Sky Sports - New TV Deal (Merged Threads)

[weloveyouwakefield2]

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/feb/04/marwan-koukash-salford-rfl-sky?

[Doghead]

Radio 5L to cover more Super League games on their digital channel, plus the games own show, starting this Friday Wigan v Huddersfield.

[Dave T]

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/feb/04/marwan-koukash-salford-rfl-sky?

The bloke is a loon with no realistic expectations at all. Is there really any need to publicly state deals with partners at a press launch? I suppose many will put it down to genius marketing! 

 

It is extremely easy to sit on the outskirts slating everything that happens. It is more difficult to make things happen. Let's see how well things go at Salford this year.

[GeordieSaint]

The bloke is a loon with no realistic expectations at all. Is there really any need to publicly state deals with partners at a press launch? I suppose many will put it down to genius marketing! 

 

It is extremely easy to sit on the outskirts slating everything that happens. It is more difficult to make things happen. Let's see how well things go at Salford this year.

 

I do understand your viewpoint. That said, I can't help but like Koukash... I think he is a breath of fresh air!

 

Pearson at Hull is another one who doesn't mind upsetting a few people!  

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Not that I agree, but at least we're getting an interesting read rather than the same old spin.

I've enjoyed Pearson's comments at times as well. Ruffle some feathers!

The England coach situation I think is spot on. I'll leave that for another thread though.

[Saintslass]

The bloke is a loon with no realistic expectations at all. Is there really any need to publicly state deals with partners at a press launch? I suppose many will put it down to genius marketing! 

 

It is extremely easy to sit on the outskirts slating everything that happens. It is more difficult to make things happen. Let's see how well things go at Salford this year.

I'm sure Koukash would make things happen if he was employed by the RFL, which is what he would need to be to not be on the 'outstkirts' rather than having success at Salford.  No one club chair is going to fix anything are they, not outside of their club environment anyway. 

 

Imagine the ride the sport would have if Koukash was CEO of the RFL.  Now that would be an experience!

[gingerjon]

Imagine the ride the sport would have if Koukash was CEO of the RFL.  Now that would be an experience!

 

An experience you'd be complaining about right from the off.

 

Think he wants cosy little games tucked away on a channel no-one watches?

[Saintslass]

An experience you'd be complaining about right from the off.

 

Think he wants cosy little games tucked away on a channel no-one watches?

Sometimes, you know, the things you say are really childish.

[gingerjon]

Sometimes, you know, the things you say are really childish.

 

I'm hurt.

 

Sometimes, indeed.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

I'm sure Koukash would make things happen if he was employed by the RFL

He would?

I'd like to see if anything happens at Salford first. They may be a complete disappointment yet.

[THE RED ROOSTER]

Not sad enough to go through the whole of this thread but the following points nmeed to be made:

 

Firstly, Unlike ITV Digital, Setanta and even ESPN BT sport is cashed uip for the long haul in its war with SKY for sports rights

 

Secondly, Currently the fourth estate is plagued with disinformation disseminated by SKY and BT SPORT about each other. The sly leak of a new Richard Keys and Andy Grey tape to a soccer website as Grey does at BT sport programme one such example. There was media chatter about a BT Sport bid for Rugby League but nothing concrete. My I suggest Mr Sadler one of your Journalists is tasked with contacting BT Sport to see how real a bid may have been and who may or may not have made contact with who. BT probably more willing now a SKY property.

 

As to the success of BT Sport. I ask the question of the Live sports you watch which platform is it on.For me

 

Cricket                       SKY

Rugby League           SKY / BBC

American Football     SKY / Channel 4 / Eurosport

Rugby Union             SKY / BT Sport / BBC

 

So only one sport - No 4 in my pecking order is on BT Sport so why should I subscribe to them unless they acquire another two sports

 

Money from Sports subscription channels is not everything

 

Subscription TV you preach to the Converted

 

Free To Air (FTA) you preach to the masses.

 

Cricket being a big example of taking the money and losing exposure. The acerbic Gideon Haigh (once of Fanzine Jonny Miller 96 not out) noted that while the 2005 Ashes enthalled the nation. The 2009 version played in Cardiff on SKY was Britain's best kept secret.

