Jungle Out There Banner
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 188

Thread: Potential new Sky TV deal

  1. #76
    Learning All The Songs barry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Ashton in Makerfield
    Posts
    1,514
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyprus View Post
    20 million a year? We know Elstone is on 500K that will mean Rhodri will be on 200K then you have the rest of the functions, it would be reasonable to say it costs 4-5 Million per year just to administer Super League Europe. That leaves 15 Million for exclusivity and selling our soul.

    I would if I was Saints, Wigan, Leeds, Wire, Hull, even Leigh! Say we will take our chances on gate money and get rid of one of the governing bodies and SKY. They are killing us by a thousand cuts at present. Without repeating myself if that Grand Final is a worthless product or worth half of RU we may has well get our coat now. I disagree with the previous poster, Amazon Prime would be interested in purchasing the bigger games and it would be to a different audience. We stuck with the BBC all through the Eddie Waring era and they treated us like surfs.
    I don't think Amazon know what Rugby League is let alone be interested in buying the rights. BT is the only real alternative but that comes with a lack of exposure and possible lack of money.

    It is all well and good telling Sky where to go but gate receipts alone aren't going to fund decent wages for players. Also while it is fashionable to crucify smaller clubs on here just for being small clubs there is no way that teams are going to survive on crowds of 7/8000 and less with no TV money. Without them there is no viable competition unless we go back to part time which imo would be the death knell for the game.

    Sent from my SM-A715F using Tapatalk

  2. #77
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    921
    Rep Power
    3

    Default

    So would you just accept the 20 Million and bow our heads?

  3. #78
    Moderator Div's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sintellins
    Posts
    11,392
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    I think the last thing RL needs is to be tucked away on channel few people subscribe to.
    I think a free to air channel would be the best bet in the medium/ long term. If only they were prepared to pay something like the going rate.
    I think it's the best way to attract new interest.
    I reckon most of those watching on paid for dedicated channels are the converted.

  4. #79
    In The South Stand Dux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    4,454
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyprus View Post
    20 million a year? We know Elstone is on 500K that will mean Rhodri will be on 200K then you have the rest of the functions, it would be reasonable to say it costs 4-5 Million per year just to administer Super League Europe. That leaves 15 Million for exclusivity and selling our soul.

    I would if I was Saints, Wigan, Leeds, Wire, Hull, even Leigh! Say we will take our chances on gate money and get rid of one of the governing bodies and SKY. They are killing us by a thousand cuts at present.
    The clubs got rid of the governing body a couple of years back. They govern themselves and appointed Elstone themselves.

  5. #80
    In The South Stand Dux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    4,454
    Rep Power
    22

    Default Potential new Sky TV deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Div View Post
    I think the last thing RL needs is to be tucked away on channel few people subscribe to.
    I think a free to air channel would be the best bet in the medium/ long term. If only they were prepared to pay something like the going rate.
    I think it's the best way to attract new interest.
    I reckon most of those watching on paid for dedicated channels are the converted.
    I wonder if in the current climate a terrestrial channel could come into the mix. When Sky were offering 40m then it was well outside their spending range, but if a terrestrial channel came in now and offered, say, 15m it would be worth thinking about.

  6. #81
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,829
    Rep Power
    27

    Default

    If Sky value our game at around 50% what they did 5 years ago, despite crowds being pretty much the same and their tv ratings being pretty much the same, then the powers that be need to ask them why, especially as BT value the RU Prem at around the same as they valued it 5 years ago. If Sky want to pay half as much, fair enough, give them half as much. Tell them 20m gets them the first pick game of every weekend and one game a week from the play offs, and see what they say. We can then offer up second pick games to a terrestrial partner for 5m a year, leaving us with more money than Sky are offering for the lot.

    We could have Sky show a Friday night game (1st pick) and BBC revive the old Grandstand Sat afternoon slot for a second pick game with highlights of the Friday night game beforehand maybe. That would then mean they have a Sat RL game every weekend of the season combined with their Cup games, and would give them decent games to sell the sport. On most given weekends the second best game is decent, and it would mean a lot of attention for the sport for a price that the BBC would probably pay.

