PDA

View Full Version : Doncaster and the TV deal



hibbysam
20-05-2014, 06:41 PM
http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/275976-spfl-pay-broadcaster-up-to-250000-per-season-to-show-rangers-games/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

How is that fud still in a job? We have to be the only country in the world to actually pay the TV companies to show our games rather than the other way around? If the TV companies didn't want our game because Rangers weren't in the top league they should have been told to bolt, not paid to stay!

Pretty Boy
20-05-2014, 06:44 PM
Hunbelievable.

col02
20-05-2014, 06:47 PM
Only in Scotland would you actually have a governing body too stupid or scared enough to roll over so easily to actually pay for the crumbs left on the television companies table.

jodjam
20-05-2014, 06:47 PM
Couldn't believe this when stv ran it. How on earth can they let this happen. Scottish football panders to two clubs. The others should lie down and have their tummies tickled.

Smartie
20-05-2014, 06:51 PM
Is it that bad? Having read the article it says the £250k payment is made to prevent the loss of tens of millions of pounds of broadcasting deals for the SPFL. Surely that makes business sense? Not doing it would be cutting off their noses to spite themselves.

hibbysam
20-05-2014, 07:04 PM
Is it that bad? Having read the article it says the £250k payment is made to prevent the loss of tens of millions of pounds of broadcasting deals for the SPFL. Surely that makes business sense? Not doing it would be cutting off their noses to spite themselves.

The TV deal isn't worth tens of millions of pounds and never has been. If our game wasn't good enough without Rangers to the TV company then they should have been told to shove it... There is 40 other teams in the leagues other than Rangers or Celtic and it's about time Doncaster and his pals realised this.

Kato
20-05-2014, 07:16 PM
Is it that bad? Having read the article it says the £250k payment is made to prevent the loss of tens of millions of pounds of broadcasting deals for the SPFL. Surely that makes business sense? Not doing it would be cutting off their noses to spite themselves.

How many tens of millions of pounds are the contracts actually worth?

I think they meant tens of millions of pence.

HFC07
20-05-2014, 07:24 PM
It's the principle of it, this whole scottish football is nothing without Rangers. The scottish game has proven over the last season that it is good enough to stand without them.

The Green Goblin
20-05-2014, 07:28 PM
It's the principle of it, this whole scottish football is nothing without Rangers. The scottish game has proven over the last season that it is good enough to stand without them.

Yup. I would go further and say that the top league is much better without them.

marinello59
20-05-2014, 07:29 PM
It's the principle of it, this whole scottish football is nothing without Rangers. The scottish game has proven over the last season that it is good enough to stand without them.

According to this deal with the TV company we are not good enough to stand without them. It was either no deal and therefore no TV revenue or we made this arrangement.

Albion Hibs
20-05-2014, 07:39 PM
The TV deal isn't worth tens of millions of pounds and never has been. If our game wasn't good enough without Rangers to the TV company then they should have been told to shove it... There is 40 other teams in the leagues other than Rangers or Celtic and it's about time Doncaster and his pals realised this.

:top marks

Sick of every third game being at a ridiculous time on a none footballing day only to act as a filler for an overpaid EPL, then having to listen to Sky talk about bids for players from glorified championship teams which will amount to more than we can spend on the clubs player wages for two years.

The two in "charge" clearly have no business ability, they need sacked and business people brought in who can get scottish football teams a proper deal. Failing that clubs take back control bin the TV and start delivering a product at a time and on a day which football should be played.

Eyrie
20-05-2014, 07:47 PM
If BT want to show lower league games then that is up to them, but those games should not be subsidised by the SPFL.

HFC07
20-05-2014, 07:48 PM
According to this deal with the TV company we are not good enough to stand without them. It was either no deal and therefore no TV revenue or we made this arrangement.

It's still a big kick in the teeth, what other country pays the TV company to show there games.
If the money was to cover the cost of setting & rigging in places like Elgin to show the Gers games, then don't show them if it's not financially viable.