 

The current boom in Australia owes both to the side winning but also the staging of the T20 big bash on FTA through Channel 10. Something that Englisg Cricket does not have FTA exposure and is declining as a result in playing numbers and interest despite up until this winter the national side being sccessful.

 

Compare this with a boom sport in American Football where if you speak to Alasdair Kirkwood of NFL UK you will see it is part of NFL strategy to have two FTA platforms, one on mainstream TV and the other a freeview platform to maximise exposure. The result increased interest and playing numbers.

 

Why was the World Cup deemed a success, partly because games were on BBC FTA. Unfortunately the game now dissappears for the majority of us (yes I know you can get BBC North on Digital TV) until the challenge cup. But through signing the deal as it has from 2018 Rugby League will be preaching to the converted only.

 

There is a choice to make - Shioret Termism taking the money for reduced exposure or long term gain - less money but greater exposure.

That has always underscored the need for expansion in Rugby League -

Greater exposure / greater interest = more money long-term.

More money but a geographically restricted niche market gets you less money in future deals.

 

As for the haste in signing the deal as I have said earlier Bradford are not the only club financially challenged there are quite a few in strife in Super League and Championship who wanted the money pronto - a bit like in 1995 - So long term planning was not a m,kajor considfewration in this deal.

 

 

 

[yipyee]

An experience you'd be complaining about right from the off.

Think he wants cosy little games tucked away on a channel no-one watches?

I would rather pay 9.99 to premier than 30 a month to sky...

Box nation seems to do ok as a specialist channel??

[Father Ted]

Not read the whole 26 pages but in Martyn's article he states that SKY will show 17 rounds of the Challenge Cup each season.

So what's happened to the BBC? Are they partners from 2017 or have they been dumped?

Again, were they invited to tender or how many games will they show?

[yipyee]

Not sad enough to go through the whole of this thread but the following points nmeed to be made:

Firstly, Unlike ITV Digital, Setanta and even ESPN BT sport is cashed uip for the long haul in its war with SKY for sports rights

Secondly, Currently the fourth estate is plagued with disinformation disseminated by SKY and BT SPORT about each other. The sly leak of a new Richard Keys and Andy Grey tape to a soccer website as Grey does at BT sport programme one such example. There was media chatter about a BT Sport bid for Rugby League but nothing concrete. My I suggest Mr Sadler one of your Journalists is tasked with contacting BT Sport to see how real a bid may have been and who may or may not have made contact with who. BT probably more willing now a SKY property.

As to the success of BT Sport. I ask the question of the Live sports you watch which platform is it on.For me

Cricket SKY

Rugby League SKY / BBC

American Football SKY / Channel 4 / Eurosport

Rugby Union SKY / BT Sport / BBC

So only one sport - No 4 in my pecking order is on BT Sport so why should I subscribe to them unless they acquire another two sports

Money from Sports subscription channels is not everything

Subscription TV you preach to the Converted

Free To Air (FTA) you preach to the masses.

Cricket being a big example of taking the money and losing exposure. The acerbic Gideon Haigh (once of Fanzine Jonny Miller 96 not out) noted that while the 2005 Ashes enthalled the nation. The 2009 version played in Cardiff on SKY was Britain's best kept secret.

The current boom in Australia owes both to the side winning but also the staging of the T20 big bash on FTA through Channel 10. Something that Englisg Cricket does not have FTA exposure and is declining as a result in playing numbers and interest despite up until this winter the national side being sccessful.

Compare this with a boom sport in American Football where if you speak to Alasdair Kirkwood of NFL UK you will see it is part of NFL strategy to have two FTA platforms, one on mainstream TV and the other a freeview platform to maximise exposure. The result increased interest and playing numbers.

Why was the World Cup deemed a success, partly because games were on BBC FTA. Unfortunately the game now dissappears for the majority of us (yes I know you can get BBC North on Digital TV) until the challenge cup. But through signing the deal as it has from 2018 Rugby League will be preaching to the converted only.

There is a choice to make - Shioret Termism taking the money for reduced exposure or long term gain - less money but greater exposure.

That has always underscored the need for expansion in Rugby League -

Greater exposure / greater interest = more money long-term.

More money but a geographically restricted niche market gets you less money in future deals.

As for the haste in signing the deal as I have said earlier Bradford are not the only club financially challenged there are quite a few in strife in Super League and Championship who wanted the money pronto - a bit like in 1995 - So long term planning was not a m,kajor considfewration in this deal.

typical of RL in general, short termism..... not planning for the future! The world cup was a succses and sky no where in sight! In fact they pretended it wasnt happening! But we need sky dont we! How long did RL treat whole swathes of the country as not important and treating union as feeder clubs! Now the tables have turned, RL could have set up roots years ago and never, and when someone took RL by the scruff of its neck (lewis) and finally puts successful expansion in place. .....the muppets try to rip up all the gains to defend the rotting corpse of pre - professionalism. ...all the while being cheered on by deluded dinosaurs and trolls!!

[gingerjon]

Box nation seems to do ok as a specialist channel??

 

Just had to google them to find out who they are.

 

It appears to be owned by Frank Warren and show lots of Frank Warren related content.

 

I'm guessing mainly fights/programmes that Warren couldn't sell to a mainstream channel for bigger money.

[Yakstorm]

Has it been confirmed whether as part of the new deal that BSkyB has also secured all mobile/internet rights for the competition? 

 

Also, whilst it most likely is, have we handed exclusivity over to BSkyB for all of our competitions (Super League, Challenge Cup, Championship, Championship 1, Northern Rail Cup)?

 

Naturally with the way broadcasting is going, if somehow we've kept internet and mobile free, then we still have a very significant asset in our back pocket moving forward. Secondly, whilst Sky is covering more than ever before, there is still a lot of content that isn't being covered, which could create other opportunities for the sport if we haven't given away everything.

[gingerjon]

Has it been confirmed whether as part of the new deal that BSkyB has also secured all mobile/internet rights for the competition? 

 

Also, whilst it most likely is, have we handed exclusivity over to BSkyB for all of our competitions (Super League, Challenge Cup, Championship, Championship 1, Northern Rail Cup)?

 

Naturally with the way broadcasting is going, if somehow we've kept internet and mobile free, then we still have a very significant asset in our back pocket moving forward. Secondly, whilst Sky is covering more than ever before, there is still a lot of content that isn't being covered, which could create other opportunities for the sport if we haven't given away everything.

 

Sky's (and indeed BT's) deals for virtually every other sport includes broadcast on their own internet/mobile channels, at least within the UK.  The only exceptions I'm aware of are BT/ESPN when it comes to some US sports like baseball where the league has their own mobile platform.

 

Also, the Northern Rail Cup doesn't exist any more.  The RFL got confused about having too much jeopardy, or opportunities for clubs to play for anything meaningful, and scrapped it.

[The Parksider]

1. "There is a choice to make - Shioret Termism"

 

2. "Planning was not a m,kajor considfewration in this deal".

 

1. Wassat?

 

2. n.that?

[Wellsy4HullFC]

Sky's (and indeed BT's) deals for virtually every other sport includes broadcast on their own internet/mobile channels, at least within the UK. The only exceptions I'm aware of are BT/ESPN when it comes to some US sports like baseball where the league has their own mobile platform.

Also, the Northern Rail Cup doesn't exist any more. The RFL got confused about having too much jeopardy, or opportunities for clubs to play for anything meaningful, and scrapped it.

I thought it'd have made far more sense to have the bottom 8 play for the NRC. At least it is a recognisable name in the game and recognisable as not being the same as winning the league (less confusion).

[GeordieSaint]

I thought it'd have made far more sense to have the bottom 8 play for the NRC. At least it is a recognisable name in the game and recognisable as not being the same as winning the league (less confusion).

 

And throw the Championship 1 into that mix as well?! Straight knock out for teams out of the Challenge Cup early...

[flyingking]

This is how BBC Radio will cover the season

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-league/26031984

[Padge]

£87m in 1996 would be equivalent to £140m today,

 

No comment, something to ponder.

[bobbruce]

£87m in 1996 would be equivalent to £140m today,

No comment, something to ponder.

Didnt that get negotiated down part way through though. What did we actually receive from that deal.

[Dave T]

£87m in 1996 would be equivalent to £140m today,

No comment, something to ponder.

so as we all know the £87m fee was a massively inflated amount due to the SL war. What was the renegotiated amount a couple of years later? Wasnt it around £50m?

[Padge]

so as we all know the £87m fee was a massively inflated amount due to the SL war. What was the renegotiated amount a couple of years later? Wasnt it around £50m?

 

£62m