NHC. EPL small team spending!

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Until the SPFL bears more competition in who will win the league, there wont be any level of interest. Every season, its either been Celtic or Rangers who have won the league. No competition.

Unfortunately, that is just the way it is. If the trumpets running the SFA didn't opt for Setanta Sports then we could be in a different position today, where we would receive a better TV income, but nevertheless, hindsight is a wonderful thing.

imo, merging of smaller city teams, such as Dundee and Dundee UTD, would provide a lot more competition, due to combined stadiums, fans and money.

quite interested to hear other folks thoughts on this?

Thank you, Mr. Mercer

[GillyHibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Thank you, Mr. Mercer

I was waiting on that!

[Ryan69]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Agreed.

the EPL is marketed very effectively. It’s a big brand, a graat product and is watched by millions around the world.

The sponsorship and TV deals are huge and provide millions to the Premiership clubs exactly for that reason. It’s in demand. Games across the English Premiership are sold out every week.

By contrast our game is poorly marketed. There was under 5k at Perth yesterday and to be honest, nobody outside Scotland would pay to watch St Johnstone v Hibs.

its the harsh reality I’m afraid.

You could also say that 1/1000th approximately of the whole of Scotland was there....which isnt bad really.

People that attend games in Scotland compared to population wise....SPL is one of the best attended in the world.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I was waiting on that!

Joking aside, this has been discussed many times before.

Taking 2 clubs with an average gate of 5k, and merging them, does not result in a new club with 10k fans. You can't artificially create new allegiances overnight.

[jgl07]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Joking aside, this has been discussed many times before.

Taking 2 clubs with an average gate of 5k, and merging them, does not result in a new club with 10k fans. You can't artificially create new allegiances overnight.

As proved by Inverness. The forced merger of Caley and Thistle creates tensions and a lot of fans refused to take part with many defecting to Ross County. How is it that Ross County often get more support that Inverness?

[Tyler Durden]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Explain?

Every subscriber in Scotland could cancel their Sky account and they wouldn’t blink. It wouldn’t make a difference.

The reference to Rangers fans - they previously said they would boycott Lloyds Bank after they had the temerity to enforce contractual debt obligations. Similarly Lloyds wouldn’t give a toss if every Hun closed their account. It’s meaningless.

The BBC and Sky owe Scottish Football nothing

[Jim44]

On the Beeb news just now, every team in the English Premiership outside the top five could play every match in a completely empty stadium and still make a profit.

[patlowe]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Every subscriber in Scotland could cancel their Sky account and they wouldn’t blink. It wouldn’t make a difference.

The reference to Rangers fans - they previously said they would boycott Lloyds Bank after they had the temerity to enforce contractual debt obligations. Similarly Lloyds wouldn’t give a toss if every Hun closed their account. It’s meaningless.

The BBC and Sky owe Scottish Football nothing

The broadcast companies are hugely precious about subscription numbers. Assuming there are 1m+ subscribers in Scotland I'd say they would be extremely concerned about losing them. Not that I think it's a feasible or realistic prospect.

[superfurryhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Every subscriber in Scotland could cancel their Sky account and they wouldn’t blink. It wouldn’t make a difference.

The reference to Rangers fans - they previously said they would boycott Lloyds Bank after they had the temerity to enforce contractual debt obligations. Similarly Lloyds wouldn’t give a toss if every Hun closed their account. It’s meaningless.

The BBC and Sky owe Scottish Football nothing

The BBC are a state funded broadcaster with a mandate that makes them very different in terms of accountability than Sky.

Still no one can explain why the Danish League gets over twice our broadcasting revenue?

[Winston Ingram]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As proved by Inverness. The forced merger of Caley and Thistle creates tensions and a lot of fans refused to take part with many defecting to Ross County. How is it that Ross County often get more support that Inverness?

