Another 3 years of Terry OConnor

[Belgian Saint]

If every game is being televised is this not a chance to increase the revenue from ground advertising, as they will receive national coverage every week.

You would hope that is the case, more so if we get decent viewing figures.

[DD]

I cannot see any possibility that the clubs would allow six different matches to be televised at different times.

If you look at the reasoning that Saints have always stuck to Friday games, it's for consistency and a degree of security for sponsors box sales.

I think people need to be careful for what they wish for. If we end up with more games televised, then the away support level which is already well down on 10-15 years ago is going to take another hit, and I suspect home attendances will too, with season ticket sales taking a massive knock if more games are at risk of being moved to Saturdays, which has traditionally always been the worst attended day for RL games over the last fifty years.

If all games are to be televised, even if three a week are on Our League App, the TV money needs to be adjusted accordingly. To sell six games a week for less than the price we last sold three for would be gross incompetence.

[DD]

If it's Sky it really needs a revamp with possibly an aussie commentator putting some enthusiasm in to the commentary. The cloth cap image that they push is preventing development imo.

Is this the 'cloth cap image' that saw an Irish guy elevated above similar qualified pros to get a presenter's job in RL because he had a 'different accent?'. Throw in Jenna Brooks and it hardly fits that bill.

The thing that prevents RL development is the fact that we are a tradition based society. It will never break boundaries because those on the other side of those boundaries have no interest in seeing them being broken. It's the very reason why 90% of expansion clubs eventually die off, and I think anybody with any degree of foresight can see that North Wales, Midlands and Cornwall are very much on 'death row', as we speak, and i wouldn't rule out the demise of Newcastle or London Skolars in the next five years either. They're all seeing declining crowds. Not one has hit the imagination of the public and never will.

[Blobbynator]

I cannot see any possibility that the clubs would allow six different matches to be televised at different times.

If you look at the reasoning that Saints have always stuck to Friday games, it's for consistency and a degree of security for sponsors box sales.

I think people need to be careful for what they wish for. If we end up with more games televised, then the away support level which is already well down on 10-15 years ago is going to take another hit, and I suspect home attendances will too, with season ticket sales taking a massive knock if more games are at risk of being moved to Saturdays, which has traditionally always been the worst attended day for RL games over the last fifty years.

If all games are to be televised, even if three a week are on Our League App, the TV money needs to be adjusted accordingly. To sell six games a week for less than the price we last sold three for would be gross incompetence.

I thought the same.

I suppose we have to await full details, but I'm failing to see any positives with this new deal. Less more but more games to be televised. How will that improve the game commercially? If the TV deal was double the value and they were doing it then fair enough, but I think this will just drive a culture of people watching on TV and not attending. Will the revenue streams bring in that much money that it offsets the reduction and potential impact on crowds?

[BackrowSaint]

The clubs are happy with it from a financial point of view. They are expecting a drop in attendances (particularly away as mentioned) but believe this can be offset with a greater chance of sponsorship revenue with more exposure of guaranteeing that brands will be on show every week.

There's also an expectance that sky will produce all of the games but not show them all, giving the opportunity for further top up sales of games through OurLeague and potentially other platforms with distributions to the clubs. This is all ongoing negotiation as part of the contract terms but the free production for extra games is essentially what Sky are paying in additional to their monetary value, which the sport can then raise further funds from.

Channel 4 are also interested in extending their deal (they didn't pay anything for the games they have had so far) and there's an expectance that this will now raise extra funding. I think this would still be Channel 4 production and separate from what's mentioned on the paragraph above.

On the face of it, I didn't like the deal. But the more I'm hearing of potential finer details on terms, it could end up being a better deal then we've had in our current term, whilst not ripping up any trees.

[Pasty]

The clubs are happy with it from a financial point of view. They are expecting a drop in attendances (particularly away as mentioned) but believe this can be offset with a greater chance of sponsorship revenue with more exposure of guaranteeing that brands will be on show every week.