Why not just amend the overall tv deal to cover the cost instead of getting a kick back from the SPFL. This just smells like the whole Armageddon situation again, it was bull **** then and it's bull **** now.

Pretty Boy
20-05-2014, 07:52 PM
If BT want to show lower league games then that is up to them, but those games should not be subsidised by the SPFL.

This is it for me.

If BT were so desperate to show The Rangers games surely they should have been willing to pay more for it not expect a refund.

Let's be honest neither them.or Sky would have walked away from the TV deal with Celtic still around.

cabbageandribs1875
20-05-2014, 07:52 PM
Yup. I would go further and say that the top league is much better without them.



apart from our performances of late it's been an absolute pleasure being at/watching tv games without the vile hun neanderthals

marinello59
20-05-2014, 07:56 PM
It's still a big kick in the teeth, what other country pays the TV company to show there games.
If the money was to cover the cost of setting & rigging in places like Elgin to show the Gers games, then don't show them if it's not financially viable.

Why not just amend the overall tv deal to cover the cost instead of getting a kick back from the SPFL. This just smells like the whole Armageddon situation again, it was bull **** then and it's bull **** now.

I don't disagree about it being sickening.
The TV company will be making a purely commercial decision. Whether we like it or not out with Scotland the Old Firm are much more likely to attract viewers than anybody else. And within Scotland their massive supports means more subscriptions sold and bigger advertising revenue. It may be fairly unpalatable but that's the way it is. The whole thing is a bit of a mess though and appears to have been undersold. The fact that Sky can show the play off finals at no extra cost is just as bad as the Sevco rebate.

Saorsa
20-05-2014, 08:21 PM
Only in Scottish fitba :bitchy: Clowns giving money away tae TV companies instead of the other way around. Pity the clowns cannae even dae a job and attract a sponsor for the Scottish leagues, never mind giving money away, ****in' erseholes.

Sign a **** TV deal in the 1st place then get conned in tae giving a large chunk of it back, get that **** dungcaster tae ****.

green&left
20-05-2014, 08:21 PM
Hope BT/Sky tell the SFA when the contract is up they'll be paying half to renew. Because what Doncaster has done here by giving them a quarter of a million pound is basically that we're that desperate and we have no alternative so here, don't leave and here's your cash.

Will show him for what he is. A useless hun loving c***.

Get em to **** along with Sky/BT.

Gatecrasher
20-05-2014, 08:26 PM
What a ****ing joke, only in Scotland. :hilarious

I would say doncaster has has to go but the guy has more lives than a cat.

Saorsa
20-05-2014, 08:44 PM
What a ****ing joke, only in Scotland. :hilarious

I would say doncaster has has to go but the guy has more lives than a cat.I would say it's unbelievable the the SPFL members left that **** in the job but sadly it isnae or he must have something on them....

Forza Fred
20-05-2014, 08:46 PM
What a ****ing joke, only in Scotland. :hilarious

I would say doncaster has has to go but the guy has more lives than a cat.

Not commenting to support any particular argument, only to say the 'only in Scotland' argument is not correct.

I have personal knowledge,albeit any years ago, of a deal where the then Ozassociation paid a tv channel to ensure 'exposure' on a particular channel/ show.

Perhaps different circumstances I admit, but has happened elsewhere I the past

Thecat23
20-05-2014, 08:59 PM
I'm sick hearing how bad the Scottish game is. Sorry but it's better than ever. Ok the standard may not be the greatest but look at the Aberdeen v Well game battling for second, look who's won the Scottish cup, sad to say this look who's in the play offs!!

This league has thrived without The Rangers IMO and I'm sick to death hearing how we need them. If TV companies did pull the plug I honestly think more fans would attend. It's scaremongering at its best.

Sooner these pair leave the better for everyone. When they come back they will get every decision going (nothing knew) to make sure they finish strongly.

Sorry but the whole thing stinks IMO and it's all that is wrong with football these days.

DC_Hibs
20-05-2014, 09:04 PM
Granted we are lucky that anyone pays a penny to broadcast scottish football - as it's absolutely garbage - but having to compensate them for covering Huns away at diddy clubs is a bit much.

