Super League on Sky

Comments

• coventrywooo Posts: 3,473

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  20/10/14 - 13:18 #2

  this new deal is a joke...
  the Super League bosses are a joke...
  they didnt even ask if any other broadcasters were interested, they could of got a lot more money from going out to tender....

  0
• [Deleted User] Posts: 185

  Forum Member

  ✭

  20/10/14 - 13:56 #3

  Is it really necessary to cut and paste Sky press releases?

  0
• Ginger Daddy Posts: 8,507

  Forum Member

  ✭

  20/10/14 - 14:14 #4

  coventrywooo wrote: »

  this new deal is a joke...
  the Super League bosses are a joke...
  they didnt even ask if any other broadcasters were interested, they could of got a lot more money from going out to tender....

  
  Really?
  
  Or perhaps the Super League clubs and bosses are quite happy with the exposure Sky have given the game? The effectively saved it from extinction. Its the reason the Wimbledon committee give the event to the BBC every time, they know Sky will give them more money but its sometimes not about the money.
  
  Half the games in the League are being shown in some weeks, thats better exposure than the EPL gets.
  
  Who would have given them "more money"? Certainly not terrestrial broadcasters.

  0
• coventrywooo Posts: 3,473

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  20/10/14 - 15:35 #5

  selected Championship matches...
  none in them sets of games...

  0
• Ginger Daddy Posts: 8,507

  Forum Member

  ✭

  20/10/14 - 15:39 #6

  coventrywooo wrote: »

  selected Championship matches...
  none in them sets of games...

  
  Well they either:
  
  a) obviously haven't decided which ones to show
  
  or
  
  b) will be showing the more meaningful ones towards the end of the year.

  0
• Alex2606 Posts: 2,682

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  20/10/14 - 15:51 #7

  coventrywooo wrote: »

  this new deal is a joke...
  the Super League bosses are a joke...
  they didnt even ask if any other broadcasters were interested, they could of got a lot more money from going out to tender....

  
  This isn't a new deal, merely a continuation of the one agreed in January which extended Sky's coverage (due to run out in 2016) to 2021

  0
• david04121980 Posts: 2,593

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  20/10/14 - 16:24 #8

  It also says the Challenge cup. Did SKY show the Challenge cup before hand?

  0
• Ginger Daddy Posts: 8,507

  Forum Member

  ✭

  20/10/14 - 16:29 #9

  david04121980 wrote: »

  It also says the Challenge cup. Did SKY show the Challenge cup before hand?

  
  Yes, suppose its just clarifying it still exists under the terms of the deal.

  0
• Alan58 Posts: 1,892

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  20/10/14 - 16:32 #10

  The RFL signed the deal with Sky without even asking if BT Sports were interested in bidding for the contract.

  0
• mlt11 Posts: 21,092

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  20/10/14 - 17:09 #11

  Alex2606 wrote: »

  This isn't a new deal, merely a continuation of the one agreed in January which extended Sky's coverage (due to run out in 2016) to 2021

  
  Indeed.
  
  And of course they leveraged the early renewal in order to get the extension - ie more money for 2014, 2015 and 2016 as part of the deal for the extra 5 years from 2017 to 2021.
  
  If they had gone out to tender (as others have proposed) then they were stuck on the existing lower money for 2014, 2015 and 2016.

  0
• mlt11 Posts: 21,092

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  20/10/14 - 17:15 #12

  david04121980 wrote: »

  It also says the Challenge cup. Did SKY show the Challenge cup before hand?

  
  It actually says: "even more live Challenge Cup coverage"
  
  Will be interesting to see what this will comprise. loyalsince can you find out?
  
  They previously showed 2 QFs (the worst two) and (I think) one game from each of the previous two rounds - though on one occasion I think they may not have actually shown all of that(?)

  0
• Alex2606 Posts: 2,682

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  20/10/14 - 18:08 #13

  mlt11 wrote: »

  It actually says: "even more live Challenge Cup coverage"
  
  Will be interesting to see what this will comprise. loyalsince can you find out?
  
