Sky Sports halves offer for TV rights

[Toby Chopra]

3 hours ago, Damien said:

Or they just get loads of cheap content all packaged up that requires minimal effort on their part to show it.

Yep, that's what it boils down to, they can fill an entire channel with well produced content 24 hours a day for the cost of not much more than 1 studio show a week, plus whatever fee they pay. 

Every minute of UK rugby league that Sky show they have to pay to produce themselves, on top of the rights. 

The off-the-shelf NRL coverage helps bulk up the UK inventory somewhat though, you've gotta think that there's value to both organisations to selling the rights together. 

[Oxford]

2 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

You say P&R doesn't work, but that is just from a protectionist SL fans view, Look how the Championship has improved since P&R was reintroduced in '16,

That wasn't P&R Harry and there is no evidence linking the two things, plenty of hearsay to inform though!

[Rupert Prince]

1 hour ago, Scotchy1 said:

Sky and BT make their money selling packages to people, they rarely sell one thing to one person. 

For the game to increase its value it needs to do one of two things. Either break out of its bubble and become a bigger part of the package for a bigger proportion of people, or find a way to monetise things that arent currently monetised. Preferably it would do both. 

The problem is that the game hasnt done that. For the last 5 or 6 years it has had the whiff of failure around it, its shrunk the size of its ambitions and its horizons and that has left it with an image in the wider public eye that is of a dying sport. Its thought of as old, small, irrelevant. That makes breaking out in to the 'bigger part of the package for a bigger proportion of people' virtually impossible. 

We havent done anything to monetise new things. So obviously that hasnt improved. 

The comparison I would make is with boxing. Eddie Hearn runs boxing on Sky Sports and largely in the UK. Boxing fans will moan and complain at some of the cards he puts on, some of the fighters he builds up, and complain about the 'casuals' etc tuning in to watch Joshua or White headlining, or some friday night cards with fighters like Dave Allen or Alen Babic. But those are the fights and cards to bring in the viewers, keeps the sport in the public eye and make the money. 

The small-hall shows might please the purists but they dont bring the money in. And if all there was was small hall shows, sky arent paying for them, Hearn isnt putting them on, and the sport drops from the public eye. 

Thats where we are. Regular small hall shows, but nights under the bright-lights and dropping from the public eye. 

5 years.  What about the 105 years previously to that.  During most of that time it was one of the few professional sports... the rest amateur ... football had a pay limit but was run by an amateur Football Association.

A narrow minded amateurish attitude to rugby league goes back a long way further than the last 5 years.  Its lived off its being able to pay its players, where others did not. It did not invest.  It remained parochial and it remains parochial in its outlook... not specifically with the SL, but the entire self interested game.   

And when faced with the need to change - in the professional era of many games, particularly RU - then at the start of the super league era, it refused. 

But now you and others want more action, but we are hamstrung.  We need investment, and expertise.

[ATLANTISMAN]

It is what it is for the present:)

Lets just get on with it IMHO (For what its worth) we need to get as many non SL matches on TV as possible to show the wider public how good rugby league is in the Championship.

 

P 

[Dave T]

2 hours ago, Scotchy1 said:

NFL has a really dedicated fan base and a whole heap of associated content that they can bring in pretty much for free. 

 

I think it's clear with the focus on content that this was part of Elstones plan earlier this year for SL. At times we dominate the channel we have, the problem is that it is just repeats of the same games over and over. Its a shame this year became a car crash, but will be interesting to see how he restarts that or whether they bottle it with reduced income. 

[Scotchy1]

12 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think it's clear with the focus on content that this was part of Elstones plan earlier this year for SL. At times we dominate the channel we have, the problem is that it is just repeats of the same games over and over. Its a shame this year became a car crash, but will be interesting to see how he restarts that or whether they bottle it with reduced income. 

I think it was a good idea but not particularly well implemented and did seem to disappear really really quickly. 

[Dave T]

57 minutes ago, Scotchy1 said:

I think it was a good idea but not particularly well implemented and did seem to disappear really really quickly. 

To be fair, it disappeared when lockdown kicked in. We got a couple of docs and a weekly show, which wasn't bad for just the first few weeks. Hopefully the docs were to become a regular thing, I found them a touch boring personally, but they were pretty well received as a decent starting point, relatively stylishly done compared to some of the previous magazine efforts. 

Like I say, will be interesting to see whether he sticks to his convictions or it is another thing we cull when funds become tight. 

[Scotchy1]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

To be fair, it disappeared when lockdown kicked in. We got a couple of docs and a weekly show, which wasn't bad for just the first few weeks. Hopefully the docs were to become a regular thing, I found them a touch boring personally, but they were pretty well received as a decent starting point, relatively stylishly done compared to some of the previous magazine efforts. 

Like I say, will be interesting to see whether he sticks to his convictions or it is another thing we cull when funds become tight. 

i think it is an important thing, something we miss completely is any sort of analysis and build up. 

But we need to ask who that content is for and what we are using it for. Filler is one thing, to build up games and make them bigger is another important part. to keep people in touch and introduce them to the game as well is really important. 

But the main content is obviously live games, and thats why Toronto would have been such a benefit. Another timeslot that we can't really address ourselves. Its also one of the reasons i think we should push more NRL content and cross-conference games. The time difference isnt our enemy, its our friend. There are only so many time slots we can conceivably fill here and very quickly you start doubling up with isnt ideal. 

