Sky Sports halves offer for TV rights

[Rupert Prince]

9 hours ago, Scotchy1 said:

Its where the argument re leigh has become confused. 

The problem isnt that leigh were admitted as a last minute option just to get us to 12 for next season. Its not that they are a short term solution. 

Its that there isn't a long term plan. At all. Its just give it a lick of paint and hope. 

Any current plan would be scuppered by the flat cappers.  These ideas were put forward years ago and self interest got in the way.

A plan needs investment.  That's the first prerequisite.  Of course using it to fulfil a poor plan would not be a good idea.

But come 2022 things will change.  Rugby League has been amateurish for too long.  If we get investment, any investment it needs to be run professionally.  Wigan as an example, and there are others, are marketing themselves more professionally... But as soon as they do (e.g. their new logo), the flat cap tendency just joke.

[Davo5]

26 minutes ago, Dave T said:

No - which people seem outraged about (TWP). 

Yes - Newcastle and France, taking games to Liverpool etc. But I'd rather we did much more. 

Yes, daily. Running the game, spending money, doing everything we can. It's never ending. 

Allowing Newcastle & Toulouse to take part is not focusing on those areas.

Surviving,treading water and in some cases a controlled decline is not getting our house in order.

[Rupert Prince]

8 hours ago, Dave T said:

We need to be clear on what we expect. 

When we say we don't k ow what SL is trying to do, or what the strategy is etc. we'll tbh, it's the same as the like of the RU prem. You don't see them chasing fake billionaires in Canada because they are so insecure about their clubs in Sale, Newcastle etc. 

They have never admitted an expansion club yet, yet crack on and work to drive value, but if we dare focus on our existing game it is a sign we are backward. 

People need to calm down and clear their heads. 

If Sky halve their offer, you are close to the point of telling them you will go your own way. But we should remember that other media sources told us it was 50% higher than this a few weeks back. Somebody is wrong. 

Correct.  We do not see them worrying about the M5 corridor.

We were the ones who broke away from RU in eighteen frozen stiff.  We survived because were WERE professional and they were amateur.  But since the 90s were have become amateurish and them professional.   We are 20 years plus behind the Australians and the dead wood has left us stuck in the mud. 

[Moove]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Our pyramid and access to that is the biggest asset we have. 

 

Imagine we'd held back say 10% of the Sky money from the SL clubs for the five year of the last contract and used that to fund growth projects. Maybe supplementing the Sky Try initiative, investing in non-contact variations of the sport, investing in digital strategy, supporting initiatives in growth areas to build on those one-off/annual events etc.

Maybe then we'd have more to our assets than simply permitting someone to play against us. Maybe then we'd have done something truly meaningful to focus on getting our house in order and investing in growth.

Maybe then we wouldn't be staring down the barrel of a 50% reduction in media funding.

[Rupert Prince]

6 minutes ago, Moove said:

Imagine we'd held back say 10% of the Sky money from the SL clubs for the five year of the last contract and used that to fund growth projects. Maybe supplementing the Sky Try initiative, investing in non-contact variations of the sport, investing in digital strategy, supporting initiatives in growth areas to build on those one-off/annual events etc.

Maybe then we'd have more to our assets than simply permitting someone to play against us. Maybe then we'd have done something truly meaningful to focus on getting our house in order and investing in growth.

Maybe then we wouldn't be staring down the barrel of a 50% reduction in media funding.

The amount of money given to the SL clubs was something like 22 million, not 40.  So the RFL took a fair chunk.  Where did that go?  Never mind Elstone, where did Woods go?

Nothing will happen without the end of P&R.  The tail must stop wagging the dog. 

[Moove]

11 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

The amount of money given to the SL clubs was something like 22 million, not 40.  So the RFL took a fair chunk.  Where did that go?  Never mind Elstone, where did Woods go?

Nothing will happen without the end of P&R.  The tail must stop wagging the dog. 

Ah yes the £500k golden handshake for Woods. Didn't he also get a consultancy gig for the RFL afterwards to look at foreign clubs joining our league structure? In fairness we've probably got bigger problems than that £500k now.

Some of the RFL money gets redistributed to the lower leagues, other funds for referees, admin etc. It's not particularly transparent so who knows.