There's also an expectance that sky will produce all of the games but not show them all, giving the opportunity for further top up sales of games through OurLeague and potentially other platforms with distributions to the clubs. This is all ongoing negotiation as part of the contract terms but the free production for extra games is essentially what Sky are paying in additional to their monetary value, which the sport can then raise further funds from.

Channel 4 are also interested in extending their deal (they didn't pay anything for the games they have had so far) and there's an expectance that this will now raise extra funding. I think this would still be Channel 4 production and separate from what's mentioned on the paragraph above.

On the face of it, I didn't like the deal. But the more I'm hearing of potential finer details on terms, it could end up being a better deal then we've had in our current term, whilst not ripping up any trees.

I hope you’re right. It feels to me like we’re on a slippery slope and need relatively rapid improvements in the game to sustain it. Radical ideas such as dropping to 12 aside, requiring smaller, cheaper squads, comes to mind. The need to level every team down and sustain unsustainable teams in lower divisions as professional or semi professional hasn’t gone well in my view, with promotion and relegation gauranteed. Promoting Featherstone, for example, would be a waste of time, May as well keep Wakefield!

We’re in danger of heading towards an anodyne, tick rugby with divisions so small the leagues are barely viable. Or a returned to part time professionalism, which is tantamount to disaster.

Clearly Sky don’t regard us very highly so we have to hope other TV deals can increase revenue.

[BackrowSaint]

I hope you’re right. It feels to me like we’re on a slippery slope and need relatively rapid improvements in the game to sustain it. Radical ideas such as dropping to 12 aside, requiring smaller, cheaper squads, comes to mind. The need to level every team down and sustain unsustainable teams in lower divisions as professional or semi professional hasn’t gone well in my view, with promotion and relegation gauranteed. Promoting Featherstone, for example, would be a waste of time, May as well keep Wakefield!

We’re in danger of heading towards an anodyne, tick rugby with divisions so small the leagues are barely viable. Or a returned to part time professionalism, which is tantamount to disaster.

Clearly Sky don’t regard us very highly so we have to hope other TV deals can increase revenue.

My initial reaction was very similar, certainly when you account for the ever increasing financial clout of the NRL to contend with.

[BigTuna]

The clubs are happy with it from a financial point of view. They are expecting a drop in attendances (particularly away as mentioned) but believe this can be offset with a greater chance of sponsorship revenue with more exposure of guaranteeing that brands will be on show every week.

There's also an expectance that sky will produce all of the games but not show them all, giving the opportunity for further top up sales of games through OurLeague and potentially other platforms with distributions to the clubs. This is all ongoing negotiation as part of the contract terms but the free production for extra games is essentially what Sky are paying in additional to their monetary value, which the sport can then raise further funds from.

Channel 4 are also interested in extending their deal (they didn't pay anything for the games they have had so far) and there's an expectance that this will now raise extra funding. I think this would still be Channel 4 production and separate from what's mentioned on the paragraph above.

On the face of it, I didn't like the deal. But the more I'm hearing of potential finer details on terms, it could end up being a better deal then we've had in our current term, whilst not ripping up any trees.

So what happens when every match is attended like a Huddersfield home game? Surely the "fans" watching on TV will just switch off due to a very poorly attended game with absolutely zero atmosphere - so who will these super duper sponsors coming in be paying to target?

[brook]

So what happens when every match is attended like a Huddersfield home game? Surely the "fans" watching on TV will just switch off due to a very poorly attended game with absolutely zero atmosphere - so who will these super duper sponsors coming in be paying to target?

You think fans will switch off due to stadium attendance ? People watch for the game not the atmosphere.

[BackrowSaint]

So what happens when every match is attended like a Huddersfield home game? Surely the "fans" watching on TV will just switch off due to a very poorly attended game with absolutely zero atmosphere - so who will these super duper sponsors coming in be paying to target?

There's some abysmal attendances in the NRL, hasn't effected their commercial revenues or viewership at all. I don't think I have ever, or would ever not watch something just because there's not people there, feels like a bit of a non issue.

[Belgian Saint]

So what happens when every match is attended like a Huddersfield home game? Surely the "fans" watching on TV will just switch off due to a very poorly attended game with absolutely zero atmosphere - so who will these super duper sponsors coming in be paying to target?

If you want atmosphere go to the ground.

[BigTuna]

You think fans will switch off due to stadium attendance ? People watch for the game not the atmosphere.

I have. I used to watch every game on TV 10-15 years or so ago - good quality games, well attended, good atmospheres etc. I struggle to watch the Saints games that are on TV that I can't get to live, never mind grind my way through Hull KR v Salford, or Hudds v Cas with no one on the terraces and Sky doing their best to make the pre-match stuff impossible to get through.

[Pasty]

There's some abysmal attendances in the NRL, hasn't effected their commercial revenues or viewership at all. I don't think I have ever, or would ever not watch something just because there's not people there, feels like a bit of a non issue.

I agree. We need as much TV revenue as we can get. Every team has a limit to the number of people they can get regularly attending at the ground, except for a handful of matches

[STIDDY]

I have. I used to watch every game on TV 10-15 years or so ago - good quality games, well attended, good atmospheres etc. I struggle to watch the Saints games that are on TV that I can't get to live, never mind grind my way through Hull KR v Salford, or Hudds v Cas with no one on the terraces and Sky doing their best to make the pre-match stuff impossible to get through.

SKY team suck the atmosphere out of most of the games, some grounds like Castleford they can't filter out as much because they are close to the fans. SKY seem to put the crowd on muted volume because they want to here the likes of the monotone commentators who talk a lot about decisions and players rather than the game itself.

Grand Final is a bit different though, thats usually on full volume.

[DD]

There's some abysmal attendances in the NRL, hasn't effected their commercial revenues or viewership at all. I don't think I have ever, or would ever not watch something just because there's not people there, feels like a bit of a non issue.

Abysmal attendances in the NRL?

The club with the lowest average attendance in the NRL last season was Cronulla with 12,044.

Only Leeds and Wigan in this country bettered the NRL's worst average crowd, and only by a few hundred at that.

If you want abysmal, then check Huddersfield, Salford and Wakefield's crowds.

I would suggest that Big Tuna's point is a good one. If you are a neutral flicking through the channels or tuning into a game on TV to see what it's all about, Saints v Wigan in front of a full house is going to grab you. Huddersfield v Salford in a stadium that's 15% full isn't.

Back to the sponsors, though, and they are attracted by viewing figures. If we assume that three further games will be live on the internet, which is all that's likely, then I really can't see this being a massive turning point in the clubs' ability to attract sponsors.

This TV deal unfortunately tells a very big story about how our sport is valued in the UK, and half of me thinks that Sky are only sticking with it because of their rapidly diminishing portfolio. Sadly, with no other real interest, they know they can buy us on the cheap, because I firmly believe that any other offers were either derisory or the imagination of an organisation that's trying to bump up the incumbent supporter's offer.

It's getting to that point when I think that the sport might have to do something controversial and go back to basics. Two leagues of ten, two up and two down, and bye to the rest. The game is rapidly losing its ability to sustain itself, and I'm seeing a tipping point when full time clubs are going to have to go part time or they'll go bust. As for any of the expansion clubs in the UK from the last two decades, I'd be amazed if any of them survive the next five years.

This is where we need IMG to actually start earning their crust. The promotion and relegation issues, Magic, and loop fixtures are not the pressing concerns. The emergency, flashing blue light issue is that we need them to be bringing in investment and getting the game better deals because, at the moment, the game is peeing vital funds away to a company that has done absolutely nothing positive for the game whatsoever.

[DD]

SKY team suck the atmosphere out of most of the games, some grounds like Castleford they can't filter out as much because they are close to the fans. SKY seem to put the crowd on muted volume because they want to here the likes of the monotone commentators who talk a lot about decisions and players rather than the game itself.

Grand Final is a bit different though, thats usually on full volume.

That Sky policy extends to football too, now. It's nothing to do with commentators and everything to do with being afraid of viewers complaining about songs, chants or shouts that contain foul, racist, sexist or any other form of derogatory language. The dampening of crowd noise is far more noticeable at football and it spoils the coverage completely, for me. Interestingly, that dampened sound comes back to full volume on the three minute You Tube highlights on the football, when they know they are safe.

[BackrowSaint]

Abysmal attendances in the NRL?

The club with the lowest average attendance in the NRL last season was Cronulla with 12,044.

Only Leeds and Wigan in this country bettered the NRL's worst average crowd, and only by a few hundred at that.

If you want abysmal, then check Huddersfield, Salford and Wakefield's crowds.

I would suggest that Big Tuna's point is a good one. If you are a neutral flicking through the channels or tuning into a game on TV to see what it's all about, Saints v Wigan in front of a full house is going to grab you. Huddersfield v Salford in a stadium that's 15% full isn't.

Back to the sponsors, though, and they are attracted by viewing figures. If we assume that three further games will be live on the internet, which is all that's likely, then I really can't see this being a massive turning point in the clubs' ability to attract sponsors.

This TV deal unfortunately tells a very big story about how our sport is valued in the UK, and half of me thinks that Sky are only sticking with it because of their rapidly diminishing portfolio. Sadly, with no other real interest, they know they can buy us on the cheap, because I firmly believe that any other offers were either derisory or the imagination of an organisation that's trying to bump up the incumbent supporter's offer.

It's getting to that point when I think that the sport might have to do something controversial and go back to basics. Two leagues of ten, two up and two down, and bye to the rest. The game is rapidly losing its ability to sustain itself, and I'm seeing a tipping point when full time clubs are going to have to go part time or they'll go bust. As for any of the expansion clubs in the UK from the last two decades, I'd be amazed if any of them survive the next five years.

This is where we need IMG to actually start earning their crust. The promotion and relegation issues, Magic, and loop fixtures are not the pressing concerns. The emergency, flashing blue light issue is that we need them to be bringing in investment and getting the game better deals because, at the moment, the game is peeing vital funds away to a company that has done absolutely nothing positive for the game whatsoever.

Sorry I didn't put that into context, abysmal in the way it looks when the games are in massive stadiums and there's 15k people in there referring to the feel of the atmosphere when watching.

[Ralph Fridge]

We are clutching at straws looking at more games shown.

Bottom line is how much money the tv deal is worth. And it's not a lot

[Dos Cervezas]

The only real positive I see is the introduction of video referees at all Super League games. We’ve needed that one for a while and should have really been in place for upwards of fifteen years now but it really sums up the lack of action and moving with the times within the sport for a generation. I’m not sure how you can have some games decided by decisions made with the video referees help and others that aren’t purely because they’re not televised.

As for the money and TV deal, it’s a never ending cycle. There isn’t any change to the competition structure (the same loop games, fans not interested in loop games, too many meaningless games etc) and the TV deal goes down. The income has then been reduced so the clubs protect themselves by voting for more loop games and a guaranteed amount of home games a season and with the lack of change, the TV deal goes down again. We’ve lost out on millions per year between the last few TV deals and it should be alarming for the sport but I’m not sure it actually is. We’re just doing the same thing again and again and expecting different results. As much as we as fans can point the finger at Sky, and with good reason, we also have to look at ourselves and what we offer them. Sky are a business and need to make money but we represent poor value and as such, our TV deals are dropping every set of negotiations. We have a competition that most of its fans aren’t really that enamoured by. Many don’t like or want loop games, many think we have too many weekly rounds, many think the quality of the competition is poor, many think we change structures every couple of years, many think the officiating and disciplinary is not working how it should and many think we have a play-off structure that isn’t the best possible structure and I’m just raising things off the top of my head that I’ve read here or on social media lately. If our own customer base thinks that, I’m not sure why we would expect people to become fans of the sport outside of the ordinary avenues (born in the area, family ties etc) when this is what we do.

IMG need to be in charge immediately. Letting the clubs who have lead us down this path to continue leading us down this path, ours included, is ridiculous.

As for televising all games, it’s an utterly appalling idea. There’s no value to do so whatsoever and is a massive loss earner waiting to happen. I don’t believe we have a fanbase who uses streaming platforms enough, I’m not sure there’s enough interest in the majority of games and I’m not sure many particularly make any money.

[paulscnthorpe]

As for televising all games, it’s an utterly appalling idea. There’s no value to do so whatsoever and is a massive loss earner waiting to happen. I don’t believe we have a fanbase who uses streaming platforms enough, I’m not sure there’s enough interest in the majority of games and I’m not sure many particularly make any money.

I'm guessing the few games our league have charged as a trial suggest that it's viable. I think there's plenty of fans who don't do away games anymore because they're a bit older, got kids, finishing late on a Friday who would be willing to pay for the odd game on TV. The impact on away supporters may be a bit of a falsehood, there's still plenty of supporters who make the trip even though we're on Sky.

I actually think this is one of the better aspects of the deal

[Buddy]

There's some abysmal attendances in the NRL, hasn't effected their commercial revenues or viewership at all. I don't think I have ever, or would ever not watch something just because there's not people there, feels like a bit of a non issue.

They average over 18000 this year

Sent from my SM-F711B using Tapatalk

[BackrowSaint]

They average over 18000 this year

Sent from my SM-F711B using Tapatalk

I added on a later post, in context to the stadia the games are in. The point I was replying to was that viewers will switch off when they see stadiums only half full with little to no atmosphere, but having been to NRL games, they are as flat as a pancake and the stadiums can be 75% empty at times. Sydney roosters play most their home games at Alliance which holds 45,000 and average 17,000. South Sydney play a lot at Accor which holds 80,000 and average 14,000. Even Brisbane who average around 30,000 only just go over half the capacity of Suncorp.

If viewers were put off by empty seats and poor atmospheres, they'd be turning NRL off in their droves. Even a cold wet February night against Wakefield has more atmosphere than any NRL game.

[Canterbredve]

There are fans outside the heartlands. I live in Canterbury and have been following Saints directly since 2012 (when I started to have more time and could travel) after falling in love with the game in the 60s.

I go to at least three home games a season. I've started staying with my brother in Cheshire and I go with him. I've brought a friend with me (an Arsenal fan). I watched Saints Women beat Leeds and Leigh beat HKR with my son (a Spurs fan) at Wembley. He really enjoyed it and is disillusioned with football and the money and corruption. RL feels more honest to him.

I just think the potential is there for the game to really prosper... somehow.

[brook]

There are fans outside the heartlands. I live in Canterbury and have been following Saints directly since 2012 (when I started to have more time and could travel) after falling in love with the game in the 60s.

I go to at least three home games a season. I've started staying with my brother in Cheshire and I go with him. I've brought a friend with me (an Arsenal fan). I watched Saints Women beat Leeds and Leigh beat HKR with my son (a Spurs fan) at Wembley. He really enjoyed it and is disillusioned with football and the money and corruption. RL feels more honest to him.

I just think the potential is there for the game to really prosper... somehow.

There need to be more C4 games,I have friends in Dorset and London who would never usually watch a game but gave the C4 coverage a go and really like it now. At least C4 advertise the games when they are on and it also helps that Adam Hills always plugs it when the last leg is on.

[DD]

I added on a later post, in context to the stadia the games are in. The point I was replying to was that viewers will switch off when they see stadiums only half full with little to no atmosphere, but having been to NRL games, they are as flat as a pancake and the stadiums can be 75% empty at times. Sydney roosters play most their home games at Alliance which holds 45,000 and average 17,000. South Sydney play a lot at Accor which holds 80,000 and average 14,000. Even Brisbane who average around 30,000 only just go over half the capacity of Suncorp.

If viewers were put off by empty seats and poor atmospheres, they'd be turning NRL off in their droves. Even a cold wet February night against Wakefield has more atmosphere than any NRL game.

Viewers in Australia are not the same as casual viewers in the UK, though. Full houses still rein in those flicking through channels more than half empty stadiums. The NRL doesn't need to pull in that floating viewer. We do.