  7. #82
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    921
    Rep Power
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    If Sky value our game at around 50% what they did 5 years ago, despite crowds being pretty much the same and their tv ratings being pretty much the same, then the powers that be need to ask them why, especially as BT value the RU Prem at around the same as they valued it 5 years ago. If Sky want to pay half as much, fair enough, give them half as much. Tell them 20m gets them the first pick game of every weekend and one game a week from the play offs, and see what they say. We can then offer up second pick games to a terrestrial partner for 5m a year, leaving us with more money than Sky are offering for the lot.

    We could have Sky show a Friday night game (1st pick) and BBC revive the old Grandstand Sat afternoon slot for a second pick game with highlights of the Friday night game beforehand maybe. That would then mean they have a Sat RL game every weekend of the season combined with their Cup games, and would give them decent games to sell the sport. On most given weekends the second best game is decent, and it would mean a lot of attention for the sport for a price that the BBC would probably pay.
    Now that is not selling your soul, its saying OK you have devalued us. You can have some cake and we will try and sell the rest. By the way its one Saints v Wigan game per season.

  8. #83
    In The South Stand Angry Dave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    3,813
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    If Sky value our game at around 50% what they did 5 years ago, despite crowds being pretty much the same and their tv ratings being pretty much the same, then the powers that be need to ask them why, especially as BT value the RU Prem at around the same as they valued it 5 years ago. If Sky want to pay half as much, fair enough, give them half as much. Tell them 20m gets them the first pick game of every weekend and one game a week from the play offs, and see what they say. We can then offer up second pick games to a terrestrial partner for 5m a year, leaving us with more money than Sky are offering for the lot.

    We could have Sky show a Friday night game (1st pick) and BBC revive the old Grandstand Sat afternoon slot for a second pick game with highlights of the Friday night game beforehand maybe. That would then mean they have a Sat RL game every weekend of the season combined with their Cup games, and would give them decent games to sell the sport. On most given weekends the second best game is decent, and it would mean a lot of attention for the sport for a price that the BBC would probably pay.
    Saturday afternoon games get a big thumbs up from me, just think, you could get up in your own time, go for a breakfast, look at the paper, maybe stick a couple of bets on, go to the game with your kids/mates, few pints maybe and be home in time for MOTD. Surely that couldn't work?

  9. #84
    In The South Stand Dux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    4,454
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    If Sky value our game at around 50% what they did 5 years ago, despite crowds being pretty much the same and their tv ratings being pretty much the same, then the powers that be need to ask them why, especially as BT value the RU Prem at around the same as they valued it 5 years ago. If Sky want to pay half as much, fair enough, give them half as much. Tell them 20m gets them the first pick game of every weekend and one game a week from the play offs, and see what they say. We can then offer up second pick games to a terrestrial partner for 5m a year, leaving us with more money than Sky are offering for the lot.

    We could have Sky show a Friday night game (1st pick) and BBC revive the old Grandstand Sat afternoon slot for a second pick game with highlights of the Friday night game beforehand maybe. That would then mean they have a Sat RL game every weekend of the season combined with their Cup games, and would give them decent games to sell the sport. On most given weekends the second best game is decent, and it would mean a lot of attention for the sport for a price that the BBC would probably pay.
    Good in theory but if Sky is the only serious bidder then I very much doubt they'd be willing to give up exclusivity without drastically reducing their bid even further. I think the reason RU has been able to largely maintain the value of its deal with BT is because there was a quite realistic prospect of them sealing a deal with Amazon. As long as Sky is the only serious bidder then they've basically got RL's pants down.

  10. #85
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    150
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    As a huge rugby league fan. I'd be willing to risk everything and just pass it over to Eddie Hearn if he was still interested.
    Second to that if he wasn't is letting the NRL take over.

