Deloitte review of Scottish Football-Talking shop or a sign of change coming? SHC

[superfurryhibby]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58699735

Ron Gordon is definitely making a splash in the wee pool of our domestic game. Whilst having some reservations around the trend toward American owned SPFL clubs, it seems to me that having an outside perspective might just be the key to shaking up the status quo.

Key concerns are around the lack of TV revenue for our game and the lack of focus and coherent strategy from the SPFL in terms of increasing revenues. It seems that Ron has already met with SKy to discuss aspects of this.

"If you take four Old Firm games alone that's the equivalent of £30m of value based on the Premier League payment terms," Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson said in July. "But the SPFL as a league is only getting £25m for 48 league games? How can we say we've sold that well?"

Hibs owner Gordon - who made his money in sports rights in the United States - met Sky in London last week as part of his pitch to create a stronger brand, citing broadcasting as "one of the most important" aspects"

There seems to be a consensus amongst the owners of HIbs, Hearts ,Aberdeen and Dundee Utd that the game needs restructured and that the leading clubs should be driving that.

"The SPFL was formed in 2013 after the merger of the SPL and SFL formed one 42-team organisation. But is it under threat? Gordon, Hearts chair Ann Budge, and Cormack have all previously suggested that number of clubs - with a range of divergent needs and interests - is too many.
ordon and others have floated the idea of keeping the current pyramid, but allowing the bigger clubs to go their own way in terms of decision making, while allowing the increased revenue to trickle down in the same way it currently does.

"My sense is that somewhere in the middle maybe 24 [clubs] or something like that," he told The Athletic last month. "You could still keep the pyramid going, but the focus would be on the full-time, professional clubs that can really grow the game.

"Ultimately what happens at the top, trickles down to the smaller clubs. So you can still keep all the payments and residuals flowing down."

The concern for some fans will be the prospect of a US-style closed shop, where franchises are protected from relegation, which gives greater certainty to owners and investors. That may suit some in boardrooms, but it would be an anathema to supporters across the country"


Making the product more marketable includes encouraging fans into the ground before 2.45 and making it a more of a "sociable" experience, one that would include allowing the sale of alcohol out with the likes of Behind the Goals.


"The problem for the five clubs will be getting their way. The Deloitte review will take around six months, and at that point it becomes a political mission to convince the majority of the 42 clubs reform is in their best interests"

Any thoughts on this question? My feeling is that these guys are looking for significant change. Lots of money has been invested and I'm sure they will resist being held back by the minnows operating throughout our lower leagues. We have a lot of history and baggae in our game. Just maybe there is sea change coming and we might be on the verge of a revolution in our game?

[CMurdoch]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/58699735

Ron Gordon is definitely making a splash in the wee pool of our domestic game. Whilst having some reservations around the trend toward American owned SPFL clubs, it seems to me that having an outside perspective might just be the key to shaking up the status quo.

Key concerns are around the lack of TV revenue for our game and the lack of focus and coherent strategy from the SPFL in terms of increasing revenues. It seems that Ron has already met with SKy to discuss aspects of this.

"If you take four Old Firm games alone that's the equivalent of £30m of value based on the Premier League payment terms," Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson said in July. "But the SPFL as a league is only getting £25m for 48 league games? How can we say we've sold that well?"

Hibs owner Gordon - who made his money in sports rights in the United States - met Sky in London last week as part of his pitch to create a stronger brand, citing broadcasting as "one of the most important" aspects"

There seems to be a consensus amongst the owners of HIbs, Hearts ,Aberdeen and Dundee Utd that the game needs restructured and that the leading clubs should be driving that.

"The SPFL was formed in 2013 after the merger of the SPL and SFL formed one 42-team organisation. But is it under threat? Gordon, Hearts chair Ann Budge, and Cormack have all previously suggested that number of clubs - with a range of divergent needs and interests - is too many.
ordon and others have floated the idea of keeping the current pyramid, but allowing the bigger clubs to go their own way in terms of decision making, while allowing the increased revenue to trickle down in the same way it currently does.

"My sense is that somewhere in the middle maybe 24 [clubs] or something like that," he told The Athletic last month. "You could still keep the pyramid going, but the focus would be on the full-time, professional clubs that can really grow the game.

"Ultimately what happens at the top, trickles down to the smaller clubs. So you can still keep all the payments and residuals flowing down."

The concern for some fans will be the prospect of a US-style closed shop, where franchises are protected from relegation, which gives greater certainty to owners and investors. That may suit some in boardrooms, but it would be an anathema to supporters across the country"


Making the product more marketable includes encouraging fans into the ground before 2.45 and making it a more of a "sociable" experience, one that would include allowing the sale of alcohol out with the likes of Behind the Goals.


"The problem for the five clubs will be getting their way. The Deloitte review will take around six months, and at that point it becomes a political mission to convince the majority of the 42 clubs reform is in their best interests"

Any thoughts on this question? My feeling is that these guys are looking for significant change. Lots of money has been invested and I'm sure they will resist being held back by the minnows operating throughout our lower leagues. We have a lot of history and baggae in our game. Just maybe there is sea change coming and we might be on the verge of a revolution in our game?

My biggest concern is that money is their God and they will be happy to sacrifice everything in the Scottish game for it.
The American owners are not here to help us out.
They arrived here because they believe there is untapped money to be made and are now making their play.
They will try to do to the part time teams what we feel the Old Firm do to us with the voting system.
My belief is there will be an offer of money to the part time teams as a bribe to back the big guys plans and if that doesn't work a breakaway of the full time clubs.
The pyramid will be dead.

The money men won't be happy until the game is soulless.
Don't believe me look at the EPL and the Champions League.
They make lots of money for the owners but it no longer has a soul and lots of fans in this country no longer watch it.
As we saw with the attempted super league breakaway the owners are just looking for the next quick buck.
England no longer has an authentic top league and the fans no longer have their clubs. The clubs are simply corporate cash cows to be exploited..........and the worst thing is the supporters can never get the clubs back. Manchester United no longer exist other than as a team label that play at the same ground. Might as well be called MacDonalds United or KFC United.

Obviously there isn't the money to be made in Scottish football that there was in England but we need to be aware and switched on as supporters to the big picture when this thing kicks into gear.

[ABZHFC]

I despise American involvement in our game and would happily bring in a rule that ensured there was no overseas ownership of Scottish clubs, or at the very least a 50+1 rule so the fans would have always the final say on crucial issues

[WhileTheChief..]

Thank Christ for the likes of Ron Gordon and Dave Cormack.

We've spent decades moaning about the blazers running our game, well, now we've got some folk in to shake things up and get things moving.

Don't give a damn about 20 odd tiny 'community clubs', they should have hee-haw say in what Hibs do. Let them form their own community league and see how they get on with crowds of under 300 every week.

RG wants the top flight to be about elite football in Scotland. I back him 100% of the way.

We'll come up with a proposal following the review. If it's not voted through there will be another breakaway.

Either way, for once, we will get what we want.

[Kato]

Thank Christ for the likes of Ron Gordon and Dave Cormack.

We've spent decades moaning about the blazers running our game, well, now we've got some folk in to shake things up and get things moving.

Don't give a damn about 20 odd tiny 'community clubs', they should have hee-haw say in what Hibs do. Let them form their own community league and see how they get on with crowds of under 300 every week.

RG wants the top flight to be about elite football in Scotland. I back him 100% of the way.

We'll come up with a proposal following the review. If it's not voted through there will be another breakaway.

Either way, for once, we will get what we want.True. Games stagnating and only going to get worse. Nothing against the "community" clubs, they will find a level without dragging everyone else down.

All for it.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[CMurdoch]

Thank Christ for the likes of Ron Gordon and Dave Cormack.

We've spent decades moaning about the blazers running our game, well, now we've got some folk in to shake things up and get things moving.

Don't give a damn about 20 odd tiny 'community clubs', they should have hee-haw say in what Hibs do. Let them form their own community league and see how they get on with crowds of under 300 every week.

RG wants the top flight to be about elite football in Scotland. I back him 100% of the way.

We'll come up with a proposal following the review. If it's not voted through there will be another breakaway.

Either way, for once, we will get what we want.

You speak about the smaller clubs the way Old Firm fans speak about wee teams like Hibs

[et_hibby]

My biggest concern is that money is their God and they will be happy to sacrifice everything in the Scottish game for it.
The American owners are not here to help us out.
They arrived here because they believe there is untapped money to be made and are now making their play.
They will try to do to the part time teams what we feel the Old Firm do to us with the voting system.
My belief is there will be an offer of money to the part time teams as a bribe to back the big guys plans and if that doesn't work a breakaway of the full time clubs.
The pyramid will be dead.

The money men won't be happy until the game is soulless.
Don't believe me look at the EPL and the Champions League.
They make lots of money for the owners but it no longer has a soul and lots of fans in this country no longer watch it.
As we saw with the attempted super league breakaway the owners are just looking for the next quick buck.
England no longer has an authentic top league and the fans no longer have their clubs. The clubs are simply corporate cash cows to be exploited..........and the worst thing is the supporters can never get the clubs back. Manchester United no longer exist other than as a team label that play at the same ground. Might as well be called MacDonalds United or KFC United.

Obviously there isn't the money to be made in Scottish football that there was in England but we need to be aware and switched on as supporters to the big picture when this thing kicks into gear.

I agree with your outlook on this. I think the first thing the bigger clubs should be trying to address is the basic amount brought in via the TV deal- disproportionately low compared with other Euro leagues. RG, Cormack and co should show their acumen in addressing that before looking at 'breakaways.'

[Wilson]

I think it is just a talking shop to be honest. Any real change would be driven by the OF clubs and would therefore be in their interests not ours. It'll make interesting news for a while but that is as far as it'll go.

[CapitalGreen]

I despise American involvement in our game and would happily bring in a rule that ensured there was no overseas ownership of Scottish clubs, or at the very least a 50+1 rule so the fans would have always the final say on crucial issues

What does an owners nationality have to do with it? You get good owners and you get bad owners, their nationality is irrelevant.

[CMurdoch]

I agree with your outlook on this. I think the first thing the bigger clubs should be trying to address is the basic amount brought in via the TV deal- disproportionately low compared with other Euro leagues. RG, Cormack and co should show their acumen in addressing that before looking at 'breakaways.'

RG is exactly the right guy to deal with the TV deal.
He knows the market well. Will know exactly what it is worth.
The biggest thing that limits the TV contract that we can't change is our small population of 5.5 million so the number of possible subscribers is small and thus the number of people that can be reached by advertisers is small. These are the biggest factors in the worth of the deal.
Other factors/markets: How much interest is there in the SPFL in the world outside of Ireland, N.Ireland, Australia & New Zealand. Not much I would suggest. The Japanese guy at Celtic will increase interest from there so possible other teams could sign prevalent Japanese player, Chinese player etc.

[Smartie]

I guess it depends on the motivation of these American chaps.

If it's purely to make money then I guess we should be afraid.

Most often it's to have a pet project or to buy love. Under those circumstances they might be just the shot in the arm we need.

If was purely about milking money then there would already be student flats on Easter Road though, so he should get the benefit of the doubt for now.

[bod]

[I]"If you take four Old Firm games alone that's the equivalent of £30m of value based on the Premier League payment terms," Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson said in July. "But the SPFL as a league is only getting £25m for 48 league games? How can we say we've sold that well?"



This to me says any league will still have teams playing each other 3 or 4 times per season

[ABZHFC]

What does an owners nationality have to do with it? You get good owners and you get bad owners, their nationality is irrelevant.

American owners come from a country where sport is viewed in totally different ways to how it is viewed here. I am not saying any owner is 'bad' because of their nationality, but they have a different worldview on what the sport should look like, including seeing nothing wrong with uprooting a club and making it play in another city because that market is more profitable.

Our club was founded for the poor and impoverished Irish community of Edinburgh, even that would be totally alien to an owner from America. Germany has it right when it comes to ownership, the fans should have the final say, not the moneymen

[Peevemor]

American owners come from a country where sport is viewed in totally different ways to how it is viewed here. I am not saying any owner is 'bad' because of their nationality, but they have a different worldview on what the sport should look like, including seeing nothing wrong with uprooting a club and making it play in another city because that market is more profitable.

Our club was founded for the poor and impoverished Irish community of Edinburgh, even that would be totally alien to an owner from America. Germany has it right when it comes to ownership, the fans should have the final say, not the moneymen

What about a South American owner with Scottish/British ancestry - how does that fit with your pigeon-holing and generalisations?

[Pretty Boy]

I think you have to be careful about being too dismissive of the smaller clubs in Scotland. They offer an excellent avenue into 1st team football for a lot of players and it's a system we have used fruitfully in years gone by and continue to use today. Equally you can't just dismiss over a century of history and fans affection for their clubs because it doesn't suit Hibs agenda anymore.

In saying that there has to be an acceptance that the game here can only truly be grown by a small number of clubs, arguably only a handful. The monetary value of our TV rights and in turn the commercial partners we can attract is driven by the top clubs, in reality the TV deal probably hinges on who places the most value on the fixtures between 2 clubs. I wonder if there is merit in continuing with a 12 team top league, potentially expanding it to 14 then having a 2nd league comprised of 14-16 and then below that a loosely regionalised pyramid system involving the Highland Legaue, Lowland Legaue, East of Scotland League etc etc.

The biggest thing for me is that no league should become a closed shop. The Super League and the attempts to safeguard places in the Champions League is regularly a source of ire among fans. We can't have a system in Scotland in which Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen and so on are insulated against relegation; sporting merit has to remain a driver. I actually take the point made about the American outlook on sport in which the top teams status is ensured and a team like the Oakland Raiders were once uprooted to Los Angeles and now to Las Vegas because it was/is more commercially viable. That would be a huge no for me, albeit I don't think that has been suggested by anyone as of now. I honestly think more links ups such as the one we have with Stenhousemuir are a good idea, it creates an environment in which young players can play football in a good environment, remain linked to their parent club and it aids the lower league club in remaining viable within their community. Maybe a more formal set of arrangements to govern these link ups, allow more players to be sent from one club to a single club. I think when the NFL started the World League, later NFL Europe, NFL teams could 'allocate' players to the European teams. Some embraced it and done well out of it, others showed little interest. The choice was there for them.

[Allez Hibs]

[url]

Any thoughts on this question? My feeling is that these guys are looking for significant change. Lots of money has been invested and I'm sure they will resist being held back by the minnows operating throughout our lower leagues. We have a lot of history and baggae in our game. Just maybe there is sea change coming and we might be on the verge of a revolution in our game?

Fingers crossed this brings wholesale and inclusive change to make top level Football in Scotland competitive again. Not just owners making more money.

I am very sceptical anything will happen, the rest of Scottish Football has already sold its soul to the Old Firm so it will take something monumental to deliver any change that benefits the whole game.

[superfurryhibby]

I'm of the view that these American owners see potential in the Scottish football market and want to drive the game onwards. If they make money from it then they'll be doing better than most over the past thirty odd years.

The TV deal is a scandal, for me it's ridiculous that we are paid way less than comparable leagues in Europe. It's good to hear that Ron is exerting some pressure on SKy. I still can't understand how our league can be valued so low? We should be matching revenues from the likes of the Scandinavian leagues surely (some of them earn twice as much from broadcasting as our deal).

Equally the alcohol issue and current "matchday experience" are like relics from a bygone age. Getting fans into the ground earlier and spending more makes sense to me. The reliance on the standard Pie and Bovril fayre needs consigned to the bin. Pop up stalls, more local suppliers, more diversity of scran will help.

