Heres a thought regarding new sky deal

[jt64]

Errr, is this a serious response?

Yes, it was - season ticket holders count for a huge percentage of the attendance, and Sky typically pick games where there will be a big away following regardless. Take those out of the attendance and there's not much left that'll actually be influenced by a game being on TV

 

[BushBlade]

Very early days for sports rights on t'interweb but that's surely where they will end up up.

“They are putting a lot of resource into it. Streaming services are learning in an environment where people now want instant results. We are entering a phase of change [with streaming companies] happening quicker now than any time in my TV production career.”

The UK has become Amazon’s test market for a foray into whether exclusive live sports can supercharge its Prime Video TV offering, and ultimately expand the 100 million-strong customer base who pay £79 a year for its Prime subscription service of perks, from free music streaming to one-day delivery.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/25/can-amazon-ace-live-sports-broadcasting-us-open

I get the Eleven Sports (Elev8????) / ITV digital analogy, but why would anyone with a brain sign a 5 year deal in this rapidly changing world?
Oh yes, I forgot, it was Shaun Harvey wasn't it.......

Five years of guaranteed income for lower league clubs. They may care about that more than the big boys filling their pockets.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

Yes, it was - season ticket holders count for a huge percentage of the attendance, and Sky typically pick games where there will be a big away following regardless. Take those out of the attendance and there's not much left that'll actually be influenced by a game being on TV

Sorry, I disagree, as is evidenced by our lower attendances this season.

 

[McGrath]

We're getting a tenth of what the Premier League gets and it's split amongst the full 72 league clubs depending on the league you're in - evenly.

So, Sheff U will receive the same amount as Ipswich for example, yet we're on TV far more and it negatively affects the amount of matchday tickets sold.

Additionally here's food for thought.

Sheffield United last season had games with viewing figures above the 500k mark in the UK. Cardiff's last game in the Prem barely scraped 400k. But they're game is worth over 10x more apparently.

I agree with the clubs, the deal stinks.

I don't understand how Championship is valued at a tenth of the Premier League.

These days half the Premier fixtures are about as inspiring as watching Scottish Dvision 1 football. I mean who seriously would rather watch Bournemouth Vs Watford or Palace Vs Brighton or Fulham Vs Soton instead of us Vs the Pigs or Leeds Vs Villa or Forest Vs Lampards Derby?

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

I don't understand how Championship is valued at a tenth of the Premier League.

These days half the Premier fixtures are about as inspiring as watching Scottish Dvision 1 football. I mean who seriously would rather watch Bournemouth Vs Watford or Palace Vs Brighton or Fulham Vs Soton instead of us Vs the Pigs or Leeds Vs Villa or Forest Vs Lampards Derby?

Thing is, it's not 'just the championship'. It's the rest of the 72 clubs.

 

[alcoblade]

Five years of guaranteed income for lower league clubs. They may care about that more than the big boys filling their pockets.

If you mean “the big boys” of the championship, remember they will be the clubs that are losing the most money too.

 

[BushBlade]

If you mean “the big boys” of the championship, remember they will be the clubs that are losing the most money too.

Do you mean the losses they are currently incurring? Their choice.

Or do you mean losing future potential earnings based on an offer that may or may not be made in three years time?

 

[SwissBlade]

No. The Premier League deals have all been either 3 or 4 years IIRC.



They all have one vote, but no-one tunes in to watch Bury, Fleetwood or Mansfield. As per ealier in this post, we get games with a bigger TV audience than the likes of Cardiff.

Lots of people want to watch us, Villa, DirtyLeeds, Forest, FL'sDC etc etc. It is for this reason that these clibs want a better deal, not just to take a few thousand more from the same clubs (i.e. a 'bigger cake').

I don't mind solidarity with the smaller clubs and it is not long since we were down there, but I hate Sky. They have profitted from football and consistently underpaid to build their own business. The EFL have missed a trick here as the Championship has never been more atractive and Sky know it!

There must be a reason for the 5 years.

Regarding One club one vote, it doesn’t just apply to TV deals, it applies to the whole league set up and if the clubs that people want to watch more start bullying for a bigger slice of the pie then it’s a bit of a slippery slope. There should be a better deal for all clubs, not just financially but also to ensure that even League 1 and 2 get visibility. Maybe the red button would work better for those clubs, maybe they deserve a bigger slice of the TV revenue.

We know how good the football was when we were down there, but you hardly saw it on TV.

To be honest I don’t know what the answer is but there’s now 5 years to look at it

 

[grafikhaus]

The deal doesnt look great i agree there, but if that's the best offer thats the best offer.

© T. May.

BT are starting to pull out of football outside of Premier League and Europe unless they can pick it up for next to nothing (National League). They've pulled out of the Scottish League and would not go to the sums Sky are paying for efl.

Eleven Sports aren't established enough yet and there would also be conflict of interest (Leeds)

The others such as Amazon, Facebook etc are not ready to dip their toes into something as there is no guarantee of return.

Sky was the only option on the table for that sort of money. The efl basically had to bend over. Despite what the chairmen think, the other deals ain't there.

Here's a radical thought. What about the BBC (which we already pay a 'Poll Tax' for) making a bid? Instead of paying Lineker's vast salary and broadcasting utter shite like 'Strictly' and 'Children in Need'? I sure if it was rebranded 'The Women's EFL' they'd go for it.

 

[SwissBlade]

I don't understand how Championship is valued at a tenth of the Premier League.

These days half the Premier fixtures are about as inspiring as watching Scottish Dvision 1 football. I mean who seriously would rather watch Bournemouth Vs Watford or Palace Vs Brighton or Fulham Vs Soton instead of us Vs the Pigs or Leeds Vs Villa or Forest Vs Lampards Derby?

I don’t get how the Premier League is worth ten times more than the championship...

Perhaps the EFL deal is the right one, it’s the PL one which is onscene

 

[Sharrow Snuff Mill]

It looks to me that the EFL has been nicely tucked up (f instead of t if you prefer) for the next five years. The vast disparity between thePL and Championship "values" is ridiculous. A wide awake negotiator should have been able to finalise a substantially better deal over a shorter time, which would have benefitted all 72 EFL clubs, and would have given the bigger clubs something nearer to what most might assess as true market value.

 

[TJB.]

I don't understand how Championship is valued at a tenth of the Premier League.

These days half the Premier fixtures are about as inspiring as watching Scottish Dvision 1 football. I mean who seriously would rather watch Bournemouth Vs Watford or Palace Vs Brighton or Fulham Vs Soton instead of us Vs the Pigs or Leeds Vs Villa or Forest Vs Lampards Derby?

It's probably a testament to how good a job has been done in turning the Premier League into the brand it currently is when global viewers choose to tune into those games, rather than something with a bit more 'meat' to it in the division below. People will watch those shittier games simply because they're being played in that division, which has been packaged and sold off as the best in the world. If you're two sides which are part of that fraternity, it MUST be a game which'll be worth watching...right?

 

[spongebobblade]

Thing is, it's not 'just the championship'. It's the rest of the 72 clubs.

And then the EFL will be scratching there heads when the Premier League 2nd division is formed. Yes we need to look after clubs lower down the scale but equally we cannot let the ridiculous gap between the top 2 divisions get any wider

 

[SwissBlade]

© T. May.




Here's a radical thought. What about the BBC (which we already pay a 'Poll Tax' for) making a bid? Instead of paying Lineker's vast salary and broadcasting utter shite like 'Strictly' and 'Children in Need'? I sure if it was rebranded 'The Women's EFL' they'd go for it.

Top sports story on BBC news last night. Arsenal player could miss the World Cup... turns out it was women’s football which has attendances akin to the national league

 

[Davalon]

Is there a better deal on offer?

A number of our fans respond with 'who was offering more?' when some complain about us selling players too cheaply.

Despite agreeing with a number of comments and observations on this thread, what are the alternatives at this time?

 

[Killamarshblades]

I don't understand how Championship is valued at a tenth of the Premier League.

These days half the Premier fixtures are about as inspiring as watching Scottish Dvision 1 football. I mean who seriously would rather watch Bournemouth Vs Watford or Palace Vs Brighton or Fulham Vs Soton instead of us Vs the Pigs or Leeds Vs Villa or Forest Vs Lampards Derby?

Its Its hard to compare matches though isnt it. We'd rather watch a top end championship match than a mid table Premier game, but if we were in the Premier League how many of us would be arsed about watching Blackburn v QPR? But id imagine we'd watch those fixtures you mention more than others as that's the league we are in.

At the end of the day the PL is huge, all over the world, and the marketing around it means that there is less / little interest in the rest of English football aside from fans of those clubs, its as though you dont exist if you're not in the PL. Plus the football in the PL is better, the teams are better, hence why generally more people will want to watch it

 

[raul]

I don’t get how the Premier League is worth ten times more than the championship...

Perhaps the EFL deal is the right one, it’s the PL one which is onscene

Are overseas broadcasting rights in the Prem deal? Whilst domestic audiences could be similar for Watford v Hudd to FLDC v WBA, it'll be the global audience that watches one but not the other due to the strength of the EPL brand.