    There is no hope for the super league without radical change in my opinion.
    More players will go to NRL and less will be interested in getting involved in the first place.
    That grand final was brilliant. Just a brilliant game and an amazing sporting moment, and the sport deserves to be massive, and I genuinely believe run right could be.

    What hope is there for a TV deal if there's no faith in those running the game in the first place

  11. #86
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Wilts
    Posts
    4,799
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dux View Post
    Good in theory but if Sky is the only serious bidder then I very much doubt they'd be willing to give up exclusivity without drastically reducing their bid even further. I think the reason RU has been able to largely maintain the value of its deal with BT is because there was a quite realistic prospect of them sealing a deal with Amazon. As long as Sky is the only serious bidder then they've basically got RL's pants down.
    Its up to the game’s leaders to promote the value of the sport. For years they made Labour club deals over beer and sandwiches with SKY when there were other bidders with an interest in the game so the current problems are of the sports own makings.

    How many times do we see this sport backed into a cul de sac? It just has no strategic vision whatsoever and constantly finds itself given fait accompli.

    Using Gray’s theory, it would improve the commercial position of our SL clubs no end if the sport improved its terrestrial presence as it could secure better partners for more revenue. Instead, the game just appears to be some sort of Coronation Street caricature where you ‘just take t’ money.’ Its other words its run like a ••••ing newsagent.

    I don’t buy ‘only SKY were interested’ at all, and if they were true it would be an indictment of the leaders, not a defeatist excuse.

  12. #87
    In The South Stand Dux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    4,454
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eddiewaringsflatcap View Post
    Its up to the game’s leaders to promote the value of the sport. For years they made Labour club deals over beer and sandwiches with SKY when there were other bidders with an interest in the game so the current problems are of the sports own makings.

    How many times do we see this sport backed into a cul de sac? It just has no strategic vision whatsoever and constantly finds itself given fait accompli.

    Using Gray’s theory, it would improve the commercial position of our SL clubs no end if the sport improved its terrestrial presence as it could secure better partners for more revenue. Instead, the game just appears to be some sort of Coronation Street caricature where you ‘just take t’ money.’ Its other words its run like a ••••ing newsagent.

    I don’t buy ‘only SKY were interested’ at all, and if they were true it would be an indictment of the leaders, not a defeatist excuse.
    Don't get me wrong - I'm not sticking up for the game's leaders, who have royally screwed this up over a sustained period. The Papa John's deal, which sent out the message that the product is basically worthless during a TV renegotiation year, was only the latest lowlight in what has been a consistent story of failure at worst and stagnation at best. Something needs to change.

    But right now we are where we are and unfortunately I think this embarrassing TV deal is something the game is going to have to swallow. If other broadcasters are genuinely interested then great, but if that were the case I suspect Sky would be offering more than 20m p/a.

  13. #88
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,829
    Rep Power
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyprus View Post
    Now that is not selling your soul, its saying OK you have devalued us. You can have some cake and we will try and sell the rest. By the way its one Saints v Wigan game per season.
    Yeah, I'd stick some quotas on Sky much like the PL do, tell them that they can only pick each team 8 times for example in their 27 first picks, stuff like that. 20m a year should mean less games, and shouldn't mean they continue to just show the one big game a week they care about now for half the money. They show Salford v Wakefield on a Thursday night in June because they have to fill the schedule, when all they really care about is games between Saints, Wigan, Wire and Leeds, and the two Hull derbies. Limit them to how many of those games they can show if they're only fronting up half the cash.

  14. #89
    In The South Stand Dux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    4,454
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    Yeah, I'd stick some quotas on Sky much like the PL do, tell them that they can only pick each team 8 times for example in their 27 first picks, stuff like that. 20m a year should mean less games, and shouldn't mean they continue to just show the one big game a week they care about now for half the money. They show Salford v Wakefield on a Thursday night in June because they have to fill the schedule, when all they really care about is games between Saints, Wigan, Wire and Leeds, and the two Hull derbies. Limit them to how many of those games they can show if they're only fronting up half the cash.
    I agree with you, Gray77, that this would be a desirable outcome, but I just can't see why Sky would agree to it. If they don't, or if they say, 'OK, but we're only paying 10m for that', what do you do then, especially if there are no other serious offers on the table?

