SPFL Tv Deal

[gbhibby]

https://youtu.be/Y56x8wv0NBc
Thus guy is spot on with his analysis of the TV deal. Also agree with his comments on Doncaster.

Sent from my SM-A127F using Tapatalk

[offshorehibby]

As soon as i saw the news in the press this morning my first thought was i wonder if this is a stich up between Doncaster and Sky before the premier club review is published and passably reveal a more lucrative alternative.

[Iain G]

Ron should be negotiating this deal, we would get better than that spineless Doncaster would ever get, he has more belief in the football product of Scotland than Doncaster and chums...

[gbhibby]

Ron should be negotiating this deal, we would get better than that spineless Doncaster would ever get, he has more belief in the football product of Scotland than Doncaster and chums...
100%

[Billy Whizz]

Ron should be negotiating this deal, we would get better than that spineless Doncaster would ever get, he has more belief in the football product of Scotland than Doncaster and chums...

Ron’s on the board, so part of the discussion making process
Doncaster only works to the Boards decision making process

[Not In The Know]

As soon as i saw the news in the press this morning my first thought was i wonder if this is a stich up between Doncaster and Sky before the premier club review is published and passably reveal a more lucrative alternative.

suppose we need to see the club review asap.

[chippy]

They’re probably fleshing out how high sky will go initially before they tell them how much they can earn via spfl tv , or there is another party involved

[KeithTheHibby]

We are starting from such a low base figure to the point that no matter when the tv deal is due to be renewed it will always look ***** in comparison to other countries.

Doncaster is complete fraud, an amateur at best however it’s going to take decades and a complete change in leadership for us to get full value for our league.

[Antifa Hibs]

Doncaster is an absolute *insert insult of choice here*. But, it's just a proposal that the clubs then have to vote on. If it goes through blame the clubs, and if it does go through it shows how tinpot some of the clubs are. No-doubt there will be some boards out there will be happy to just bag the extra 200k instead of looking at the bigger picture.

Can also see us, Hearts and Aberdeen being shafted. Every away game featuring Rangers and Celtic will be televised. The 5 PPV options that clubs can show will likely involve those 3 clubs as with the larger fanbases they're likely to buy the game in larger numbers.

For home matches we'll have 6 games (top 6 permitting) v Hearts, Celtic and Rangers shown on Sky and if the club decide to air 5 PPV matches that's potentially 11 matches in total moved away from Saturday 3pm kick-offs. Throw in the midweek and boxing day cards and last game of the season which are all moved and we could have 5 home matches at 3pm on a Saturday.

[Iain G]

Ron’s on the board, so part of the discussion making process
Doncaster only works to the Boards decision making process

I assume Doncaster is the one going out to Sky and whoever and negotiating the deals? He has never struck me as someone who has belief in the product, like the BBC and others, treats it like a joke and is apologetic about our game rather than starting from a position of belief. We should be on par with the deals for Denmark and Norway at least. Our game is worth more than this and the impact on attendance figures and income from match day ticket sales will be hit by extra games being shown (as noted by others on here in more detail).

[Antifa Hibs]

I assume Doncaster is the one going out to Sky and whoever and negotiating the deals? He has never struck me as someone who has belief in the product, like the BBC and others, treats it like a joke and is apologetic about our game rather than starting from a position of belief. We should be on par with the deals for Denmark and Norway at least. Our game is worth more than this and the impact on attendance figures and income from match day ticket sales will be hit by extra games being shown (as noted by others on here in more detail).

I don't know about Denmark but for Norway and Greece, their TV deal is for every single match to be televised every week.

[Iain G]

I don't know about Denmark but for Norway and Greece, their TV deal is for every single match to be televised every week.

Ah that's interesting, didn't appreciate that.

I do think if Sky want Celtic and Sevco, which is what they focus on, then they should Pony up though 😁

[Billy Whizz]

Ah that's interesting, didn't appreciate that.

I do think if Sky want Celtic and Sevco, which is what they focus on, then they should Pony up though 😁

I’m surprised we’re discussing this before the Deloitte report is published

[Libby Hibby]

I’m surprised we’re discussing this before the Deloitte report is published

Quite possibly the reason why we are discussing it. To add confusion to the debate.

[WhileTheChief..]

https://youtu.be/Y56x8wv0NBc
Thus guy is spot on with his analysis of the TV deal. Also agree with his comments on Doncaster.

Sent from my SM-A127F using Tapatalk

Celtic fan telling us where the league has gone wrong and how we should get more money from Sky? He can do one.

2 institutions? Really aye? Self important guff from the prick.

I think RG and other cub owners put a bit more thought into these things than looking at a chart showing tv deals around europe and greetin'.

How is Norway's deal in any way related to ours? It isn't.

If there's no one else to bid, Sky aren't just going to chuck an extra £30m at it ffs.

[WhileTheChief..]

I assume Doncaster is the one going out to Sky and whoever and negotiating the deals? He has never struck me as someone who has belief in the product, like the BBC and others, treats it like a joke and is apologetic about our game rather than starting from a position of belief. We should be on par with the deals for Denmark and Norway at least. Our game is worth more than this and the impact on attendance figures and income from match day ticket sales will be hit by extra games being shown (as noted by others on here in more detail).

How much more? How do you put a figure on it?

Assuming there's more to it the plucking numbers from mid-air, we're probably getting exactly what it's worth.

Sky know exactly how many people watch everything and for how long. They know exactly how much they can get per second for selling adverts.

Marketing companies know exactly how much their clients need to spend to get a return for their investments ( tv adverts). Hibs marketing guys go to our potential sponsors with actual viewing figures, not what we 'might' get.

Every single stakeholder involved has to make it work for them.

It's to just down to the clubs. We want maximum cash for minimum disruption to our game.

I don't see how they go together? More money means more live games which means more random kick offs which means more complaining from fans!

So how do we as fans come to the conclusion that the game is worth more? Based on what?

[Lago]

How much more? How do you put a figure on it?

Assuming there's more to it the plucking numbers from mid-air, we're probably getting exactly what it's worth.

Sky know exactly how many people watch everything and for how long. They know exactly how much they can get per second for selling adverts.

Marketing companies know exactly how much their clients need to spend to get a return for their investments ( tv adverts). Hibs marketing guys go to our potential sponsors with actual viewing figures, not what we 'might' get.

Every single stakeholder involved has to make it work for them.

It's to just down to the clubs. We want maximum cash for minimum disruption to our game.

I don't see how they go together? More money means more live games which means more random kick offs which means more complaining from fans!

So how do we as fans come to the conclusion that the game is worth more? Based on what?
Decent analysis 👍

[Sioux]

Sky are in total control. They have no competitive bidders to consider. No one else is going to meet their funding package. Very few viewers watch Scottish football, in fact many fans posting on here won't watch Sky football per se.

Doncaster has no tools in his armoury to get more than Sky are prepared to offer. As someone else alluded to, Doncaster is the messenger for the SPFL Board, who agree, or otherwise, with most non administrative proposals.

[Smartie]

Sky are in total control. They have no competitive bidders to consider. No one else is going to meet their funding package. Very few viewers watch Scottish football, in fact many fans posting on here won't watch Sky football per se.

Doncaster has no tools in his armoury to get more than Sky are prepared to offer. As someone else alluded to, Doncaster is the messenger for the SPFL Board, who agree, or otherwise, with most non administrative proposals.

Pretty sure it’s not true that “not many viewers watch Scottish football.

Certainly Rangers and Celtic get huge viewing figures for their away games, and the figures for games involving neither are surprisingly decent.

They’re not as big as those involving teams down South (obviously) but relative to the pittance Sky pays Scottish football, the figures are actually colossal.

We made the mistake of horribly “devaluing our product” a while ago and it’s quite hard to come back from that. I have a bit of sympathy with those tasked with negotiating a better deal as they’re starting from a bad position and when clubs would be so badly affected if they walked away saying “no deal”.

[Scorrie]

I think at the very least all the big games that showcase the league best should be live on tv. This ridiculous rule that the OF insist on that no more than 4 of their home games be shown should be amended. And this insistence of showing OF away games Almost every week is also wrong as we end up with some right guff and other potentially more important games are missed. What other league doesn’t show their best and biggest games?

[ancient hibee]

If the standard of our football was higher we would get a better deal as more people would watch. Even so Sky is paying 20% more to get 25% more matches which is a crazy deal for Doncaster to put forward. At the very least the percentage increase should be the same.

[A Hi-Bee]

Just been reading about the original sky tv deal when the English first division was taken over and changed to the premier league 30 years ago.
The deal was for £314million now even simple math's if we say that the population of Engerlund is 10 times that of Scotland then a similar deal 30 years ago for Scotland would have been worth 31.4 million.
It sort of puts things in perspective for me in regards Scottish Football and how the tv companies see us.

[Since452]

Did SKY not pay the EFL teams 600 million over five years? More teams obviously but still.

[ScottB]

Sky will bid the absolute minimum they can to win the rights, they aren’t in it to fund the game, they’re in it to make sure their sport channels have enough content.

The only way to boost the money is to have other bidders, if they aren’t there, and it seems they aren’t, then our choice is to either take what Sky are offering, or reject and hope they come back to the table.

What other countries / leagues get or don’t get isn’t particularly relevant, especially in our unique case, where we exist inside the same broadcast market as a giant league.

[A Hi-Bee]

Did SKY not pay the EFL teams 600 million over five years? More teams obviously but still.

Pleased you are there to correct me,:greengrin it was in fact a wee bit less at 304 million, as per the bbc website

Thirty years of the Premier League in pictures (bbc.co.uk) (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/extra/pf331s01hu/Thirty-years-of-the-premier-league-in-pictures)

[Steven79]

If the standard of our football was higher we would get a better deal as more people would watch. Even so Sky is paying 20% more to get 25% more matches which is a crazy deal for Doncaster to put forward. At the very least the percentage increase should be the same.

If they put more money into our game then the standard would be higher but as per usual with any "British" company they are only interested in investing in anything English and throwing us scraps.

[Torto7]

Sky are in total control. They have no competitive bidders to consider. No one else is going to meet their funding package. Very few viewers watch Scottish football, in fact many fans posting on here won't watch Sky football per se.

Doncaster has no tools in his armoury to get more than Sky are prepared to offer. As someone else alluded to, Doncaster is the messenger for the SPFL Board, who agree, or otherwise, with most non administrative proposals.

Thats not true. The SPL rates very well, even the derby does well.

[Swedish hibee]

They need someone expert at negotiations to do a much better deal for Scottish football.. and quick!

[Is It On....]

They need someone expert at negotiations to do a much better deal for Scottish football.. and quick!

They should contract Barry Hearn to run the negotiations..and then revamp our game. He would be much better than the current mob..

[Eyrie]

Did SKY not pay the EFL teams 600 million over five years? More teams obviously but still.

That deal was signed in 2018 and entitled Sky to show 138 games for the first three seasons and 158 for the other two years. So that's 730 games for £595m which is £815k per match.

A comparable figure for 44 games in Scotland would be £36m per season.

The next question is how the viewing figures for Scottish football compare to the English league games.

[WhileTheChief..]

They need someone expert at negotiations to do a much better deal for Scottish football.. and quick!

So Sky say £30m or nowt. What then?

We can all rejoice at going back to 3pm kick offs on Saturday's but with no live TV we're taking a pretty big hit.

I guess it would be the same for all clubs though, so maybe it would just be a slight downgrade on quality of players across the league or increased crowds to make up the shortfall?

I'd be all for it.

[ancient hibee]

So Sky say £30m or nowt. What then?

We can all rejoice at going back to 3pm kick offs on Saturday's but with no live TV we're taking a pretty big hit.

I guess it would be the same for all clubs though, so maybe it would just be a slight downgrade on quality of players across the league or increased crowds to make up the shortfall?

I'd be all for it.

The money goes into the prize fund not directly to the clubs.

[archie]

If they put more money into our game then the standard would be higher but as per usual with any "British" company they are only interested in investing in anything English and throwing us scraps.
Sky is owned by Comcast, based in the US.

[WhileTheChief..]

The money goes into the prize fund not directly to the clubs.

But if there’s no tv deal, there’s no money. Doesn’t matter where it would have gone!

Bottom line is every club in Scotland would be worse off.

[Billy Whizz]

I wish we weren’t with Sky. I only really watch Scottish football, but my monthly subscription is funding English football, pretty frustrating

[Juniper Greens]

Surprised that premier aren't interested. Would have meant it would all be on one place

[Billy Whizz]

Surprised that premier aren't interested. Would have meant it would all be on one place

They’ve just been bought over by Viaplay, who have the rights to the Scottish National team games, so you never know

[McD]

I wish we weren’t with Sky. I only really watch Scottish football, but my monthly subscription is funding English football, pretty frustrating


and everything else sky broadcast, including Scottish football