The place to recommend (or otherwise) football or football-related TV programmes, DVDs, Videos and Movies.

Also to let users know about upcoming programmes in your part of the world.
Site Admin
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:51 pm

Post by Scottish » Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:08 pm

We are well into lunatics taking over the asylum territory HERE

I particularly like this extract: "The Old firm giants are unhappy at the deal offered by Sky and ESPN, thought to be worth £65m over five years.

A spokeswoman for Rangers said: "Rangers and Celtic have had discussions with regard to buying out the SPL television rights.

"Both clubs felt obliged to do this given the offer from Sky and ESPN is so low."

It has been reported that the Old Firm believe the rights are worth £25m over two years.

Hmmm. Divide 65 by 5. Then divide 25 by 2. I think something must have been lost in translation. Not even in the mad world of the SPL would someone put forward a proposal to accept £12.5M a year for two years instead of £13M a year for five.

But I'm still struggling to get my head round this. The OF think they won't get enough money from the Sky/ESPN offer, right? So they will put in a bigger bid themselves and pay themselves more as a result?

Assuming that can't be right, one has to surmise that the OF will need external funding to pull this off. That cash has to be either a loan ( a loan to put up enough money to buy the TV rights so that the TV rights money can be paid to the clubs who will need it to repay the loan) or a shareholding (in which case the shareholders will call the shots, not the OF) or a lovely free gift from nice people who love our game so much.

Maybe I'm missing something but if the OF have the cash to buy up the TV rights at a level significantly higher than the current offer then why didn't they do so when the Setanta bid (which both opposed) was agreed?

Or is this, as I suspect, the last desperate attempt to force up the asking price from Sky/ESPN? If so, then the broadcasters might return with a few extra sweeties and everyone will go away happy with the OF proclaiming that they are the saviours of Scottish football. OTOH they might just say 'sod it' and walk away. Neither Sky nor ESPN NEEDS the SPL. Yes, they'd LIKE to have the games, particularly the OF ones but Sky have survived pretty well without the SPL these past seven years and ESPN already have their 'in' to the UK market - the 46 English Premiership matches scheduled originally for Setanta.

Finally, another arithmetical howler, worse than the 65M/25M one above. The Herald says: "However, the £65 million five-year offer by Sky and ESPN is only half of what the contract with Irish broadcaster Setanta was worth."

WRONG! The Sky/ESPN offer is worth more than Setanta's. £65M more to be precise.

Posts: 773
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 5:36 pm

Post by HibeeJibee » Tue Jul 14, 2009 2:16 pm

Those whom the gods intend to destroy, they first make mad...

Posts: 168
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 3:10 am
Location: Christchurch New Zealand


Post by kiwiscot » Wed Jul 15, 2009 12:06 am

Can't see the OFTV /SPLTV offering a world wide audience that ESPN can.If they dont watch out, they will end up with SFATV.

bobby s
Posts: 808
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 9:15 am
Location: Nittingrange

Post by bobby s » Wed Jul 15, 2009 10:28 am

"This proposal is for the good of Scottish football as a whole," he said. "It's not just for Rangers and Celtic but to benefit the likes of St Mirren and St Johnstone as well. We're doing it in everyone's interests.
If that's not clear cut evidence that this is a bad deal I don't know what is. It's pretty blindingly clear to this poster that David Murray and his counterpart at Celtic put their own interest before Scottish footballs'.
It's the Hope I can't stand

Posts: 773
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 5:36 pm

Re: Sentanta

Post by HibeeJibee » Wed Jul 15, 2009 12:07 pm

kiwiscot wrote:Can't see the OFTV /SPLTV offering a world wide audience that ESPN can.If they dont watch out, they will end up with SFATV.
The rights up for sale are domestic only, i.e. the UK & overseas territories.

An interesting quote in The Scotsman from The Great Stewart Gilmour...

"I'm not against it [Old Firm TV] in principal - but I would obviousle like to see the terms and conditions of their proposal. That is the most important thing in a deal. I don't mind who wins as long as it gives us more money."

The "money over sustainability/viability/future prospects" policy in action.

My fundemental concern is in 2 member clubs holding the rights for all 12.

Site Admin
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:51 pm

Post by Scottish » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:07 pm

Good News, Bad News.

The good is that the clubs have seen sense and taken the Sky/ESPN money. Though I see that Lex Gold is preening himself - "We are pleased that in just over three weeks we have been able to strike this deal."

Lex, when Setanta went tits up it took the English Premiership less than a day to do the same.

Sky Sports subscribers will get 30 SPL matches for (presumably) no extra cost.

The bad news is for the armchair fan who doesn't have such a subscription. Both Sky and ESPN will show 30 matches each, meaning viewers will need two subscriptions in future as opposed to just one with Setanta (yes, I know a basic Sky subscription was necessary for many but now Sky Sports will also have to be added). Also, no news (that I can find anyway) on Freeview. Setanta had a Freeview option for Setanta Sports 1.

If nothing is forthcoming on Freeview then those viewers will either lose out or have to take out a Sky subscription plus dish installation.

ESPN have not announced prices either. Will they try and charge the same as Setanta for half the matches?

The 'opt-out' clause after three years appears to be one-way and will either prove totally worthless or provide useful leverage in squeezing more money out of the broadcasters. Since it's impossible to predict the state of play in three years time this is a sensible option to have to hand.

Site Admin
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 4:51 pm

Post by Scottish » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:25 pm

My mistake - ESPN pricing details are available. £9 per month for Sky Sports subscribers and £12 for others. So for non Sky Sports subscribers it means a SKY Sports subscription which, I think is around £14 per month more than the basic, plus around the same as you paid for Setanta in order to get every SPL match. So £14-£15 MORE per month for the same.

Sky Sports subscribers OTOH get 30 SPL matches for hee-haw and can get the other 30 (plus 46 English Premiership games) for £9 per month.

If you were a non-Sky Sports subscriber and you're prepared to wait before making the move you may get a better deal once ESPN scheduling becomes apparent. It's also cheaper to subscribe online though experience dictates that it's never a bad idea to phone up Sky and haggle.

the hibLOG
Posts: 1163
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 8:41 am
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Post by the hibLOG » Mon Jul 20, 2009 4:03 am

I couldn't help laughing at Dundee United Chairman Stephen Thomson's quote in the Herald on Sunday, in response to John Reid's moan about the TV deal. Quoth Thompson: "I have nothing against the Old Firm, I get on well with one or two of them..."

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests