. The issue is the RFL not growing the sport, not Sky.

I thought RL was right up there as generating top viewing figures outside of soccer. More so than club RU which has a much bigger broadcast deal I think.

If the sport was better funded and so could attract and keep the best athletes those viewing figures may well increase further. The Premier League wouldn't get the viewing figures it does if the top clubs could not afford some of the best players in the world and they do at least in part by the massive subsidy they get from Sky.

I think the issue stems from the fact under Nigel Woods the RFL accepted Sky's lower bid without putting the TV rights out to tender when the sport was arguably in a better shape and more attractive than it is now. I know IL was furious about that and rightly so but once you have let them have the same product for £15m less it is very hard to argue the opposite.

So we are where we are and the only way we are going to see significantly increased funding is if the sport can generate it from something other than TV money (stating the obvious) but that is a big ask. I' be astonished if IMG can rustle up an extra £16m just to get us back to where the sport was when NW was screwing it up.

[the pieman]

Do Sky actually want a sport worth watching? Pay peanuts, get monkeys.

They will pay what they think it’s worth based on the number of viewers, advertising etc.

The demand clearly isn’t there to warrant a bigger deal.

You can see with other sports Sky are willing to pay the money and promote. The issue is the RFL not growing the sport, not Sky.

I thought RL was right up there as generating top viewing figures outside of soccer. More so than club RU which has a much bigger broadcast deal I think.

If the sport was better funded and so could attract and keep the best athletes those viewing figures may well increase further. The Premier League wouldn't get the viewing figures it does if the top clubs could not afford some of the best players in the world and they do at least in part by the massive subsidy they get from Sky.

I think the issue stems from the fact under Nigel Woods the RFL accepted Sky's lower bid without putting the TV rights out to tender when the sport was arguably in a better shape and more attractive than it is now. I know IL was furious about that and rightly so but once you have let them have the same product for £15m less it is very hard to argue the opposite.

So we are where we are and the only way we are going to see significantly increased funding is if the sport can generate it from something other than TV money (stating the obvious) but that is a big ask. I' be astonished if IMG can rustle up an extra £16m just to get us back to where the sport was when NW was screwing it up.

he pulled a couple of classics in his time did Nige

TV deal signed off, so Bradford, Wakey could get money in to keep the administrators at bay, not that it did much good. Rushed through like you said with little or no negotiation or other parties at the negotiating table
and
Eddie Stobart anyone

[Charriots Offiah]

Live broadcast of every SL game! Why buy a ticket?

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/r ... nt-4264950

[Mike]

Live broadcast of every SL game! Why buy a ticket?

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/r ... nt-4264950

Works OK in Aus? Also does this say that they are all on SKY and free for subscribers? If not, its likely they'll be pay per view and the clubs might be able to stream them live for a fee?

Interesting development though. Something that everyone has been asking for is a level playing field on VR calls and we'd get that. They'd have to fund more refs I imagine. I wonder if all the games would be on SKY, or if the RL has to pick up the bill for streaming the.

[Caboosegg]

Live broadcast of every SL game! Why buy a ticket?

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/r ... nt-4264950

Works OK in Aus? Also does this say that they are all on SKY and free for subscribers? If not, its likely they'll be pay per view and the clubs might be able to stream them live for a fee?

Interesting development though. Something that everyone has been asking for is a level playing field on VR calls and we'd get that. They'd have to fund more refs I imagine. I wonder if all the games would be on SKY, or if the RL has to pick up the bill for streaming the.

I'm glad I didn't post a knee jerk reaction earlier. All games being broadcast I'd a big improvement gives wider exposure and if the product improves who knows how the next contract will go.

And for why buy a ticket? Why do people by tickets to any sport shown on TV? The experience, atmosphere. For me watching the game live is like a roller coaster of emotion but I also get less agitated at decisions as I can't 100% tell from the line the wrong calls been made.

Watching on TV is much more stressful as you have a clear answer to if a call is wrong.

[nathan_rugby]

Live broadcast of every SL game! Why buy a ticket?

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/r ... nt-4264950

Works OK in Aus? Also does this say that they are all on SKY and free for subscribers? If not, its likely they'll be pay per view and the clubs might be able to stream them live for a fee?

Interesting development though. Something that everyone has been asking for is a level playing field on VR calls and we'd get that. They'd have to fund more refs I imagine. I wonder if all the games would be on SKY, or if the RL has to pick up the bill for streaming the.

I'm glad I didn't post a knee jerk reaction earlier. All games being broadcast I'd a big improvement gives wider exposure and if the product improves who knows how the next contract will go.

And for why buy a ticket? Why do people by tickets to any sport shown on TV? The experience, atmosphere. For me watching the game live is like a roller coaster of emotion but I also get less agitated at decisions as I can't 100% tell from the line the wrong calls been made.

Watching on TV is much more stressful as you have a clear answer to if a call is wrong.

There is an agreement in football with the 3pm blackout of fixtures which stops every Premier League game from being played.

But I think that is to continue with the great attendance at lower league games rather than everyone tuning into the Prem instead.

A problem super league doesn’t have.

[DaveO]

They will pay what they think it’s worth based on the number of viewers, advertising etc.

The demand clearly isn’t there to warrant a bigger deal.

You can see with other sports Sky are willing to pay the money and promote. The issue is the RFL not growing the sport, not Sky.

I thought RL was right up there as generating top viewing figures outside of soccer. More so than club RU which has a much bigger broadcast deal I think.

