Interesting article about Pro 12 - won't copy the English & French's "unsustainable" business model but realises they need to get more ££ from the next TV deal.
Erm, I think the English and the French are the clubs taking all the glory and winning competitions. As a Welshman, please please follow their examples so we can have some money in the game and in the regions and build success, a winning culture and some decent players. It's all about the money and you have to speculate to accumulate. So what if it means going in the red, that's sport.
We don't have the 'sugar daddys' in the Pro 12 to pour in the money. It's as simple as that. Also apart from Ulster/Munster/Leinster and possibly Glasgow crowds are simply not big enough while most live TV coverage is FTA and not subscription (therefore less money) unlike Aviva Premiership and Top 14.
I'm only really speaking with regards to the Welsh regional scene to be honest, where we once had some sugar daddies before the game went regional.
And I'm not advocating a time where we renegate to before regional days, but it is possible to have them back again (sugart daddies) if we have a product that is viable and entertaining. And the Pro 12 just doesn't cut it at the moment.
But, we don't need sugar daddies anyway if we have sympathetic financial institutions willing to carry the load and a business (the regions) that is willing to take the risk and know[ that a few years of taking the business into the red will pay dividens long term - leadingb to increased revenue from TV & turn-styles from better and quality players signed. Look at the team sheet of any of the Welsh regions compared to the best of the English and French clubs and barring a few upsets along the way they (the welsh regions) haven't a chance of competing.
You have to invest and you have to speculate to accumulate and you need quality players to bring the people in - that's the real fact of the matter. And that costs hard ££
So going back to my link in my earlier post today, the blazer bridage fill me with dread with their comments.
It must have been about 5 seasons ago, maybe more, that the big-wigs announced an annual regional budget cap - way way to small a figure btw. I predicted a steady deline there on in (in terms of quality signings and players on the pitch) and sadly it is painful to watch it come true. I know many many people, myself included, who have become disilusioned and fed up with the game due to the underinvestment which has led to one sided matches and hammerings inflicted to the Welsh regions.
TG4 has the Irish TV broadcasting rightsin this cycle.
Eir Sport should bid for the rights in the next cycle
Then you'll have to pay won't you and you would no longer be FTAkeith. Also if Eir Sports got Irish rights it would mean very few in N. Ireland watching as Premier/Eir Sports 1 package here is not widely known or used AFAIK. I contacted the Irish HQ re subscribing to Eir Sports and they told me that I needed to be an Eir Sports broadband subscriber to watch Eir Sports 1 in N. Ireland! That is impossible and is equivalent to being a BT broadband subscriber in the ROI. When I contacted Premier Sports UK about receiving Eir Sports 1 in NI they were equally as vague. I guess very few here in NI have Eir Sports at present.
Interesting article about Pro 12 - won't copy the English & French's "unsustainable" business model but realises they need to get more ££ from the next TV deal.
Erm, I think the English and the French are the clubs taking all the glory and winning competitions. As a Welshman, please please follow their examples so we can have some money in the game and in the regions and build success, a winning culture and some decent players. It's all about the money and you have to speculate to accumulate. So what if it means going in the red, that's sport.
Martin Anayi's view that Pro12 "will have a bright future without following the "unsustainable" English and French business models" isn't entirely accurate, though.
Gloucester, Leicester, Northampton, and Exeter, are self-sustaining and profitable clubs that haven't gone down the wealthy backer route. I think the biggest difference with those clubs and the Welsh regions is that those clubs also have attendances in excess of 85% of ground capacity for every game.
However with regards those clubs that have taken that route I agree with him entirely, it is unsustainable.
Martin Anayi's view that Pro12 "will have a bright future without following the "unsustainable" English and French business models" isn't entirely accurate, though.
Gloucester, Leicester, Northampton, and Exeter, are self-sustaining and profitable clubs that haven't gone down the wealthy backer route. I think the biggest difference with those clubs and the Welsh regions is that those clubs also have attendances in excess of 85% of ground capacity for every game.