  15. #90
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    near leigh
    Posts
    2,756
    Rep Power
    14

    Default

    If Rugby League is worth more than SKY want to pay the organisers should be made to tell them , if something is being sold anywhere and the person selling it knows that the buyer wants it they tell them the price they want and tell the, either pay it or go , we will get buy .

  16. #91
    Learning All The Songs barry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Ashton in Makerfield
    Posts
    1,514
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyprus View Post
    So would you just accept the 20 Million and bow our heads?
    I genuinely don't know what the alternative is. Others have come up with suggestions that realistically aren't going to happen. Problem is is that this has been on the cards for years. Games have been tucked away on Sky Sports Mix/Action/Arena with no promotion, rarely do you see an advert for a RL game these days. Thursdays we are behind the Darts on Main Event. Friday night games in the past were Skys main sports programming, now for a significant part of the season we are behind the EFL and Premier League Games. Hemmings was replaced by a cheap stand in who is awful, the outdated production has been done to the death. Sky don't care anymore and it shows in this crap offer.

    Sent from my SM-A715F using Tapatalk

  17. #92
    Learning All The Songs barry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Ashton in Makerfield
    Posts
    1,514
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CGSaint View Post
    As a huge rugby league fan. I'd be willing to risk everything and just pass it over to Eddie Hearn if he was still interested.
    Second to that if he wasn't is letting the NRL take over.

    There is no hope for the super league without radical change in my opinion.
    More players will go to NRL and less will be interested in getting involved in the first place.
    That grand final was brilliant. Just a brilliant game and an amazing sporting moment, and the sport deserves to be massive, and I genuinely believe run right could be.

    What hope is there for a TV deal if there's no faith in those running the game in the first place
    Hearns main broadcast partner is SKY, so there isn't any more money going to come in from that front. He may be able to negotiate a better sponsorship deal but the majority of named PDC partners are bookies and there are rumblings that there could be a possible advertising ban.

    Other than that what is Hearn going to bring? He specialises in big individual events targeted towards certain demographics in bigger towns and cities. The Premier League gets big crowds because it is an attraction, in some cases such as Exeter, Bournemouth for example they will only see that event once a year. Same with Antony Joshua as he fights once/twice a year, his fights sell themselves. Also what would he change on a match day experience? Loads of us go the games to have a few beers with mates/family and enjoy the game anyway, Chase the Sun is probably already being played after tries at most grounds, Saints have had walk on music for years and most clubs have Cheerleaders. I just don't see how Hearn is going to change that.

    What we need is the promotion that Darts gets and that is on Sky, not necessarily Hearn. Sky could promote Rugby League every ad break if they wanted to, and at one time they used to advertise the game well but they choose not too. It wasn't that long ago we had some sort of RL content every day, now we barely get 5 minutes before/after a match to even see the highlights. I used to watch Saints on a Friday and watch a full replay at about 12am when I got home. Games had the red button analysis and highlights from the other games afterwards. Believe me I'd like the RFL to tell SKY to do one but is there a viable alternative? It really worries me.

  18. #93
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    150
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I'm not going to pretend to have the answer, only that I believe maybe it's time to try something radical.
    In Hearns words. Rugby league is ••••ed, and by that I don't think he means how many cheerleaders or if a ground sells beers or not.
    One thing he did say specific is, first thing is scrap the salary cap.

    It hasn't worked. I don't think anyone can deny that. Maybe cashcow would still be at Salford throwing money at players if he wasn't restricted.
    Last edited by CGSaint; 24th December 2020 at 21:54.