If the sport was better funded and so could attract and keep the best athletes those viewing figures may well increase further. The Premier League wouldn't get the viewing figures it does if the top clubs could not afford some of the best players in the world and they do at least in part by the massive subsidy they get from Sky.

I think the issue stems from the fact under Nigel Woods the RFL accepted Sky's lower bid without putting the TV rights out to tender when the sport was arguably in a better shape and more attractive than it is now. I know IL was furious about that and rightly so but once you have let them have the same product for £15m less it is very hard to argue the opposite.

So we are where we are and the only way we are going to see significantly increased funding is if the sport can generate it from something other than TV money (stating the obvious) but that is a big ask. I' be astonished if IMG can rustle up an extra £16m just to get us back to where the sport was when NW was screwing it up.

he pulled a couple of classics in his time did Nige

TV deal signed off, so Bradford, Wakey could get money in to keep the administrators at bay, not that it did much good. Rushed through like you said with little or no negotiation or other parties at the negotiating table
and
Eddie Stobart anyone

Wasn't that done early and before the then current deal ran out so he could get is hands on the cash?

[the pieman]

I thought RL was right up there as generating top viewing figures outside of soccer. More so than club RU which has a much bigger broadcast deal I think.

If the sport was better funded and so could attract and keep the best athletes those viewing figures may well increase further. The Premier League wouldn't get the viewing figures it does if the top clubs could not afford some of the best players in the world and they do at least in part by the massive subsidy they get from Sky.

I think the issue stems from the fact under Nigel Woods the RFL accepted Sky's lower bid without putting the TV rights out to tender when the sport was arguably in a better shape and more attractive than it is now. I know IL was furious about that and rightly so but once you have let them have the same product for £15m less it is very hard to argue the opposite.

So we are where we are and the only way we are going to see significantly increased funding is if the sport can generate it from something other than TV money (stating the obvious) but that is a big ask. I' be astonished if IMG can rustle up an extra £16m just to get us back to where the sport was when NW was screwing it up.

he pulled a couple of classics in his time did Nige

TV deal signed off, so Bradford, Wakey could get money in to keep the administrators at bay, not that it did much good. Rushed through like you said with little or no negotiation or other parties at the negotiating table
and
Eddie Stobart anyone

Wasn't that done early and before the then current deal ran out so he could get is hands on the cash?

i cant remember the exact facts about it at the time, but it certainly wasnt done with the best intentions of getting a good deal for all parties, and it was purely to help a couple of cash strapped clubs out

[DaveO]

Live broadcast of every SL game! Why buy a ticket?

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/r ... nt-4264950

Works OK in Aus? Also does this say that they are all on SKY and free for subscribers? If not, its likely they'll be pay per view and the clubs might be able to stream them live for a fee?

Interesting development though. Something that everyone has been asking for is a level playing field on VR calls and we'd get that. They'd have to fund more refs I imagine. I wonder if all the games would be on SKY, or if the RL has to pick up the bill for streaming the.

I'm glad I didn't post a knee jerk reaction earlier. All games being broadcast I'd a big improvement gives wider exposure and if the product improves who knows how the next contract will go.

The broadcasters will be generating more revenue off the back of RL due to more matches being televised (or they wouldn't be doing it) but the RFL will be getting slightly less revenue than now. That is not what I call any kind of a win.

I really don't think having VR at all matches makes up for the fact the sport will remain chronically underfunded compared to the NRL and is slightly worse off financially due to this deal.

As to all matches being televised giving the sport a chance of a bigger deal in future, that will require someone else to bid for the TV rights besides Sky which isn't necessarily going to happen. I think we will continue to suffer from Nigel Woods incompetence where he effectively lowered the price for RL for a long time.

And for why buy a ticket? Why do people by tickets to any sport shown on TV? The experience, atmosphere. For me watching the game live is like a roller coaster of emotion but I also get less agitated at decisions as I can't 100% tell from the line the wrong calls been made.

Watching on TV is much more stressful as you have a clear answer to if a call is wrong.

I agree. I much prefer to watch the games live for the very same reasons but not everyone is like you and I in this regard. I think it's £22 a month for new customers for Sky Sports which is about the price of a season ticket. It may also affect the travelling support but we will just have to wait and see.

One other side-issue springs to mind. One of the IMG points criteria is having a big screen as a permanent fixture at the ground. Will there be a screen at every televised match or will video refs be working off a video feed not put up on a big screen? If there is going to be a screen at every match that criteria won't make much sense but then several of the criteria seem to have been made up on the back of a fag packet anyway.

[Charriots Offiah]

Live broadcast of every SL game! Why buy a ticket?

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/r ... nt-4264950

Works OK in Aus? Also does this say that they are all on SKY and free for subscribers? If not, its likely they'll be pay per view and the clubs might be able to stream them live for a fee?

Interesting development though. Something that everyone has been asking for is a level playing field on VR calls and we'd get that. They'd have to fund more refs I imagine. I wonder if all the games would be on SKY, or if the RL has to pick up the bill for streaming the.

It does work fine in Australia but you need to remember that clubs have other forms of income and do not rely solely on TV deals. British RL is a totally different beast in many ways.

I suppose the devil is in the detail but, given that the RL are already saying that they are hoping to balance the books through streaming, it doesn’t give you any confidence that they will be able to cover any shortfall in season tickets, or match day ticket sales, if attendances drop as a consequence of more live games.