 

[Topplayersleave]

TV in one form or another is here to stay, they'll keep giving more and more as long as people watch it and as long as they can put an advertisement on every 2 minutes (except during the live games)

They won't stop at that though, eventually an advert will flick on during a penalty shoot out a bit like it does in American sports

 

[I should coco]

Despite agreeing with a number of comments and observations on this thread, what are the alternatives at this time?

Presumably no concrete offers on the table today, but the Silicon Valley giants are growing by the day. Offers will come, of that I'm sure.

That is the dissenting clubs gripe. Why sign a 5 year deal in such a rapidly evolving market?

One club one vote is fair to the small clubs but the EFL is getting into a similar position to FIFA. The latter offers an extra package of 'jumpers for goalposts' and all the Sub-Saharan minows, the Asiatic tiddlers and the Central American pygmies will all vote for what they are told to. 48 team world cups coming soon to a continent near you, to be followed by 60, 72 and 144 team world cup finals....

Bury, Mansfield, Colchester et al will vote for the deal as they get a few hundred thousand per year for nothing. I don't dispute they deserve at least some crumbs from the table, but the price for that will be that idiots like Harvey remain in charge. Much in the same way Blatter held sway until he got too corrupt even for FIFA.

 

[Berkshire Blade]

As consumers and fans this sky deal is best for us. No new subscription service like eleven sports needed.

Its not Sky's fault clubs overspend.

If the clubs get their way and get a bigger deal where exactly do you think the extra money comes from? Its the fans pocket. They should have proper wage and transfer caps so they can't lose any money rather than look for more TV money which only means wages and fees go up.

 

[I should coco]

As consumers and fans this sky deal is best for us. No new subscription service like eleven sports needed.

Eh?

So is Sky now free then?

 

[Razor_Blade]

If the Fans dont watch the Red Button, Sky will kick it into touch

I am guessing they do watch, so its a good thing

Not for attendance at the match it isn't.

 

[Berkshire Blade]

Eh?

So is Sky now free then?

No but its the best legal option right now. The clubs want more money from fans and weirdly fans seem to be cheerleading this.

 

[siblade]

As consumers and fans this sky deal is best for us. No new subscription service like eleven sports needed.

Its not Sky's fault clubs overspend.

If the clubs get their way and get a bigger deal where exactly do you think the extra money comes from? Its the fans pocket. They should have proper wage and transfer caps so they can't lose any money rather than look for more TV money which only means wages and fees go up.

Clubs overspend to get to the EPL because of the riches there, aren't Sky partly responsible for this super rich club that everyone wants to be in?

I'm with SwissBlade, it's not that the EFL should have more money, the EPL should have less.

 

[Worksop II]

Not for attendance at the match it isn't.

Isn't that what the money is for, to compensate for the attendance dropping .......

 

[I should coco]

No but its the best legal option right now. The clubs want more money from fans and weirdly fans seem to be cheerleading this.

Repeating myself, but I have to say 'eh?' again.

I agree it is the only legal option right now but that's exactly why the clubs don't want to sign up for 5 years. I would suggest it will prove to be far from the 'best'.

You said:

As consumers and fans this sky deal is best for us

So that's £50 per month for all footy whether you want it or not.

What if Amazon come up with a model where United's games are say £10 each so a whol season away from home for £230 as opposed to £600 a year for Sky.

I really don't understand why you have hitched your wagon to Sky without any thought as to what else might come along.

As an aside, remember that 'Murdoch news is bad news'. You might be able to ditch the right wing stike breaking smug Aussie twat, as well and his nepotic offspring.

 

[blade too long]

Sheffield United last season had games with viewing figures above the 500k mark in the UK. Cardiff's last game in the Prem barely scraped 400k. .

so , weve got 500000 fans watching us , dont tell wednesday fans

 

[Chali 2na]

I'm with SwissBlade, it's not that the EFL should have more money, the EPL should have less.

Why should the EPL have less?

 

[blade too long]

who negotiates these things


things being divided by 20
means 20 bigger lumps than
things being divided by 72

really getting stiffed at every turn

 

[BushBlade]

Clubs overspend to get to the EPL because of the riches there, aren't Sky partly responsible for this super rich club that everyone wants to be in?

I'm with SwissBlade, it's not that the EFL should have more money, the EPL should have less.

No Sky aren’t responsible. Owners who overspend are responsible. They’re big businessmen who are more than capable of deciding what to do with their money.