New TV deal negotiations / Perilous finances (Merged threads)

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Rugbyleaguesupporter said:

@Dave T I'm not sure on this but I think sky bought all the rights to challenge cup and internationals, but then sub licensed them to BBC. 

This was clever by RFL because it meant they got paid and matches shown on Sky if BBC didnt pay. 

The old deal is complicated by the fact it subsumed a previous deal. It's easier to step back and assess that RFL get around £10m a year and super league £30m.

Now the rights are clearly in two packages so value can be clearly defined, and sky priority is Super league part. 

Yeah ive seen that mentioned a few times, not sure how true it is, why would it even happen? What's in it for any of the parties involved? 

From previous annual reports it does mention payments from the BBC too, so not sure how true it is. 

 

[GUBRATS]

I'd suggest given the current circumstances , the sport might be better talking to SKY about short term deals to get as many clubs at all levels through the next couple of years , and then reassessing the longer term future of the sport from a broadcasting point of view 

This would then allow the structure to fit the requirements of the broadcaster in the short term 

Difficult times require difficult decisions 

[sentoffagain2]

2 hours ago, Rugbyleaguesupporter said:

I suspect league will go down to 10 clubs (play each other 3 times) 

Clubs to get £1.7m ish in funding

Alternative is 12 clubs at £1.5m . 

What RFL really needs is international game to grow- 5 home internationals a year will help considerably- both for tickets and tv. 

  14 Teams then would equate to £1.28m but the extra two home games would bring in income to above £1.5 million.26 games without duplication + Magic Weekend and Cup +plus play off matches is more than enough games for our players.

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

14 minutes ago, sentoffagain2 said:

  14 Teams then would equate to £1.28m but the extra two home games would bring in income to above £1.5 million.26 games without duplication + Magic Weekend and Cup +plus play off matches is more than enough games for our players.

There wouldn't be 2 extra home games over what happens now though, there'd be one less. So using your numbers clubs would be down over £500k.

[redjonn]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Yeah ive seen that mentioned a few times, not sure how true it is, why would it even happen? What's in it for any of the parties involved? 

From previous annual reports it does mention payments from the BBC too, so not sure how true it is. 

 

I though both broadcasters shared the early rounds. Thus some games on Sky and games on BBC.  The later rounds as in Semi's and final went to BBC.

That is it wasn't an exclusive sale of all Challenge Cup games.

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

4 hours ago, Rugbyleaguesupporter said:

I suspect league will go down to 10 clubs (play each other 3 times) 

Clubs to get £1.7m ish in funding

Alternative is 12 clubs at £1.5m . 

What RFL really needs is international game to grow- 5 home internationals a year will help considerably- both for tickets and tv. 

A reduction to a 10 team league would be a disaster. Reducing from 14 teams to 12 teams and bringing back promotion and relegation is exactly where our problems began.

[sweaty craiq]

2 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

A reduction to a 10 team league would be a disaster. Reducing from 14 teams to 12 teams and bringing back promotion and relegation is exactly where our problems began.

Exactly keep to 14 with 1 up/down by position and a million pound game at the Championship runner up v second bottom SL

[sweaty craiq]

3 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

There wouldn't be 2 extra home games over what happens now though, there'd be one less. So using your numbers clubs would be down over £500k.

Must have become popular all of a sudden them loop fixtures since the format removed the middle 8's - they might even see sense and move to 2 x 10 FT clubs with p&r with non UK clubs providing their own deal at the party

[Steve Slater]

2 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

bringing back promotion and relegation is exactly where our problems began.

Whose problems? There are probably around 15,000 - 20,000 fans supporting the top six clubs in the Championship? Give them nothing to play for and you risk losing a fair proportion of those fans while also rendering games between lower placed SL clubs irrelevant and probably reduce crowds there also.

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

2 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

A reduction to a 10 team league would be a disaster. Reducing from 14 teams to 12 teams and bringing back promotion and relegation is exactly where our problems began.

Ah yes, 2009-14, the era of licencing and the golden age of financial stability in SL......

[Rupert Prince]

17 hours ago, Oldbear said:

Either that or our clubs (those that survive and have strong academies), will become official feeder clubs to the NRL. Given the choice of being an NRL feeder club, controlled by that club, or switching codes, I wonder which route our top clubs would go?

