IMG Grading System (Many Merged Threads)

[JohnM]

9 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Saying nowt!

Promises, promises.

[Chrispmartha]

There’s still a mountain of work to be done from SL and especially the clubs regarding SM let’s take YouTube, Leigh Leopards (who have a marketing genius running the club according to some) they have under 3k subscribers and their videos regularly get less than 1k views, which is pretty terrible.

IMG can’t do that work for them.

SL itself has pretty poor numbers aswell, 49k subscribers, let’s compare that to the Hundred (seeing as we have now employed their Marketing and Comms guy) they have 340k subscribers with videos getting hundreds of thousands of views.

[Agbrigg]

15 minutes ago, Damien said:

Don't forget how many satellite dishes they sell too (even though there is zero evidence that it makes any difference either way).

Satellite dishes , I thought they went obsolete a few years back

[Agbrigg]

24 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Featherstone played at Toulouse on the Sunday then Toronto on the Saturday and took a sizeable fallowing to both. If fans are determined enough they will be there.

Correct, providing those fans actually exist

[JohnM]

1 hour ago, Gooleboy said:

Featherstone played at Toulouse on the Sunday then Toronto on the Saturday and took a sizeable fallowing to both. If fans are determined enough they will be there.

Perhaps they've been before and not found it appetising.

Edited October 17, 2024 by JohnM

[Worzel]

23 hours ago, up the robins said:

Imagine if Toulouse were to do a Leigh and make a challenge cup final after promotion were they meet Catalans at Wembley in front of a near empty Wembley  stadium.

Think sky tv , bbc the  press organisation's would say that's good for the sport and it's promotion.

Our main income in this sport is broadcasting rights having two teams in a twelve team competition that won't subscribe to your product is hardly going to increase investment from the likes of sky.

I'm not sure you understand how broadcast rights get valued? Individual teams don't exist in a comp based on the subscribers they personally bring from their geographic area, they get valued based on how much they add to the competition's quality, meaning that overall more viewers are enticed to watch, and subsequently subscribers are retained or attracted to the channel

The only criteria is: Who will deliver more competitive matches, consistently, creating a great TV product. Put simply, is Wigan versus Huddersfield more or less attractive an event for everybody in the potential audience to watch than Wigan versus Toulouse. I don't just watch Hull KR games. The overwhelming majority of Super League viewers do not directly support one of the teams involved, and even if they do are not necessarily located where that team is. 

I'm not saying which one of those two matches is more attractive by the way, I'm just saying that the whole idea of needing a French TV deal is a total red herring.  

[Worzel]

2 hours ago, Forever Trinity said:

12 tickets sold by Toulouse for a grand final is pathetic to say the least. The Bulls took quite a few fans to Toulouse for the semi with a weeks notice for travel, if Toulouse want to be in SL then at least get up for a final where points are at stake and support your team.

"I believe it should just be based on promotion and relegation"

"I also think we should determine who gets in the comp based on how many Grand Final tickets they sell, regardless of distance to the event"

[Archie Gordon]

1 hour ago, Chrispmartha said:

There’s still a mountain of work to be done from SL and especially the clubs regarding SM let’s take YouTube, Leigh Leopards (who have a marketing genius running the club according to some) they have under 3k subscribers and their videos regularly get less than 1k views, which is pretty terrible.

IMG can’t do that work for them.

SL itself has pretty poor numbers aswell, 49k subscribers, let’s compare that to the Hundred (seeing as we have now employed their Marketing and Comms guy) they have 340k subscribers with videos getting hundreds of thousands of views.

One way that IMG might have done better is to build this into the grading criteria in a more incentivised way. From what I have seen, many clubs with fairly middling support are expecting to score >4 on fandom - i.e. a solid A. If the plan was to stretch clubs to achieve better results, on this criterion the intern did a pretty poor job.

[RP London]

14 hours ago, Tommygilf said:

It epitomises the criticism tbf, it's a narrow minded joke 

It's the misunderstanding that not every part has to be directly making money but that some parts are vital for the next stage that will make profit but that that one brick doesn't. foundations/utilities of a building, you can't see them, they cost but dont look nice & you may wonder why you need them, but without them the whole thing is utterly pointless. 

[Archie Gordon]

8 minutes ago, Worzel said:

I'm not sure you understand how broadcast rights get valued? Individual teams don't exist in a comp based on the subscribers they personally bring from their geographic area, ...

That was precisely how I thought until it was pointed out that Catalan's GF appearances may have contributed to depressed attendances *and* viewing figures. I would love to have a look at more data on this.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, Archie Gordon said:

That was precisely how I thought until it was pointed out that Catalan's GF appearances may have contributed to depressed attendances *and* viewing figures. I would love to have a look at more data on this.

You’d need to look at figures across seasons (both play offs and regular season) with direct comparisons as to whether RL was up against England football, given the GF falls during an international break in soccer.

[up the robins]

10 minutes ago, Worzel said:

I'm not sure you understand how broadcast rights get valued? Individual teams don't exist in a comp based on the subscribers they personally bring from their geographic area, they get valued based on how much they add to the competition's quality, meaning that overall more viewers are enticed to watch, and subsequently subscribers are retained or attracted to the channel

The only criteria is: Who will deliver more competitive matches, consistently, creating a great TV product. Put simply, is Wigan versus Huddersfield more or less attractive an event for everybody in the potential audience to watch than Wigan versus Toulouse. I don't just watch Hull KR games. The overwhelming majority of Super League viewers do not directly support one of the teams involved, and even if they do are not necessarily located where that team is. 

I'm not saying which one of those two matches is more attractive by the way, I'm just saying that the whole idea of needing a French TV deal is a total red herring.  

There can be no denying that a clubs fans that has a team in the Super league are more likely to watch matches involving there competitors than say fans of a championship club. And most clubs have a following who don't attend games but have interest in watching the matches via TV. 

Sky I'm sure may look at the value a team brings to the comp in many ways, But potential  subscribers are the biggest way of recouping money invested in TV rights. I would be interested to know from sky what they would value more? 

1.More teams from outside the UK 

2. More UK big cities outside the heartlands like London (this would be my pick.

3. More clubs from the heartlands like Bradford with potential for big crowds.

Or anything else

I love watching games with a great atmosphere with away fans singing but seeing empty away stands every time a French team is playing away doesn't look good on tv or deliver a atmosphere. How many times do sky pan on the singing home and away fans when broadcasting.

[Mumby Magic]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

Don't forget how many satellite dishes they sell too (even though there is zero evidence that it makes any difference either way).

Taking out of the equation that Toulouse travel over seas half of the season whereas if Toulouse stay in the Championship I'm planning on going over as its a one off. These are the same people who dont want overseas teams and will then gladly watch the game die on it bum when the game collapses.

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

29 minutes ago, Worzel said:

I'm not sure you understand how broadcast rights get valued? Individual teams don't exist in a comp based on the subscribers they personally bring from their geographic area, they get valued based on how much they add to the competition's quality, meaning that overall more viewers are enticed to watch, and subsequently subscribers are retained or attracted to the channel

The only criteria is: Who will deliver more competitive matches, consistently, creating a great TV product. Put simply, is Wigan versus Huddersfield more or less attractive an event for everybody in the potential audience to watch than Wigan versus Toulouse. I don't just watch Hull KR games. The overwhelming majority of Super League viewers do not directly support one of the teams involved, and even if they do are not necessarily located where that team is. 

I'm not saying which one of those two matches is more attractive by the way, I'm just saying that the whole idea of needing a French TV deal is a total red herring.  

Can you point me to where I can find this data. I'd love to see how much each individual club was valued at. The breakdowns for the last two deals would be interesting, has the value of every club decreased or are certain clubs pulling the value down?

Regarding the two games you mention I'd rate them both underwhelming because the atmosphere would be flatter than a pancake. 

[Trojan Horse]

On 16/10/2024 at 08:13, Harry Stottle said:

So Sylvain Houles believes that irrespective of IMG's gradings his club should be elevated to Super League because they have great potential, thoughts please.

The 12 fans that’s have bought tickets for Saturdays final agree with him I’m sure 

[Worzel]

13 minutes ago, up the robins said:

There can be no denying that a clubs fans that has a team in the Super league are more likely to watch matches involving there competitors than say fans of a championship club. And most clubs have a following who don't attend games but have interest in watching the matches via TV. 

Sky I'm sure may look at the value a team brings to the comp in many ways, But potential  subscribers are the biggest way of recouping money invested in TV rights. I would be interested to know from sky what they would value more? 

1.More teams from outside the UK 

2. More UK big cities outside the heartlands like London (this would be my pick.

3. More clubs from the heartlands like Bradford with potential for big crowds.

Or anything else

I love watching games with a great atmosphere with away fans singing but seeing empty away stands every time a French team is playing away doesn't look good on tv or deliver a atmosphere. How many times do sky pan on the singing home and away fans when broadcasting.

Yes it is about audience, advertisers and subscribers. But those things are not linked to a club's location. 

Around 60,000 people attend Super League matches every week, and they don't (a) all have access to Sky and (b) certainly don't watch every televised match each week. By definition a clubs own home fans don't watch on TV. So you can very quickly do the maths and see how important our "core" club supporters are to overall audience figures. The answer is, "not very much". Research showed that more than half of the Super League viewers were outside the 'heartlands'. 

In football more people watch Champions League games with one British side and one foreign side in than watch Championship or League One games on TV. It's about product quality, not team location. There's an audience for the NFL, NBA, NHL, you name it, which exists on British Pay TV despite the teams involved not "bringing subscribers in from their cities" 

I'm not holding a candle here for Toulouse, these days I'm pretty indifferent to that. But we need to get beyond this local subscribers and "bring away fans" argument, it's not relevant to the decisions that broadcasters are making. 