  They previously showed 2 QFs (the worst two) and (I think) one game from each of the previous two rounds - though on one occasion I think they may not have actually shown all of that(?)

  
  According to this
  
  http://www.totalrl.com/ins-outs-super-leagues-lucrative-new-tv-deal/
  
  Sky has the rights to 11 Challenge Cup games, not sure how many they had before.

  0
• mlt11 Posts: 21,092

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  20/10/14 - 18:16 #14

  Alex2606 wrote: »

  According to this
  
  http://www.totalrl.com/ins-outs-super-leagues-lucrative-new-tv-deal/
  
  Sky has the rights to 11 Challenge Cup games, not sure how many they had before.

  
  Per the discussion on here at the time, there is a suggestion that Sky has actually got exclusive live rights to the entire Challenge Cup from 2018 to 2021 - but that hasn't been stated anywhere explicitly.
  
  NB. IF correct, the Final is listed so would have to be offered for simulcast on FTA.

  0
• Ginger Daddy Posts: 8,507

  Forum Member

  ✭

  20/10/14 - 20:19 #15

  Alan58 wrote: »

  The RFL signed the deal with Sky without even asking if BT Sports were interested in bidding for the contract.

  
  Oh well.

  0
• Darren Lethem Posts: 61,683

  Forum Member

  ✭✭

  20/10/14 - 20:54 #16

  coventrywooo wrote: »

  this new deal is a joke...
  the Super League bosses are a joke...
  they didnt even ask if any other broadcasters were interested, they could of got a lot more money from going out to tender....

  
  Yeah sod the fans lets offer it to a station very few have so we can get no money
  
  
  What stupid utter cretins the RFL are eh ? Putting viewing figures before profit.
  
  Is that what you meant by your post ????

  0
• Madsocks Posts: 3,373

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  20/10/14 - 22:32 #17

  mlt11 wrote: »

  It actually says: "even more live Challenge Cup coverage"
  
  Will be interesting to see what this will comprise. loyalsince can you find out?
  
  They previously showed 2 QFs (the worst two) and (I think) one game from each of the previous two rounds - though on one occasion I think they may not have actually shown all of that(?)

  
  Sky have got 11 ties for the Challenge Cup as from 2018. The current Challenge Cup deal is that the BBC show 1 tie from the 5th round, 6th round, 2 quarter finals (picks 1 & 3), both semi finals and the final.
  
  Sky show the remaining 2 quarter finals (picks 2 & 4) and HAVE the option to show 1 tie from the 5th round and 6th round, but the season just gone they never bothered.
  
  Surprised they have the rights from 2018 to be fair, they normally don't give a flying toss about the Challenge Cup.

  0
• Alex2606 Posts: 2,682

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  20/10/14 - 22:52 #18

  So what happens to the Challenge Cup in 2017 if Sky don't have full rights until 2018 and the BBC deal runs out in 2016?

  0
• loyalsince Posts: 6,065

  Forum Member

  ✭

  20/10/14 - 23:10 #19

  Alex2606 wrote: »

  So what happens to the Challenge Cup in 2017 if Sky don't have full rights until 2018 and the BBC deal runs out in 2016?

  
  Good question! I think the timing is that BBC and Premier Sports will share the 2014/2016 Four Nations (Eng, NZ, Aus plus one) and 2017 World Cup, so as BBC showing World Cup, it was probably agreed by Sky that complete loss of terrestrial presence would be better post World Cup than before.
  
  I don't think there is a current broadcast agreement in place for Eng V NZ 3-match test series in 2015 (don't think this will fall under current Sky contract)

  0
• loyalsince Posts: 6,065

  Forum Member

  ✭

  20/10/14 - 23:22 #20

  Madsocks wrote: »

  Sky have got 11 ties for the Challenge Cup as from 2018. The current Challenge Cup deal is that the BBC show 1 tie from the 5th round, 6th round, 2 quarter finals (picks 1 & 3), both semi finals and the final.
  
  Sky show the remaining 2 quarter finals (picks 2 & 4) and HAVE the option to show 1 tie from the 5th round and 6th round, but the season just gone they never bothered.
  

