Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

The ins and outs of the new Super League TV deal


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#21 Scubby

Scubby
  • Coach
  • 3,604 posts

Posted 04 February 2014 - 03:44 PM

a) So if we are getting £182m, why do the amounts going to SL, Champ and C1 clubs only total £163m - I assume this means the RFL/SLE will get their 10% cut (mentioned as the cost base in the policy doc)?

 

b ) Based on the Championship 1 splits, the 13 clubs in here will be getting £75k x 13 = £975k per annum = this totals £4.8m over 5 years or £6.8m if split over the 7 years. This is much higher than the £1.8m they are supposedly getting.

 

This is actually pretty difficult to understand, is the £200m split over the 7 years, or has some funds been filtered from the £200m to increase the amounts payable in 2015 and 2016?

Will these increases start in 2017?

 

It's better the RFL getting a 10% cut than IMG I suppose.



#22 bobbruce

bobbruce
  • Coach
  • 5,977 posts

Posted 04 February 2014 - 04:03 PM

It's better the RFL getting a 10% cut than IMG I suppose.


Under the last deal I thought the RFL received the same share as each club. The extra could be a negotiating bonus I suppose but isn't there a cost to the big screen and video ref equipment. Which may also account for the short fall.

#23 redjonn

redjonn
  • Coach
  • 820 posts

Posted 04 February 2014 - 04:12 PM

Bt would never have come up with that amount of cash

 

You could be right but hopefully it has been tested. 

 

Also the RFL could have created media packages, e.g regular round SL, play-offs, magic weekend, etc and providing it fitted in with a strategy of maximizing pay tv and getting out to "free" TV to maximize exposure.. etc.   



#24 the phoenix

the phoenix
  • Coach
  • 123 posts

Posted 04 February 2014 - 04:38 PM

i would assume  that in return for the cash ,sky would want some sort of exclusivity



#25 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,138 posts

Posted 04 February 2014 - 04:39 PM

Football on BT generally gets a quarter of the viewing figures that Sky football can get.

 

I'd prefer us not to go with an even smaller channel, providing we can get the money we are asking, which based on the vote it looks like we did.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users