New TV deal

Careca said:
I predict next to no one will pay an SPL subscription. I couldn’t watch 10 minutes of another Scottish game if you forced me and IPTV is cheap and everywhere.

We need politicians to start being serious about levelling up other parts of the UK by forcing SKY and other broadcasters to pay Scotland proportionate deals.

If not I’d go the ITV model and give it all away for free on any medium that will have us but load to the gunnels with adverts. At least it might grow that way.
Click to expand...

I don't think politicians can force Sky or any commercial broadcaster to pay a proportionate deal to the SPFL however they should be able to legislate within the BBC charter for proportional spending across the home nations for sports rights. The £70m per season they pay for the EPL highlights should equate to £7m for the rights to show SPFL highlights on Sportscene rather than the pittance we get now. Don't want to pay for SPFL then you can't have EPL.
 
Kubala said:
I have zero actual knowledge but the way I look at it is 500,000 people in Scotland might care enough to pay £50 a month to watch Scottish football. Unfortunately, those 500,000 people are paying £50 a month and £49.99 of that is going to English football. I don't know what the solution is.
Click to expand...

The Sky Sports package currently costs £25pm.

However I would hazard a guess that with deepening cost of living crisis many will see their Sky tv as a luxury they can no longer afford and ditch it when their cobtract expires. I know for a fact each and every subscription service is shitting themselves as they expect people to leave in droves.

Illegal streaming or IPTV will be the way ahead for many.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
Half way there for our Home games. Sky will show 5 and we will probably be able to do 5 ourselves on UK PPV via RangersTV.
Click to expand...
The only real issue would be away games, if Sky don't want to show it and it falls in the blackout period we are screwed.
 
Bluebeard said:
We need to remove ourselves from Scottish football.

Keeping an eye on that current court case that could change everything for us.
Click to expand...
My opinion we need to get the ball rolling just now , get into talks with your ajax , PSVs anderlecht , copenhagen , of this world and put the feelers out and see if they would be interested in a new league ,sniff out possible sponsors and TV deals ,the super leagues are coming and we need to be on the front foot to get talks underway or we will be left behind . These leagues know that the big guns will break away sooner rather than later and your dutch , belgian teams will be left behind thats why they want to join the dutch and belgian teams into one league
 
barrheadbear said:
The Sky Sports package currently costs £25pm.

However I would hazard a guess that with deepening cost of living crisis many will see their Sky tv as a luxury they can no longer afford and ditch it when their cobtract expires. I know for a fact each and every subscription service is shitting themselves as they expect people to leave in droves.

Illegal streaming or IPTV will be the way ahead for many.
Click to expand...
Aren't people on old legacy contracts being shafted by Sky well beyond £25 a month?
 
Has it been confirmed if the SPFL are negotiating via an agency again? If so, they'll take a cut and this proposed deal will be even worse!
 
barrheadbear said:
The Sky Sports package currently costs £25pm.

However I would hazard a guess that with deepening cost of living crisis many will see their Sky tv as a luxury they can no longer afford and ditch it when their cobtract expires. I know for a fact each and every subscription service is shitting themselves as they expect people to leave in droves.

Illegal streaming or IPTV will be the way ahead for many.
Click to expand...
And if you only want football it drops to £18 a month. I don't think anyone could set up a SPFL streaming service for the same money and still pay the clubs.

1) provide camera crews.
2) commentators (ok I know, dubious they do now)
3) backhaul back to the hub.
4) encoding for distribution
5) Encryption
6) Akamai for caching/distribution
7) Customer service for when it goes wrong and it will.
8) Illegal stream monitoring

It all adds up, someone quoted 500,000 people, paying for this but would 500,000 people pay for just the SPFL and nothing else at £18 a month, in reality you would need to price it under a tenner, as alternate source required for European games. So you end up with £60 million a year, well lets be serious we would all cancel in the summer so £55 million tops, take VAT off and all the costs above and the actual income at a guess is about £12 million a year (ballpark). Sky deal does not look bad compared, and remember they also distribute to areas that cannot get streams on satellite so added expense there.

Not saying we get the true value of our content, but going alone is a whole new ball game.

For any SNP supporters, if you go independent then factor all that in above for BBC and ITV in Scotland, the content budget for a scottish only BBC and ITV will be close to zero by the time they pay their carraige and engineering costs.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
This bit of the deal sounds like a step forward. The rest is shit, apart from maybe the minimum limit of 42 games they must achieve.

