Sky Sports to cover RDP12 for 4 seasons from 2014

DarkJager

If it means I get to watch a few more games without muting the tv then this is a great deal

totallegend

OldRio wrote: »

I've been out of the country for a few days and this is awful news. The naivety of some on this thread is shocking. Yes, the money is good for the league and clubs.

No FTA for the fans is terrible news. You cannot grow the game without the casual viewer. There will be no FTA coverage. IMHO sooner rather than later.

Sky will move the times about. No kick off times will clash with the soccer. You can be sure of that.
You may think its grand going into bed with Sky but in the morning you will feel very different. Most English soccer fans realise that now.

When would they clash with soccer anyway? Sky show Premiership games on Saturday @ noon, Sunday afternoons and Monday nights. When was the last Rabo game in any of those slots? RTE and TG4 are calling the shots on scheduling as it is, there won't be much change.

It's not at all clear if the FTA broadcasters will lose their rights. Sky's plan is to show 30 games per season - I can't believe that the league would have agreed that this will be the sum total of coverage. Maybe exclusivity will happen down the road, but not for several years.

If you asked most English soccer fans would they rather have the premiership as it is now, or be FTA and have all best players chasing higher salaries in Spain and Germany, I'd say you'd get a pretty unanimous response.

The league needs more exposure than the likes of S4C and BBC Alba can provide. It needs an injection of cash to stem the flow of players to England and France. If the current broadcasters can't do it, then the league has to look elsewhere. There may be collateral damage and maybe Irish fans won't get to see three out of four provinces live every weekend, but that's the reality of modern sport.

Bogota

its_phil wrote: »

Even more shocked so

Well I don't understand why. Daire O'Brian is outrageously biased towards his home province (Munster). I genuinely find him hard to stomach during the provincial derbies.

Grimebox

On a personal level, I am not happy with this at all. I don't have Sky nor do I ever see myself paying for it. I prefer to avoid watching matches in the pub as it can easily degenerate into "ah sure I'll just the one pint" and end up the next morning with a headache, an empty wallet and a stamp for coppers. It means I will have to stream more matches like a filthy pirate

awec

Sky (and other broadcasters) aren't allowed to air Premier League games on Saturday afternoons (hence why it's always a lunchtime or evening kickoff), so I can see why they would broadcast then. Their prime offering at this time is Soccer Saturday and that only appeals to certain types of people.

Digifriendly

This is not a bad deal if:
(1) FTA brodcasters continue to show live Rabo games.
(2) Games Sky show exclusively live are available for FTA broadcasters to show as highlights.
(3) KO times chosen by Sky do not directly clash with club games e.g. AIL

wp_rathead

As long as there is still FTA available can only see this being good news
Sky will obvo cherry pick the big games, that is inevitable- Connacht would highly unlikely feature in this so maybe RTE would be forced to show us more :P

A highlight//weekly magazine style show is exactly what Sky can offer and what the league needs

Grimebox wrote: »

On a personal level, I am not happy with this at all. I don't have Sky nor do I ever see myself paying for it. I prefer to avoid watching matches in the pub as it can easily degenerate into "ah sure I'll just the one pint" and end up the next morning with a headache, an empty wallet and a stamp for coppers. It means I will have to stream more matches like a filthy pirate

..you'll be lucky if that is all you wake up with from coppers..

thomond2006

Please Sky, please don't hire Tremenjus.

awec

Digifriendly wrote: »

This is not a bad deal if:
(1) FTA brodcasters continue to show live Rabo games.
(2) Games Sky show exclusively live are available for FTA broadcasters to show as highlights.
(3) KO times chosen by Sky do not directly clash with club games e.g. AIL

Sky won't care about the AIL.

wprathead wrote: »

As long as there is still FTA available can only see this being good news
Sky will obvo cherry pick the big games, that is inevitable- Connacht would highly unlikely feature in this so maybe RTE would be forced to show us more :P

A highlight//weekly magazine style show is exactly what Sky can offer and what the league needs



..you'll be lucky if that is all you wake up with from coppers..

Is there not a provision that all teams must be shown a certain number of times?

Connacht will be on Sky a few times for sure.

Podge_irl

awec wrote: »

Is there not a provision that all teams must be shown a certain number of times?

Connacht will be on Sky a few times for sure.

I think there is for football and people are just extrapolating. There are few enough details of this deal released from what I've read. Though I could easily have missed something obviously.

P_1

thomond2006 wrote: »

Please Sky, please don't hire Tremenjus.

You know they will, sure they're giving him lots of screen time with the Lions.

Looking forward to hearing Mark Robson's gems more often though (slight guilty pleasure) :pac:

[Jackass]

I quite like Donal Lenihan I have to say. Think he's a good co-commentator. I'd take him over Flannery or worse, Sheehan any day of the week.

desertcircus

OldRio wrote: »

I've been out of the country for a few days and this is awful news. The naivety of some on this thread is shocking. Yes, the money is good for the league and clubs.

No FTA for the fans is terrible news. You cannot grow the game without the casual viewer. There will be no FTA coverage. IMHO sooner rather than later.

Sky will move the times about. No kick off times will clash with the soccer. You can be sure of that.
You may think its grand going into bed with Sky but in the morning you will feel very different. Most English soccer fans realise that now.

I really don't see a move of games to Sky as being a threat to casual viewership. It'd be one thing if Pro12 viewing figures were miles ahead of Heineken Cup figures, but I'm pretty sure the reverse probably applies. At the moment, on FTA, there isn't a particularly big audience for all bar the biggest games - so we're unlikely to lose a huge amount in a move.

And why is there such a desperate effort to draw parallels to English football? What happened with English football was a once-in-a-lifetime occurrence; you're talking about the marquee product for the broadcaster. As far as most Sky subscribers are concerned, Sky Sports is the Premiership plus bonuses, and Sky is ferocious in maintaining that connection. The Pro12 should be compared to Premiership rugby, which hasn't done particularly badly.

Last but not least; it's probably not financially worth it for Sky to try to outbid the domestic broadcasters for absolutely everything. Ulster will have a couple of games picked up, but it simply won't be worth as much to Sky to buy every Ulster game as it will to BBCNI to buy the rights to everything Sky don't take. Leinster will have a few games taken up, but again, Leinster v Connacht or Treviso v Dragons is going to be worth more to the domestic broadcaster than to Sky. What Sky are talking about looks like a selection of one marquee game a week and a few extras - the package being discussed simply doesn't look like a takeover. And who's going to be that badly hit? Thirty games means an average of five games a team over the course of the season - so we're talking about five games for someone who doesn't go to matches, or two or three for a season ticket holder.

desertcircus

Also (and apologies for this being a bit off-topic): it's beyond ridiculous that we have two state-funded broadcasters competing with each other to buy the same content. It works out well for Irish rugby funding, but it's a farce that a situation has been engineered that ensures that the taxpayer pays a higher amount for the same product.

jamiedav2011

OldRio wrote: »

I've been out of the country for a few days and this is awful news. The naivety of some on this thread is shocking. Yes, the money is good for the league and clubs.

No FTA for the fans is terrible news. You cannot grow the game without the casual viewer. There will be no FTA coverage. IMHO sooner rather than later.

Sky will move the times about. No kick off times will clash with the soccer. You can be sure of that.
You may think its grand going into bed with Sky but in the morning you will feel very different. Most English soccer fans realise that now.

Don't agree with much of that, but can you further expand on the bolded part?

totallegend

desertcircus wrote: »

Also (and apologies for this being a bit off-topic): it's beyond ridiculous that we have two state-funded broadcasters competing with each other to buy the same content. It works out well for Irish rugby funding, but it's a farce that a situation has been engineered that ensures that the taxpayer pays a higher amount for the same product.

Firstly, I'd say the total amount paid is a pittance.

Secondly, there's no way either channel alone could show as much as the two together do, so it's not the same product.

Also, the fact that the big games are carved up equally between the two suggests cooperation rather than competition.

rrpc

[Jackass] wrote: »

I quite like Donal Lenihan I have to say. Think he's a good co-commentator. I'd take him over Flannery or worse, Sheehan any day of the week.

That's a bit like saying you'd prefer a good dose of the squits to botulism or galloping knob rot. :eek:

The fourth option is: 'none of the above please'.

He's an outrageously bad commentator. Hilariously praising POM for winning the ball on a Munster lineout as a 'great steal' is just one of his many faux pas.

'twas tremenjus

lologram

totallegend wrote: »

Firstly, I'd say the total amount paid is a pittance.

Secondly, there's no way either channel alone could show as much as the two together do, so it's not the same product.

Also, the fact that the big games are carved up equally between the two suggests cooperation rather than competition.

I'd say you're right on all counts. The amount a channel has to pay to win the Pro12 rights is only as much as a potential competitor would pay to outbid them. If there's no other bidder, you would pay almost nothing. It looks as though RTE and TG4 cooperated in bidding for the rights. With no other bidder (or perhaps just TV3 maybe) going for the rights to Lein, Mun and Conn, the price they would have paid is likely very low.

jamiedav2011

rrpc wrote: »

That's a bit like saying you'd prefer a good dose of the squits to botulism or galloping knob rot. :eek:

The fourth option is: 'none of the above please'.

He's an outrageously bad commentator. Hilariously praising POM for winning the ball on a Munster lineout as a 'great steal' is just one of his many faux pas.

'twas tremenjus

Does anyone know if POM has ever played on the wing for Con btw? Don't think I've ever heard tremenjus mention it.

He isn't nearly the worst, but was simply hilarious in the recent Thomond encounter.

mrpdap

Sky were on the ball last Friday night

OldRio

totallegend wrote: »

When would they clash with soccer anyway? Sky show Premiership games on Saturday @ noon, Sunday afternoons and Monday nights. When was the last Rabo game in any of those slots? RTE and TG4 are calling the shots on scheduling as it is, there won't be much change.

You are correct about the scheduling of the soccer. I should have said the Rabo games will be held in the time slots Sky use for rugby. Which include early Saturday and Sunday afternoons. If Skys treatment of soccer is anything to go by there will be changes

It's not at all clear if the FTA broadcasters will lose their rights. Sky's plan is to show 30 games per season - I can't believe that the league would have agreed that this will be the sum total of coverage. Maybe exclusivity will happen down the road, but not for several years.

We will wait.

If you asked most English soccer fans would they rather have the premiership as it is now, or be FTA and have all best players chasing higher salaries in Spain and Germany, I'd say you'd get a pretty unanimous response.

IMHO I could not disagree more, I spent over 30 years working in England and many of my English friends love their soccer. Most would say that the influence of Sky has ruined the national soccer team.
The money Sky spends on the sport has increased wages to an atmospheric level. 67% of a premierships clubs turnover is now spent on wages. Therefore ticket prices have rose and people on average wages are priced out of the market.


The league needs more exposure than the likes of S4C and BBC Alba can provide. It needs an injection of cash to stem the flow of players to England and France. If the current broadcasters can't do it, then the league has to look elsewhere. There may be collateral damage and maybe Irish fans won't get to see three out of four provinces live every weekend, but that's the reality of modern sport.

Wages will escalate. Ticket prices will increase. You do not get more exposure by locking your 'product' behind a paywall.
Maybe I'm been an old cynical b@llox but I've seen this all before

thomond2006

I really don't think ticket prices will increase. Given the economic conditions it would be extremely difficult to justify for one.

I doubt Sky offered an outlandish sum to secure the Pro12, it's only 30 games and competing offers wouldn't have been high so why should Sky's be? I don't think the unions are suddenly going to be able to pay Top14 wage levels.

OldRio

jamiedav2011 wrote: »

Don't agree with much of that, but can you further expand on the bolded part?

Sorry jamiedav. Just read your post. See my reply above.

The excitement of having Sky putting money into soccer is well over.
You now have a complete separation of players from fans.
The wages these guys are earning is mind numbing.
The teams once owned by a local businessman are now owned by a foreign investor.
The ticket prices have increased to silly levels.
The premiership teams are full of foreign players which has resulted in limited opportunities for good young English players. This has a detrimental effect on the national team.

Re: Ticket Prices

Could increase as;
People no longer able to watch the games on FTA and can't afford Sky start to go to games instead. This increase in demand reaches a point where the supply is unable to match it.

Could negatively affect: Teams with close to capacity crowds on a regular basis
Would Positively affect: All other teams' finances directly. (That's probably > 75% of the league).

Could stay exactly the same as;
The market that Sky affects is further reaching than the local supporters. Games still can only really be attended by those in a ~ 100m radius of the stadium, with the further you get from the stadium, the less likely you are to attend.
The numbers within that radius that are 'forced' to attend due to Sky cherry picking the better games can only be a subset of 'People that watch games on FTA' && ' People that cannot afford/do not want / can't be arsed by / hate Sky' && 'People that will go to the games because of this'. This will likely be a very small percentage of team's fans (currently).

Could Lower as
Teams try to get more people through the gates for their Premium Games. A full stadium, with a big atmosphere increases the marketability of the game, and the potential worth of the tv deal.

OldRio

OldRio wrote: »

Sorry jamiedav. Just read your post. See my reply above.

The excitement of having Sky putting money into soccer is well over.
You now have a complete separation of players from fans.
The wages these guys are earning is mind numbing.
The teams once owned by a local businessman are now owned by a foreign investor.
The ticket prices have increased to silly levels.
The premiership teams are full of foreign players which has resulted in limited opportunities for good young English players. This has a detrimental effect on the national team.

comparing soccer to rugby is oranges and potatoes though.

Sky/ESPN taking the AP hasn't caused any of the above.

bilston

If ticket prices do rise it will be nothing to do with Sky it will because the provinces realise they can make more money while still attracting capacity crowds. Given that very few Pro 12 games outside of maybe Ravenhill, the RDS and Inter Pro games in Limerick and Galway are sell-outs I don't see this being a problem.

thomond2006

OldRio wrote: »

Sorry jamiedav. Just read your post. See my reply above.

The excitement of having Sky putting money into soccer is well over.
You now have a complete separation of players from fans.
The wages these guys are earning is mind numbing.
The teams once owned by a local businessman are now owned by a foreign investor.
The ticket prices have increased to silly levels.
The premiership teams are full of foreign players which has resulted in limited opportunities for good young English players. This has a detrimental effect on the national team.

All true but rugby will never reach the level of global popularity that football has (at least in my lifetime!).

Will the Sky deal may help the IRFU offer better contracts to keep the internationals in Ireland, I don't think it will get us to a Toulon wage level where they can pay Bakkies Botha €800,000 per annum. How much will 30 Pro12 games cost for Sky anyway?

OldRio

Deleted User wrote: »

comparing soccer to rugby is oranges and potatoes though.

Sky/ESPN taking the AP hasn't caused any of the above.

Emmet, jamiedav was asking me to expand on my post about English soccer fans and Sky.

OldRio

OldRio wrote: »

Emmet, jamiedav was asking me to expand on my post about English soccer fans and Sky.

ha, oops!

I agree with the lot in soccer terms if that helps. Just don't think it's applicable to less-popular games whatsoever.

bilston

thomond2006 wrote: »

All true but rugby will never reach the level of global popularity that football has (at least in my lifetime!).

Will the Sky deal may help the IRFU offer better contracts to keep the internationals in Ireland, I don't think it will get us to a Toulon wage level where they can pay Bakkies Botha €800,000 per annum. How much will 30 Pro12 games cost for Sky anyway?

Well someone mentioned the current deal is worth 20m over 4 years (not sure if that's Euros or Sterling), so if the increase of 50% is to be believed that would suggest 30m over 4 years. So an extra 2.5m into the pot each season. I don't know how that's broken down but crudely speaking it may roughly mean an extra 200k a year per province/club.

The above is just mere speculation and may or may not be close to truth.