 

Edited October 17, 2024 by Worzel
Typo

[Trojan Horse]

13 hours ago, owls said:

14 teams please,  TO, Wakey, London and either Widnes or Bradford,

If I were to choose I based on potential and future value to SL I would choose.

Wakefield

York

Bulls 

These clubs would offer far more to the comp that London or Toulouse. 
 

But we aren’t playing SL manager. 
 

Everyone talking pie in the sky like this is just a load of guff. 
 

The format and criteria is set and should not be changed and likely will not. 

[Worzel]

10 minutes ago, Jill Halfpenny fan said:

Can you point me to where I can find this data. I'd love to see how much each individual club was valued at. The breakdowns for the last two deals would be interesting, has the value of every club decreased or are certain clubs pulling the value down?

Regarding the two games you mention I'd rate them both underwhelming because the atmosphere would be flatter than a pancake. 

Of course there isn't an individual value for each club. But in the aggregate, there is decades of research that shows that audiences (and so broadcasters) prefer high levels of uncertainty in sporting outcomes. That's the #1 thing that drives value. Firstly how likely before a match is one team or the other to win, versus a close game, and then secondly within a game how long does that uncertainty last (how long before the end is the result almost known)

Sports leagues value teams within them that can consistently compete, because that's what creates value that broadcasters pay more money for. That's why Catalans are more valuable than Huddersfield, and why Wigan are more valuable than Catalans.

You can do things to promote the sport more generally, you can do things to make leagues, individual teams and specific players 'brands' more resonant and attractive, but at the very core of "collective value creation" is the uncertainty principle. 

 

[Worzel]

2 hours ago, Agbrigg said:

I hope I am wrong because it would be unreasonable if they refused.

On a wider issue, I totally understand why championship clubs need assistance with travel expenses having seen the perilous state some clubs exist financially in the championship. However as I have said previously I also believe SL clubs should stand the cost of French travel themselves or step aside. 

I agree with this, the Championship doesn't have a TV deal and so any "exceptional" club should pay the extra costs if they want to join the league. If you can't, don't join.

Similarly in Super League, that comp comes with a TV deal you all collectively sell, and if you can't afford the costs associated with being in that league in order to access that revenue (including foreign travel) then you're very welcome in the Championship.

[Harry Stottle]

2 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

There’s still a mountain of work to be done from SL and especially the clubs regarding SM let’s take YouTube, Leigh Leopards (who have a marketing genius running the club according to some) they have under 3k subscribers and their videos regularly get less than 1k views, which is pretty terrible.

IMG can’t do that work for them.

SL itself has pretty poor numbers aswell, 49k subscribers, let’s compare that to the Hundred (seeing as we have now employed their Marketing and Comms guy) they have 340k subscribers with videos getting hundreds of thousands of views.

Excellent.

[Chrispmartha]

51 minutes ago, RP London said:

It's the misunderstanding that not every part has to be directly making money but that some parts are vital for the next stage that will make profit but that that one brick doesn't. foundations/utilities of a building, you can't see them, they cost but dont look nice & you may wonder why you need them, but without them the whole thing is utterly pointless. 

Precisely, I encounter this every day because I work in Branding - now judging ROI on Branding is extremely difficult but it is very important, which is why successful brands spend money on it.

[Chrispmartha]

Just now, Harry Stottle said:

Excellent.

What is?

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

10 minutes ago, Worzel said:

Of course there isn't an individual value for each club. But in the aggregate, there is decades of research that shows that audiences (and so broadcasters) prefer high levels of uncertainty in sporting outcomes. That's the #1 thing that drives value. Firstly how likely before a match is one team or the other to win, versus a close game, and then secondly within a game how long does that uncertainty last (how long before the end is the result almost known)

Sports leagues value teams within them that can consistently compete, because that's what creates value that broadcasters pay more money for. That's why Catalans are more valuable than Huddersfield, and why Wigan are more valuable than Catalans.

You can do things to promote the sport more generally, you can do things to make leagues, individual teams and specific players 'brands' more resonant and attractive, but at the very core of "collective value creation" is the uncertainty principle. 

 

Yet we've been giving them all that for years and the value of the TV deal consistently reduces. If I was the broadcaster my logic would be along the lines of "How badly do I want this sport, how badly do my competitors want this sport, how cheaply can I get this sport".

[Harry Stottle]

18 minutes ago, Worzel said:

Similarly in Super League, that comp comes with a TV deal you all collectively sell, and if you can't afford the costs associated with being in that league in order to access that revenue (including foreign travel) then you're very welcome in the Championship.

All collectively sell in varying degrees by viewer numbers, recognised by Sky as per which 2 games they broadcast on the main channels as opposed to the fillers for SkySports+. And as we all know the cost of foriegn travel will not apply to both Catalan and Toulouse next season irrespective of whichever division they play in.

[Harry Stottle]

23 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

What is?

What you said.