On the table for Scottish clubs as an added incentive is scope to sell up to five of their home matches each season on a pay-per-view basis, but only if the fixture has not been chosen for live Sky broadcast and does not – pending special dispensation – fall in the UK blackout window between 2.45pm and 5.15pm on a Saturday.
Click to expand...

That was the bit I was most concerned about to be honest

Asking people to pay more money to watch.

Did they not try that with the Premier league during project restart and quickly abandoned it ?
 
JW1988 said:
The only real issue would be away games, if Sky don't want to show it and it falls in the blackout period we are screwed.
Click to expand...
If Sky aren't showing it then the other team will almost certainly show it as one of their 5 Home games and look for a change of kick-off. Not ideal I agree. Might charge a premium (like Livi), might not. That's why a VPN should be in everyone's arsenal for use with RangersTV.;)
 
DoubleWhopper said:
That was the bit I was most concerned about to be honest

Asking people to pay more money to watch.

Did they not try that with the Premier league during project restart and quickly abandoned it ?
Click to expand...
Not really. If its not on Sky then most who cannot get to Ibrox would choose to watch via RangersTV anyway so they are already paying more anyway. Last two seasons they've been able to do it within the UK. This season we are back to requiring a VPN. At least this would give us an extra 5 Home games available within the UK - the real stumbling block being that they couldn't be on a Saturday at 1500hrs, which presents its own challenges.

I ditched both Sky and BTSport a few years ago and got my RangersTV Unlimited sub. Best thing I ever did.
 
Why now, why Sky and why such an abysmally low amount?

Italian Serie B and the UAE will have higher domestic income than the SPFL if this deal goes through, it will comfortably be the worst deal of any top-20 ranked European league.

Look at the domestic revenue from some of the leagues "roughly similar" in size
  • Belgium £86m per season
  • Norway £63m per season
  • Sweden £43m per season
  • Denmark £35m per season (up for renewal)
The SPFL's deal is an absolute disgrace and the proposed one is even worse.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
Not really. If its not on Sky then most who cannot get to Ibrox would choose to watch via RangersTV anyway. Last two seasons they've been able to do it within the UK. This season we are back to requiring a VPN. At least this would give us an extra 5 Home games available within the UK - the real stumbling block being that they couldn't be on a Saturday at 1500hrs, which presents its own challenges.
Click to expand...

Paying money to the club and using a VPN…fair enough I’d do that if there’s no alternative and i was free to watch it (if I’m not at the game I’m probably working anyway)

But I’m not going to pay Sky any more money on top what I do pay, not even to watch Rangers.

If they want to show more games, then it’s up to both parties to sort that out for the next contract. It’s beyond time from Scottish football’s side they got rid of some of their antiquated rules around how many games per stadium etc.

But anything remotely like a PPV model for subscription television must be fiercely resisted
 
That is a horrific deal and one the SPFL will most likely sign, meaning Scottish Football will continue to decline.

However I am not sure we can have an argument to improve that deal.

What are the viewing figures per match?
What are the viewing figures for matches that don't include us or them?

Does anyone outside of Scotland want to watch Dundee Utd vs Livi, Motherwell vs Ross County?

The last few results in Europe will not have helped either. Motherwell getting pumped off of a pub team and Dundee Utd getting absolutely embarrassed by AZ Alkmaar.

Its getting more and more difficult to sell the Scottish game. Basically our games are 80% possession and 20% of a team trying to time waste.

Scottish Football has had so many opportunities to make massive change but instead they chose to chase the money for our fans in 4 games a season.

Where's this Deloitte report?
 
Mr_Miscellaneous said:
Why now, why Sky and why such an abysmally low amount?

Italian Serie B and the UAE will have higher domestic income than the SPFL if this deal goes through, it will comfortably be the worst deal of any top-20 ranked European league.

Look at the domestic revenue from some of the leagues "roughly similar" in size
  • Belgium £86m per season
  • Norway £63m per season
  • Sweden £43m per season
  • Denmark £35m per season (up for renewal)
The SPFL's deal is an absolute disgrace and the proposed one is even worse.
Click to expand...
Are any of those massively better when you factor in population differences? Sweden and Belgium are roughly twice as big, Denmark looks fairly comparable with a similar population and Norway is dwarfing ours but everything is dearer there.
 
DoubleWhopper said:
Paying money to the club and using a VPN…fair enough I’d do that if there’s no alternative and i was free to watch it (if I’m not at the game I’m probably working anyway)

But I’m not going to pay Sky any more money on top what I do pay, not even to watch Rangers.

If they want to show more games, then it’s up to both parties to sort that out for the next contract. It’s beyond time from Scottish football’s side they got rid of some of their antiquated rules around how many games per stadium etc.

But anything remotely like a PPV model for subscription television must be fiercely resisted
Click to expand...
Unless I've read it wrongly there is no suggestion that we, as subscribers, pay Sky for the extra 5 Home matches that the clubs are allowed to stream via their club services within the UK, which is what we are talking about here.

To be clear, for the last 2 seasons Rangers have been able to stream Home matches on RangersTV via PPV - regardless of kick-off time - provided they weren't on Sky. That is no longer allowed. What the suggestion is here is that Rangers, and everybody else, will be permitted to stream 5 Home matches within the UK - provided they are not on Sky and provided they are not at the Saturday 1500hrs kick-off slot. The latter is a problem but the extra 5 Home games, albeit at alternative kick-off times, will be of value to those who don't want the hassle of a VPN but are happy to pay RangersTV to view, as many have done over the last two seasons, and even those of us who do have VPNs but find the stream to be better when not required to use a VPN.
 
Last edited:
I actually think now is a great time for me to offer them magic beans that can grow into a good tv deal…I might actually make quite a bit of money from them :D

Funnily enough if we had went for BT Sport the last time around VAR would have already been in place. If I remember correctly they were willing to foot the bill for it. Plus their coverage in general blows Sky out of the water in respect of Scottish Football.

Such a derisory figure on offer, really need Doncaster et all to move on now. They are simply a detriment to growing the game here.
 
Just as well they hammered out that tv deal before the Dundee United game started last night.

Can you imagine how bad the deal would have been after the result ?;)
 
I'd have thought the Rangers Board would have contacts in the media industry who would be able to advise on how we could get more money from broadcasting games. From all the comments on this thread it's clearly not an easy one to resolve.

The big draw is of course the Old Firm. I read recently that over 1.4 million people watched the Celtic v Rangers match on 29th December 2019 either live or via recorded highlights on Sky. The league might not like it but these are the games most people want to watch and which should be at the centre of the negotiations. Our run in Europe last season has increased the profile and we should be using that to get a better deal.

The clubs need to realise that football is a business and that Scotland needs to maximise the income available to all clubs via tv deals and selling tickets to people who actually want to attend football matches. If they did that then maybe the standard of Scottish football overall would improve which would in turn provide a more saleable product to tv companies and sponsors. At the moment too many Scottish clubs are cutting their noses off to spite their faces.
 
Its just ridiculous in a day and age that we have BT Sports, Sky Sports, Prime TV and clubs having their own channels that we can't get some decent income for the game, we've just had a team reach a European final for crying out loud.
 
This is such a paltry sum - especially after it's been creamed off, divvied up & filters down to each club - that there's probably an argument to decline the entire package altogether
- although I expect the terms of the contract already signed would prevent that happening

Ripping it up & starting again is probably the only way to negotiate a decent deal
Extending a duff deal for a pittance here & there is simply going to keep us at an
unacceptably poor level for a much longer period
 
Bluenose88 said:
Scottish football's TV deal is about two teams only.

Screening away games for our games (and theirs) does nothing to enhance the image of the game. Crappy little half-empty grounds, poor camera angles, plastic pitches, away fans outnumbering home fans. How does that showcase in a good light?

It's all done just to appease the rest of the teams. The reality is Sky care only for four games a year.

Rangers and the mhanks would be better off insisting on owning their own TV rights. Only then will they reap the real value.
Click to expand...
They dont have to insist on owning their own tv rights, they just have to bid more than sky and then sell all the games as ppv. why do you think they don’t?
 
Pennies again, what a fucking shambles.

The SPFL would honestly be better off if us or them negotiated a TV deal.
 
Do Sky still have the SPFL by the proverbials due to the early closure of the Pandemic season. My memory suggests that they did when the last deal was negotiated and was why it was such a poor outcome.
 
Sums up Scottish football really

Clubs will all go along with new deal as to rail against Doncaster etc is to be seen as supporting our stance against them and the running of the game

Rather take a shitty deal and not risk angering their fans by being seen to side with us and asking fro removal of these idiots that run our game
 
insanicdrunk said:
The didnt even show all their games last season. Also take last weekend, the beggars away to Ross County wasnt on tv. I dont give a fuk about them, but it will happen to us as well.
Click to expand...
All our and their away games should be on TV, especially with tin pot clubs cutting away allocation for us both
 
Is there anything we can actually do here?

Write an angry email to the idiots running the game here? Get some of the fan media to raise it at press conferences? Display by the UB?

I don't know how we can stop/fix this, but we need to do something. We've been punching in Europe for the last few years but if our deal stays stagnant at these tiny amounts then other countries and there teams could go by us.
 
No other club, fans, media called them out on the current deal, this gives them free reign to deliver shit like this for the foreseeable future. Is this the expectations the latest club commissioned review delivered?
 
DonDraper said:
What would you do with the sky offer then?
Click to expand...
Have a different set of people to package up, market and sell the options to various streaming services and tv companies to generate interest.

We have incompetents (shown by the current deal, this proposed deal and the Cinch deal) who are underselling the worth of the tv coverage.

Its basic business development but we employ cabbages in the SPL.
 
No Money No Problems said:
Is there anything we can actually do here?

Write an angry email to the idiots running the game here? Get some of the fan media to raise it at press conferences? Display by the UB?

I don't know how we can stop/fix this, but we need to do something. We've been punching in Europe for the last few years but if our deal stays stagnant at these tiny amounts then other countries and there teams could go by us.
Click to expand...
If everyone subscribed to RTV unlimited and used a VPN they could watch every game and contribute massively to the club.

I get it's not exactly straightforward and for some too complex to consider but it is a viable alternative.
 
am i right in saying, Sky are paying an extra £2m for these extra 12 games? So in essence, a measly £166k extra for each club for 12 additional games?

Wow they really under sell our game so badly.
 
Do the press in this country ever point out that we are an embarrassment compared to countries of similar population?
 
Celtc poodles SPFL briefing the papers today to run with the headline figure if £150M bonanza ?

Read on and find out that £150M is for 7 years. FFS
 
Davie_Mitchell said:
If 25,000 of our fans who pay £50 a month for Sky were to cancel and take up the RTV Unlimited package they each would save around £25 a month and net the club another £7M a year. Win-Win
Click to expand...
For that to work they would need 1. to bring back the monthly subscription, not all of us can afford the £250 upfront for it, 2. have an official app on multiple formats that support a VPN (like Amazon fire stick & Apple TV boxes) and 3. Allow multiple log ins (even for a slightly extra fee) as if keep threatening to leave nowtv , can have them down to £22 a month for sports and boost which allows you to watch 3 separate devises ( which can be in 3 separate houses) at same time in HD & doesn’t involve a VPN
 
km_2083 said:
For that to work they would need 1. to bring back the monthly subscription, not all of us can afford the £250 upfront for it, 2. have an official app on multiple formats that support a VPN (like Amazon fire stick & Apple TV boxes) and 3. Allow multiple log ins (even for a slightly extra fee) as if keep threatening to leave nowtv , can have them down to £22 a month for sports and boost which allows you to watch 3 separate devises ( which can be in 3 separate houses) at same time in HD & doesn’t involve a VPN
Click to expand...
The monthly subscription at £24 returned several months ago.

There are Apps available for both Android and Apple mobile devices - though I'd agree they are very, very poor and could be greatly improved - but not for Fire TV Stick or via TV services. I know the App can be sideloaded onto the new 4kMAX Fire TV Stick though. Anything should work via the website however and its only a couple of extra 'clicks' in most cases. I watch every match via RangersTV and wouldn't touch the App with a bargepole.

The VPN issue isn't Rangers doing its just the tech. If you are using a VPN on your phone and trying to cast to an AppleTV, for example, it will see it as being on a different network if you switch the VPN on. On Android I believe the way around this is to cast a Chrome tab using Google Home. Screen mirroring, which may involve a third party app, should work on Apple devices.

The problem with multiple logins is that we all know full well Billy Bloggs will sign up to a subscription and then share his credentials with a dozen of his mates. That screws Rangers over.
 
Last edited:
Kubala said:
Aren't people on old legacy contracts being shafted by Sky well beyond £25 a month?
Click to expand...

Sky contracts only last 18 months before you negotiate an extension and the 8 sports channels package has never been more than £25.
Obviously before you can access the Sports package you have to take Sky tv first which adds to the overall cost
 
If we don't put it out to the marketplace how do we know how much someone is willing to pay? Amazon may pay more but if it's a closed shop we'll never know. If clubs vote for this they deserve all they get.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top