Jump to content

Catalans tv deal


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Will Catalans make any of the production costs back in anyway, or are they paying this out purely to benefit from the tv exposure? It seems the tv company have got a good deal out of it to broadcast Super League games and have Catalans pay for the production costs. I know a broadcaster previously paid a small fee for the French Super League rights, then Robert Elstone scrapped the deal.

They will double their expenditure 

 

I reckon this will benefit them by between £700,000 to a million in increased partnerships 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply
4 hours ago, barnyia said:

The Catalan are paying production costs of between 15 to 20000 euros per match and paying for the sky signal for the other away games to be shown in france. Toulouse don't have the budget to pay for their home  game production costs. 

I put the 'confused' emoji up because I was lead to believe that finances are not a problem that Toulouse will suffer from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Future is League said:

Possibly they will hope to get more sponsors on board.

The more i here about Robert Elstone the more I'm happy he's not involved with our game anymore. He must have have cost Rugby League millions and nothing to show for it.

Do you honestly believe that Robert Elstone would have taken the decision Kev accuses him of without the direction of the SL hierarchy? 

Is it not beyond comprehension that such esteemed people at making money and legal brains who preside over SL clubs would not have stepped in if they consider Mr Elstone was wrong? Next you will be telling me that it was his decision to see the back of Toronto!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I put the 'confused' emoji up because I was lead to believe that finances are not a problem that Toulouse will suffer from?

Toulouse are paying the travel costs of away teams, so an extra 20k a game gets expensive I'd say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Do you honestly believe that Robert Elstone would have taken the decision Kev accuses him of without the direction of the SL hierarchy? 

Is it not beyond comprehension that such esteemed people at making money and legal brains who preside over SL clubs would not have stepped in if they consider Mr Elstone was wrong? Next you will be telling me that it was his decision to see the back of Toronto!

Whether Elstone had backing from Lenegan or anyone else it was still a shocking move and one the sport is now paying the price of 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, barnyia said:

Toulouse are paying the travel costs of away teams, so an extra 20k a game gets expensive I'd say. 

Is that definite? I know they did for lower league clubs and it was to be discussed once they got promoted but has their been any confirmation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, barnyia said:

Toulouse are paying the travel costs of away teams, so an extra 20k a game gets expensive I'd say. 

OK, so one question - why? 

If you enter into a European competition (the word is literally in the name of the league), then your business model probably needs to account for the fact that you might be expected to travel. 

Pre-covid, most clubs had no problem funding pre-season jolly-ups at La Santa or Browns, but traveling to fixtures? Best see if we can shake down the opposition for that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, barnyia said:

Toulouse are paying the travel costs of away teams, so an extra 20k a game gets expensive I'd say. 

Even in SL?  Just how small time are the English members of SL anyway that they can't budget for those costs themselves????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Big Picture said:

Even in SL?  Just how small time are the English members of SL anyway that they can't budget for those costs themselves????

Each team paying 2 possibly 3 trips against 1 team paying towards 10 plus teams matches. Yes that's a balanced format. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Yes, if you include the production costs of 13x€20,000 and add the €70,000 fee they were paying €330,000 a year. Now Catalans are paying the production costs of 13x€20,000 the sport is €590,000 a year worse off from the French tv deal alone.

beIN Sports “quickly informed” Super League officials that it would be unwilling to negotiate a new rights deal after the broadcaster had been told that the competition’s chief executive, Robert Elstone, is seeking a significant increase in the rights fee.

The newspaper added that beIN Sports, which has offered Super League coverage since 2012, paid “up to €70,000 ($78,500) per season” for the rights and also covered production costs of approximately €20,000 per Catalans Dragons home game.

Elstone, who was reported to have been “astonished” by the decision by beIN Sports

https://media.sportbusiness.com/news/bein-sports-turns-back-on-super-league/

Another article showing how inept Elstone was

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Even in SL?  Just how small time are the English members of SL anyway that they can't budget for those costs themselves????

That’s what happened to the NZ Warriors when they joined the ARL. We’re the Australian clubs that hard up? It's about self interest over the wider benefit for the game. Clubs forced to pay these costs have less resources to build a better squad. 

My blog: https://rugbyl.blogspot.co.nz/

It takes wisdom to know when a discussion has run its course.

It takes reasonableness to end that discussion. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These travel costs are fair and all basic stuff really.......negotiating a participation agreement....

Overseas team: We'd really like to join the League.... 

Member Clubs: We would love to have you but sorry, don't want these extra travel costs......

Overseas team: Hows about we cover the travel costs?...

Member Clubs: You are in, welcome aboard.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RayCee said:

That’s what happened to the NZ Warriors when they joined the ARL. We’re the Australian clubs that hard up? It's about self interest over the wider benefit for the game. Clubs forced to pay these costs have less resources to build a better squad. 

And it's what helped to destroy the Perth Western Reds too, who had to pay for accommodation and travel costs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

These travel costs are fair and all basic stuff really.......negotiating a participation agreement....

Overseas team: We'd really like to join the League.... 