  19. #94
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,829
    Rep Power
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    Hearns main broadcast partner is SKY, so there isn't any more money going to come in from that front. He may be able to negotiate a better sponsorship deal but the majority of named PDC partners are bookies and there are rumblings that there could be a possible advertising ban.

    Other than that what is Hearn going to bring? He specialises in big individual events targeted towards certain demographics in bigger towns and cities. The Premier League gets big crowds because it is an attraction, in some cases such as Exeter, Bournemouth for example they will only see that event once a year. Same with Antony Joshua as he fights once/twice a year, his fights sell themselves. Also what would he change on a match day experience? Loads of us go the games to have a few beers with mates/family and enjoy the game anyway, Chase the Sun is probably already being played after tries at most grounds, Saints have had walk on music for years and most clubs have Cheerleaders. I just don't see how Hearn is going to change that.
    Hearn is IMO very overrated. Darts and boxing are his two big 'successes' but I'll question whether either have been a real success. He has some good boxers in his stable like Brook and Joshua, but how many people out there know who Kell Brook is compared to how many people knew who Chris Eubank or Nigel Benn were? Those two were some of the most famous people in the country, with 15-20m watching their fights. Nowadays Brook will be lucky if a tenth of that number watch his fights on PPV. Basically, Hearn has taken a sport that is in a bit of a low period and glitzed it up, making his fighters richer than previous generations but really making the whole thing a niche interest for those willing to pay 20 for PPV once every few months. Now PPV obviously existed before Hearn, I'm not blaming him for that, but whilst a decent boxer in 2020 will be paid well more often than not, if you're someone who wants boxing to be mainstream and for our best fighters to be household names, no chance. Hearn has done nothing to alleviate that.

    And darts. Well, the World Championship and the Premier League of Darts are events, no doubt. The Hearns have done a good job of increasing the purse for these events and making darts players wealthier and more valued I would argue. But is darts bigger now than it was 20 years ago? Is it even remotely as big? Apart from Phil Taylor are there any darts players around now who are household names like Eric Bristow, Jockey Wilson and John Lowe were back in the day. The World Final gets around 500,000 on Sky, barely more than our Grand Final, and 90% of the crowd at these events are barely watching the darts and are there for a glorified fancy dress stag doo. That's all fine, I have no issue with that, but whilst the spectacle of modern day darts screams 'big time' it's only really big time for the small number of people who already watched it. For everyone else who in previous generations watched the darts and knew the players it has now become an irrelevance, much like boxing has become, whereas once upon a time half the country watched the world darts final and watched our best boxers.

    Hearn has no track record at turning something and making it more popular. He has made his athletes richer and made their professions better I imagine, but if we're looking at him as someone who will turn RL from a niche northern sport into a mass audience juggernaut I see no evidence of how he will do that. He can run good set piece events that don't require huge crowds and don't actually generate massive tv audiences, but with RL he needs to be able to have a plan for a 12 team competition over nine months of the year. We will have the same small audience but with a few bells and whistles attached, and probably a few things that would in time annoy us as we saw a bit of the soul of the sport removed.

  20. #95
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk paulscnthorpe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St Helens
    Age
    36
    Posts
    7,865
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Gray that post is excellent and my thoughts exactly.. I don't mind watching the darts on Sky, it's easy watching and I like seeing the St Helens lads doing well.. however I won't sit down and think the darts is on, I can't miss it, if I'm flicking through the channels I'll watch it..

    Same for boxing, I'd probably watch Fury vs Joshua if it was on BBC, or even Sky, but I wouldn't pay 20 and wait till three in the morning..

    I think a lot is the same for Super League, I know lots of football fans who watched the grand final on Sky, and all commented how exciting it was, they didn't think the event was lacking, they understood the drama if they didn't fully understand the rules. A similar number enjoy watching it if it's on Sky..

