I wouldnt have thought it would make much sense for Sky to pay over the odds for all 4 days. If you're a golf fan you will probably have Sky (if you can afford it) and I doubt that just two days a year extra exclusive golf would get many new subscribers in.
Agreed but I think the point is that Sky were already paying what appeared an enormous sum for what they have now.
Under current deal Sky supposedly paying £12m per year and BBC £2m per year.
So it could be argued why is Sky paying so much at the moment when all they get exclusive is R1 and R2? How many subs does that generate?
I think it looked like a stepping stone to getting all 4 days exclusive but that has obviously not happened.
Of course we don't know what either Sky or BBC are paying for the new deal.
Agreed but I think the point is that Sky were already paying what appeared an enormous sum for what they have now.
Under current deal Sky supposedly paying £12m per year and BBC £2m per year.
So it could be argued why is Sky paying so much at the moment when all they get exclusive is R1 and R2? How many subs does that generate?
I think it looked like a stepping stone to getting all 4 days exclusive but that has obviously not happened.
Of course we don't know what either Sky or BBC are paying for the new deal.
No doubt Sky bid strongly for all four days but the Augusta Committee decided the exposure of terrestrial TV outweighed the extra cash.
I agree that it seems folly for Sky to be paying six times more than the BBC for effectively only the first couple of rounds.
The problem for Sky is that they have little leverage with the Committee if they are adamant that they don't wish to give them the exclusive rights- they can't threaten a "take it or leave it" offer as BT would likely step in or the BBC would gain access to all four days again.
I think that time will tell that Sky have vastly overpaid for the rights.
No doubt Sky bid strongly for all four days but the Augusta Committee decided the exposure of terrestrial TV outweighed the extra cash.
I agree that it seems folly for Sky to be paying six times more than the BBC for effectively only the first couple of rounds.
The problem for Sky is that they have little leverage with the Committee if they are adamant that they don't wish to give them the exclusive rights- they can't threaten a "take it or leave it" offer as BT would likely step in or the BBC would gain access to all four days again.
I think that time will tell that Sky have vastly overpaid for the rights.
Agree entirely - if Masters Committee is determined to retain BBC then obviously nothing Sky can do.
It would be interesting to know prices paid for new deal - Sky may have reduced their offer to some degree if they have accepted that they never have any chance of getting all 4 days exclusively.
does anyone know why no 3d coverage this year, i bought a 3d telly last year and was looking forward to the coverage
The reason Sky are not showing The US Masters in 3D this year is beyond their control as the broadcaster in the US that broadcast that golf tournament in 3D have pulled out of broadcasting 3D altogether. So no country worldwide will be broadcasting the US Masters in 3D for that reason.
Ian.
It seemed like a rather sombre announcement on Sky Sports News earlier- I think that Sky thought that they would gain the exclusive rights with their bid.
I suspect that the BBC haven't increased their bid and Sky have slightly reduced theirs.
As I missed last nights action could someone post the whole presenting/commentating team Sky had from Augusta and who has been on Morning Masters thanks?
That would be nice but it looks like the BBC are just stuck with Highlights. They are very good extended highlights though, 2hrs.
Quick question regarding the BBC highlights - do the BBC commentators sit there all day commentating on everything, even though a huge chunk of it will never be shown?
As I missed last nights action could someone post the whole presenting/commentating team Sky had from Augusta and who has been on Morning Masters thanks?
Last night.
Presenting.
Livingstone, Butch, Nicklaus, Monty, Roey and McGinley.
Commentary
Ewen, Bruce, Butch, Monty, McGinley, Nicklaus and Roey on the course (perch on the 12th then down back nine).
Quick question regarding the BBC highlights - do the BBC commentators sit there all day commentating on everything, even though a huge chunk of it will never be shown?
You'd hope so but I doubt it- I suspect they follow certain groups/televised coverage and then fill in the gaps afterwards.
They effectively have got to boil down around five hours of televised play down to two hours each night.
In a nutshell Sky are paying ten million pounds more per year than the BBC for ten hours worth of live golf.
It's Roe on course commentating. First time there's ever been one for The Masters (on Sky at least). Most of the time he's static at the 12th until the last group have played their 13th tee shots.
Any thoughts on Sky's editing so far in 3rd round - they are showing an enormous number of shots of British players.
Only my perception but impression I get is they are deviating from CBS feed to a very large extent - more than in previous years.
eg We've got Furyk in 2nd= position and he's not being shown at all.
OK, they are showing every Bubba shot but whole host of people in 2nd= being shown very little whilst we see shot after shot of Brits much further back.
I do not like this at all but of course they will say that's what viewers want. I would personally far prefer to just watch CBS.
Comments
Agreed but I think the point is that Sky were already paying what appeared an enormous sum for what they have now.
Under current deal Sky supposedly paying £12m per year and BBC £2m per year.
So it could be argued why is Sky paying so much at the moment when all they get exclusive is R1 and R2? How many subs does that generate?
I think it looked like a stepping stone to getting all 4 days exclusive but that has obviously not happened.
Of course we don't know what either Sky or BBC are paying for the new deal.
I agree that it seems folly for Sky to be paying six times more than the BBC for effectively only the first couple of rounds.
The problem for Sky is that they have little leverage with the Committee if they are adamant that they don't wish to give them the exclusive rights- they can't threaten a "take it or leave it" offer as BT would likely step in or the BBC would gain access to all four days again.
I think that time will tell that Sky have vastly overpaid for the rights.
Agree entirely - if Masters Committee is determined to retain BBC then obviously nothing Sky can do.
It would be interesting to know prices paid for new deal - Sky may have reduced their offer to some degree if they have accepted that they never have any chance of getting all 4 days exclusively.
Excellent, The Masters Committee have found a sweet spot between cash and audience and I applaud them for keeping the BBC.
As has been said I don't think it's viable for sky to be buying it exclusively and having the BBC on board delivers a huge amount of promotion.
This was the one contract I thought the BBC were at risk of losing.
they took the 3D feed from ESPN, which there not doing this year....
Bring on the Tournament.
The reason Sky are not showing The US Masters in 3D this year is beyond their control as the broadcaster in the US that broadcast that golf tournament in 3D have pulled out of broadcasting 3D altogether. So no country worldwide will be broadcasting the US Masters in 3D for that reason.
Ian.
I suspect that the BBC haven't increased their bid and Sky have slightly reduced theirs.
Note that BBC also use the phrase "multi-year".
So appears that Augusta, BBC and Sky all agreed on that wording - ie exact length of contract not revealed.
That would be nice but it looks like the BBC are just stuck with Highlights. They are very good extended highlights though, 2hrs.
Quick question regarding the BBC highlights - do the BBC commentators sit there all day commentating on everything, even though a huge chunk of it will never be shown?
Last night.
Presenting.
Livingstone, Butch, Nicklaus, Monty, Roey and McGinley.
Commentary
Ewen, Bruce, Butch, Monty, McGinley, Nicklaus and Roey on the course (perch on the 12th then down back nine).
Tim interviewing.
They effectively have got to boil down around five hours of televised play down to two hours each night.
In a nutshell Sky are paying ten million pounds more per year than the BBC for ten hours worth of live golf.
...and hours of red button.
No Howard Clark?
I was just going to ask the same question
Also I am sure I seen Mark Roe in the SSN studio Tuesday or Wednesday
he was on the press release I am sure
I am thinking the poster has got Howard Clark and Mark Roe mixed up maybe unless Clark suddenly became unavailable
Only my perception but impression I get is they are deviating from CBS feed to a very large extent - more than in previous years.
eg We've got Furyk in 2nd= position and he's not being shown at all.
OK, they are showing every Bubba shot but whole host of people in 2nd= being shown very little whilst we see shot after shot of Brits much further back.
I do not like this at all but of course they will say that's what viewers want. I would personally far prefer to just watch CBS.
Can anyone compare to what BBC are doing?