Bluebeard
Well-Known Member
It’s inevitable now. Only a matter of time.We can't hang around for a long reach, one day, that probably won't come to pass; that's a completely different issue.
It’s inevitable now. Only a matter of time.We can't hang around for a long reach, one day, that probably won't come to pass; that's a completely different issue.
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.
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.
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.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.
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 leagueWe need to remove ourselves from Scottish football.
Keeping an eye on that current court case that could change everything for us.
Aren't people on old legacy contracts being shafted by Sky well beyond £25 a month?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.
I've long thought that the SPFL should have they're own streaming network. But would you trust Doncaster or the likes of the manage the development.Not really, we have the SPFL equivalent of Martin Bain doing the negotiating.
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.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.
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.
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.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.
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.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 ?
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.
That fanny would get punted from a bowling club committee, he could %^*& up allocating trays for taking drinks from the bar. Prick.Another shambles courtesy of Doncaster.
Iptv and give them fook all.There's a simple solution to that, my friend...
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.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
The SPFL's deal is an absolute disgrace and the proposed one is even worse.
- Belgium £86m per season
- Norway £63m per season
- Sweden £43m per season
- Denmark £35m per season (up for renewal)
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.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
Look at Turkeys populationCountries like Turkey get 75 mill a season.
If the contract was worth more someone would offer more, it’s an open market for anyone to bid. no one doesThe contract is worth more, can be seen from similar leagues around Europe that the tv deal is undervalued.
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?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.
Again come back to the Martin Bain analogy, if you accept shit then you devalue your product.If the contract was worth more someone would offer more, it’s an open market for anyone to bid. no one does
What would you do with the sky offer then?Again come back to the Martin Bain analogy, if you accept shit then you devalue your product.
When you look at it that way - it’s actually LESS money .£27.5m i think , so they get 25% extra games for just £2m
All our and their away games should be on TV, especially with tin pot clubs cutting away allocation for us bothThe 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.
Have a different set of people to package up, market and sell the options to various streaming services and tv companies to generate interest.What would you do with the sky offer then?
If everyone subscribed to RTV unlimited and used a VPN they could watch every game and contribute massively to the club.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.
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 VPNIf 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
The monthly subscription at £24 returned several months ago.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
Aren't people on old legacy contracts being shafted by Sky well beyond £25 a month?