Bedfordshire Bronco Posted November 11, 2019 Author Share Posted November 11, 2019 On 10/11/2019 at 18:21, Damien said: There is no reason why it has to be anyone in particular. However for all their knockers Sky have consistently put their money where their mouth is. In comparison, as far as I know, the likes of BT have never even bid. Surely if other providers interested then Sky might have to pay more... Simple competition principle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bedfordshire Bronco Posted November 11, 2019 Author Share Posted November 11, 2019 19 hours ago, dixiedean said: Ideally both. A regular game every week on the same channel at a known time would do wonders. Every other game on pay TV. BT sport give channel 5 some Gallagher Premiership games each season... A cracking idea.... Apparently something SKY are dead against Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damien Posted November 11, 2019 Share Posted November 11, 2019 14 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said: Surely if other providers interested then Sky might have to pay more... Simple competition principle That goes without saying. Not sure what that has to do with what you quoted though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatmichaelsays Posted November 11, 2019 Share Posted November 11, 2019 4 hours ago, graveyard johnny said: let sky do what they do with the clause NO thurs or sat night games- Friday night and sunday evening and stop using our games as schedule fillers to suit themselves But we are filler to suit Sky, as we would be to any broadcaster. Sky's priority is bums on sofas, not fans on the M62. It doesn't care how fans get to games, but how many people are watching at home, because that's its business. Any other broadcaster would want games played on their terms, not ours. That's the reality of modern professionals sport. I think that's where Elstone's point that the clubs need to work harder with Thursday nights rings true. As a sport we actually have it pretty good - we only have one 'unsociable' night in our schedule, the travel distances are short and Sky has actually declared the first 21 Thursday games. If you think that's not good enough, as I type this, 600 Portsmouth fans are currently in Harrogate watching a game that was arranged less than a month ago and has been delayed by an hour. RL needs to find a way to own Thursday nights. There are people out there looking for things to do on Thursday nights (other sports and leisure pursuits have proven that). RL clubs need to find those people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bedfordshire Bronco Posted November 11, 2019 Author Share Posted November 11, 2019 3 minutes ago, SL17 said: Thursday nights do nothing for the game. If they are local games then fair enough. But Sky will choose the best scenario for couch potatoes. Again... I like Thursday games.... What else would I do of a Thursday? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bedfordshire Bronco Posted November 12, 2019 Author Share Posted November 12, 2019 13 hours ago, SL17 said: Watch Corry. Coronation Street??? I'm a Southern rugby league fan There is already too much northern-ness in my life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSW87 Posted November 12, 2019 Share Posted November 12, 2019 The short answer to this is it doesn't. RL should look to use a range of broadcasters/ media channels. Create 2 or 3 tiered packages and open them to bids from different media outlets. This would create greater competition and increase exposure. Thinking further ahead, they should be looking to create a profile/ packages for streaming sites. Amazon are launching sports streaming along with others. For instance, - Tier 1 would include 70% of the major match ups (local derbys, and a split of regular SL, championship and League 1 games along with playoffs and finals for each), T - Tier 2 would be remaining 30% of major match ups (I.e. Warrington vs Leeds, Wigan vs Hull) and a split of SL, Championship and League one games - they too can show playoffs and final) - Tier 3 (and thinking more for building an online profile) should be access for exclusive rights to extended highlights across all SL, Championship and League 1 games, with maybe 1 or 2 live streamed events each year. For lower league clubs, the above would encourage broader coverage - this should give greater access to TV money but also incentivize increased local sponsorship as they can demonstrate better visibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yipyee Posted November 12, 2019 Share Posted November 12, 2019 On 10/11/2019 at 19:52, weloveyouwakefield2 said: In years gone by sky have come in with a offer and the rfl say you have got a few hours to decide if you want it or not or it will be off the table. It didn’t give the club’s much option! Well surely before the contracts up there should be multiple bids from the tender process? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RigbyLuger Posted November 12, 2019 Share Posted November 12, 2019 Has anyone genuinely shown an interest in showing RL outside of Super League? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iffleyox Posted November 12, 2019 Share Posted November 12, 2019 38 minutes ago, RigbyLuger said: Has anyone genuinely shown an interest in showing RL outside of Super League? The BBC via web and red button has done some good things with the early Challenge Cup rounds to be scrupulously fair. Down south, without Sky, those and the CC final are basically the only RL I've seen live this year. Getting married knocked out the usual couple of pilgrimages to the north. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redsi42 Posted November 12, 2019 Share Posted November 12, 2019 4 hours ago, MSW87 said: The short answer to this is it doesn't. RL should look to use a range of broadcasters/ media channels. Create 2 or 3 tiered packages and open them to bids from different media outlets. This would create greater competition and increase exposure. Thinking further ahead, they should be looking to create a profile/ packages for streaming sites. Amazon are launching sports streaming along with others. For instance, - Tier 1 would include 70% of the major match ups (local derbys, and a split of regular SL, championship and League 1 games along with playoffs and finals for each), T - Tier 2 would be remaining 30% of major match ups (I.e. Warrington vs Leeds, Wigan vs Hull) and a split of SL, Championship and League one games - they too can show playoffs and final) - Tier 3 (and thinking more for building an online profile) should be access for exclusive rights to extended highlights across all SL, Championship and League 1 games, with maybe 1 or 2 live streamed events each year. For lower league clubs, the above would encourage broader coverage - this should give greater access to TV money but also incentivize increased local sponsorship as they can demonstrate better visibility. Something like this has to be the goal. With changing viewing habits a dedicated subscription service is a must And I think one game a week on a free to air station is also a must for building the games profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bedfordshire Bronco Posted November 12, 2019 Author Share Posted November 12, 2019 6 hours ago, yipyee said: Well surely before the contracts up there should be multiple bids from the tender process? Yep, I