How long would NRL last without an English Rugby League?  (Even with Wallabies just getting tonked).

 

Without investment then game will die.  IF Sky cut their current deal down then all the tv money will have to go to the superleague clubs.  Howelse can this not be?  How else can the professional clubs  give away money that they do not have.  Otherwise we will become defacto feeders to NRL.  But all this is predicated on rumour.

In ant event, unless the wider British rugby world wakes up and smells the coffee, there will be a split, where the full time clubs go their way with their local amateur teams taking them with them.

The game cannot tread water for much longer. Or more accurately, it cannot walk on water.  It walks on money.  Anybody expecting miracles will be disappointed.

[Rugbyleaguesupporter]

4 hours ago, redjonn said:

I though both broadcasters shared the early rounds. Thus some games on Sky and games on BBC.  The later rounds as in Semi's and final went to BBC.

That is it wasn't an exclusive sale of all Challenge Cup games.

So I think sky bought it all, then sub licensed to BBC. 

This way the RFL were safe knowing that BBC didnt stump up, they'd get money from Sky. 

[Oldbear]

1 hour ago, Rupert Prince said:

How long would NRL last without an English Rugby League?  (Even with Wallabies just getting tonked).

 

Without investment then game will die.  IF Sky cut their current deal down then all the tv money will have to go to the superleague clubs.  Howelse can this not be?  How else can the professional clubs  give away money that they do not have.  Otherwise we will become defacto feeders to NRL.  But all this is predicated on rumour.

In ant event, unless the wider British rugby world wakes up and smells the coffee, there will be a split, where the full time clubs go their way with their local amateur teams taking them with them.

The game cannot tread water for much longer. Or more accurately, it cannot walk on water.  It walks on money.  Anybody expecting miracles will be disappointed.

Good post, the NRL one is a difficult question, some may say they may be better placed in the short term as Sky replaces the more expensive to produce SL with ready made NRL just by taking the feed, however I truly believe that in the long run the two leagues need each other, and not just for SL to be a source of players for the NRL. Unless you are an American sport, with the massive US market to draw on, it’s difficult being a sport in one country alone and as popular as the NRL is in Aus, the country is not big enough population wise for it to be completely alone.

I really haven’t a clue what the next TV deal may bring, but I suspect you won’t be too far off with your idea of the bigger clubs keeping all the money and taking the amateur game with them to safeguard the player production pipeline. I don’t think that’s a good thing though, a split at this point in time cannot be healthy.

[Oxford]

19 hours ago, Oldbear said:

Either that or our clubs (those that survive and have strong academies), will become official feeder clubs to the NRL. Given the choice of being an NRL feeder club, controlled by that club, or switching codes, I wonder which route our top clubs would go?

That's a very good question, which way would Wigan ( Ancient & Loyal ) go?

I don't think that, if we got to that state,  being a feeder system would be an option.

And as another ill wind there'd only be a need to print one magazine.

[Damien]

1 minute ago, Oxford said:

That's a very good question, which way would Wigan ( Ancient & Loyal ) go?

I don't think that, if we got to that state,  being a feeder system would be an option.

And as another ill wind there'd only be a need to print one magazine.

It's not, it's a ridiculous question. If people wanted to watch RU then they would be doing so. There are 3 RU clubs in the town as is if people felt that way. Most fans would be lost to Football long before they considered RU. Indeed most RL fans I know generally follow RL and Football, few if any follow RU. That is the case with many RL fans that I know from from other towns too.

[Oxford]

20 minutes ago, Damien said:

It's not, it's a ridiculous question. If people wanted to watch RU then they would be doing so. There are 3 RU clubs in the town as is if people felt that way. Most fans would be lost to Football long before they considered RU. Indeed most RL fans I know generally follow RL and Football, few if any follow RU. That is the case with many RL fans that I know from from other towns too.

I think you've miscued there a bit Damien. It would be a Hobson's Choice job if it happened and where we'd all end would be a moot job.

[GUBRATS]

4 minutes ago, Oxford said:

I think you've miscued there a bit Damien. It would be a Hobson's Choice job if it happened and where we'd all end would be a moot job.

It is a ridiculous question , yes Union might try to pick off one of two ' big guns ' , but would have no interest in the rest , all of whom would just carry on 

[Damien]

3 minutes ago, Oxford said:

I think you've miscued there a bit Damien. It would be a Hobson's Choice job if it happened and where we'd all end would be a moot job.

I think you need to give the sport and fans more credit than that. RL fans aren't just closet RU devotees. As a Wigan fan I can name various sports that are more attractive than me than watching RU. I would certainly never watch Wigan RL play RU and its very likely that a new Wigan RL team would be created anyway. Wigan have done all this by proxy with Orrell, it failed, Leeds did it with Leeds Tykes, it failed. Such a scenario would fail too.

[Oxford]

2 hours ago, Damien said:

I think you need to give the sport and fans more credit than that. RL fans aren't just closet RU devotees. As a Wigan fan I can name various sports that are more attractive than me than watching RU. I would certainly never watch Wigan RL play RU and its very likely that a new Wigan RL team would be created anyway. Wigan have done all this by proxy with Orrell, it failed, Leeds did it with Leeds Tykes, it failed. Such a scenario would fail too.

Yet again the wrong end of the stick Damien, I give TGG fans all the credit for choosing what is the best team sport in the known universe. This will not change even if the sport goes out of existence. The scenario as you put it would be what happens if we end up with too few teams to keep the sport going? This was not to accuse anyone of anything and no attempt was made to do so.

Stay well and take care of yourself.

[Smudger06]

On 30/10/2020 at 09:40, sweaty craiq said:

Couple of points 1) every championship club I am in contact with is in a strong financial position due to full sky money being paid, furlough, and season ticket/sponsors not taking money back ie huge % of income with little paid out. 2) Reduce to 10 and where does that leave Catalans and TW who do not  bring TV money to the table - indeed write off Ottawa etc otherwise we end up with 5/6 UK clubs in a few years. Time for Cats and TW to get a TV deal imo as our first priority in a reduced TV deal is our long term family. 3) Any reduced deal must be stripped of 'perks' eg Internationals, Challenge Cup, Magic, Summer Bash, Champ play offs -  we must get on Terrestrial with these, even if it means no income for a season - think of the next deal if we get the right coverage.

Absolutely. If sky drop £10m, in return they loose those nice to have perks. Yes, the big thing they have said all along is RL exclusivity. They gotta loose that if they are only dishing out £30m p.a. 

[Rugbyleaguesupporter]

So it appears I was wrong with move to 10 teams being a serious option. 

I would like to think Super League/ RFL could go back to Sky and argue why an additional £7-10m (around cost of 1 PL match on Sky) would be very beneficial. 

In return I think RFL do need to have a serious conversation with clubs about where each team sees itself and the purpose of championship/ league 1. 

[Rugbyleaguesupporter]

@Smudger06 Magic is part of super league deal. 

The perks are frankly not worth it for Sky. A minuscule amount of people will cancel or subscribe to sky because of 4 or 5 cup ties, big bash or championship play offs. The costs of producing the games will outweigh any income from advertising or subscriptions. 

 

[Man of Kent]

Latest Forty20 pod suggests there may be two SL packages up for grabs. One for two live Super League games per week (or thereabouts), another for c.10 live SL games a season plus highlights/magazine programme. That’s maybe where the now Leeds-based Channel 4 comes in.

The BBC would give up the Super League Show but would retain internationals, the Cup and would possibly add Championship coverage. 

[Gerrumonside ref]

6 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Latest Forty20 pod suggests there may be two SL packages up for grabs. One for two live Super League games per week (or thereabouts), another for c.10 live SL games a season plus highlights/magazine programme. That’s maybe where the now Leeds-based Channel 4 comes in.

The BBC would give up the Super League Show but would retain internationals, the Cup and would possibly add Championship coverage. 

That would be great news for the sport if this is true.

[Damien]

23 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Latest Forty20 pod suggests there may be two SL packages up for grabs. One for two live Super League games per week (or thereabouts), another for c.10 live SL games a season plus highlights/magazine programme. That’s maybe where the now Leeds-based Channel 4 comes in.

The BBC would give up the Super League Show but would retain internationals, the Cup and would possibly add Championship coverage. 

Following the lead of other sports and it makes sense if the sport can pull this off. As we have seen in the past whether this can be done all depends on the numbers and the amount of competition for the packages.