  
  Spot on. The way the new structure works, more likely that Challenge Cup QF will feature 'bigger' teams as the top eight come in a round later this year.
  
  The 2nd pick R5 and R6 tie is immaterial- about as significant to Sky as a Johnstone's Paint QF.
  
  I do wonder if Sky will try to buy NRL as this would be cheap and all you have to do is take a world feed with no production costs?
  
  As for Qualifiers- it appears that Sky will show all six matches from the Big Bash (a weekend where everyone plays each other) and will show games towards the end of the season, when the bottom 4 Super League Teams merge with Top 4 Championship Teams.
  
  I know it sounds silly, but I cant help but think the decision to do the above is a sort of 'silo,' mentality, driven by management accounts.
  
  Sky Rugby League will probably have a set production budget for non-Super League rights, and to fit that budget, showing 6 games at one venue a lot cheaper than 6 separate matchnights. Hence why they also only show 2 Challenge Cup Ties- another 2 could possibly mean that they go over budget.
  
  Of course in the grand scheme of Sky Sports, this budget saving is miniscule, and although the pounds add up, I think its a bit tight fisted.
  
  I suppose its a bit like when a football club like Chelsea or Manchester United shut down their womens team to save £100k a year or so, but if a star player demands a transfer or a new contract, they would happily pay an extra £100K a week to that player.
  
  Sky are very tight on costs which don't get me wrong, a good business should be, but sometimes it leads to a decision which loses goodwill of customer (less RL on TV) or on PL football a poor punditry line up now and again (single pundit when money runs out)

  0
• loyalsince Posts: 6,065

  Forum Member

  ✭

  20/10/14 - 23:27 #21

  Darren Lethem wrote: »

  Yeah sod the fans lets offer it to a station very few have so we can get no money
  
  
  What stupid utter cretins the RFL are eh ? Putting viewing figures before profit.
  
  Is that what you meant by your post ????

  
  RFL was put in a very tough position. Its no great secret that some clubs would have really struggled financially but for Sky forwarding TV money. Do RFL take a long term deal with Sky that safeguards clubs or possibly risk that all with a tender, and possibly a reduced bid from Sky thereafter, which risks the future of the sport?
  
  As mentioned many times before, Super League and Rugby League is odd. Although it performs credibly in the ratings, it really struggles to sell its rights and I don't think BT would have been particularly interested.

  0
• Gray77 Posts: 1,317

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  21/10/14 - 09:51 #22

  So many conflicting opinions and arguments emerged after the new deal was signed earlier this year, and I have sympathy with a lot of them.
  
  Did the RFL really find out what BT could offer them?
  
  Were BT really that bothered given that they already had a big amount of important domestic RU rights?
  
  Did Sky effectively blackmail the RFL with a 'take it or we're gone' offer?
  
  Could Sky even afford to do that given that Super League is a good ratings comp for them and their foothold on PL football is not guaranteed?
  
  Is the offer big enough for the length of the deal and the ratings that the comp brings to Sky?
  
  How much say do Sky have in the re-structuring of the domestic game?
  
  Did the RFL have to lump in Challenge Cup rights as well, meaning that from 2018 RL becomes a sport where live domestic games are all on pay TV except the Cup Final?
  
  Have the RFL even considered the motives behind Sky wanting rights to the Challenge Cup after the way it has denigrated and deliberately talked it down over the last few years? Could Sky be wishing to kill the comp from within and taking it off BBC helps them to diminish it further?
  
  Or, is this a deal that guarantees clubs short term and medium term survival and was simply too good and too long for the RFL to turn down?

  0
• Darren Lethem Posts: 61,683

  Forum Member

  ✭✭

  21/10/14 - 11:14 #23

  loyalsince wrote: »

  RFL was put in a very tough position. Its no great secret that some clubs would have really struggled financially but for Sky forwarding TV money. Do RFL take a long term deal with Sky that safeguards clubs or possibly risk that all with a tender, and possibly a reduced bid from Sky thereafter, which risks the future of the sport?
  
  As mentioned many times before, Super League and Rugby League is odd. Although it performs credibly in the ratings, it really struggles to sell its rights and I don't think BT would have been particularly interested.

  
  I totally agree, I was having a go at Coventrywoo ( who never comes back to answer anybody who criticises his posts ) and his silly statement about the RFL being cretins for selling the rights to Sky. Would he rather it not on at all ?

  0
• Ginger Daddy Posts: 8,507

  Forum Member

  ✭

  21/10/14 - 11:16 #24

  How anyone can moan at the level of coverage it gets on Sky is beyond me. Catalan games on the Saturday are a nice bonus as well, they dont have to show them at all.
  
  The only thing they perhaps COULD try is to give the Beeb the odd SL match, third pick matches every other week or whatever, but I imagine Sky like the exclusivity (and is probably reflected in the price they pay) and so this would never happen.

  0
• Gray77 Posts: 1,317

  Forum Member

  ✭✭✭

  21/10/14 - 13:18 #25

  Ginger Daddy wrote: »

  How anyone can moan at the level of coverage it gets on Sky is beyond me. Catalan games on the Saturday are a nice bonus as well, they dont have to show them at all.
  
  The only thing they perhaps COULD try is to give the Beeb the odd SL match, third pick matches every other week or whatever, but I imagine Sky like the exclusivity (and is probably reflected in the price they pay) and so this would never happen.

  
  I agree that people complaining about the level of coverage are off-base. The actual visual presentation of the games (the 80 minutes when the game is on) is top quality and light years ahead of what we used to have pre-Super League.
  
  There is always the argument that games should be on free TV as well, but the opportunity to do that existed pre-1996 and neither BBC nor ITV seemed that bothered about showing Stones Bitter Championship games at any level in the 1980's and early 1990's, and all they cared about was the Cup games. Sky took the 'bread and butter' of the league competition, and made it a marquee competition in terms of its coverage, and they must be praised for that.
  
  However, IMO they have adopted the Sky mentality that the only things that matter are what they show. They did the same in football when they didn't have FA Cup rights and talked that competition down, and IMO it had a negative affect on people's attitudes to it, especially younger 'Sky generation' fans. They have IMO done the same with the Challenge Cup, with Eddie Hemmings in particular talking it down, denigrating it at any opportunity and calling it a 'side show' and a 'distraction' which is a disgrace really. For Sky to then want to be the primary broadcaster of the Cup worries me, as their attitude towards everything non-Super League has been appalling in recent years.
  
  I also worry that they've had too big a say in shaping the structure of the comp. A few people I speak to who's views I trust have indicated that Sky had a massive say in the new re-structuring and the RFL simply do as they're told.
  
  From originally being a broadcaster and a partner they have now become a major stakeholder and shaper of the domestic game. That power has become too large IMO.
  
  Yes, they should get a return for their investment, but that return should come from subscriptions and advertising revenue as a result of showing a comp that pulls in good ratings.
  
  Purchasing rights to a comp should not allow Sky, BT, BBC, or whoever from being able to dictate their terms on how that comp is run. If BT started trying to bring in Top 8 play offs to the Aviva Prem to help their ratings I'm sure they'd be told where to go. The RFL it seems go along with such whims of from their broadcasting partners with no long term plan of how this will affect the game.
  
  I have no real problem with Sky maintaining exclusivity over Super League games until 2021. They have invested a lot in to the competition and their production values are first class. I also think they market and hype Super League up to a level that the BBC fail to do in terms of the Challenge Cup.
  
  However, their influence should not extend to the shaping of the competition, its rules or its play off structure. And I worry about what they have in store for the Challenge Cup, which is a famous competition that needs to be strong for the benefit of the game. When they openly mock and criticise the longest and most famous RL cup competition in the World on air, I worry why they then want to control the broadcasting rights for it.

  0
• Ginger Daddy Posts: 8,507

  Forum Member

  ✭

  21/10/14 - 13:34 #26

  I could imagine Hemmings and Co rapidly changing their stance towards the Cup if they showed much more of it.

  0