Pyramids are fine and should remain part of the set up. However, there is a world of a difference between teams like Hibs and Heart and teams operating in lower tiers. Are their interests really aligned to ours? Tradition is all very well, but it doesn't pay our bills.

[Allez Hibs]

[I]"If you take four Old Firm games alone that's the equivalent of £30m of value based on the Premier League payment terms," Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson said in July. "But the SPFL as a league is only getting £25m for 48 league games? How can we say we've sold that well?"



This to me says any league will still have teams playing each other 3 or 4 times per seasonI certainly hope not. That is not change. That is just self interest and corporate greed.

[Allez Hibs]

Getting fans into the ground earlier and spending more makes sense to me. The reliance on the standard Pie and Bovril fayre needs consigned to the bin. Pop up stalls, more local suppliers, more diversity of scran will help.



Couldn't agree more, Hibs have so much potential to make a matchday a spectical and an event with like you say, pop up stalls. We are fortunate we are an Edinburgh club and there could really be some great pop up food stalls and pop up bars or beer gardens / fan zones around the stadium. Scotland really is stuck in the past with some things. So much space behind the East and West stands for it to work.

I'm afraid making a matchday a fan friendly event would become a political issue with licensing and planning with the current council and government so I don't have much hope they would make the right decisions to make things better.

[Pretty Boy]

Couldn't agree more, Hibs have so much potential to make a matchday a spectical and an event with like you say, pop up stalls. We are fortunate we are an Edinburgh club and there could really be some great pop up food stalls and pop up bars or beer gardens / fan zones around the stadium. Scotland really is stuck in the past with some things. So much space behind the East and West stands for it to work.

I'm afraid making a matchday a fan friendly event would become a political issue with licensing and planning with the current council and government so I don't have much hope they would make the right decisions to make things better.

I think that's a huge part of the US sporting experience.

The ability to create a family friendly party atmosphere around the stadium should be a no brainer. Our archaic licensing laws makes that difficult though.

For me it's about choice. Guys who want a few beers with their mates can still got to the Iona or Tamsons and do the traditional football thing, I'd probably join them. Equally those with families could eat street food, play beat the goalie and have a beer inside or outside the stadium. I'd probably join them sometimes as well.

[et_hibby]

RG is exactly the right guy to deal with the TV deal.
He knows the market well. Will know exactly what it is worth.
The biggest thing that limits the TV contract that we can't change is our small population of 5.5 million so the number of possible subscribers is small and thus the number of people that can be reached by advertisers is small. These are the biggest factors in the worth of the deal.
Other factors/markets: How much interest is there in the SPFL in the world outside of Ireland, N.Ireland, Australia & New Zealand. Not much I would suggest. The Japanese guy at Celtic will increase interest from there so possible other teams could sign prevalent Japanese player, Chinese player etc.

Agree, hoping RG is onto that big time. As you'll see from the chart in the article, attached (think someone posted this on .net a few months back, Daily Record link) Scotland way behind what, for example, Norway and Denmark receive. Suggestion has been for a long time that we're sold short.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/new-scottish-premiership-tv-deal-13566262

25141

[jacomo]

I think Ron’s assessment of Scottish football, its strengths and where it can improve are spot on. He’s got the experience and background to know how to make a more attractive league for TV (which, let’s face it, is the only real avenue for significantly increasing investment in the game).

I can understand people being wary about American ownership, but under Scottish ownership our game has stagnated for decades. Currently we have Sevco denying away fans tickets and destroying the title sponsorship deal.

Something has to change. I’m not sure Deloitte have the answers, but let’s see. Ron is very clear that he wants actionable recommendations.

[worcesterhibby]

The TV deal is a scandal, for me it's ridiculous that we are paid way less than comparable leagues in Europe. It's good to hear that Ron is exerting some pressure on SKy. I still can't understand how our league can be valued so low? We should be matching revenues from the likes of the Scandinavian leagues surely (some of them earn twice as much from broadcasting as our deal).



I'm far from convinced that our deal is as terrible as everyone makes out. Perhaps the best way of looking at TV deals is to see how much money they bring in per head of population of the country. But you also have to compare like with like, so If we ignore England, Italy, Spain and Germany as they have a truly global reach rather than a mostly national reach then here are some relevant figures:

TV Money per head of population

Scotland - £5.50

Greece - £5
Portugal - £12.6
Poland - £1.24
Austria - £3
Belgium - £9
Netherlands - £4
Norway - £12
Sweden - £5

As you can see Portugal and Norway are over performing but both allow all matches to be broadcast live, which would have a serious effect on attendances and revenue generated on match day, so would it be extra money or just a different way of collecting the same money, while ruining the atmosphere and match day experience ?

Greece, Netherlands, Sweden are in the same ballpark as Scotland

Poland and Austria are under performing

We need to stop judging out TV income by England which brings in £29 per head of population and look at more comparable leagues

[Ozyhibby]

I'm far from convinced that our deal is as terrible as everyone makes out. Perhaps the best way of looking at TV deals is to see how much money they bring in per head of population of the country. But you also have to compare like with like, so If we ignore England, Italy, Spain and Germany as they have a truly global reach rather than a mostly national reach then here are some relevant figures:

TV Money per head of population

Scotland - £5.50

Greece - £5
Portugal - £12.6
Poland - £1.24
Austria - £3
Belgium - £9
Netherlands - £4
Norway - £12
Sweden - £5

As you can see Portugal and Norway are over performing but both allow all matches to be broadcast live, which would have a serious effect on attendances and revenue generated on match day, so would it be extra money or just a different way of collecting the same money, while ruining the atmosphere and match day experience ?

Greece, Netherlands, Sweden are in the same ballpark as Scotland

Poland and Austria are under performing

We need to stop judging out TV income by England which brings in £29 per head of population and look at more comparable leagues

You also need to look at price per game. We only give the TV companies 48 games a season, so they pay us accordingly. Most of those other leagues will do about 200 games a season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ringothedog]

I certainly hope not. That is not change. That is just self interest and corporate greed.

You de realise that that was a quote from the Rangers Managing Director and nothing to with the review currently being done?

[WhileTheChief..]

RG is exactly the right guy to deal with the TV deal.
He knows the market well. Will know exactly what it is worth.
The biggest thing that limits the TV contract that we can't change is our small population of 5.5 million so the number of possible subscribers is small and thus the number of people that can be reached by advertisers is small. These are the biggest factors in the worth of the deal.
Other factors/markets: How much interest is there in the SPFL in the world outside of Ireland, N.Ireland, Australia & New Zealand. Not much I would suggest. The Japanese guy at Celtic will increase interest from there so possible other teams could sign prevalent Japanese player, Chinese player etc.

Is RG one of the money men who won't be happy until the soul has been ripped out the game? You know, like what you described in your opening post?

Is this him making his play now to try and make money out of Hibs?!

I think you're way off the mark here. RG is taking us to the next level and won't allow Brechin City or Cowdenbeath to hold us back.

League 2 attendances are regularly under 300. Why should we care about these clubs when they don't have any fans of their own to care?

They're community centres with football pitches and should act accordingly.

[Ozyhibby]

More power to Ron’s elbow as far as I’m concerned. I said for years I felt Hibs were just muddling along under Petrie and that we would never get close to our potential while he was there. I think RG is setting about proving me right on that. Only time will tell.
It’s clear he sees the match day experience as an area for massive improvement and we are starting to see some changes already. There will be more to come.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WhileTheChief..]

More power to Ron’s elbow as far as I’m concerned. I said for years I felt Hibs were just muddling along under Petrie and that we would never get close to our potential while he was there. I think RG is setting about proving me right on that. Only time will tell.
It’s clear he sees the match day experience as an area for massive improvement and we are starting to see some changes already. There will be more to come.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:top marksIt's happening already!

