Jump to content

3 year Sky deal for less than current deal

Pulga

By Pulga
in The General Rugby League Forum

Recommended Posts

Cheshire Setter

Cheshire Setter

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Just Browny said:

Joel Tomkins raising his finger to give someone out would give the kids nightmares.

Second only to John Hopoate raising his finger? 

A disappointing deal if the 75% is true and we weren’t in a crisis threatening the sport’s existence, but to be honest any deal at all is a bonus at this current time. I’m surprised we didn’t get taken advantage of even more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 205
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Sir Kevin Sinfield

Sir Kevin Sinfield

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Pulga said:

Will this be the final nail in the coffin for Elstone?

It has to be. He was brought in and paid a massive salary to secure a better tv deal and he’s not even come up with one that matches the previous deal. He’s a charlatan who brings nothing to the sport he only takes money out to line his own pockets.

Elstone out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rupert Prince

Rupert Prince

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, M j M said:

Once again the Nigel Wood £40m/year deal from 2014 looks like a brilliant piece of business. I'm glad he gets the recognition he deserves from grateful fans of the game.

Football got loads more back then, but subsequent deals were cut back.

To a certain extent sticking with SKY is a bit of 'the devil you know'.   I'm not sure that 'loyalty' comes in to it , but there is an element of that.   Both sides helping the other in the future, sort of thing... keep up relationships.  But only an element!

One thought.   I do not really go for "magics", but if we have to have them why not have (please!) 22 regular rounds and offer 2 magic weekends to the BBC.  Never mind the money, just take the free exposure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rupert Prince

Rupert Prince

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, FearTheVee said:

Hopefully irrespective of the contract value there is a requirement on Sky to invest in refreshing their coverage - that would be nice as it is incredibly stale.

It's a bit cheap that their presenters have to stand on a windswept platform... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scubby

Scubby

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Wasn't the Premier League's last domestic deal also worth less, and they have just had to terminate the Chinese rights, losing more value? 

It'll be interesting to see the value and what Sky get for their payment. Remember there was a lot wrapped into the £40m last time. 

I don't think anybody can say whether it is a good deal or a bad deal. 

Yes, the Sky Try initiative was bundled in there IIRC. The cash/contra split is the key here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JohnM

JohnM

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

It has to be. He was brought in and paid a massive salary to secure a better tv deal and he’s not even come up with one that matches the previous deal. He’s a charlatan who brings nothing to the sport he only takes money out to line his own pockets.

Elstone out!

He’s a charlatan

Really? How are you going to substantiate  that in court?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oxford

Oxford

Posted
Posted

The details in the article I read were scant to invisible and to me the most important thing was there were two bidders.

I doubt we'll ever know what was involved at all.

So let's, like all good lynch mobs, set off to get the get the nearest bystander, and with no evidence find them guilty!

When TWP went Covid got away scot free seems like the same will happen over the TV contract!

 

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:  Non-Political

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rupert Prince

Rupert Prince

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Robthegasman said:

As for Elstone I would suggest that the deal he has negotiated with SKY should be classed as failure as it is less than the previous deal.

 And frankly if I was his employer I would be sacking him as he has failed.He has failed the sport.

Thats rubbish. Those chairmen who refuse to sign for a private equity should sack themselves.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bedfordshire Bronco

Bedfordshire Bronco

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Pulga said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/rugbyleague/article-8979497/amp/Sky-Sports-BT-Sports-Super-League-2024.html?ito=amp_twitter_share-top&__twitter_impression=true

I'd have preferred BT sport.... Plenty of people I know from my union club get it just for the Union Premiership. They would watch more SL if it was on the same broadcaster. A 'rugby' channel on BT sport would have been great

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bedfordshire Bronco

Bedfordshire Bronco

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

Football got loads more back then, but subsequent deals were cut back.

To a certain extent sticking with SKY is a bit of 'the devil you know'.   I'm not sure that 'loyalty' comes in to it , but there is an element of that.   Both sides helping the other in the future, sort of thing... keep up relationships.  But only an element!

One thought.   I do not really go for "magics", but if we have to have them why not have (please!) 22 regular rounds and offer 2 magic weekends to the BBC.  Never mind the money, just take the free exposure.

I love the Magic and the Bash for that matter.... A weekend should me where different and loads of games 

I agree sticking it on Channel 4 with similar coverage to their union which is excellent would be a great idea

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cookey

cookey

Posted
Posted

I just want one thing from this deal which we know little or nothing about.

Dear SL,just for once,prepare a strategy,tell us what it is and stick to it. It really isn't too difficult. Then we have something to judge you by.

One day,fairly shortly,you wont have a second chance. Do you want to expand? Do you want clubs from outside the heartlands,if so how are you going to help them? Are you still happy,after 25yrs and hundreds of millions of pounds,playing the game in run down,semi derelict stadiums?

p.s. for Gods sake,get rid of the two semi literate clowns and insist on a professional presentation of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JohnM

JohnM

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Robthegasman said:

As for Elstone I would suggest that the deal he has negotiated with SKY should be classed as failure as it is less than the previous deal.

 And frankly if I was his employer I would be sacking him as he has failed.He has failed the sport.

How can it be classified as a failure when you don't know what the deal is going to be.

How much is it for? 

What is expected of SL in return for payment?

What is Sky going to do to recover it's expenditure?

How can a bunch of naysayers imagine they can do a better job, when they have time to waste posting on here instead of lobbying for the game in the corridors of power and influence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thirteenthman

thirteenthman

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Dave T said:

If we get less from Sky but maybe free up rights to some of the assets they held, maybe even to allow the odd game on terrestrial TV like some other sports, that could be really positive. 

 

There was a line in this months Forty 20 about Channel 4 looking at a secondary rights package of 10 SL games a season and a weekly magazine programme. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.