However with regards those clubs that have taken that route I agree with him entirely, it is unsustainable.
Totally agree. I refer to my earlier post, where I said you have to speculate to accumulate and reaslise that it may take a few years in the red to grow the business. To get anywhere near good capacity numbers the welsh regions need to invest in decent players and have a sellable package and then (hopefully) a winning formula on the pitch. Self imposed (low) salary caps will not rise the regions out of the mediocre.
Good to see more of Pro 12 in HD this season on TG4 HD (satellite) and S4C HD (satellite). Will BBC regions go HD any time soon and what about BBC Alba?
That's what puts me off watching the BBC2 Wales Friday night live Scrum V matches - the channel is not in HD. The Sunday round up programme is back tonight, which is also not in HD.
Good matches in the English Premiership on BT Sport. The west country sides Gloucester and Bristol must be kicking themselves they lost but a good win for Bath at Northampton, didn't expect that. Hope Faletau recovers in time for the November internationals though.
Good to see more of Pro 12 in HD this season on TG4 HD (satellite) and S4C HD (satellite). Will BBC regions go HD any time soon and what about BBC Alba?
The Cardiff Edinburgh game didn't seem to be in HD last night on S4C despite being marked as such on the EPG. Looked to me like it was being upscaled.
On another thread it has been pointed out that S4C have lost highlights rights to both European competitions. Considering excellent performances of Welsh teams in ECC last night this is a real pity. No more European rugby FTA in UK. i wonder did S4C not stump up enough money or why EPCR have allowed FTA coverage to cease?
Although that won't take effect until the current five year deal with BT and Sky concludes. It's a bit worrying for the organisers to admit that the current TV arrangements have failed when we're only 2/5ths of the way through them.
Looking at the fixtures across Sky & BT for the first round of matches shown, IMO BT have won the opening round in terms of having the best fixtures. The Glasgow v Leicester match was superb last night, and was most pleasing to see Glasgow win (I am not Scottish btw....but not Englisg either lol)
Looking at the fixtures across Sky & BT for the first round of matches shown, IMO BT have won the opening round in terms of having the best fixtures. The Glasgow v Leicester match was superb last night, and was most pleasing to see Glasgow win (I am not Scottish btw....but not Englisg either lol)
I think I'm right in saying BT as part of the present deal get first choice for English teams.
– BT get to pick 3 games involving Premiership clubs
– Sky get to pick 3 games not involving Premiership clubs (up to here is pretty much publicly confirmed)
– Sky get to pick another 2 games from any of the remaining 4
– BT get the remaining 2 games
I thought with the Heineken Cup essentially after BT pick 3 games involving English sides, Sky can literally pick whatever they want as their next 3? Doesn't have to be Magners League sides? So BT x3 Eng, Sky x3 (any), BT 2, Sky 2.
Effectively BT picks 1-3 (Must be Eng), 7 & 8. Sky 4-6, 9 & 10 (Any games, of those available)
I thought with the Heineken Cup essentially after BT pick 3 games involving English sides, Sky can literally pick whatever they want as their next 3? Doesn't have to be Magners League sides? So BT x3 Eng, Sky x3 (any), BT 2, Sky 2.
Effectively BT picks 1-3 (Must be Eng), 7 & 8. Sky 4-6, 9 & 10 (Any games, of those available)
Then the reversal in the Challenge Cup.
Given that all-French / French-Italian matches almost always end up on BT I'd be very surprised if they didn't have the 10th pick.
I would like to see TV viewing figures of the accumulative total of Sky & BT's audience from last years competition compared to say the previous year when the whole of the competition was only shown by one broadcaster (Sky).
I'm not sure I agree with the decision to go back to one provider at the next contract renewal. I would have thought more people have access to the competition now given that BT's business model is to give the sports channels away cheaply to sure up its broadband numbers, so therefore people who would not subscribe to the more costly Sky Sports would have access to BT Sport.