Keep paying the sky and bt subscriptions guys. Although we're mostly filling the pocket of bawbags like nae birthday cake Toure and filling the coffers of lower league English clubs to sp-unk over us in the transfer market, 0.0000001% of our contributions will maybe make it's way to Hibs latest managerial mastermind to work his magic in the transfer market.

DC_Hibs
20-05-2014, 09:07 PM
Ok the standard may not be the greatest

Agreed, it's absolute pony right now!

The league is more competitive though.........but then so is the Joey Deacon soccer sixes.

Nutmegged
20-05-2014, 09:21 PM
I've read a lot from @AgentScotland tonight on Twitter, Yams and Tims are swamping him, to be fair he has been quite level headed and made a lot of sense, anyway I was of the same opinion of him but hopefully I'll explain my reasoning slightly better.

I don't agree that this is a bad move, I can completely understand why the SPL felt the need to agree to this move, hindsight is a wonderful thing but at the time in 2012 a lot of clubs did have a panic going on about voting Rangers out of the League, well voting against them re-entering in their new guise, the two home gates lost to Rangers were always going to create some problems, while clubs could cut their clothes accordingly I think potentially losing the TV deal woulf have neen a bridge to far, the only real monet clubs can bank on is.the Season ticket money and the TV money.

A lot of people on Twitter are thinking the SPL somehow gave Rangers money, they didn't, Neil Doncaster, under the instruction of the SPL made provisions with ESPN (now BT) to cover the extra costs it would be to set up all their cameras/studios etc in locations that wouldn't have been otherwise prepaired.

Should the SPL have done this? Well it depends what the alternative was, if ESPN were threatening to walk away from their what? £8m p/y deal then giving them a potential pay-back of £250,000 to cover their costs was a no-brainer, also, if ESPN didn't decide to show Rangers games then they'd more than likely lose the vast majority of all Rangers fans who had previously subscribed

ESPN signed up to cover Scottish Football, mainly two clubs if we're honest, they didn't sign up to go on location to the arse end of no-where and in doing so leave themselves out of pocket, the SPL had to subsidise the Broadcaster in my own humble opinion

givescotlandfreedom
20-05-2014, 10:12 PM
Farcical arrangement. The man who effectively said our game was dead is paying to show a lower league team BT obviously we take to show. Amazing incompetence or corruption.

Smartie
20-05-2014, 10:19 PM
I've read a lot from @AgentScotland tonight on Twitter, Yams and Tims are swamping him, to be fair he has been quite level headed and made a lot of sense, anyway I was of the same opinion of him but hopefully I'll explain my reasoning slightly better.

I don't agree that this is a bad move, I can completely understand why the SPL felt the need to agree to this move, hindsight is a wonderful thing but at the time in 2012 a lot of clubs did have a panic going on about voting Rangers out of the League, well voting against them re-entering in their new guise, the two home gates lost to Rangers were always going to create some problems, while clubs could cut their clothes accordingly I think potentially losing the TV deal woulf have neen a bridge to far, the only real monet clubs can bank on is.the Season ticket money and the TV money.

A lot of people on Twitter are thinking the SPL somehow gave Rangers money, they didn't, Neil Doncaster, under the instruction of the SPL made provisions with ESPN (now BT) to cover the extra costs it would be to set up all their cameras/studios etc in locations that wouldn't have been otherwise prepaired.

Should the SPL have done this? Well it depends what the alternative was, if ESPN were threatening to walk away from their what? £8m p/y deal then giving them a potential pay-back of £250,000 to cover their costs was a no-brainer, also, if ESPN didn't decide to show Rangers games then they'd more than likely lose the vast majority of all Rangers fans who had previously subscribed

ESPN signed up to cover Scottish Football, mainly two clubs if we're honest, they didn't sign up to go on location to the arse end of no-where and in doing so leave themselves out of pocket, the SPL had to subsidise the Broadcaster in my own humble opinion

It's a pretty unpalatable truth for us but I agree with you entirely.

I heard that of all the fixtures broadcast during the 2012-2013 season, the 2 biggest viewing figures were for the The Rangers v Peterhead game (the first of the season) and their Scottish Cup tie at Tannadice. These blew the figures for all the other games out of the water.

Whether we like it or not they are big box office and that appeals to the broadcasters. Given the panic that seemed to be kicking about during that "armageddon" summer I reckon the salvaging of any tv deal should be considered a success - as I mentioned spending £250k to generate a larger amount seems common sense for me. Those of you who are enthusing about the good standard of Scottish football should probably be grateful for this additional income.

For what it's worth I can't stand the perceived importance of the Old Firm in Scotland. I love the top league without Rangers and wish Celtic weren't there either. It would be magic for the rest of us to stand a chance of winning the league at the start of the season. I deeply resent the movement of kickoff times to accommodate a measly Tv deal. Scottish football measures its performance way too much on the performance of Celtic and Rangers in Europe and ignores the under-performance of the other sides and the competitiveness of the leagues. Losing them from the top league for a few years will hopefully allow some of their cash to be spread through the lower leagues and the top league MUST sort out its voting structure and prize money distribution before they return to improve competition and prevent a return to the status quo.

But Scottish football doesn't revolve around me. The armchair Old Firm fan is far more important to the powers that be. Because of the movement of kickoff times a season ticket is no longer value for money for me as I can't make enough of the games. I'm still to decide if I'm to renew next year, after having one for 16 years because of this.

I may not like it but I understand and accept that the SPFL, Sky TV and BT Sport are commercial enterprises and must do what they can to make profits. And if this peculiar deal is part of that then so be it.

EH6 Hibby
20-05-2014, 10:25 PM
Doesn't surprise me in the slightest. Doncaster spent months telling anyone that would listen that Scottish Football was worthless without The Rangers, the TV companies saw an opportunity and took it. I questioned at the time the new deal was being worked out how those in charge could work out a deal when they were shouting from the rooftops that without Rangers the league was nothing.

hibbysam
20-05-2014, 10:34 PM
I've read a lot from @AgentScotland tonight on Twitter, Yams and Tims are swamping him, to be fair he has been quite level headed and made a lot of sense, anyway I was of the same opinion of him but hopefully I'll explain my reasoning slightly better.

I don't agree that this is a bad move, I can completely understand why the SPL felt the need to agree to this move, hindsight is a wonderful thing but at the time in 2012 a lot of clubs did have a panic going on about voting Rangers out of the League, well voting against them re-entering in their new guise, the two home gates lost to Rangers were always going to create some problems, while clubs could cut their clothes accordingly I think potentially losing the TV deal woulf have neen a bridge to far, the only real monet clubs can bank on is.the Season ticket money and the TV money.

A lot of people on Twitter are thinking the SPL somehow gave Rangers money, they didn't, Neil Doncaster, under the instruction of the SPL made provisions with ESPN (now BT) to cover the extra costs it would be to set up all their cameras/studios etc in locations that wouldn't have been otherwise prepaired.

Should the SPL have done this? Well it depends what the alternative was, if ESPN were threatening to walk away from their what? £8m p/y deal then giving them a potential pay-back of £250,000 to cover their costs was a no-brainer, also, if ESPN didn't decide to show Rangers games then they'd more than likely lose the vast majority of all Rangers fans who had previously subscribed

ESPN signed up to cover Scottish Football, mainly two clubs if we're honest, they didn't sign up to go on location to the arse end of no-where and in doing so leave themselves out of pocket, the SPL had to subsidise the Broadcaster in my own humble opinion

That's nonsense though as this deal was struck after the spl and sfl joined forces at the beginning of 13/14 season so nothing to do with 2012.

It's about BT not ESPN and this is the same man that told us our game was finished if rangers were not allowed to enter the spl! He should be nowhere near our game. BT would never walk away from a deal involving Celtic as they are, support wise one of the top 10 in Britain meaning no matter who they play people will watch! Doncaster is just pandering to keep rangers involved!