assumed this was the case I have zero loyalty to SKY or any other digital provider. I wander what % of my SKY subscription actually goes to League and how much to bloody soccer.... I'd prefer all my money go to league if it was possible and I drop any access to soccer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yipyee Posted November 12, 2019 Share Posted November 12, 2019 5 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: The question the game needs to ask is whether the cost of sky is higher or lower than its 'elasticity of demand' How many who would pay wont pay for sky but would pay a separate sub. That gives you a basic value. That's what we can get separately from sky. There would probably be a sizeable amount especially if you had an option for a one off game pass similar to nowtv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bedfordshire Bronco Posted November 12, 2019 Author Share Posted November 12, 2019 20 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: How many though. Let's say costs are 10m a year (an arbitrary figure I picked but I dont think its anywhere near too low) Thsts 50m a year we need to find. £10 a month, less two months for the offseason and we need 500k. Are there 500k people who would pay that? Maybe Maybe you could get a bit more from a bit fewer Maybe you could sell the rights to a game or two a week to ITV for £15m a year and try and use that to drive subs, sell it wholesale to sky, Netflix, amazon etc, maybe all three. Its doable. But do we have the owners prepared to back it? Our league should be proving a decent proving ground. I'd love coverage to go to Amazon or Netflix They'd market it better than Sky ever could and I assume a lot more people have Netflix than Sky Sports so Netflix could promote it's sale withing their format Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted November 12, 2019 Share Posted November 12, 2019 26 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: How many though. Let's say costs are 10m a year (an arbitrary figure I picked but I dont think its anywhere near too low) Thsts 50m a year we need to find. £10 a month, less two months for the offseason and we need 500k. Are there 500k people who would pay that? Maybe Maybe you could get a bit more from a bit fewer Maybe you could sell the rights to a game or two a week to ITV for £15m a year and try and use that to drive subs, sell it wholesale to sky, Netflix, amazon etc, maybe all three. Its doable. But do we have the owners prepared to back it? Our league should be proving a decent proving ground. I think I read the top Our League viewing figure last season was 6,000 for the Oldham v Newcastle play off final (was astounded at how low it was tbh but fairly sure I read that), in which case I doubt Netflix or Amazon would be falling over themselves based on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RigbyLuger Posted November 12, 2019 Share Posted November 12, 2019 Netflix don't show live sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerjon Posted November 13, 2019 Share Posted November 13, 2019 8 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said: I'd love coverage to go to Amazon or Netflix They'd market it better than Sky ever could What's this based on? Netflix doesn't show live sport and Amazon's marketing of the little sport it has is woeful. Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pulga Posted November 13, 2019 Share Posted November 13, 2019 NRL's digital arm worth $1bn. https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/1bn-valuation-of-nrl-digital-arm-shows-early-sale-would-be-foolish-20191107-p538bz.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Wind Up Posted November 13, 2019 Share Posted November 13, 2019 Too many dreamers on here. If the game wants to get as much exposure as possible while receiving a good sum for the rights, it's Sky or BT. All the other options compromise on one or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted November 13, 2019 Share Posted November 13, 2019 25 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: Is it surprising? 6k people sought out the stream to watch a third tier RL game. How many went? I think the difference between the potential market for L1 and super league (and what in effect would be the mostly likely outcome, and that is an all league package) is huge 900k watch England v NZ in Denver, morebthan a million some CC games, around 200k for an SL game Yes it is surprising to me, given there have been plenty of championship and league one games on Our League and they must have have all got less than 6,000 viewers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted November 13, 2019 Share Posted November 13, 2019 1 hour ago, scotchy1 said: How many L1 games had more than 6k attend? That’s like saying why does Bournemouth v Watford get more than 11,000 viewers on sky. Wouldn’t you expect a televised audience to be bigger than the attendance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygilf Posted November 13, 2019 Share Posted November 13, 2019 RL is in a very similar position to Cricket imo. We need the Sky/BT TV money to keep the game afloat. However we have both also realised that having a majority of our presence behind a paywall has not helped us spread the game or grow interest significantly at all - arguably visibility of our premier competition has shrunk. The solution surely is a balance between FTA and Subscription services. Indeed for someone like sky, having 1 game a week say on FTA could actually be a net benefit as they stand to benefit from any new subscribers. Ultimately monopolies are never good and a bit of competition may improve broadcast quality etc. One way this sort of model could be made to work is by bringing production of matches in house and then selling the feeds to broadcasters. Currently we have 6 games a weekend. Thursday Night Rugby, Friday Night Rugby, 2 Super Saturday games kicking off at 3 and 5 (potentially a 3rd with a Toronto Home game in the later evening) and a Sunday Night rugby kicking off at 5 on the Beeb sounds like a fair aim to me and is obviously bolstered by our other assets ie Internationals, Championship, L1 and the Challenge Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yipyee Posted November 13, 2019 Share Posted November 13, 2019 11 hours ago, RigbyLuger said: Netflix don't show live sport. There's no reason they Can't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted November 13, 2019 Share Posted November 13, 2019 13 minutes ago, scotchy1 said: We did, largely. 6k sought out a stream for 3rd tier RL, a league where attendances are in the hundreds, low hundreds often. How much reach do we think our league will have when its largely only broadcasting matches attended by a few hundred? I thought more than a couple of thousand (bearing in mind the record is 6,000 so the average game will be lots less). However my surprise isn’t really the issue, my point was that numbers like that aren’t going to impress any potential broadcaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RigbyLuger Posted November 13, 2019 Share Posted November 13, 2019 19 minutes ago, yipyee said: There's no reason they Can't? Because it doesn't fit in with what they do. They sell films, dramas, comedy, not live sport. It's like wondering why you can't get a Big Mac at KFC. It's not what they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.