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Moove said:

Ah yes the £500k golden handshake for Woods. Didn't he also get a consultancy gig for the RFL afterwards to look at foreign clubs joining our league structure? In fairness we've probably got bigger problems than that £500k now.

Some of the RFL money gets redistributed to the lower leagues, other funds for referees, admin etc. It's not particularly transparent so who knows.

It seems small fry but consider the amount of development officer work that could have been funded through figures such as that.

[Davo5]

2 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

It seems small fry but consider the amount of development officer work that could have been funded through figures such as that.

Or the £1.8m or £0,8m withheld from Toronto & Leigh.

[Tommygilf]

Just now, Davo5 said:

Or the £1.8m or £0,8m withheld from Toronto & Leigh.

It seems the last TV deal was excellent value but terribly spent.

[whatmichaelsays]

7 minutes ago, Moove said:

Ah yes the £500k golden handshake for Woods. Didn't he also get a consultancy gig for the RFL afterwards to look at foreign clubs joining our league structure? In fairness we've probably got bigger problems than that £500k now.

Some of the RFL money gets redistributed to the lower leagues, other funds for referees, admin etc. It's not particularly transparent so who knows.

It's all in the RFL Annual Report (p46-50 if you're interested). How much more transparent would you like it? 

[Harry Stottle]

11 hours ago, The Future is League said:

We have just let in a team into Super who are in a suburb of Wigan and offer nothing to Super League that isn't already there

Again, what part of England is it you live in, don't be shy tell us.

[Tommygilf]

If this is true, sod equal distribution. 

[Moove]

6 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

It's all in the RFL Annual Report (p46-50 if you're interested). How much more transparent would you like it? 

Fair enough, hadn't seen the financial pages at the end of that previously, thanks. Will have a read.

[Harry Stottle]

11 hours ago, Damien said:

Its just the same as we have changed p&r and things like the super 8s that were supposedly set in stone by Sky.

I can't recall ever seeing reference to that Damien.

[Damien]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

Pro14 haven't really expanded though tbh, it has brought together existing clubs. I think there is plenty to learn from Pro14 though, so it's a fair shout, but it is very different. 

But it brought together existing clubs in existing territories with existing rights. It just structured them differently. 

Super Rugby has attempted some expansion into new territories, and had to back out. 

I mean expansion of the competition and taking the competition into new markets, to grow the pie, rather than expansion of the game. That said expanding the game at the top level is expanding the game for me and teams such as Zebre were formed specifically for the Pro 14. The closest parallel in RL is what happened in the Pro 14 and the expansion to Italy where RU existed at a semi pro level, much like France in RL. The equivalent would be Super League properly embracing expansion in France to grow Super League and the game in France. The returns may or may not be there but a well backed club in Toulouse, providing there were sufficient guarantees, could reduce dependency on a sole TV contract and increase the pie.

I agree Super Rugby Union got far too greedy and destroyed their competition but we are far from the aggressive expansion that they sought. Timezones and playing across 5 completely different countries were key issues that are not applicable to SL, the reason why it did this is.

Again though I think were Super League stands in terms of what it needs to do is much closer to these competitions than the RU Premiership. If Super League had more clubs getting crowds of 6K+ and more clubs backed by millionaires like the RU Premiership it would be a different story. Unfortunately it is not.

[Hela Wigmen]

Rugby League has brought this on itself, down from the administration of the game to the players, fans and coaches. It’s a sad state of affairs but it’s not exactly surprising. 

[Harry Stottle]

10 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

Ask yourself what sky pay for GAA or the Scottish Premiership (around £25 million a season for the latter) and see how they could justify much more to RL

Good point, but how popular is the Scottish Premership south of the border, there are roughly 5million people in Scotland, Sky must have a target from that figure they want to convert into subscriptions, can the RL heartlands be judged by Sky in the same way re the population of the M62 with Sky having done some market research and assesing the target that are interested in RL, obviously there are a good number of Football fans to take into consideration along the M62 corridor.

When we purchase a Sky Sports subscription there are no questions asked as to why and what are the preferences that persuade us to do so, so if all the Sky Sports channels could be individually sourced and we had a dedicated RL channel that we could purchase as a stand alone which then could be directly measured do you think we coukd still demand 40million?