One of the things ive always asked when people say the championship should have a tv deal, my question is when would you show it? We need to look at rebuilding the game as a tv product, and that will require adjustment in thinking around content and time

[Rugby&soccerfan]

On 20/12/2020 at 20:50, Man of Kent said:

League Express reporting Sky has offered £20m a year for Super League, worth half the current deal, meaning SL revenue could drop by a third. 

https://www.totalrl.com/super-league-receives-tv-rights-blow/

Same story reports Novalpina Capital (who is also eyeing up domestic French RU) have made a £60m formal offer for the management rights for the competition and a third of Super League’s broadcast income for as long as it holds its stake in the competition.

Hmmm.

Tell Sky to shove it offer rights to BT, Amazon and Terrestrial TV. 

Like with Football Sky no longer hold the monopoly 

[Damien]

11 minutes ago, Rugby&soccerfan said:

Tell Sky to shove it offer rights to BT, Amazon and Terrestrial TV. 

Like with Football Sky no longer hold the monopoly 

As much as I may criticise SL and the RFL I find it hard to imagine that they haven't already pursued all options. History has shown with RL that it is a buyers market, not a sellers.

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

13 hours ago, Oxford said:

You appear to be asking for SL/RFL to be acting contradictory to their nature.

I'm not sure why you think P&R is working apart from ensuring one club swaps with another?

It works in the psyche of a group of fans but beyond that I feel it's been a disaster for most going down. And that commercial value you put so much store in has never been enhanced by relegation and rarely by promotion.

So apart from not asking for anything special for your club, I'm not sure what you're saying.

 

I think my points were pretty specific mate, no idea why you think there’s none in that post 

1. P&R isn’t inherently contradictory with also selecting growth markets you approach differently 

2. New teams from those growth markets should have a protected period to establish themselves, as Catalans were

3. We should provide more funding to those new teams than the existing teams, to give them a greater chance of being successful 

 

Call it a 3 point plan if you like. What part of that is me saying nothing?

 

 

 

 

 

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

7 hours ago, Rugby&soccerfan said:

Tell Sky to shove it offer rights to BT, Amazon and Terrestrial TV. 

Like with Football Sky no longer hold the monopoly 

Rather than telling sky to shove it, if sky insist on a massive reduction in the fee they pay it should be that they lose exclusive rights. Then we have a sky deal and also something to sell to Amazon or terrestrial tv.

[Tommygilf]

8 hours ago, Rugby&soccerfan said:

Tell Sky to shove it offer rights to BT, Amazon and Terrestrial TV. 

Like with Football Sky no longer hold the monopoly 

That worked excellently for Scottish football 

[Nearenough]

at a time when we hav bt, amazon, apple n even disney all keen to buy content we should not b rushing to do a bad deal with yesterdays man.

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, Nearenough said:

at a time when we hav bt, amazon, apple n even disney all keen to buy content we should not b rushing to do a bad deal with yesterdays man.

And when BT, Amazon, Apple and Disney look at rugby league and go, "Hang on, aren't you yesterday's sport?", what happens then?

[Sports Prophet]

If only there were six matches to televise a week in order to increase the value of SL.

[gingerjon]

3 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

If only there were six matches to televise a week in order to increase the value of SL.

The value of RU's Premiership has gone down since all matches per week were broadcast.

So, it's not a guarantee.

[Sports Prophet]

3 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

The value of RU's Premiership has gone down since all matches per week were broadcast.

So, it's not a guarantee.

But it’s currently valued more than what it would be currently valued if only 3 games were up for broadcast.

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

We should certainly be looking at getting more games televised than the 2 a week we have had. The problem is Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Warrington, Hull and Catalans are carrying the rest of the league, broadcasters have little interest outside of those teams. 

[Davo5]

17 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

We should certainly be looking at getting more games televised than the 2 a week we have had. The problem is Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Warrington, Hull and Catalans are carrying the rest of the league, broadcasters have little interest outside of those teams. 

We had a Catalans home match every fortnight until Elstone worked his magic !!!

[Harry Stottle]

16 hours ago, Oxford said:

That wasn't P&R Harry and there is no evidence linking the two things, plenty of hearsay to inform though!

Well then Oxy, please inform me what improved the Championship if it was not the will to speculate on improved performers and many clubs signing player's on Full Time contracts in the quest to cross the drawbridge that had been lowered to SL.

I would say that I have the advantage over you in that I am witness to the transformation of the Championship having watched my team and the others through the licensed period, there are far more teams now in contention for the top, the Championship was mundane and without purpose during Licensing it isn't anymore.

There then is the evidence of an eye witness, so again tell me what you consider has brought about this improvement and still getting better in the Championship that just happens to coincide with with P&R being reinstated?

[Harry Stottle]

10 hours ago, Damien said:

As much as I may criticise SL and the RFL I find it hard to imagine that they haven't already pursued all options. History has shown with RL that it is a buyers market, not a sellers.

Exactly so Damien, and it goes without saying the game will dance to any tune the buyer plays, I agree with you all other avenues will have been pursued we have no alternative and the buyer knows that, and it would not surprise me at all if Sky were not already aware of the value of any offers from it's competitors.

[Harry Stottle]

2 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Rather than telling sky to shove it, if sky insist on a massive reduction in the fee they pay it should be that they lose exclusive rights. Then we have a sky deal and also something to sell to Amazon or terrestrial tv.

And how far would you push Sky Kevin? Up to them saying Bye Bye on your way then.

[Harry Stottle]

2 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

That worked excellently for Scottish football 

Excuse my ignorance, but is that a sarcastic comment or did it work?

[Tommygilf]

23 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Excuse my ignorance, but is that a sarcastic comment or did it work?

It didn't work...

There's a difference between exploring options and playing hard ball when you're in a weak position. Scottish football was offerred something like £35 million, thought they could get better telling Sky to stuff it, couldn't get better and had to accept Sky's second offer of £25 million.