I'm sure Dingwall only has a population of 5000 people

[hibsbollah]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Scotland's figure seems within normal parameters, based on the TV deals in a number of countries on that graphic. The deals in Sweden, Austria & Switzerland - countries with populations of 8 to 10 million - are similar. Combining the words "Portugal" and "football" will get you a reaction internationally. Combining "Scotland" and "football" won't. Is Rangers v. Celtic really any more captivating than Boca v. River?
Comparing any league anywhere to the English Premier League is a long way from being an "apples for apples" comparison.
The bottom line is economics. Scotland is still a largely mono-ethnic and mono-cultural backwater. The percentage of the world's population that knows Scotland exists is surprisingly small. The country attracts little foreign "investment" of the type that flows into London and which makes London the capital of the world. Large numbers of "investors" in London are loaded with "new money." They are from backgrounds that find football attractive.
Traditional European aristocracy "old money" and American "old money" is rarely invested in football. Nor is it invested in gold-plated Lamborghinis. Or at the tables of London's rapidly multiplying casinos.
"Vulgar" is the word that springs to mind.
London is an incredible place. It's the bubble of London's economy that produces the byproduct of the English Premier League bubble.
To say that London's increasing affluence is the result of money-laundering isn't strictly true. However, the UK's ridiculously inept legislation on transparency for offshore companies and its proliferation of tax loopholes means money-laundering on a massive scale is almost certainly easier and more profitable to accomplish via setting-up murky offshore companies and buying property in the UK than any other method. Most of the investment in London is by Russians, Arabs, Malaysians, Chinese - especially Chinese - and other dubious "got rich quick" overseas spivs buying vast quantities of property. Many of them also buy businesses - principally in the leisure sector.
They invest in London because The Party, His Majesty, El Presidente or Comrade Putin can't suddenly enact legislation that greatly devalues - or appropriates�� - their investment.
Comrade Corbyn or Mayor Sadiq Khan could suggest a massive tax or even a ban on property purchases by foreigners. That's hardly radical. There are lots of places where one must be a citizen, resident, tax-payer or all three in order to buy property.
No such noises coming from those directions though. London's housing crisis continues to escalate. As does the scale of residential property development in prime areas of the English capital. Most of it bought by overseas "businessmen" as an investment. Their kids can stay in it while doing eyewateringly expensive degrees at Imperial College or the London School of Economics - two institutions whose own recent property purchases in South Kensington and Bloomsbury, neither exactly ghettos, have seen them become inner-city suburbs in themselves.
Whilst in London, the "investors" see toys. They like toys. They buy toys. Football clubs are excellent toys. Hours of interactive fun for all the family. These "investors" own companies back home. Marketing their toy through these companies can help recoup the purchase price of the toy or at least contribute towards the toy's running costs.
Of course, it would be a lot better for the planet's economy as a whole if the mega-rich invested their billions in their own countries. London's economy is nice for the Poles, Filipinos, Brazilians, Ghanaians etc. who work for £8.50 per hour serving you coffee in Starbucks or delivering your Domino's pizza. They can send some much needed money home. It would benefit a hell of a lot more working class people in poor countries if the rich people in those countries invested their money in creating wealth (& jobs) back home. Could even invest it in football or other youth/community projects for poor kids... But then that applies equally to those domestic idiots funding Kelty Hearts, Salford City and Billericay Town.
Can't see it happening soon though.
While London continues to get rich on dubious financial practices, the English Premier League will continue to fall into the beady-eyed glances of the culturally diverse selection of the planet's mafiosi who are attracted to London.
The crane numbers on London's skyline suggests Brexit is having as much effect on keeping down invasive parasites as DDT had on keeping down invasive parasites that developed resistance in the 1950s.
While London's bubble keeps growing, the English Premier League bubble is safe.
I've composed this rant on a phone while bouncing about on a train. A bit of time to kill. Hope it makes some sort of sense.

Excellent post. Just because the implications are depressing doesn't mean it isn't true.

Back closer to home, getting money into the Scottish game is only part of the story. The aim should be to spend that money on coaching excellence. Which means actually getting rid of the current incumbents both in the sfa and out on the training pitches and replace them with people who know what they're doing.

[jgl07]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

SFA/SPFL should request a pro rata payment based on Sky Sports contributions from Scotland. That would be approximately 9% of the amount given to the English leagues.

They could request it but they would be told to p*ss off.

They will base it on potential ratings. The ratings outside of Scotland for SPFL matches is minimal unless it is a Celtic-Sevco match or something like Hibs v Hearts.

[Chorley Hibee]

Premier League: 11 of 20 clubs could have made profits in 2016-17 without fans at games -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44850888

This can only be bad news for your average football fan. Sadly it's no longer "the people's game".

[where'stheslope]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Scotland does but ye’ve got to remember there are only 5m people in Scotland. There are 55m in England.

I’m not sure there are stacks of Sky Sports subscribers in the 5m.

I think you'll be surprised, as most of the North of Scotland can only get Channel 5 if they have SKY as they don't have enough transmitter power for another channel to be broadcast, so having the dish is the only way to recieve good TV reception.
And don't even mention Cable, as only some of the bigger towns and cities have that????