Nutmegged
20-05-2014, 10:48 PM
That's nonsense though as this deal was struck after the spl and sfl joined forces at the beginning of 13/14 season so nothing to do with 2012.

It's about BT not ESPN and this is the same man that told us our game was finished if rangers were not allowed to enter the spl! He should be nowhere near our game. BT would never walk away from a deal involving Celtic as they are, support wise one of the top 10 in Britain meaning no matter who they play people will watch! Doncaster is just pandering to keep rangers involved!

Unfortunately mate you're wrong, the deal was struck in the immediate aftermath of Rangers reforming as a Newco and playing in the arse end of nowhere in 2012-13...that was ESPN....BT Sport just bought the contract off ESPN which included the restructuring of said contract.

Thanks for the reply though.

Wakeyhibee
20-05-2014, 10:53 PM
I don't disagree about it being sickening.
The TV company will be making a purely commercial decision. Whether we like it or not out with Scotland the Old Firm are much more likely to attract viewers than anybody else. And within Scotland their massive supports means more subscriptions sold and bigger advertising revenue. It may be fairly unpalatable but that's the way it is. The whole thing is a bit of a mess though and appears to have been undersold. The fact that Sky can show the play off finals at no extra cost is just as bad as the Sevco rebate.

:agree: the TV company smelt blood, Doncaster was sat on a small pair (poker that is) and couldn't risk it. Don't like the decision
but can understand why

hibbysam
20-05-2014, 10:56 PM
Unfortunately mate you're wrong, the deal was struck in the immediate aftermath of Rangers reforming as a Newco and playing in the arse end of nowhere in 2012-13...that was ESPN....BT Sport just bought the contract off ESPN which included the restructuring of said contract.

Thanks for the reply though.

Looking back over it your right... Still doesn't explain why the deal was signed... £8m a year, minus £800k and £250k so £7m between 12 teams?
Is that really a good deal when it's so weighted towards the top two teams? Whilst chasing the fans to run a million miles, drives the prices sky high and in a round about way causes clubs to lose out on probably millions in revenue! Our tv deal is a joke and now our game is made to look an even bigger joke!!

Andy Bee
21-05-2014, 12:37 AM
Granted we are lucky that anyone pays a penny to broadcast scottish football - as it's absolutely garbage - but having to compensate them for covering Huns away at diddy clubs is a bit much.

Keep paying the sky and bt subscriptions guys. Although we're mostly filling the pocket of bawbags like nae birthday cake Toure and filling the coffers of lower league English clubs to sp-unk over us in the transfer market, 0.0000001% of our contributions will maybe make it's way to Hibs latest managerial mastermind to work his magic in the transfer market.

Exactly...£60m to Cardiff for being relegated, wtf is that all about. You've gorra laugh at people slagging Doncaster off for ultimately trying to safeguard the minuscule amount Scottish football does receive from the TV companies, meanwhile the direct debits keep coming which finance the systematic demise of Scottish football. Sky/BT GIRFUY.

Onion
21-05-2014, 03:37 AM
Doncaster and Regan should have been sacked long ago for the HunGate fiasco. They proved themselves to be incompetents, out of their depth and not fit for purpose. Sadly they are surrounded by other incompetents like Petrie who are in no position to judge others.

MWHIBBIES
21-05-2014, 05:15 AM
Yup. I would go further and say that the top league is much better without them.Indeed, would be better without Celtic as well. Imagine the drama if Motherwell had scored a dodgey 90th minute goal to win the league vs Aberdeen rather than 2nd place.

bingo70
21-05-2014, 05:18 AM
Agreed, it's absolute pony right now!

The league is more competitive though.........but then so is the Joey Deacon soccer sixes.

Disagree, I think Motherwell, Aberdeen and Dundee utd in particular have been excellent thus season. Mostly done with young Scottish players coming through. St Johnstone also had a good season with a terrific result in Europe.

Of course there's some **** teams and many **** games but I think the league is thriving and the standard improving.

StevieC
21-05-2014, 08:05 AM
£8m a year, minus £800k and £250k so £7m between 12 teams?
Is that really a good deal when it's so weighted towards the top two teams?

Didn't the re-structure involve a fairer distribution of the money as well though? I seem to recall that, once The Rangers were emptied from the league, the duopoly on the TV money was changed.

hibbysam
21-05-2014, 09:35 AM
Didn't the re-structure involve a fairer distribution of the money as well though? I seem to recall that, once The Rangers were emptied from the league, the duopoly on the TV money was changed.

It is spread out more between every team in the spfl, all 42 but I still think the top two get a fair chunk of this although again I could be wrong... But if the deal is £8million then between 42 teams and taking £250k off because of some silly twat then really clubs ain't getting all that much!

Hibee-Bongo
21-05-2014, 09:52 AM
Isn't this a case of having the 250k clause as a reason to get a better overall deal?

NAE NOOKIE
21-05-2014, 10:13 AM
Disagree, I think Motherwell, Aberdeen and Dundee utd in particular have been excellent thus season. Mostly done with young Scottish players coming through. St Johnstone also had a good season with a terrific result in Europe.

Of course there's some **** teams and many **** games but I think the league is thriving and the standard improving.

I agree with this. I think our outlook is tainted a bit because Hibs have been so bad.

I've seen a few games on ALBA this year I have really enjoyed ..... aye its no the EPL but two evenly matched teams going for it can still be entertaining. The Aberdeen St Johnstone semi was a great game and I enjoyed the Scottish Cup final very much.

The other thing of note was some of the crowds that turned out for games without a Weegie to be seen.

Aberdeen took 40,000 fans to the LC final
Dundee Utd took 30,000 to the SC final
St Johnstone somehow managed to dredge up 15,000 fans from somewhere
We attracted the biggest crowd to an Edinburgh derby for years
Dundee attracted a full house of 11,000 to their final league game

I know that these crowds are out of the ordinary ...... but the heartening thing about it is that all of these people had enough interest in the clubs involved to bother turning out. That tells me that the people of Scotland certainly have not fallen out of love with the game.

In fact the only club who failed to get folk oot the hoose when it mattered were celtic, with a ( for them ) pathetic turn out for the SC QF against Aberdeen.

Beefster
21-05-2014, 11:13 AM
Isn't this a case of having the 250k clause as a reason to get a better overall deal?

Yes.

Hibee-Bongo
21-05-2014, 11:15 AM
Yes.

Right, so maybe some people should be un-twisting their panties? Why wouldn't Doncaster put this clause in?

Beefster
21-05-2014, 11:22 AM
Right, so maybe some people should be un-twisting their panties? Why wouldn't Doncaster put this clause in?

I agree with you. IIRC, in order to keep or seal the deal, the SPFL have basically said that'll reimburse the extra costs of covering games from stadiums without decent broadcast facilities, up to a certain limit. Seems entirely sensible to me.

KeithTheHibby
21-05-2014, 11:25 AM
Doncaster is a complete bellend and has done nothing to enhance our game..that cant Regan is useless too.

The most galling thing for me is the failure to secure any kind of sponsorship deal for the SPFL this season. An utter embarrassment to launch the new league structure without any kind of sponsorship deal. He should have been sacked for that alone however the flat topped **** seems to be beyond emptying.

NAE NOOKIE
21-05-2014, 02:45 PM
Doncaster is a complete bellend and has done nothing to enhance our game..that cant Regan is useless too.

The most galling thing for me is the failure to secure any kind of sponsorship deal for the SPFL this season. An utter embarrassment to launch the new league structure without any kind of sponsorship deal. He should have been sacked for that alone however the flat topped **** seems to be beyond emptying.

Yeh ... for me this is the big one, our exposure on BBC1, SKY, BT SPORT, ALBA and the internet should make us an attractive proposition .... for example, some companies put up a million quid to sponsor golf tournaments which last for 3 days ... how can we not flog 9 months exposure?