[ABZHFC]

If you want a good TV deal then prepare to say goodbye to the majority of games being Saturday 3pms btw. Something that people always forget in these discussions about our TV deals compared to the rest of Europe is that only 1 of our games is shown per weekend. In most leagues our size, games are staggered and spread across the whole weekend. This means they get a bigger TV deal, as there are more games shown, but if we wanted a bigger one as well then I guarantee they’d try to negotiate by putting getting rid of the Saturday 3pm blackout that we currently have on the table

Be careful what you wish for

[Broken Gnome]

I'm fairly comfortable about this for now, I'm not sure the Scottish game is really ripe for sanitisation and losing its soul to money.

The closed shop idea doesn't work - the idea of Hibs, Hearts and Aberdeen being protected from relegation would be laughed out of town. If we're promoting the game for its madcap drama, a straw poll would probably cite Hibs, Hearts and Rangers in the lower leagues as the most entertainment there's been.

Everyone else is probably equally likely to be in trouble at one time or another and aside from maybe the Dundee clubs they lack any sort of tangible financial clout to be worth safeguarding. The only way semi-realistic way to do it would be a rebranded top two leagues to form some sort of elite, then have a regional system below. Would the anger from lower league clubs, fans and Twitter purists be enough of a reputational error? Doubt it.

If Ron Gordon is intent on being a money making machine, I can't see the perceived negative for Hibs at this stage? He can't hike ticket prices further as people would be driven away; if he invests loads to buy success then no one would give a monkeys if it meant a decent challenge to Rangers and Celtic - it's not got the scale to go down the route of the EPL tourist clubs either; if the ground becomes 'too' family friendly, then we've still got near-10k empty seats to work with - everyone can be accommodated without being shoehorned into an experience they don't like.

If Ron's intent on making Hibs better, and meetings with Sky would be great cause for optimism here for his credibility and standing, then it's largely worth being along for the ride. The ticket prices are his only real red line as I see it - for all he's promoting football here, he also has to realise it's limitations and the fact people moan about it constantly. It might have a hidden media value, but the consumer buy-in is limited and he could give himself too much to do if pricing fans out.

[.Sean.]

About time and I’ve said it on here before and I don’t care if it does sound snobby. It is ludicrous there are teams with about 200 fans that are basically social clubs with a football team that get a say on matters involving full time professional football clubs.

Of course there is absolutely a place in the pyramid for them but not in the current guise.

I’m all for change. As for the Americans in it to make money - of course they are, but I think they’ve all got good intentions, in particular Cormack at Aberdeen and Ron Gordon.

Scottish football has stagnated for too long and for fear of change some people are happy to just accept it. No wonder the gimpy wee EPL fanboys sneer at Scottish football

[Ozyhibby]

Previous Scottish owners have taken a lot more money out of Hibs than RG will manage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Seveno]

If you have several million Dollars lying around and want to make money from it, go see an investment manager. You will never make money in Scottish Football.

[ScottB]

Other small leagues aren’t in the same broadcast market as one of the giants, that is one of our problems when it comes to getting a better deal.

For example, if there was a Sky Scotland, presumably it would still show the EPL, but they’d be paying a smaller foreign rights amount, rather than Scottish subscribers funnelling into the current UK arrangement. Conversely, the number of subscribers who’d be interested in watching Scottish games would be high, rather than a small percentage as things stand.

[jacomo]

I'm fairly comfortable about this for now, I'm not sure the Scottish game is really ripe for sanitisation and losing its soul to money.

The closed shop idea doesn't work - the idea of Hibs, Hearts and Aberdeen being protected from relegation would be laughed out of town. If we're promoting the game for its madcap drama, a straw poll would probably cite Hibs, Hearts and Rangers in the lower leagues as the most entertainment there's been.

Everyone else is probably equally likely to be in trouble at one time or another and aside from maybe the Dundee clubs they lack any sort of tangible financial clout to be worth safeguarding. The only way semi-realistic way to do it would be a rebranded top two leagues to form some sort of elite, then have a regional system below. Would the anger from lower league clubs, fans and Twitter purists be enough of a reputational error? Doubt it.

If Ron Gordon is intent on being a money making machine, I can't see the perceived negative for Hibs at this stage? He can't hike ticket prices further as people would be driven away; if he invests loads to buy success then no one would give a monkeys if it meant a decent challenge to Rangers and Celtic - it's not got the scale to go down the route of the EPL tourist clubs either; if the ground becomes 'too' family friendly, then we've still got near-10k empty seats to work with - everyone can be accommodated without being shoehorned into an experience they don't like.

If Ron's intent on making Hibs better, and meetings with Sky would be great cause for optimism here for his credibility and standing, then it's largely worth being along for the ride. The ticket prices are his only real red line as I see it - for all he's promoting football here, he also has to realise it's limitations and the fact people moan about it constantly. It might have a hidden media value, but the consumer buy-in is limited and he could give himself too much to do if pricing fans out.


Ron has repeatedly said this is not about getting rid of the pyramid. It’s about restructuring the SPFL so that the bigger clubs with common interests can get things done.

Devil is in the detail of course but it sounds about right. Promotion / relegation are sacrosanct imo and I don’t think anyone is or should be an American style franchise system. It’s just not what our game is about.

[Iain G]

I agree with your outlook on this. I think the first thing the bigger clubs should be trying to address is the basic amount brought in via the TV deal- disproportionately low compared with other Euro leagues. RG, Cormack and co should show their acumen in addressing that before looking at 'breakaways.'

That is a key part of what they are doing!

[superfurryhibby]

If you want a good TV deal then prepare to say goodbye to the majority of games being Saturday 3pms btw. Something that people always forget in these discussions about our TV deals compared to the rest of Europe is that only 1 of our games is shown per weekend. In most leagues our size, games are staggered and spread across the whole weekend. This means they get a bigger TV deal, as there are more games shown, but if we wanted a bigger one as well then I guarantee they’d try to negotiate by putting getting rid of the Saturday 3pm blackout that we currently have on the table

Be careful what you wish for

Saturday 3pm KO is very traditional, but I can easily live without it if it meant the SPFL had enough money coming in to compete with the giants of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway in European competition.

As some have the said, one of the downsides in the leagues with blanket coverage or with no 3pm blackout may be smaller crowds.

[mixumatosis]

Saturday 3pm KO is very traditional, but I can easily live without it if it meant the SPFL had enough money coming in to compete with the giants of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway football in European competition.

If we're where most of us would (realistically) like us to be, playing regularly in Europe on a Thursday night, we'll be playing most of our games on a Sunday anyway.

Wouldn't imagine too many folk missing Saturday afternoon kick offs under those circumstances.

[CMurdoch]

Is RG one of the money men who won't be happy until the soul has been ripped out the game? You know, like what you described in your opening post?

Is this him making his play now to try and make money out of Hibs?!

I think you're way off the mark here. RG is taking us to the next level and won't allow Brechin City or Cowdenbeath to hold us back.

League 2 attendances are regularly under 300. Why should we care about these clubs when they don't have any fans of their own to care?

They're community centres with football pitches and should act accordingly.

Ron's big play will come when he sells the club. This is part 3 in a 7 part series.
Re taking us to the next level, I agree if you mean making it into the group stages of the Eurpean Conference.
That could easily come as soon as next season given we have 12 players out of contract and Daz almost certainly retiring.
Sell a player for a decent fee and we could finance better replacements for those players we don't resign.
Reach the European Conference group stages and a big wad of money will come our way in prize money from UEFA as well as through gate money and TV rights. Start doing it regularly and the benefits could move us on.

The big issue the American four and Anderson Hearts have to solve is how can they wrestle power from the old firm who under the current arrangement can stop anything that doesn't suit them. They see themselves as big clubs and see the rest of us as tinpot in relation to the TV deal so won't be sharing their voting power and any benefits it derives anytime soon. I reckon the OF will see them off so they will bully the wee teams.

I see a new Super League governing body being formed of 2 full time leagues with regional leagues below that governed by the SFA.
The teams in the 2nd league will be delighted because they can't drop into the 3rd tier.
Interest in the likes of Arbroath will slowly be destroyed because they can't be promoted from the 3rd tier and they will erode into nothing.

[Peevemor]

Ron's big play will come when he sells the club. This is part 2 in a 6 part series....

If Ron eventually sells the club at a profit then surely that would mean that we're in a better place? As long as we stay in "good "hands, I don't care how much he makes.

It certainly didn't do Celtic any harm when McCann shook them out of their stupor, eventually making millions for himself in the process.

[jacomo]

Ron's big play will come when he sells the club. This is part 2 in a 6 part series.
Re taking us to the next level, I agree if you mean making it into the group stages of the Eurpean Conference.
That could easily come as soon as next season given we have 12 players out of contract and Daz almost certainly retiring.
Sell a player for a decent fee and we could finance better replacements for those players we don't resign.
Reach the European Conference group stages and a big wad of money will come our way in prize money from UEFA as well as through gate money and TV rights. Start doing it regularly and the benefits could move us on.

The big issue the American four and Anderson Hearts have to solve is how can they wrestle power from the old firm who under the current arrangement can stop anything that doesn't suit them. They see themselves as big clubs and see the rest of us as tinpot in relation to the TV deal so won't be sharing their voting power and any benefits it derives anytime soon.


I guess this is why they’ve engaged Deloitte. External consultants often don’t come up with any fresh ideas, but sometimes their recommendations are more likely to be implemented as they are seen as impartial experts rather than folk with agendas.

[CMurdoch]

I guess this is why they’ve engaged Deloitte. External consultants often don’t come up with any fresh ideas, but sometimes their recommendations are more likely to be implemented as they are seen as impartial experts rather than folk with agendas.

Exactly, but the real issue for the 5 is that the Old Firm hold the whip hand in any vote and they won't ever give it up.
Only way to beat them is for all the others to start a new league without them but that would be financial madness as without the OF the TV deal and other commercial revenues would shrink to the size of a walnut so that is a non starter.
In the end the 5 will beat up the wee teams, banish them and claim a massive victory whilst being no further forward with the voting rights which allow the Old Firm to control things.
We had one chance in a million to change the voting rule when Rangers were demoted but they didn't take it.
The only good extra money to be made for the 5 is to sell players to English teams for realistic fees and to reach the group stage of the European Conference tournament.

[Allez Hibs]

Exactly, but the real issue for the 5 is that the Old Firm hold the whip hand in any vote and they won't give it up.
Only way to beat them is for every other team to start a new league without them but that would be financial madness as without the OF the TV deal and other commercial revenues would shrink to the size of a walnut so that is a non starter.Yep, the clubs outwith the Old Firm really have sold their soul to the Old Firm from the SPL era onwards.

What was the issue with an SPL TV Channel back in the early days of the SPL?

A netflix type broadcasting deal is Simon Jordans big idea for the Premier League in England, saying it could generate billions worldwide. I wonder if this is something that could work in the top league of the SPFL. Would be interesting to know how much La Liga TV makes for La Liga.

[superfurryhibby]

Exactly, but the real issue for the 5 is that the Old Firm hold the whip hand in any vote and they won't ever give it up.
Only way to beat them is for every other team to start a new league without them but that would be financial madness as without the OF the TV deal and other commercial revenues would shrink to the size of a walnut so that is a non starter.
In the end the 5 will beat up the wee teams, banish them and claim a massive victory whilst being no further forward with the voting rights which allow the Old Firm to control things.
We had one chance in a million to change the voting rule when Rangers were demoted but they didn't take it.
The only good extra money to be made for the 5 is to sell players to English teams for realistic fees and to reach the group stage of the European Conference tournament.

Surely it cuts both ways? Without the other SPFL clubs there would be no league for Rangers or Celtic to play in?

The madness of handing them what amounts effectively to a voting veto has hamstrung progress in our game for a long time (why did the clubs ever think this was a good idea? ). Change is needed and one way or another, I reckon it's coming. The new investors aren't here for a joyride. They know our game has potential to be better than it is, in so many areas, and I have the feeling that guys like Ron aren't just going to roll over and have their stomachs tickled.

[CMurdoch]

Surely it cuts both ways? Without the other SPFL clubs there would be no league for Rangers or Celtic to play in?

The madness of handing them what amounts effectively to a voting veto has hamstrung progress in our game for a long time (why did the clubs ever think this was a good idea? ). Change is needed and one way or another, I reckon it's coming. The new investors aren't here for a joyride. They know our game has potential to be better than it is, in so many areas, and I have the feeling that guys like Ron aren't just going to roll over and have their stomachs tickled.

It cuts both ways but without them commercial entities and TV companies would offer buttons for our wares.
The Americans are about making money not about losing it so they won't go near the threat to go it alone without them.
Hell, the Americans biggest fear will be the risk of The OF leaving to join a Benilux or Atlantic league. We live in scary commercial times.
In the end it's all about money and power for all the parties.
I think RG is realistic and will go down the path that suits him best and protects his investment and his club.
He is fighting on a number of fronts to up Hibs revenues.
Player sales are on the launch pad.
Qualification for the group stage of The European Conference League will be brought to the launch pad next summer and will either make it or get very close.
These are the 2 big things he needs to grow Hibs.
Selling and recruitment will require a great decision on who RG brings in to take over from Mathie and that will feed into the summers ins and outs and if that person gets that right the group qualification can take place. Get either recruiter or recruitment wrong and a fix will be slow and expensive.

[Alfred E Newman]

Previous Scottish owners have taken a lot more money out of Hibs than RG will manage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really?

[chippy]

Yep, the clubs outwith the Old Firm really have sold their soul to the Old Firm from the SPL era onwards.

What was the issue with an SPL TV Channel back in the early days of the SPL?

A netflix type broadcasting deal is Simon Jordans big idea for the Premier League in England, saying it could generate billions worldwide. I wonder if this is something that could work in the top league of the SPFL. Would be interesting to know how much La Liga TV makes for La Liga.

I reckon this will be the biggy from Ron. A re branded SPL with 24-28 fully professional clubs in 2 tiers. Some sort of streaming service you describe for home and away games. Possibly linked to season tickets. Not necessarily all games live to everyone., but can see own clubs away games live with subscription. Yes promotion/ relegation between tier 1 and 2, but no drop from tier 2. It may well be that this service could be provided by a current company like BT or Sky but I think the 6 month review will include costing/ valuing an In house SPL service.

[Fergus52]

I'm far from convinced that our deal is as terrible as everyone makes out. Perhaps the best way of looking at TV deals is to see how much money they bring in per head of population of the country. But you also have to compare like with like, so If we ignore England, Italy, Spain and Germany as they have a truly global reach rather than a mostly national reach then here are some relevant figures:

TV Money per head of population

Scotland - £5.50

Greece - £5
Portugal - £12.6
Poland - £1.24
Austria - £3
Belgium - £9
Netherlands - £4
Norway - £12
Sweden - £5

As you can see Portugal and Norway are over performing but both allow all matches to be broadcast live, which would have a serious effect on attendances and revenue generated on match day, so would it be extra money or just a different way of collecting the same money, while ruining the atmosphere and match day experience ?

Greece, Netherlands, Sweden are in the same ballpark as Scotland

Poland and Austria are under performing

We need to stop judging out TV income by England which brings in £29 per head of population and look at more comparable leagues

Understand your point, but the two most comparable leagues in terms of being both of a similar quality and a roughly equivalent population size are Belgium and Denmark - both of which receive nearly twice as much money as we do per population.

Not sure how many games are shown per season in their deal mind you.

[Not In The Know]

What about a South American owner with Scottish/British ancestry - how does that fit with your pigeon-holing and generalisations?

:not worth:not worth:not worth

[Wakeyhibee]

Understand your point, but the two most comparable leagues in terms of being both of a similar quality and a roughly equivalent population size are Belgium and Denmark - both of which receive nearly twice as much money as we do per population.

Not sure how many games are shown per season in their deal mind you.

Per game Scotland do well and better than most, other countries show 200+ games though for more money overall.

If we want more TV revenue then fans will have to put up with awkward times to show more games etc..

[Allez Hibs]

American owners come from a country where sport is viewed in totally different ways to how it is viewed here. I am not saying any owner is 'bad' because of their nationality, but they have a different worldview on what the sport should look like, including seeing nothing wrong with uprooting a club and making it play in another city because that market is more profitable.

Our club was founded for the poor and impoverished Irish community of Edinburgh, even that would be totally alien to an owner from America. Germany has it right when it comes to ownership, the fans should have the final say, not the moneymenThe American ownership model is a totally different model in America though. Franchises will move to a different city because that city will offer to build them a stadium in that market and give them other incentives which can become very political.

Recently the Chargers moved to LA from San Diego after the city of San Diego couldn't get a ballot through which required a two thirds majority from voters to allow them to build a new stadium using hotel bill tax money.

I think Ron is trying to tap into the potential of a club that is deeply rooted in its own market and trying to grow not only his teams market but that of the league as a whole.

[jacomo]

I reckon this will be the biggy from Ron. A re branded SPL with 24-28 fully professional clubs in 2 tiers. Some sort of streaming service you describe for home and away games. Possibly linked to season tickets. Not necessarily all games live to everyone., but can see own clubs away games live with subscription. Yes promotion/ relegation between tier 1 and 2, but no drop from tier 2. It may well be that this service could be provided by a current company like BT or Sky but I think the 6 month review will include costing/ valuing an In house SPL service.


You could and should maintain the pyramid and keep promotion / relegation in and out of any new league set up. It can be done.

[ABZHFC]

Understand your point, but the two most comparable leagues in terms of being both of a similar quality and a roughly equivalent population size are Belgium and Denmark - both of which receive nearly twice as much money as we do per population.

Not sure how many games are shown per season in their deal mind you.

Every single Danish top flight game is shown live on TV, all with staggered kickoff times across the weekend. It's something I, and I believe most match-going fans in Scotland, would hate, if it was to happen here.

We have the highest attendance per head in Europe, that is what we should be focusing on, not trying to whore ourselves out to TV companies for a marginally better TV deal

[Allez Hibs]

We have the highest attendance per head in Europe, that is what we should be focusing on, not trying to whore ourselves out to TV companies for a marginally better TV deal

And do what with it? The whole model has to change.

I wouldn't say attendances are even that great outside Rangers Celtic ourselves Hearts and Aberdeen.

Even we could do a wee bit better given the stadium now.

For me, saying we have the highest attendance per head is a Doncasterism and is purely spin to paint a positive light on our professional sport, it completely masks the underlying issues covered in not only this thread but the other threads such as Rangers ticket allocation and the whole debate around playing each other 4 times a season.

There needs to be wholesale change.

[chippy]

You could and should maintain the pyramid and keep promotion / relegation in and out of any new league set up. It can be done.

How do you replace a fully professional club with a semi pro club and maintain quality ?

[chippy]

Understand your point, but the two most comparable leagues in terms of being both of a similar quality and a roughly equivalent population size are Belgium and Denmark - both of which receive nearly twice as much money as we do per population.

Not sure how many games are shown per season in their deal mind you.

Their national teams are not too shabby either and they both have end of season symmetrical splits up and down the league. Belgium 16 clubs and Denmark 14 I their tier one leagues.

[CMurdoch]

Understand your point, but the two most comparable leagues in terms of being both of a similar quality and a roughly equivalent population size are Belgium and Denmark - both of which receive nearly twice as much money as we do per population.

Not sure how many games are shown per season in their deal mind you.

I should say before I start I am not aiming the following at you Fergus.

Re your examples. Denmark has a very similar population. Lets look at their TV deal
Danish TV deal is £45 million. Average attendance in the league in the last season without covid was 6,595
Scottish TV deal is £30 million. Average attendance in the league in the last season without covid was 15,973
Accordingly match day income from tickets, hospitality, food and drink, the shop etc would be at least double in Scotland when compared to Denmark
The real kicker is their TV deal is for 250 live matches and ours is for 50 which explains their poor attendances and match day income.

In conclusion the Danish TV deal is pish although a fool only looking at the top line would be babbling the usual nonsense.
The real story is that all their games are shown live on TV therefore very few people attend games and as a result of that Danish clubs make little money from match day income as detailed above. Additionally they have no atmosphere at their games.

Our model is far superior to theirs.
Our model suffered last season due to the pandemic.
Their model will suffer every other season and will die if the TV money ever stops.
Our model is TV moneyproofed.

To compare countries TV deals you need to:compare:
countries of similar population
the number of games televised i.e how much are you getting per game
the average attendances
match day income

Only then can you work out how good or bad a TV deal is.
Simply looking at the top line is for fools or for gaslighting fools

[WhileTheChief..]

It cuts both ways but without them commercial entities and TV companies would offer buttons for our wares.
The Americans are about making money not about losing it so they won't go near the threat to go it alone without them.
Hell, the Americans biggest fear will be the risk of The OF leaving to join a Benilux or Atlantic league. We live in scary commercial times.
In the end it's all about money and power for all the parties.
I think RG is realistic and will go down the path that suits him best and protects his investment and his club.
He is fighting on a number of fronts to up Hibs revenues.
Player sales are on the launch pad.
Qualification for the group stage of The European Conference League will be brought to the launch pad next summer and will either make it or get very close.
These are the 2 big things he needs to grow Hibs.
Selling and recruitment will require a great decision on who RG brings in to take over from Mathie and that will feed into the summers ins and outs and if that person gets that right the group qualification can take place. Get either recruiter or recruitment wrong and a fix will be slow and expensive.

This is just your imagination though - you can't possibly know this to be the case.

Your sweeping generalisation of American's is just pure weird. If all they wanted to do was make money they wouldn't touch Scottish football.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, is worried that the Old Firm will leave and join another league. Where did you get that from?

[Iain G]

I should say before I start I am not aiming the following at you Fergus.

Re your examples. Denmark has a very similar population. Lets look at their TV deal
Danish TV deal is £45 million. Average attendance in the league in the last season without covid was 6,595
Scottish TV deal is £30 million. Average attendance in the league in the last season without covid was 15,973
Accordingly match day income from tickets, hospitality, food and drink, the shop etc would be at least double in Scotland when compared to Denmark
The real kicker is their TV deal is for 250 live matches and ours is for 50 which explains their poor attendances and match day income.

In conclusion the Danish TV deal is pish although a fool only looking at the top line would be babbling the usual nonsense.
The real story is that all their games are shown live on TV therefore very few people attend games and as a result of that Danish clubs make little money from match day income as detailed above. Additionally they have no atmosphere at their games.

Our model is far superior to theirs.
Our model suffered last season due to the pandemic.
Their model will suffer every other season and will die if the TV money ever stops.
Our model is TV moneyproofed.

To compare countries TV deals you need to:compare:
countries of similar population
the number of games televised i.e how much are you getting per game
the average attendances
match day income

Only then can you work out how good or bad a TV deal is.
Simply looking at the top line is for fools or for gaslighting fools

Would be interesting to see our average league attendance once you take Ibrox and Parkhead out of the figures (oh and the 400,000 they get every other week at the PBS).

Edit: Taking the 3rd to 12th places the average attandance for the season pre-Covid, minus the OF, was 8.651. Again this is skewed by Hibs and Hearts at 16000+ and Aberdeen at 13800 ish, everyone else is below 10.000.

Would obviously reduce further if adding in the other league clubs.

[CMurdoch]

And do what with it? The whole model has to change.

I wouldn't say attendances are even that great outside Rangers Celtic ourselves Hearts and Aberdeen.

Even we could do a wee bit better given the stadium now.

For me, saying we have the highest attendance per head is a Doncasterism and is purely spin to paint a positive light on our professional sport, it completely masks the underlying issues covered in not only this thread but the other threads such as Rangers ticket allocation and the whole debate around playing each other 4 times a season.

There needs to be wholesale change.

Your factless post is full of nothing.
The Rangers ticket allocation is a strawman argument and playing 4 times a season is to give the clubs more money by providing more games against the big teams to make up for us being a small country with a small number of big teams similarly it provides more big games to sell to TV.

Our high attendance figures per head are a fact and a strength of our model providing relatively good match day income in conjunction with relatively low numbers of live TV coverage of matches
There is no need for wholesale changes.
What we will probably see is structural change but nothing will really change for Hibs.
Ron is a good guy to know the relative worth of the TV options so that could be a possible big change but couldn't be made before 2025 when the current deal ends.

The only big thing Hibs need to get right now is the Mathie replacement and that person needs to recruit and sell the right players at the right price.
Get that right and Hibs will flourish in the next few years because finally we have no debt to service and no major infrastructure projects to pay for.
The whole thing hangs on the new recruitment guy. I would have kept Mathie and added a contract negotiator but it appears we are going down a higher risk route.
If the new guy gets it we will stall for 2 years while we expensively weed out his mistakes.

[Peevemor]

Would be interesting to see our average league attendance once you take Ibrox and Parkhead out of the figures (oh and the 400,000 they get every other week at the PBS).

Edit: Taking the 3rd to 12th places the average attandance for the season pre-Covid, minus the OF, was 8.651.

Would obviously reduce further if adding in the other league clubs.All countries/leagues have 2 or 3 clubs with far higher attendances than the rest.

[Iain G]

All countries/leagues have 2 or 3 clubs with far higher attendances than the rest.

In Denmark, which is a comparison that has been used in discussions here, the delta from top to bottom of the league attendance is around 10,000.

In Scotland it's 54,000 so yes it does skew the numbers having 2 huge clubs so far ahead of the others in attendance.

[Renfrew_Hibby]

There won't be another country in the world of less than 10M population where if you disregard the 2 best supported sides you have an average attendance of close on 9,000 for the remaining top flight clubs.
When you also consider the scale of support the old firm get then the passion for football in Scotland is quite remarkable.
Ron gets this.

[CMurdoch]

Would be interesting to see our average league attendance once you take Ibrox and Parkhead out of the figures (oh and the 400,000 they get every other week at the PBS).

Edit: Taking the 3rd to 12th places the average attandance for the season pre-Covid, minus the OF, was 8.651. Again this is skewed by Hibs and Hearts at 16000+ and Aberdeen at 13800 ish, everyone else is below 10.000.

Would obviously reduce further if adding in the other league clubs.

The last unaffected by covid season was 2018/19.
Hibs averaged 17,740
Hearts averaged 17, 564
Aberdeen 14, 924

No Danish team had average attendances as high as Hibs or Hearts that season
That includes Copenhagen the only Danish side to exceed Aberdeens average

Hamilton, Livingston and St Johnstone were the only poorly supported teams that season.
We have eventually shaken of Hamilton and hopefully Livingston fall this season to be replaced by Kilmarnock.

SPFL have already added Dundee Utd to the league since 2019 and they should be good for an average 8,000 at home games especially with Dundee also in the league.
Kilmarnocks return will leave only Dunfermline and Falkirk of the decent supported teams outside of the top league.

Stirling is the Scottish anomaly. Should have a decent supported team

[CMurdoch]

In Denmark, which is a comparison that has been used in discussions here, the delta from top to bottom of the league attendance is around 10,000.

In Scotland it's 54,000 so yes it does skew the numbers having 2 huge clubs so far ahead of the others in attendance.

But even Denmarks top supported team Copenhagen couldn't match Hibs and Hearts average attendances in the last non affected covid season.

[superfurryhibby]

The last unaffected by covid season was 2018/19.
Hibs averaged 17,740
Hearts averaged 17, 564
Aberdeen 14, 924

No Danish team had average attendances as high as Hibs or Hearts that season
That includes Copenhagen the only Danish side to exceed Aberdeens average

Hamilton, Livingston and St Johnstone were the only poorly supported teams that season.
We have eventually shaken of Hamilton and hopefully Livingston fall this season to be replaced by Kilmarnock.

SPFL have already added Dundee Utd to the league since 2019 and they should be good for an average 8,000 at home games especially with Dundee also in the league.
Kilmarnocks return will leave only Dunfermline and Falkirk of the decent supported teams outside of the top league.

Stirling is the Scottish anomaly. Should have a decent supported team

Maybe the attendances are also aligned to Scotland having a very different football culture, rather than simply attributing it to them showing 5 times as many live games?

Do you know how the Danish viewing figures compare to those for our leagues?

[CapitalGreen]

I should say before I start I am not aiming the following at you Fergus.

Re your examples. Denmark has a very similar population. Lets look at their TV deal
Danish TV deal is £45 million. Average attendance in the league in the last season without covid was 6,595
Scottish TV deal is £30 million. Average attendance in the league in the last season without covid was 15,973
Accordingly match day income from tickets, hospitality, food and drink, the shop etc would be at least double in Scotland when compared to Denmark
The real kicker is their TV deal is for 250 live matches and ours is for 50 which explains their poor attendances and match day income.

In conclusion the Danish TV deal is pish although a fool only looking at the top line would be babbling the usual nonsense.
The real story is that all their games are shown live on TV therefore very few people attend games and as a result of that Danish clubs make little money from match day income as detailed above. Additionally they have no atmosphere at their games.

Our model is far superior to theirs.
Our model suffered last season due to the pandemic.
Their model will suffer every other season and will die if the TV money ever stops.
Our model is TV moneyproofed.

To compare countries TV deals you need to:compare:
countries of similar population
the number of games televised i.e how much are you getting per game
the average attendances
match day income

Only then can you work out how good or bad a TV deal is.
Simply looking at the top line is for fools or for gaslighting fools

A very selective use of statistics here where you have cherry picked figures and presented them with little context to try and make your point.

You claim that Danish attendances are poor as a result of their TV deal but present no evidence of that in your post. The Danish top flight was rebranded in 1991 and since then the average attendance of Danish top flight matches has more than doubled while the league has expanded to include more teams. As you can see from the table below, attendances have remained stable despite the TV deal, in fact average attendances are currently at their highest number in over a decade despite Covid still being an issue.

25142

You have called people fools for “only looking at the top line”, yet you have done exactly this with regards to the Danish attendances by not presenting them in context and omitting the historical trends. Fortunately, I am confident that the analysts at Deloitte who will be tasked with reviewing our game and presenting possible improvements will have a better grasp of statistical analysis than yourself.

[whiskyhibby]

Thank Christ for the likes of Ron Gordon and Dave Cormack.

We've spent decades moaning about the blazers running our game, well, now we've got some folk in to shake things up and get things moving.

Don't give a damn about 20 odd tiny 'community clubs', they should have hee-haw say in what Hibs do. Let them form their own community league and see how they get on with crowds of under 300 every week.

RG wants the top flight to be about elite football in Scotland. I back him 100% of the way.

We'll come up with a proposal following the review. If it's not voted through there will be another breakaway.

Either way, for once, we will get what we want.


spot on :flag::flag:

[whiskyhibby]

I'm fairly comfortable about this for now, I'm not sure the Scottish game is really ripe for sanitisation and losing its soul to money.

The closed shop idea doesn't work - the idea of Hibs, Hearts and Aberdeen being protected from relegation would be laughed out of town. If we're promoting the game for its madcap drama, a straw poll would probably cite Hibs, Hearts and Rangers in the lower leagues as the most entertainment there's been.

Everyone else is probably equally likely to be in trouble at one time or another and aside from maybe the Dundee clubs they lack any sort of tangible financial clout to be worth safeguarding. The only way semi-realistic way to do it would be a rebranded top two leagues to form some sort of elite, then have a regional system below. Would the anger from lower league clubs, fans and Twitter purists be enough of a reputational error? Doubt it.

If Ron Gordon is intent on being a money making machine, I can't see the perceived negative for Hibs at this stage? He can't hike ticket prices further as people would be driven away; if he invests loads to buy success then no one would give a monkeys if it meant a decent challenge to Rangers and Celtic - it's not got the scale to go down the route of the EPL tourist clubs either; if the ground becomes 'too' family friendly, then we've still got near-10k empty seats to work with - everyone can be accommodated without being shoehorned into an experience they don't like.

If Ron's intent on making Hibs better, and meetings with Sky would be great cause for optimism here for his credibility and standing, then it's largely worth being along for the ride. The ticket prices are his only real red line as I see it - for all he's promoting football here, he also has to realise it's limitations and the fact people moan about it constantly. It might have a hidden media value, but the consumer buy-in is limited and he could give himself too much to do if pricing fans out.

Absolutely, Hibs need to look after their best interests, and that should tie in with what’s best for the Scottish game, it needs to be much stronger to compete in Europe. it also needs to look beyond the SFA And current SPL set up which is only there to serve the Glasgow two

[Keith_M]

Somebody mentioned the comparison to Austria, but there's only one team in Austria that gets higher than 10k average attendances per season.

The biggest issue they have is that football is only the second most popular sport, after skiing. Plus the fact that a very large proportion of people in Vienna have links to Eastern and Southern Europe and are more likely to support the likes of Ferencvaros or Partisan Belgrade than their local team.

[Allez Hibs]

Your factless post is full of nothing.

Apologies, I gave my opinion on a football fans forum full of opinion.

It is widely agreed that the Scottish game could be improved, grown and made more competitive.

[007]

If Ron and the others manage to get the alcohol ban lifted that would be a huge step forward. Clubs should at least be allowed to try it and if there's any trouble then the club loses its licence. If England can manage to do it then I don't see why we can't manage to as well.

[CMurdoch]

A very selective use of statistics here where you have cherry picked figures and presented them with little context to try and make your point.

You claim that Danish attendances are poor as a result of their TV deal but present no evidence of that in your post. The Danish top flight was rebranded in 1991 and since then the average attendance of Danish top flight matches has more than doubled while the league has expanded to include more teams. As you can see from the table below, attendances have remained stable despite the TV deal, in fact average attendances are currently at their highest number in over a decade despite Covid still being an issue.

25142

You have called people fools for “only looking at the top line”, yet you have done exactly this with regards to the Danish attendances by not presenting them in context and omitting the historical trends. Fortunately, I am confident that the analysts at Deloitte who will be tasked with reviewing our game and presenting possible improvements will have a better grasp of statistical analysis than yourself.

The average attendances in Denmark are poor compared to Scotland and will remain so for a long time. Suspect this seasons upturn in attendances is the Eriksen & national team Euro effect which may or may not be sustained.
Re your comment re Deloitte, they will be paid a fortune and will take 6 months to produce their report so hardly fair to make a comparison with a post I put together in 5 minutes for Social Media.
I look forward to the vast tomb of the blindingly obvious which they will produce ably supported by a vast array of statistics and graphs. This report will eventually be used to bludgeon Scotland's part time teams and Doncaster with after the Old Firm tell the payees that they can have whatever league structure they want but the 11-1 majority needed for major decisions will remain as is so that they can continue to veto any wee team driven reforms they don't support.

[CMurdoch]

Maybe the attendances are also aligned to Scotland having a very different football culture, rather than simply attributing it to them showing 5 times as many live games?

Do you know how the Danish viewing figures compare to those for our leagues?

Not of the top of my head.

[Kato]

Your sweeping generalisation of American's is just pure weird. If all they wanted to do was make money they wouldn't touch Scottish football.



Agree with that. I've worked with and for Americans for years. On the scale Ron is at they mainly want to offer a great product and have customers who come back again and again. They want this as its a sustainable recipe for making money. Some even care for the reputation. The idea that they all behave like rapacious conglomerates is a lazy myth.



Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

[ABZHFC]

The average attendances in Denmark are poor compared to Scotland and will remain so for a long time. Suspect this seasons upturn in attendances is the Eriksen & national team Euro effect which may or may not be sustained.
Re your comment re Deloitte, they will be paid a fortune and will take 6 months to produce their report so hardly fair to make a comparison with a post I put together in 5 minutes for Social Media.
I look forward to the vast tomb of the blindingly obvious which they will produce ably supported by a vast array of statistics and graphs. This report will eventually be used to bludgeon Scotland's part time teams and Doncaster with after the Old Firm tell the payees that they can have whatever league structure they want but the 11-1 majority needed for major decisions will remain as is so that they can continue to veto any wee team driven reforms they don't support.

It almost certainly is, having been over there during their Euros run, the whole nation became absolutely swept up in football this summer

[jacomo]

How do you replace a fully professional club with a semi pro club and maintain quality ?


At the moment nearly half the SPFL is semi pro. The argument is that a few of them step up to join the 22 professional clubs. That’s a step up in quality.

If a club got relegated out of the two pro leagues, they’d have to decide whether to maintain their budget or cut their cloth. A promoted team would likewise have to adapt very quickly to stay up.

It would be a big step between two leagues, obviously, but possible.

[jacomo]

It cuts both ways but without them commercial entities and TV companies would offer buttons for our wares.
The Americans are about making money not about losing it so they won't go near the threat to go it alone without them.
Hell, the Americans biggest fear will be the risk of The OF leaving to join a Benilux or Atlantic league. We live in scary commercial times.
In the end it's all about money and power for all the parties.
I think RG is realistic and will go down the path that suits him best and protects his investment and his club.
He is fighting on a number of fronts to up Hibs revenues.
Player sales are on the launch pad.
Qualification for the group stage of The European Conference League will be brought to the launch pad next summer and will either make it or get very close.
These are the 2 big things he needs to grow Hibs.
Selling and recruitment will require a great decision on who RG brings in to take over from Mathie and that will feed into the summers ins and outs and if that person gets that right the group qualification can take place. Get either recruiter or recruitment wrong and a fix will be slow and expensive.


I think your pretty spot on here. Unfortunately Sevco get more unreasonable by the day and Celtc are in turmoil. It will be hard to get anything out of them.

[CMurdoch]

I think your pretty spot on here. Unfortunately Sevco get more unreasonable by the day and Celtc are in turmoil. It will be hard to get anything out of them.

Sevco are still desperately trying to put their finances on a firm footing which keeps them in an agitated state and Celtic seem to be trying to get dressed in a gale!

[Eyrie]

At the moment nearly half the SPFL is semi pro. The argument is that a few of them step up to join the 22 professional clubs. That’s a step up in quality.

If a club got relegated out of the two pro leagues, they’d have to decide whether to maintain their budget or cut their cloth. A promoted team would likewise have to adapt very quickly to stay up.

It would be a big step between two leagues, obviously, but possible.

There's a clear case for having two separate parts to the league, with delegated authority to the top two divisions (mostly if not all full time clubs) regarding their affairs and to the lower leagues for the part time clubs with different concerns.

Major items affecting both such as promotion/relegation between the two parts or revenue sharing would require to be voted on by all the clubs.