I would like to see TV viewing figures of the accumulative total of Sky & BT's audience from last years competition compared to say the previous year when the whole of the competition was only shown by one broadcaster (Sky).
I'm not sure I agree with the decision to go back to one provider at the next contract renewal. I would have thought more people have access to the competition now given that BT's business model is to give the sports channels away cheaply to sure up its broadband numbers, so therefore people who would not subscribe to the more costly Sky Sports would have access to BT Sport.
The other benefit of having the coverage split of course, though more important for the fan than the company and probably more important still for the fans on here, is that the coverage is of a better standard as the on-screen talent is spread much less thinly, and under the Sky arrangement there were more games behind the red button than under the current arrangement (the reduction from 12 games to 10 per match round helps here).
Whether both BT and Sky go all-out for rights to the whole thing we will have to see. It's probably a fairly key contract for both, and given the fuss last time I'd be surprised if either broadcaster rolls over. It'll be interesting to see whether they split up the Champions Cup and Challenge Cup or sell them as one – perhaps we could see the BBC regions come in for the Challenge Cup in the case of the former, probably alongside Sky/BT as is the case for the Pro12.
I thought both Sky/BT covered the tragic passing of Anthony Foley very sensitively and appropriately. Tyrone Howe on Sky, just after the news had broken, was especially moving in his tribute to one of Munster's and Ireland's finest.
The other benefit of having the coverage split of course, though more important for the fan than the company and probably more important still for the fans on here, is that the coverage is of a better standard as the on-screen talent is spread much less thinly, and under the Sky arrangement there were more games behind the red button than under the current arrangement (the reduction from 12 games to 10 per match round helps here).
The major downside for me is that the flow of the coverage isn't there any more. Last Saturday, the schedules went Sky, BT (x2), Sky (x2), BT meaning on both broadcasters there was a match sized break between their games. Previously there would have been one continuous broadcast from around midday until late evening with coverage of each of the 'main games' flowing into the other, with the option to opt-out if you preferred the look of the match on the red button. Now even if you have both services, the two broadcasters will barely mention the other games, less so that they're televised elsewhere. If you have only one or the other, it means it's very stop/start rather than the all-afternoon event that it used to be.
I would like to see TV viewing figures of the accumulative total of Sky & BT's audience from last years competition compared to say the previous year when the whole of the competition was only shown by one broadcaster (Sky).
Haven't got those figures, but if we compare the last four finals, it becomes clear that more potential viewers doesn't necessarily equal more viewers:
2013 Heineken Cup final (Clermont v Toulon) - 265,000 (265,000 (Sky))
2015 Champions Cup final (Clermont v Toulon) - 177,000 (99,000 (BT) + 78,000 (Sky))
2014 Heineken Cup final (Toulon v Saracens) - 460,000 (460,000 (Sky))
2016 Champions Cup final (Racing v Saracens) - 252,000 (131,000 (BT) + 121,000 (Sky))
The major downside for me is that the flow of the coverage isn't there any more. Last Saturday, the schedules went Sky, BT (x2), Sky (x2), BT meaning on both broadcasters there was a match sized break between their games. Previously there would have been one continuous broadcast from around midday until late evening with coverage of each of the 'main games' flowing into the other, with the option to opt-out if you preferred the look of the match on the red button. Now even if you have both services, the two broadcasters will barely mention the other games, less so that they're televised elsewhere. If you have only one or the other, it means it's very stop/start rather than the all-afternoon event that it used to be.
Haven't got those figures, but if we compare the last four finals, it becomes clear that more potential viewers doesn't necessarily equal more viewers:
2013 Heineken Cup final (Clermont v Toulon) - 265,000 (265,000 (Sky))
2015 Champions Cup final (Clermont v Toulon) - 177,000 (99,000 (BT) + 78,000 (Sky))
2014 Heineken Cup final (Toulon v Saracens) - 460,000 (460,000 (Sky))
2016 Champions Cup final (Racing v Saracens) - 252,000 (131,000 (BT) + 121,000 (Sky))
True enough, and thanks for the figures - interesting reading.
