SKY Sports to end broadcast partnership with

[crashmon]

TBF pretty much all the major sports (Football, Union, Cricket, F1 etc) and alot of minor ones (Darts for example) would collapse without tv funding of some sort, so this is not a RL only issue.

The issue is more why Sky would not consider us a major sport to invest in, while they happiely show BBL for instance is more of an issue

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

On 25/10/2022 at 01:09, Londonbornirishbred said:

The GAA

Might be nothing, but reading that story it seems that Sky probably wanted too much in return for too little Money and the GAA have decided to explore other avenues. The current SKY deal is due for negotiation/renewal at the end of 2023 and given it is said that we got less per year than before last time, have we got the game to "explore other avenues"? 
Channel 4 would be fantastic, but would they be able to match SKY? BT sport anyone?

IMG have to hit the ground running and first up MUST be the job of securing a new BETTER broadcast deal. Anew broadcast partner might be just the "freshen-up" the game needs.

I may be a minority but if Sky drop RL then i drop SKY 

I wouldn't actually mind if BT sport got.it.....works well as they already have the Gallagher RU prem ...plenty of chance of catching some new fans to SL.too

 

[hunsletgreenandgold]

On 25/10/2022 at 14:41, gingerjon said:

Also, it's worth saying (and I say it a fair bit TBH), is just how different to the rest of the world the dominance of Sky makes the UK market.

Unlike the rest of the world, in the UK, streaming is still some quirky outlier - and will be for as long as the main Premier League package is held by a company that, even with minor moves around the edges, is absolutely a receive and satellite dish company.

At some point, Sky's model will have to change because there won't the tech to keep it going but their streaming options are absolutely awful, and/or the market will be completely changed by a provider with a streaming focus getting those Premier League rights.

The best RL can do is put itself in the strongest position to be a property that people will want to have.

Which is entirely what IMG are about.

It's already happening - Sky has been moving over to streaming/OTT platform for the past 2 years. It's going to take a few years to migrate all customers away from satellite but that is the direction it's heading. 

As for Sky overall - there's no denying Football is front and centre of pretty much everything sports wise. You're right about what RL and other sports need to do - make themselves look like a better proposition to the buyer (sky in this case), not the buyer make the sport look better. Sky and other companies enjoy sports like NFL because the production is all there, they just buy the rights and do some UK presentation around it - similar to how the Premier League sells itself. The NRL and Fox are closely aligned on this kind of thing, as an example of how it is transferable to RL. I've said this many times, if SL/RFL just keep going to these negotiations essentially saying we have a great game how much will you pay for it? Oh and we need you to do all the legwork to get it in a position where it can be broadcast - Sky and any other broadcaster know where the power lies and it's never with the seller. 

[nadera78]

Why would Sky drop RL? It makes no sense. We give them 8 months of good viewing figures 2 or 3 nights a week, they don't have to do any work to generate an audience, and at a price point they obviously dictate (and it's a sport where most clubs and fans would accept whatever pennies are thrown at them). 

I've spent the last 25 years listening to fans saying "what if Sky pull out?" It aint happening folks.

[Big Picture]

Just now, nadera78 said:

Why would Sky drop RL? It makes no sense. We give them 8 months of good viewing figures 2 or 3 nights a week, they don't have to do any work to generate an audience, and at a price point they obviously dictate (and it's a sport where most clubs and fans would accept whatever pennies are thrown at them). 

I've spent the last 25 years listening to fans saying "what if Sky pull out?" It aint happening folks.

Low ratings, that's why.

For most of those 25 years there was no indication from Sky that they might pull out, but now that the game's been given two years to proves its value or else that indication exists.

[Eddie]

On 25/10/2022 at 10:53, Gerrumonside ref said:

As much as Channel 4 coverage has been great for the game, the Sky money is vital and it would be devastating if they terminated the relationship.

 

Indeed, careful what you wish for is the phrase that comes to mind. 

[Eddie]

5 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

I may be a minority but if Sky drop RL then i drop SKY 

I wouldn't actually mind if BT sport got.it.....works well as they already have the Gallagher RU prem ...plenty of chance of catching some new fans to SL.too

 

I would as well, I have it for RL first and also enjoy the NFL of a Sunday night - I barely watch anything else, didn’t even bother with Norwich last night as I had PNG v Cook Islands on instead. Accept I’m in a minority though. 

[Eddie]

5 hours ago, crashmon said:

TBF pretty much all the major sports (Football, Union, Cricket, F1 etc) and alot of minor ones (Darts for example) would collapse without tv funding of some sort, so this is not a RL only issue.

The issue is more why Sky would not consider us a major sport to invest in, while they happiely show BBL for instance is more of an issue

Maybe they pay BBL a lot less, is it even properly professional? 

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

7 hours ago, crashmon said:

 while they happiely show BBL for instance is more of an issue

BBL...is that some sex thing?

[Eddie]

37 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

BBL...is that some sex thing?

Big B00bed Ladies? Maybe @crashmon is confusing Sky Sports with his other subscription? 

[corkonian77]

50 minutes ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

BBL...is that some sex thing?

British  Basketball  League.  Too niche even for Eurosport. 

[northamptoncougar]

I gave up with sky over a year ago, I only used it for RL and the contempt that they show for the sport is so obvious I decided enough was enough.

Everything can be streamed nowadays one way or another, I’ve a ten year old girl and the only time she’d consider watching terrestrial or sky tv is when she visits the grandparents to watch strictly, this is where the world has has quickly gone.

I’m now £850 better off a year and I still watch the sport.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

31 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Big B00bed Ladies? Maybe @crashmon is confusing Sky Sports with his other subscription? 

In that case bundling SL with BBL would interest me....get on it SKY

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

19 minutes ago, corkonian77 said:

British  Basketball  League.  Too niche even for Eurosport. 

Disapointing .....thought it was another type of niche

[Blind side johnny]

As a part of their presentation didn't IMG refer to having access to other broadcasting systems and partners.

Given the size of their organisation I would hope that they are miles ahead of the rest of us in preparing for changes and getting a string of alternatives in place. this isn't like the days when a couple of representatives from the RFL wandered up to negotiate the deal. IMG's professionalism in this sphere should put the sport in a better position than it would be without them.

[nadera78]

4 hours ago, Big Picture said:

Low ratings, that's why.

For most of those 25 years there was no indication from Sky that they might pull out, but now that the game's been given two years to proves its value or else that indication exists.

Nonsense. RL gives Sky good ratings, always has done.

[bobbruce]

10 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

I may be a minority but if Sky drop RL then i drop SKY 

I wouldn't actually mind if BT sport got.it.....works well as they already have the Gallagher RU prem ...plenty of chance of catching some new fans to SL.too

 

I’d likely do the same and people have to realise Sky work on the fact once they get you buying one thing they can slowly keep adding other things too it. Until recently my Sky bill was £120 a month plus whatever I spend on Sky bet. It wouldn’t take many people knocking Sky on the head for it to become a net loss for Sky. 

[Wiltshire Warrior Dragon]

Is there any way it is possible to watch RTE TV, legally, in GB?

[DI Keith Fowler]

26 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

Nonsense. RL gives Sky good ratings, always has done.

Exactly. Ratings are solid and always have been for minimal outlay or effort from Sky.

We got a lower deal last time because in the previous round we promised more, got more but delivered the same. It wasn't a cut to say "we're thinking of dropping you" it was a "we don't really see the point in giving you more money".

The whole 2 year prove yourself thing was Sky effectively saying there's money there but you need to bring *something*.

[corkonian77]

18 minutes ago, Wiltshire Warrior Dragon said:

Is there any way it is possible to watch RTE TV, legally, in GB?

There is Saorsat. That can be recieved in Wales and Cornwall.  

But most use a Vpn. 

[DI Keith Fowler]

33 minutes ago, Wiltshire Warrior Dragon said:

Is there any way it is possible to watch RTE TV, legally, in GB?

I have a real soft spot for RTE. A few years ago I was on a trip to Dublin but came down with a heavy cold the day before and had a slightly miserable few days.

However, by the end of the weekend I was feeling improved enough to have a few/8 pints of Guinness, then retired to my room and what did RTE have on? Naked Gun.

RTE knew I needed that and I am forever thankful.

[Big Picture]

1 hour ago, nadera78 said:

Nonsense. RL gives Sky good ratings, always has done.

No it doesn't and hasn't.  Low ratings were the reason why Sky cut their rights fee in 1999, and they're the reason why SL lost the Saturday night slot it had originally and was shunted to Thursdays instead.  Low ratings are the reason Sky put the game on two years' notice to prove its value or else too.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, Big Picture said:

No it doesn't and hasn't.  Low ratings were the reason why Sky cut their rights fee in 1999, and they're the reason why SL lost the Saturday night slot it had originally and was shunted to Thursdays instead.  Low ratings are the reason Sky put the game on two years' notice to prove its value or else too.

The ratings are not the issue. 

You can't just cherry pick two reductions as evidence we don't deliver value and ignore huge increases throughout the last 3 decades. 

[nadera78]

25 minutes ago, Big Picture said:

No it doesn't and hasn't.  Low ratings were the reason why Sky cut their rights fee in 1999, and they're the reason why SL lost the Saturday night slot it had originally and was shunted to Thursdays instead.  Low ratings are the reason Sky put the game on two years' notice to prove its value or else too.

That's not true at all. The reduction in money in 1999 was a correction to the overpayment in 1995 (which was a result of them wanting GB on their side for the SL War in Australia), the fact that we hadn't followed through on our plans to re-structure and that we had no other broadcaster to turn to. Nothing to do with ratings at all. You're just making things up.

[Big Picture]

1 minute ago, nadera78 said:

That's not true at all. The reduction in money in 1999 was a correction to the overpayment in 1995 (which was a result of them wanting GB on their side for the SL War in Australia), the fact that we hadn't followed through on our plans to re-structure and that we had no other broadcaster to turn to. Nothing to do with ratings at all. You're just making things up.

No I'm not making things up, the ratings weren't high enough to justify that original amount and that's why Sky reduced it.  If the ratings had been better they wouldn't have done that.