Forget about things like Swimming and Athletics, BBC will only end up with things no one watches such as Wresting and Judo.
Oh how I wish we were all gifted with your ability to tell the future.
The first summer games under this deal are 9 years away. We don't even know which city will be hosting them. So statements like yours are highly premature.
Oh how I wish we were all gifted with your ability to tell the future.
The first summer games under this deal are 9 years away. We don't even know which city will be hosting them. So statements like yours are highly premature.
Its obvious that Eurosport would want to keep the good stuff for themselves.
Its obvious that Eurosport would want to keep the good stuff for themselves.
Is it obvious for brand Olympics, and the 200 hours?
With 750 million people in the Europe IOC region, this sale is £2 per person living in the region. What would the IOC want in that 200 hours? The corporates like McDonalds, Coca Cola pay big money to the IOC, so they can sell products with the five rings. If the public only see weightlifting they may not be enthused by the Coke marketing machine.
Of the 200 hours would they be sold direct by the IOC?
Could the FTA broadcaster buy xxx more hours off Discovery?
If the BBC explored its options and opened up to just a part-subscription model as well as funded by the TVL, they might have a shot at getting the Pay TV coverage part, If Olympics coverage does split into a FTA/Pay ratio in the future like I expect.
But hey, the BBC are so asleep and out of touch it's unbelievable, still trying to cling onto that elitist notion of everyone's broadcaster mentally.
The BBC is no more of Britain's broadcaster than NBC is to the US! Just wished the BBC would get that.
I do belive the BBC are not allowe to launch such a channel, even if they wanted to.
Forget about things like Swimming and Athletics, BBC will only end up with things no one watches such as Wresting and Judo.
Discovery has to contract with a free to air broadcaster (at least unless the rules change)
The free to air broadcasters don't have to contract with Discovery.
Therefore the broadcasters will be in the prime position to make sure they get some of "the good stuff" as they can otherwise walk away and put Discovery in a bit of a bind
We are in 2015, this MIGHT be news in 2022, chill out guys! God knows what will happen I the next 7 years! Talk aout an over reaction on this thread.
The same over reaction that occurred when a member started a thread asking why should the viewing public lose out in 2022 through the Qatar World Cup being moved to winter! Actually that was even more of an over reaction given that, in my view, it's still doubtful that the 2022 WC will be held in winter, or indeed in Qatar.
Discovery has to contract with a free to air broadcaster (at least unless the rules change)
The free to air broadcasters don't have to contract with Discovery.
Therefore the broadcasters will be in the prime position to make sure they get some of "the good stuff" as they can otherwise walk away and put Discovery in a bit of a bind
Yes, but the rules state that if none of the FTA broadcasters b
offers Discovery enough money, then they can reject all those offers and show it all behind a pay wall.
If something is listed as on the A-List of protected events, you require OFCOM consent to broadcast it and any broadcaster that decides to ignore that risks having their broadcasting licence/s revoked and then where would that leave DiscoveryUK?
Its law!
The licences are only required for uplinks from the UK. They could use any other EU country in which they have a licence to uplink from. No UK licence required to broadcast to the UK via satellite from another country.
Yes, but the rules state that if none of the FTA broadcasters b
offers Discovery enough money, then they can reject all those offers and show it all behind a pay wall.
The rules appear to state a bit more - that it must be all above board before Ofcom grants permission to bend the rules?
As mlt11 has already pointed out up-thread, the arbiter of any decision is the Secretary of State (who may well delegate the matter to Ofcom). It is up to the arbiter to decide whether offers from terrestrial channels are reasonable or not, not Discovery.
It's bad news. Eurosport's coverage is terrible. The crowd sound is always muted and the commentators sound like they are in a broom closet. Not to mention the constant commercial breaks.
It's bad news. Eurosport's coverage is terrible. The crowd sound is always muted and the commentators sound like they are in a broom closet. Not to mention the constant commercial breaks.
As things stand, the Charter under which the operate prevents them from doing that, even if they wanted to.
The ball is really in their court in the upcoming renewal talks. Many ministers have said it's up to the BBC to explore other options. And I can't really fathom why the beeb oppose this, since no matter what, its public service remit will always be funded by TVL or general taxation, however only up to a certain point.
Siphoning off some of the BBC operations under a subscription model really is the best option they have, before it gets too late, and those people who oppose this: really don't understand the complications of the changing broadcasting landscape.
The IOC have sent a clear message here: and that it is NOT happy with the backward looking PSB European public funding, and prefer super commercial media companies like NBC Universal (who still have the most stroke). Seriously, the Americans have already won the way future media practices are run.
Not a surprise at all, that they sold the European rights to a more pioneering spirit of a US corporation! Don't the Americans always win the Olympics, anyway?
On a serious note - we're discussing something which is impossible to talk about, 9 years ago iPlayer didn't even exist yet now it's part of daily life for some people, hell I don't even watch some TV programmes on my TV any more as they're available via apps on my tablet (another common day item which didn't exist in such prominence 9 years ago)
There's no point trying to use today's TV experience and compare it to 9 years from now - the landscape will be entirely different, hell we might not even have a BBC by then so what's the point in panicking before it happens?
The licences are only required for uplinks from the UK. They could use any other EU country in which they have a licence to uplink from. No UK licence required to broadcast to the UK via satellite from another country.
And Eurosport happens to be one such channel, licenced/uplinked in France and with no Ofcom licence.
The IOC have sent a clear message here: and that it is NOT happy with the backward looking PSB European public funding, and prefer super commercial media companies like NBC Universal (who still have the most stroke). Seriously, the Americans have already won the way future media practices are run.
I agree, the BBC deserve all they got because of the way they neglect Olympic sports outside the actual Olympic events. Their coverage of Winter Sports was utterly pathetic - perhaps 20 hours of live coverage over the entire year, shoved away on BBC Red Button. Contrast that with the amount that Eurosport has done for Winter Sports on a European basis - they converted once obscure sports like biathlon into mainstream sports all across Europe
So in 2024 when the Games are in Paris.
Europe will get 200 hrs of broadcasts FTA.
1. Sorry moaners, but EastEnders I'd it is still on will be on BBC 2.
2. Though FTA I think it is fair to say live coverage will be sparse in those broadcast hours. If you look at Athletics in the starting at 10am, but it may not finish until past 10pm. Although with the hour time difference I see the following.
Day One opening. 5 hours. Friday.
Day 4 Monday.
BBC Breakfast (with Games News so avoiding the allocated hours).
9am to 1pm Games Broadcast
1pm News
1.45 Games
18.00 News
19.00 Games
22.00 News
Thats it.
However could we see a post games show from a Paris venue, with chat, and short clips as you have on the news. Would those clips count to the 200 hours?
3. More important would Discovery control,what is live? The 100m live on Eurosport, while BBC team are in Stadium showing highlights of British medal success in Hockey?
4. In the above BBC schedule I allowed weekdays 11.5 hours. Or 115 hours. Plus 5 hours opening is 120 hours. Leaving 80 hours for the six weekend days, or about 13 hours a day. (Not forgetting any news on those days) So in theory middle weekend when Athletics/swimming cross maybe some hours on BBC 2.
5. Some people moan that BBC One focussed too much on British competitors, think that will be more so in 2024.
6. I suggest Paris, think itbwill be Europe, could be Rome or Hamburg.
On a serious note - we're discussing something which is impossible to talk about, 9 years ago iPlayer didn't even exist yet now it's part of daily life for some people, hell I don't even watch some TV programmes on my TV any more as they're available via apps on my tablet (another common day item which didn't exist in such prominence 9 years ago)
There's no point trying to use today's TV experience and compare it to 9 years from now - the landscape will be entirely different, hell we might not even have a BBC by then so what's the point in panicking before it happens?
We're discussing TV rights agreed ahead of time. The TV landscape is of no relevance. You either have the rights or you don't.
Why are posters even bothering to read this thread then if its all going to change?
It is relevent to discuss the escalating costs for sports hidden behind paytv walls. You either have first pick at the rights or you don't. The BBC doesn't, its lost its place, again. Any licenced rights which Discovery farms out won't be agreed in 9 years time, they will be agreed in the next few months.
I agree, the BBC deserve all they got because of the way they neglect Olympic sports outside the actual Olympic events. Their coverage of Winter Sports was utterly pathetic - perhaps 20 hours of live coverage over the entire year, shoved away on BBC Red Button. Contrast that with the amount that Eurosport has done for Winter Sports on a European basis - they converted once obscure sports like biathlon into mainstream sports all across Europe
In this country, there seems to be little widespread enthusiasm to watch Winter Olympics sports though, and that' the problem for the BBC - do they spend a lot of scarce sports budget and devote many hours of prime coverage to something that few people seem to want to watch (whilst at the same time displacing more popular programming from the schedules)?
And really, it's hardly right to compare a dedicated sports broadcaster with a broadcaster who has to cater for a far wider range of interests, tastes and programming.
Just to throw something else into the mix: is there any guarantee Eurosport will be around in nine years' time? ;-)
And if it is, in what form? Discovery has deep pockets; very deep pockets. Many posters on here seem concerned with how poor Eurosport's coverage currently is. I would suggest that it is equally probable that the parent company goes for a decent chunk of the next Premier League TV rights contract and looks to transform its British sports television offering.
Whilst it may seem a stretch of the imagination now, what is there to say that in 10 years Eurosport isn't the premier sports broadcaster in the UK?
Comments
The first summer games under this deal are 9 years away. We don't even know which city will be hosting them. So statements like yours are highly premature.
Its obvious that Eurosport would want to keep the good stuff for themselves.
Is it obvious for brand Olympics, and the 200 hours?
With 750 million people in the Europe IOC region, this sale is £2 per person living in the region. What would the IOC want in that 200 hours? The corporates like McDonalds, Coca Cola pay big money to the IOC, so they can sell products with the five rings. If the public only see weightlifting they may not be enthused by the Coke marketing machine.
Of the 200 hours would they be sold direct by the IOC?
Could the FTA broadcaster buy xxx more hours off Discovery?
Careful, you may be accused of using common sense on the Broadcasting forum!
Discovery has to contract with a free to air broadcaster (at least unless the rules change)
The free to air broadcasters don't have to contract with Discovery.
Therefore the broadcasters will be in the prime position to make sure they get some of "the good stuff" as they can otherwise walk away and put Discovery in a bit of a bind
The same over reaction that occurred when a member started a thread asking why should the viewing public lose out in 2022 through the Qatar World Cup being moved to winter! Actually that was even more of an over reaction given that, in my view, it's still doubtful that the 2022 WC will be held in winter, or indeed in Qatar.
Yes, but the rules state that if none of the FTA broadcasters b
offers Discovery enough money, then they can reject all those offers and show it all behind a pay wall.
BBC and Itv still got the normal rights
It will be the same with eurosport
Kirch went bankrupt, I think that won't happen with discovery
The rules appear to state a bit more - that it must be all above board before Ofcom grants permission to bend the rules?
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/other-codes/ofcom_code_on_sport.pdf
As mlt11 has already pointed out up-thread, the arbiter of any decision is the Secretary of State (who may well delegate the matter to Ofcom). It is up to the arbiter to decide whether offers from terrestrial channels are reasonable or not, not Discovery.
The ball is really in their court in the upcoming renewal talks. Many ministers have said it's up to the BBC to explore other options. And I can't really fathom why the beeb oppose this, since no matter what, its public service remit will always be funded by TVL or general taxation, however only up to a certain point.
Siphoning off some of the BBC operations under a subscription model really is the best option they have, before it gets too late, and those people who oppose this: really don't understand the complications of the changing broadcasting landscape.
The IOC have sent a clear message here: and that it is NOT happy with the backward looking PSB European public funding, and prefer super commercial media companies like NBC Universal (who still have the most stroke). Seriously, the Americans have already won the way future media practices are run.
Not a surprise at all, that they sold the European rights to a more pioneering spirit of a US corporation! Don't the Americans always win the Olympics, anyway?
This. That is all.
On a serious note - we're discussing something which is impossible to talk about, 9 years ago iPlayer didn't even exist yet now it's part of daily life for some people, hell I don't even watch some TV programmes on my TV any more as they're available via apps on my tablet (another common day item which didn't exist in such prominence 9 years ago)
There's no point trying to use today's TV experience and compare it to 9 years from now - the landscape will be entirely different, hell we might not even have a BBC by then so what's the point in panicking before it happens?
And Eurosport happens to be one such channel, licenced/uplinked in France and with no Ofcom licence.
I agree, the BBC deserve all they got because of the way they neglect Olympic sports outside the actual Olympic events. Their coverage of Winter Sports was utterly pathetic - perhaps 20 hours of live coverage over the entire year, shoved away on BBC Red Button. Contrast that with the amount that Eurosport has done for Winter Sports on a European basis - they converted once obscure sports like biathlon into mainstream sports all across Europe
What if it's Boston, or LA?
We're discussing TV rights agreed ahead of time. The TV landscape is of no relevance. You either have the rights or you don't.
Why are posters even bothering to read this thread then if its all going to change?
It is relevent to discuss the escalating costs for sports hidden behind paytv walls. You either have first pick at the rights or you don't. The BBC doesn't, its lost its place, again. Any licenced rights which Discovery farms out won't be agreed in 9 years time, they will be agreed in the next few months.
In this country, there seems to be little widespread enthusiasm to watch Winter Olympics sports though, and that' the problem for the BBC - do they spend a lot of scarce sports budget and devote many hours of prime coverage to something that few people seem to want to watch (whilst at the same time displacing more popular programming from the schedules)?
And really, it's hardly right to compare a dedicated sports broadcaster with a broadcaster who has to cater for a far wider range of interests, tastes and programming.
And if it is, in what form? Discovery has deep pockets; very deep pockets. Many posters on here seem concerned with how poor Eurosport's coverage currently is. I would suggest that it is equally probable that the parent company goes for a decent chunk of the next Premier League TV rights contract and looks to transform its British sports television offering.
Whilst it may seem a stretch of the imagination now, what is there to say that in 10 years Eurosport isn't the premier sports broadcaster in the UK?