Member Clubs: We would love to have you but sorry, don't want these extra travel costs......

Overseas team: Hows about we cover the travel costs?...

Member Clubs: You are in, welcome aboard.....

And yet, we're repeatedly told that entry to Super League should be based on on-field merit and not on financial clout. 

If I were Toulouse, the most I'd be prepared to offer is a return ticket to take a coach on the Eurotunnel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

These travel costs are fair and all basic stuff really.......negotiating a participation agreement....

Overseas team: We'd really like to join the League.... 

Member Clubs: We would love to have you but sorry, don't want these extra travel costs......

Overseas team: Hows about we cover the travel costs?...

Member Clubs: You are in, welcome aboard.....

I understand this point of view and its perfectly valid.

For me though its the difference between wanting to grow the league and develop the sport and not. Yes we could do as you say. And yes we could do the same with the likes of Cornwall because its a bit far, even though its in England, as many seemingly want. I don't think it is the right thing to do though just because we can.

Hamstringing new clubs and making them financially unviable isn't particularly sensible to me. We either commit to new clubs full heartedly and want them to work or we don't. It is much easier and sustainable for clubs to pay their own costs of 10k (or whatever it may be) than expecting a new club to stump up 200k. Even easier is for the governing body just to take it from the clubs TV share and fund costs (in reality the same but psychologically different).

Giving a new club every disadvantage and setting them up to fail is just a self fulfilling prophecy. With some people its obvious this is what they want just so they can say I told you so. If anything a new club should be getting more help, not less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Smudger06 said:

These travel costs are fair and all basic stuff really.......negotiating a participation agreement....

Overseas team: We'd really like to join the League.... 

Member Clubs: We would love to have you but sorry, don't want these extra travel costs......

Overseas team: Hows about we cover the travel costs?...

Member Clubs: You are in, welcome aboard.....

I think there is a flaw in your reasoning, Smudger.  If a competition is called Super League Europe, I struggle to see how a team from anywhere in Europe is 'overseas'.

I take whatmichaelsays' point.  If entry to SLE is via on-field performance, then when you are in, you're in; there should then be equal treatment for all.

All that said, does anybody actually know if it is true that Toulouse are being burdened with visitors' travel expenses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Yes, if you include the production costs of 13x€20,000 and add the €70,000 fee they were paying €330,000 a year. Now Catalans are paying the production costs of 13x€20,000 the sport is €590,000 a year worse off from the French tv deal alone.

beIN Sports “quickly informed” Super League officials that it would be unwilling to negotiate a new rights deal after the broadcaster had been told that the competition’s chief executive, Robert Elstone, is seeking a significant increase in the rights fee.

The newspaper added that beIN Sports, which has offered Super League coverage since 2012, paid “up to €70,000 ($78,500) per season” for the rights and also covered production costs of approximately €20,000 per Catalans Dragons home game.

Elstone, who was reported to have been “astonished” by the decision by beIN Sports

https://media.sportbusiness.com/news/bein-sports-turns-back-on-super-league/

What a charlatan he was 😄 🤣 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Damien said:

I understand this point of view and its perfectly valid.

For me though its the difference between wanting to grow the league and develop the sport and not. Yes we could do as you say. And yes we could do the same with the likes of Cornwall because its a bit far, even though its in England, as many seemingly want. I don't think it is the right thing to do though just because we can.

Hamstringing new clubs and making them financially unviable isn't particularly sensible to me. We either commit to new clubs full heartedly and want them to work or we don't. It is much easier and sustainable for clubs to pay their own costs of 10k (or whatever it may be) than expecting a new club to stump up 200k. Even easier is for the governing body just to take it from the clubs TV share and fund costs (in reality the same but psychologically different).

Giving a new club every disadvantage and setting them up to fail is just a self fulfilling prophecy. With some people its obvious this is what they want just so they can say I told you so. If anything a new club should be getting more help, not less.

I seem to recall that in the first few seasons of Catalans, there was an agreement between clubs to essentially pool the travel costs. The idea was that it wouldn't disadvantage clubs who had to travel twice and that, by funnelling all of the travel requirements through one travel agent, there was some economies of scale to benefit from. It meant that all clubs paid an equal travel levy (I can't recall the figure) and that was the travel costs for all clubs, players (and possibly match officials).

That system started to fall apart as clubs started to decide to arrange their own travel, be it for operational reasons (most clubs now seem to charter a flight to do the journey in one day without hotel costs) or commercial reasons (eg, Leeds chartering a flight as part of a 'corporate package').

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Smudger06 said:

These travel costs are fair and all basic stuff really.......negotiating a participation agreement....

Overseas team: We'd really like to join the League.... 

Member Clubs: We would love to have you but sorry, don't want these extra travel costs......

Overseas team: Hows about we cover the travel costs?...

Member Clubs: You are in, welcome aboard.....

And that is how I imagine it happening, nowhere have I heard or read of Toulouse's dismay, shock or horror that this had just been sprung on them, exactly the same as Toronto did they would have agreed to it.

I am not saying that it is right, just that it was a condition of entry which the club and governing body agreed to 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • 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.