    The biggest thing for me is getting more onto terrestrial TV, the world cup is massive for our product next year

    Ultimately, even footballers aren't household names outside of probably a handful of England players, and a handful of top foreign players nowadays

  21. #96
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    43
    Posts
    7,829
    Rep Power
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulscnthorpe View Post
    Gray that post is excellent and my thoughts exactly.. I don't mind watching the darts on Sky, it's easy watching and I like seeing the St Helens lads doing well.. however I won't sit down and think the darts is on, I can't miss it, if I'm flicking through the channels I'll watch it..

    Same for boxing, I'd probably watch Fury vs Joshua if it was on BBC, or even Sky, but I wouldn't pay 20 and wait till three in the morning..

    I think a lot is the same for Super League, I know lots of football fans who watched the grand final on Sky, and all commented how exciting it was, they didn't think the event was lacking, they understood the drama if they didn't fully understand the rules. A similar number enjoy watching it if it's on Sky..

    The biggest thing for me is getting more onto terrestrial TV, the world cup is massive for our product next year

    Ultimately, even footballers aren't household names outside of probably a handful of England players, and a handful of top foreign players nowadays
    Agreed, the RLWC is huge for us if it can be played in front of crowds and can be promoted properly. Maybe a single event like that is what we need the likes of Hearn for, but not an entire sport.

    I said earlier that we didn't try to engage FTA channels who may have wanted live games, but at the very least we need to sort out a national FTA highlights show. There is no way BBC or ITV wouldn't want a proper 60 minute Saturday or Sunday afternoon highlights show if we offered it to them for a reasonable fee. Sky keep the live games but we use the FTA highlights in the same way the PL use MOTD. It is by far the most watched football show every week, two or three times as many watch it as the live games on Sky, and loads of kids watch the repeat on Sunday mornings. Without it I think the PL would miss it massively despite the wall to wall live games. We need something like that, on BBC2 or ITV for an hour over the weekend at a decent time, showcasing the two big games, a bit of analysis, etc, it would make alot of difference to what we have now with the SLS on in the middle of the night on a Monday.

  22. #97
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    7,734
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulscnthorpe View Post
    Gray that post is excellent and my thoughts exactly.. I don't mind watching the darts on Sky, it's easy watching and I like seeing the St Helens lads doing well.. however I won't sit down and think the darts is on, I can't miss it, if I'm flicking through the channels I'll watch it..

    Same for boxing, I'd probably watch Fury vs Joshua if it was on BBC, or even Sky, but I wouldn't pay 20 and wait till three in the morning..

    I think a lot is the same for Super League, I know lots of football fans who watched the grand final on Sky, and all commented how exciting it was, they didn't think the event was lacking, they understood the drama if they didn't fully understand the rules. A similar number enjoy watching it if it's on Sky..

    The biggest thing for me is getting more onto terrestrial TV, the world cup is massive for our product next year

    Ultimately, even footballers aren't household names outside of probably a handful of England players, and a handful of top foreign players nowadays
    This pretty much sums up my thoughts the only difference being. I won't watch darts unless one of the St Helens lads is playing.
    I quite like Boxing, but I'd rather watch it on youtube the next morning than stay up till all hours and pay 20 quid.

  23. #98
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    7,734
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    Agreed, the RLWC is huge for us if it can be played in front of crowds and can be promoted properly. Maybe a single event like that is what we need the likes of Hearn for, but not an entire sport.

    I said earlier that we didn't try to engage FTA channels who may have wanted live games, but at the very least we need to sort out a national FTA highlights show. There is no way BBC or ITV wouldn't want a proper 60 minute Saturday or Sunday afternoon highlights show if we offered it to them for a reasonable fee. Sky keep the live games but we use the FTA highlights in the same way the PL use MOTD. It is by far the most watched football show every week, two or three times as many watch it as the live games on Sky, and loads of kids watch the repeat on Sunday mornings. Without it I think the PL would miss it massively despite the wall to wall live games. We need something like that, on BBC2 or ITV for an hour over the weekend at a decent time, showcasing the two big games, a bit of analysis, etc, it would make alot of difference to what we have now with the SLS on in the middle of the night on a Monday.
    I don't disagree with any of this, but do you think that like of Elstone will have put something like this to Sky as a counter to their 20m offer? I hope I am wrong, but I can't help thinking that even if something like this has been proposed, and Sky say no, we will just say OK.