Given that BT & Sky Sports have two different business models.......
BT's is to sure up its broadband and sell the sport on the cheap
Sky is all about the subscriber numbers and a higher price is paid to receive their sports offering
.........I would have thought BT would be relatively happy with those figures in as much as they had more viewers than Sky did and I would have expected to see the numbers that way around.
Although saying that, we just don't know how many people subscribe to Sky Sports anymore as Sky do not break down the numbers and publish them in that way nowadays. And although it may be possible to establish roughly how many people get telephony/broadband off BT, not all of those will have signed up for the discounted sport of course and non BT customers can also separately directly subscribe to receive BT Sport on the Sky platform. But it would be interesting to know the potential reach of both providers.
Comments
We don't have the 'sugar daddys' in the Pro 12 to pour in the money. It's as simple as that. Also apart from Ulster/Munster/Leinster and possibly Glasgow crowds are simply not big enough while most live TV coverage is FTA and not subscription (therefore less money) unlike Aviva Premiership and Top 14.
And I'm not advocating a time where we renegate to before regional days, but it is possible to have them back again (sugart daddies) if we have a product that is viable and entertaining. And the Pro 12 just doesn't cut it at the moment.
But, we don't need sugar daddies anyway if we have sympathetic financial institutions willing to carry the load and a business (the regions) that is willing to take the risk and know[ that a few years of taking the business into the red will pay dividens long term - leadingb to increased revenue from TV & turn-styles from better and quality players signed. Look at the team sheet of any of the Welsh regions compared to the best of the English and French clubs and barring a few upsets along the way they (the welsh regions) haven't a chance of competing.
You have to invest and you have to speculate to accumulate and you need quality players to bring the people in - that's the real fact of the matter. And that costs hard ££
So going back to my link in my earlier post today, the blazer bridage fill me with dread with their comments.
It must have been about 5 seasons ago, maybe more, that the big-wigs announced an annual regional budget cap - way way to small a figure btw. I predicted a steady deline there on in (in terms of quality signings and players on the pitch) and sadly it is painful to watch it come true. I know many many people, myself included, who have become disilusioned and fed up with the game due to the underinvestment which has led to one sided matches and hammerings inflicted to the Welsh regions.
TG4 has the Irish TV broadcasting rightsin this cycle.
Eir Sport should bid for the rights in the next cycle
Then you'll have to pay won't you and you would no longer be FTAkeith. Also if Eir Sports got Irish rights it would mean very few in N. Ireland watching as Premier/Eir Sports 1 package here is not widely known or used AFAIK. I contacted the Irish HQ re subscribing to Eir Sports and they told me that I needed to be an Eir Sports broadband subscriber to watch Eir Sports 1 in N. Ireland! That is impossible and is equivalent to being a BT broadband subscriber in the ROI. When I contacted Premier Sports UK about receiving Eir Sports 1 in NI they were equally as vague. I guess very few here in NI have Eir Sports at present.
Martin Anayi's view that Pro12 "will have a bright future without following the "unsustainable" English and French business models" isn't entirely accurate, though.
Gloucester, Leicester, Northampton, and Exeter, are self-sustaining and profitable clubs that haven't gone down the wealthy backer route. I think the biggest difference with those clubs and the Welsh regions is that those clubs also have attendances in excess of 85% of ground capacity for every game.
However with regards those clubs that have taken that route I agree with him entirely, it is unsustainable.
Totally agree. I refer to my earlier post, where I said you have to speculate to accumulate and reaslise that it may take a few years in the red to grow the business. To get anywhere near good capacity numbers the welsh regions need to invest in decent players and have a sellable package and then (hopefully) a winning formula on the pitch. Self imposed (low) salary caps will not rise the regions out of the mediocre.
Good matches in the English Premiership on BT Sport. The west country sides Gloucester and Bristol must be kicking themselves they lost but a good win for Bath at Northampton, didn't expect that. Hope Faletau recovers in time for the November internationals though.
The Cardiff Edinburgh game didn't seem to be in HD last night on S4C despite being marked as such on the EPG. Looked to me like it was being upscaled.
http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/european-cup/european-champions-cup-set-to-return-to-irish-terrestrial-tv-1.2818440
Although that won't take effect until the current five year deal with BT and Sky concludes. It's a bit worrying for the organisers to admit that the current TV arrangements have failed when we're only 2/5ths of the way through them.
I think I'm right in saying BT as part of the present deal get first choice for English teams.
They get the first 3 picks.
– BT get to pick 3 games involving Premiership clubs
– Sky get to pick 3 games not involving Premiership clubs (up to here is pretty much publicly confirmed)
– Sky get to pick another 2 games from any of the remaining 4
– BT get the remaining 2 games
Effectively BT picks 1-3 (Must be Eng), 7 & 8. Sky 4-6, 9 & 10 (Any games, of those available)
Then the reversal in the Challenge Cup.
Given that all-French / French-Italian matches almost always end up on BT I'd be very surprised if they didn't have the 10th pick.
I'm not sure I agree with the decision to go back to one provider at the next contract renewal. I would have thought more people have access to the competition now given that BT's business model is to give the sports channels away cheaply to sure up its broadband numbers, so therefore people who would not subscribe to the more costly Sky Sports would have access to BT Sport.
The other benefit of having the coverage split of course, though more important for the fan than the company and probably more important still for the fans on here, is that the coverage is of a better standard as the on-screen talent is spread much less thinly, and under the Sky arrangement there were more games behind the red button than under the current arrangement (the reduction from 12 games to 10 per match round helps here).
Whether both BT and Sky go all-out for rights to the whole thing we will have to see. It's probably a fairly key contract for both, and given the fuss last time I'd be surprised if either broadcaster rolls over. It'll be interesting to see whether they split up the Champions Cup and Challenge Cup or sell them as one – perhaps we could see the BBC regions come in for the Challenge Cup in the case of the former, probably alongside Sky/BT as is the case for the Pro12.
The major downside for me is that the flow of the coverage isn't there any more. Last Saturday, the schedules went Sky, BT (x2), Sky (x2), BT meaning on both broadcasters there was a match sized break between their games. Previously there would have been one continuous broadcast from around midday until late evening with coverage of each of the 'main games' flowing into the other, with the option to opt-out if you preferred the look of the match on the red button. Now even if you have both services, the two broadcasters will barely mention the other games, less so that they're televised elsewhere. If you have only one or the other, it means it's very stop/start rather than the all-afternoon event that it used to be.
Haven't got those figures, but if we compare the last four finals, it becomes clear that more potential viewers doesn't necessarily equal more viewers:
2013 Heineken Cup final (Clermont v Toulon) - 265,000 (265,000 (Sky))
2015 Champions Cup final (Clermont v Toulon) - 177,000 (99,000 (BT) + 78,000 (Sky))
2014 Heineken Cup final (Toulon v Saracens) - 460,000 (460,000 (Sky))
2016 Champions Cup final (Racing v Saracens) - 252,000 (131,000 (BT) + 121,000 (Sky))
True enough, and thanks for the figures - interesting reading.
Given that BT & Sky Sports have two different business models.......
BT's is to sure up its broadband and sell the sport on the cheap
Sky is all about the subscriber numbers and a higher price is paid to receive their sports offering
.........I would have thought BT would be relatively happy with those figures in as much as they had more viewers than Sky did and I would have expected to see the numbers that way around.
Although saying that, we just don't know how many people subscribe to Sky Sports anymore as Sky do not break down the numbers and publish them in that way nowadays. And although it may be possible to establish roughly how many people get telephony/broadband off BT, not all of those will have signed up for the discounted sport of course and non BT customers can also separately directly subscribe to receive BT Sport on the Sky platform. But it would be interesting to know the potential reach of both providers.