Beaumont suggests walking away from IMG and SKY

[Dave T]

This publication has again featured two articles this week from DB, where he repeats his criticism of IMG, no surprise there based on the fact we have heard this kind of criticism from him and LE/TRL repeatedly. 

However his latest point about leaving Sky is one that sometimes gets discussed - and I do think there is a sensible discussion to be had here. The thing that did stand out for me though is the content of DB's argument.

- He claims that we get 300k watch Sky for a game - we rarely do.

- He then works out that 300k x £10 per month is £36m on OurLeague income.  Not sure why anyone is subscribing for 12m when the season is 9. Also, that does assume its 300k households (who are all prepared to pay £120 per annum). 

- His genius next move is to just up the price 50% and "no'one is arsed' and it's just brings another £12m in like that. 

- He would also give one game per week/fortnight to BBC - potentially undermining his product.

- He claims we get 3m viewers on BBC. We don't.

 

I think there is a decent debate to be had around strategy, but really if this is the level of business acumen that we have pushing the narrative then it's no wonder we are where we are. 

[Damien]

Didn't he come out with all this before in another article?

It's all a premise based on fantasy figures.

[Dave T]

Just now, Damien said:

Didn't he come out with all this before in another article?

It's all a premise based on fantasy figures.

It's Donald Trump-type propaganda - just keep saying nonsense, but do it loudly, confidently and ignore any facts and criticism and plenty will go along with you.

But any suggestion that there is £48m on the table for RL on their streaming app is just crazy stuff.

[RP London]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

This publication has again featured two articles this week from DB, where he repeats his criticism of IMG, no surprise there based on the fact we have heard this kind of criticism from him and LE/TRL repeatedly. 

However his latest point about leaving Sky is one that sometimes gets discussed - and I do think there is a sensible discussion to be had here. The thing that did stand out for me though is the content of DB's argument.

- He claims that we get 300k watch Sky for a game - we rarely do.

- He then works out that 300k x £10 per month is £36m on OurLeague income.  Not sure why anyone is subscribing for 12m when the season is 9. Also, that does assume its 300k households (who are all prepared to pay £120 per annum). 

- His genius next move is to just up the price 50% and "no'one is arsed' and it's just brings another £12m in like that. 

- He would also give one game per week/fortnight to BBC - potentially undermining his product.

- He claims we get 3m viewers on BBC. We don't.

 

I think there is a decent debate to be had around strategy, but really if this is the level of business acumen that we have pushing the narrative then it's no wonder we are where we are. 

I think  he has a very good argument about getting all the money ourselves etc.. however, as you say there needs to be some proper actual research done and some proper figures put forward. No one would build a strategy on this sort of finger in the air statistics. 

The big thing that he is missing IMHO (which again would need some really good research done on it by a professional operation that specialises in this sort of thing.. maybe IMG) is the effect of hiding behind a paywall even further, obviously his way around that is giving the games to the BBC and that isn't a bad way (something sky have also seen over time with different sports, as have other organisations like TNT with the champions league final on you tube or FTA) but will that then drive people to an APP that is specifically for the sport, it may push people to look at the SKY listings differently to find Rugby League or maybe is the push that sends them over the edge of getting sky sports etc but does it push people to a specific APP and what is the cost they are willing to pay. Then all the rest of the maths needs to fit that sort of narrative, not what will the general fan be prepared to pay but what would a new fan be prepared to pay.

[Coggo]

Maybe we should sell the rights to QVC and get Degsy to sell leopardskin Y-fronts on camera? 

[RP London]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It's Donald Trump-type propaganda - just keep saying nonsense, but do it loudly, confidently and ignore any facts and criticism and plenty will go along with you.

But any suggestion that there is £48m on the table for RL on their streaming app is just crazy stuff.

but its the best app, probably the best in the world, definitely the bestest for sport in the galaxy!!!!

 

serioulsy knowing Rugby League if we did this we would build it to cope with 250k even though we predict 300k and the whole thing would fall over at the first hurdle.. even netflix are massivly struggling with live sport on their platform. 

BTW I quite like that the world is moving on from using Hitler's orrative style to Trump's for making outlandish claims but just saying it often enough that eventually people just believe you becuase its got to be true if you keep saying it.

[PREPOSTEROUS]

The big elephant in the room is the dodgy fire sticks, the game would get no money from them and RL fans have already shown they are a tight bunch. 

Plus you've got production costs which Sky currently absorb so that annual income would soon start to drop.

 

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, RP London said:

I think  he has a very good argument about getting all the money ourselves etc.. however, as you say there needs to be some proper actual research done and some proper figures put forward. No one would build a strategy on this sort of finger in the air statistics. 

The big thing that he is missing IMHO (which again would need some really good research done on it by a professional operation that specialises in this sort of thing.. maybe IMG) is the effect of hiding behind a paywall even further, obviously his way around that is giving the games to the BBC and that isn't a bad way (something sky have also seen over time with different sports, as have other organisations like TNT with the champions league final on you tube or FTA) but will that then drive people to an APP that is specifically for the sport, it may push people to look at the SKY listings differently to find Rugby League or maybe is the push that sends them over the edge of getting sky sports etc but does it push people to a specific APP and what is the cost they are willing to pay. Then all the rest of the maths needs to fit that sort of narrative, not what will the general fan be prepared to pay but what would a new fan be prepared to pay.

The whole proposal is flawed - even if we did get 300k people watching SL on Sky, many of those people just won't be anywhere near hardcore enough to spend their hard earned cash on an RL app. 

On Sky Sports I watch tennis, F1, football, darts, RL, cricket etc - I would only pay for RL out of all of those.

I just don't see this ever being any more than a little ancillary earner and an existing supporter engagement channel.

[RP London]

1 minute ago, Coggo said:

Maybe we should sell the rights to QVC and get Degsy to sell leopardskin Y-fronts on camera? 

I managed to get our products listed on QVC (they can be very picky and its not easy) and I was on presenting them in October and November.. we managed to uplift the specific brand's turnover for the year by 50% in just a 2 month period, it was stressful as we do not normally work B2C so I had to implement loads of process changes in the warehouse and packing but it was worth it (high margin product)... whether the old biddy sitting bored in front of the telebox is actually our main target audience is another matter though .... either way the Y-fronts would be a step too far !

[Archie Gordon]

Just now, PREPOSTEROUS said:

...

Plus you've got production costs which Sky currently absorb so that annual income would soon start to drop.

Yes. We've got Sky producing the games but the cost of that is that they get all the games.

Starting from scratch is much more costly than DB imagines and it doesn't need restating that his subscribers projection is possibly an order of magnitude out.

[RP London]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

The whole proposal is flawed - even if we did get 300k people watching SL on Sky, many of those people just won't be anywhere near hardcore enough to spend their hard earned cash on an RL app. 

On Sky Sports I watch tennis, F1, football, darts, RL, cricket etc - I would only pay for RL out of all of those.

I just don't see this ever being any more than a little ancillary earner and an existing supporter engagement channel.

totally agree.. thats why I was saying it needed proper research to find out how much we would get etc and the true effect of a bigger paywall as you say, and I am with you in terms of behaviour, I watch allsorts on Sky Sports (does my wife's head in) but I wouldnt pay specifically to watch many, if any, of them... just becuase I said he has an argument about whether it is worth it doesnt mean he has a correct argument. 

[OriginalMrC]

Every time there's a good news story involving Derek he has to ofset it by spouting some nonsense.

[The Masked Poster]

I'm keen to hear more about the Y-Fronts.

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, RP London said:

totally agree.. thats why I was saying it needed proper research to find out how much we would get etc and the true effect of a bigger paywall as you say, and I am with you in terms of behaviour, I watch allsorts on Sky Sports (does my wife's head in) but I wouldnt pay specifically to watch many, if any, of them... just becuase I said he has an argument about whether it is worth it doesnt mean he has a correct argument. 

I think there is something in the discussion, as you say it needs to be fact-based and sensible though. I would like to see this used in a way that potentially helps reduce the reliance on Sky Sports. Let's be honest, they pretty much know that we have nowhere else to go - if we can eat into any gap from walking away then maybe new partners can be enticed with more attractive commercial terms. Or to be blunt, a bit of a bargain to prove our worth.

[RP London]

3 minutes ago, OriginalMrC said:

Every time there's a good news story involving Derek he has to ofset it by spouting some nonsense.

you do wonder why it gets picked up though as its obviously based on very little fact and therefore is really a bit pointless.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, RP London said:

you do wonder why it gets picked up though as its obviously based on very little fact and therefore is really a bit pointless.

clickbait?

[RP London]

Just now, Dave T said:

I think there is something in the discussion, as you say it needs to be fact-based and sensible though. I would like to see this used in a way that potentially helps reduce the reliance on Sky Sports. Let's be honest, they pretty much know that we have nowhere else to go - if we can eat into any gap from walking away then maybe new partners can be enticed with more attractive commercial terms. Or to be blunt, a bit of a bargain to prove our worth.

100% this... its a good piece of work for someone to do to actually build the strategy around the app etc. I would be very tempted to ditch sky sports and just have the app if it was actually good an proven as I dont half watch some rubbish on it just becuase it is there. I'd then pick and chose a bit ie also get the NFL app for 4 months but overall I think i;d save a bit of cash. But its a work in tandem type project not a go it completely alone.. and there needs to be a cost based balance looked at by the RFL/media partners in developing it etc. A proper business strategy basically but not with these figures!

[sweaty craiq]

It’s to get Sky rattled before his Billionaire mates in America come in, let’s face it we are at the bottom of the why bother pit and require owners to keep the sport FT

[RP London]

Just now, Dave T said:

clickbait?

and you fell for it  

but i do like the fact you didnt link the article so none of the rest of us had to become figures in their justification for publishing it.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, RP London said:

and you fell for it  

but i do like the fact you didnt link the article so none of the rest of us had to become figures in their justification for publishing it.

thanks for reminding me:

 

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

It’s to get Sky rattled before his Billionaire mates in America come in, let’s face it we are at the bottom of the why bother pit and require owners to keep the sport FT

This really won't rattle anyone though, that's sort of the point. 

Sky know we won't get anything like £48m, or £36m, or £21m by going alone. 

All it does is make the sport look like simpletons.

[Welshleaguelover]

He's done wonders for Leigh. Gotta give him credit for that.

Other than that.... I've a pal with a decking firm just about making ends meet.

[LeytherRob]

5 minutes ago, RP London said:

and you fell for it  

but i do like the fact you didnt link the article so none of the rest of us had to become figures in their justification for publishing it.

The thread will be justification enough because the people at LE know there's a small army of RL fans ready to hate-click any article carrying the name Derek Beaumont. I've seen 4 or 5 articles now in the past week or so, each one taken from a different comment in what was clearly a singular conversation at the recent media day that is being chopped up to generate the greatest number of clicks for the ads. 

[RP London]

3 minutes ago, LeytherRob said:

The thread will be justification enough because the people at LE know there's a small army of RL fans ready to hate-click any article carrying the name Derek Beaumont. I've seen 4 or 5 articles now in the past week or so, each one taken from a different comment in what was clearly a singular conversation at the recent media day that is being chopped up to generate the greatest number of clicks for the ads. 

easy work if you can get it.. 

[JohnM]

18 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

It’s to get Sky rattled before his Billionaire mates in America come in, let’s face it we are at the bottom of the why bother pit and require owners to keep the sport FT

Not hate, but Coulrophobia

Breaking News: ex-double glazing salesman from suburb of Wigan triggers Wall Street crash. Gates, Musk, Ellison, Besos, Wales, Zuckerberg, Dell,  Buffet alliance buy out Leopards and start Ultimate Rugby League. 

Edited January 31, 2025 by JohnM