[Scotchy1]

1 minute ago, Harry Stottle said:

Good point, but how popular is the Scottish Premership south of the border, there are roughly 5million people in Scotland, Sky must have a target from that figure they want to convert into subscriptions, can the RL heartlands be judged by Sky in the same way re the population of the M62 with Sky having done some market research and assesing the target that are interested in RL, obviously there are a good number of Football fans to take into consideration along the M62 corridor.

When we purchase a Sky Sports subscription there are no questions asked as to why and what are the preferences that persuade us to do so, so if all the Sky Sports channels could be individually sourced and we had a dedicated RL channel that we could purchase as a stand alone which then could be directly measured do you think we coukd still demand 40million?

Football is extremely popular in England.

The answer is that the sky sports channels can be individually bought. The vast majority by all of them. 

The thing other sports have learned that RL never has is that RL fans aren't the market. Sports fans are. 

[Damien]

34 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

It seems the last TV deal was excellent value but terribly spent.

I've been making this point for some time. The last TV deal provided a real opportunity to grow the competition to have something better to sell for the next TV deal. SL could have gone to 14 teams, could have scrapped loop fixtures, could have ring fenced two French clubs in SL (and we'd have still have had 12 English clubs which is more than now), could have devoted real money to a media and digital arm, could have set in stone a mid season international etc. That could have all been done and every club would have still been better off than the previous TV deal. Instead it was wasted.

[Harry Stottle]

10 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Going by all the good British press coverage which Toronto generated for the sport, yes a league with Toronto it would certainly be worth more.  That's the sort of press coverage needed to attract new viewers to the sport and sell those TV subscriptions in the UK.

If as I said in the previous post, it would have been interesting to see how many more Sky subscriptions Toronto would have influenced.

[Harry Stottle]

10 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

I'm willing to bet a significant amount of money that the vast amount of sky sports subscribers in the "RL Heartlands" are for football. They don't need to consider selling subscriptions for just RL, because the amount is relatively tiny.

With that in mind the RL games become more about filler content and advertising and that is where the game really suffers, as quite simply our adverts aren't worth anywhere near as much as others. Glamour and interest is quite clearly driven by high profile teams with an interesting story etc. The game doesn't have enough of those.

Beat me to it Tommy, I hadn't seen this when I added my first reply to you.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Johnoco said:

The outrage (if that’s even the right word) wasn’t that the RFL/SL had to spend millions promoting a team in Canada. It was that somebody else shelled out and did most of the donkey work, yet they still couldn’t/wouldn’t take advantage of it.

All I’ll say is that you have more faith in the uk RL authorities than I do. 

No, that isn't true. There was outrage over no central funding. And then the new guy wanted central funding. It was part of his rejected plan. 

Canada was a no brainer when free, a tougher choice spending 2mil a year. 

[Harry Stottle]

10 hours ago, Johnoco said:

How could Sky overrule the SL clubs?

Sky are the organ grinders, SL will dance to the tune they play, if it comes down to this £20M being correct and no other broadcaster can top it, do you honestly think SL will refuse it?

[PEANUT HEAD]

10 hours ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

I'd wager there are more folk who follow soccer in those towns than RL.

Following  football  and going watching it are 2 different things.

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Good point, but how popular is the Scottish Premership south of the border, there are roughly 5million people in Scotland, Sky must have a target from that figure they want to convert into subscriptions, can the RL heartlands be judged by Sky in the same way re the population of the M62 with Sky having done some market research and assesing the target that are interested in RL, obviously there are a good number of Football fans to take into consideration along the M62 corridor.

When we purchase a Sky Sports subscription there are no questions asked as to why and what are the preferences that persuade us to do so, so if all the Sky Sports channels could be individually sourced and we had a dedicated RL channel that we could purchase as a stand alone which then could be directly measured do you think we coukd still demand 40million?

In short, no chance, as we simply don't produce enough content to justify that - I think we'd be far closer to GAA figure than the scottish premiership figure. For all its many flaws, the SPFL still has the Old Firm which is a genuinely big game between 2 clubs with appeal beyond their city and league.

Sky know who watches what. The amount of people who exclusively watch RL vs those who'll watch RL and football, and cricket, and F1, and darts etc would be miniscule in relative terms. That's why we don't have a dedicated channel but those other sports do (or at least temporarily do in Darts' case). 

RLs problem again is not that we are even a northern game, or an M62 game, but a handful of places along that. When you start looking at it like that you realise why someone doing the books at sky is going to start asking "why?"