  24. #99
    Moderator Div's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sintellins
    Posts
    11,392
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    I made the point earlier in the thread that I would like to see a free to air TV deal for Super League. Whether that is sole or shared rights.
    We are a bit too eggs in one basket and tied to Sky who hold the cards. The game is basically financed by the Sky TV money.
    I just think a more balanced number of income streams would be better.
    I think Sky sells the game to the converted who are prepared to pay their subscription. It's irks me that we pay a fortune to watch our game to effectively fund the obscene amounts paid to The Premier League.
    I think having terrestrial TV package increases the chances of attracting new support. I'm sure all on here have had people raving about the Grand Final who never watch RL because they saw the conclusion on the news. Even a number of work colleagues/ Liverpudlians who never dream of watching much other than football praising the quality of the grand final. One colleague said "maybe I could come and watch a live game with you sometime"
    So the first bonus may be through the gate.
    I imagine if your on "normal" TV you can probably demand more for you advertising hoardings,etc as the potential audience is greater.
    I'm no expert but I'd see maybe supplementing the lower TV direct money by other revenue avenues.
    First and foremost though I think the game needs a definite vision and a strategy on where it wants to be and how it gets there. The situation and lack of long term planning was exemplified by the Toronto debacle.
    If the Rugby League World Cup goes ahead in 2021 it will probably the first major international competition on these shores post Covid. They need to get it right but on the back of it have a bloody good plan to build on it and SELL this game for what it's worth.
    I remember texting Rogues shortly after the grand final hooter (enjoyed that!) saying how can we NOT sell this sport when it produces a spectacle like that?!

  25. #100
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    7,734
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Div View Post
    I made the point earlier in the thread that I would like to see a free to air TV deal for Super League. Whether that is sole or shared rights.
    We are a bit too eggs in one basket and tied to Sky who hold the cards. The game is basically financed by the Sky TV money.
    I just think a more balanced number of income streams would be better.
    I think Sky sells the game to the converted who are prepared to pay their subscription. It's irks me that we pay a fortune to watch our game to effectively fund the obscene amounts paid to The Premier League.
    I think having terrestrial TV package increases the chances of attracting new support. I'm sure all on here have had people raving about the Grand Final who never watch RL because they saw the conclusion on the news. Even a number of work colleagues/ Liverpudlians who never dream of watching much other than football praising the quality of the grand final. One colleague said "maybe I could come and watch a live game with you sometime"
    So the first bonus may be through the gate.
    I imagine if your on "normal" TV you can probably demand more for you advertising hoardings,etc as the potential audience is greater.
    I'm no expert but I'd see maybe supplementing the lower TV direct money by other revenue avenues.
    First and foremost though I think the game needs a definite vision and a strategy on where it wants to be and how it gets there. The situation and lack of long term planning was exemplified by the Toronto debacle.
    If the Rugby League World Cup goes ahead in 2021 it will probably the first major international competition on these shores post Covid. They need to get it right but on the back of it have a bloody good plan to build on it and SELL this game for what it's worth.
    I remember texting Rogues shortly after the grand final hooter (enjoyed that!) saying how can we NOT sell this sport when it produces a spectacle like that?!
    The problem with not achieving what you propose, is the morons we have running the game. I'm not sure that "morons" is not overstating their capabilities. I really think yourself and Gray talk so much sense, and then we have have to listen to the likes of Estone and Rimmer, I am actually fuming just writing this. With regard to people seeing the end of the GF on the News: My neighbour is Scottish and a football fan. He saw the end on the news then the next day sat down and watched the highlights on youtube. I'm not saying that he is a convert, but he would probably watch a decent highlights programme and from there may start watching games.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •