GAA TV Deal Renewal

howiya

Kneebreaker wrote: »

How? They also need to pay a subscription to GAAGO or €10 for individual matches not on sky. With Premier Sports every game was a tenner a month.

The cost and value of premier sports for 4 months with every game was substantially less than a GAAGO subscription and a Sky sub (even if you already had Sky)

In what way has accessing football or hurling improved for people in the UK? The Sky deal was sold as a great result for foreign gaels but in fact has just upped the cost with zero improvement in the quality of the service

You say they need to but they don't need to. They choose to. Some will be happy with Sky's content and won't pay for GAAGO.

I can only relate to my own family's experience. They had Sky already and now they get GAA games at no extra cost so they're happy out

Mantis Toboggan

Decent Skin wrote: »

What free channel ???

Sky sports mix

Decent Skin

Tyson Fury wrote: »

Sky sports mix

Thanks! The thread raised my curiosity so did a search on it; hadn't heard a thing about it!

howiya

Decent Skin wrote: »

Thanks! The thread raised my curiosity so did a search on it; hadn't heard a thing about it!

If you're with Virgin Media it's their replacement for the free Setanta/Eir channel that they no longer have

ProudDUB

I'm no fan of the Sky deal, especially as they had two of Dublins games this year, but some of the costings being tossed around here are absolutely daft imo.

threeball

If the Gaa had any vision they should do a deal with a FTA channel for Ireland and take GAAGO back under their own control where they could offer a worldwide package of games from the league through to championship with extras such as interviews, review shows etc. for €100 - €150 per year. It would get a large subscription base abroad and even here in Ireland which would eventually dwarf the current TV money they receive.
I believe they'd get more money from Ireland alone on a model like this than all the TV deals put together.

howiya

threeball wrote: »

If the Gaa had any vision they should do a deal with a FTA channel for Ireland and take GAAGO back under their own control where they could offer a worldwide package of games from the league through to championship with extras such as interviews, review shows etc. for €100 - €150 per year. It would get a large subscription base abroad and even here in Ireland which would eventually dwarf the current TV money they receive.
I believe they'd get more money from Ireland alone on a model like this than all the TV deals put together.

11.3 million currently earned from TV according to a Martin Breheny article in the Indo in February.

That figure should increase as part of the next deal.

But based on your €100 pricing and the current value of media income you would need 100,000 households to subscribe to match the 11.3 million which is a complete fantasy as nowhere near that number would subscribe.

If the content was produced by the GAA you would also be looking at increase costs too.

threeball

howiya wrote: »

11.3 million currently earned from TV according to a Martin Breheny article in the Indo in February.

That figure should increase as part of the next deal.

But based on your €100 pricing and the current value of media income you would need 100,000 households to subscribe to match the 11.3 million which is a complete fantasy as nowhere near that number would subscribe.

If the content was produced by the GAA you would also be looking at increase costs too.

So you reckon you couldn't get 100,000 subscribers worldwide? I think you'd get close to that in Ireland alone before you go near expats. Plus you're ignoring the main TV deal which would be worth between 4-5 million.

Fr Tod Umptious

threeball wrote: »

So you reckon you couldn't get 100,000 subscribers worldwide? I think you'd get close to that in Ireland alone before you go near expats. Plus you're ignoring the main TV deal which would be worth between 4-5 million.

But you could never run a online broadcast and a regular TV broadcast in Ireland

Who would pay 150 a year for games that were already on TV

And what broadcaster would pay for rights that would be available in parallel on another medium

threeball

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But you could never run a online broadcast and a regular TV broadcast in Ireland

Who would pay 150 a year for games that were already on TV

And what broadcaster would pay for rights that would be available in parallel on another medium

Not all games would be on TV just like all games aren't now. The gaago service could carry most of the rest of the games which plenty would be happy to pay for. Add classic games, interviews, podcast like shows and preview and review shows and plenty would fork out 150 euro. Most additional content would have little to no cost. Add in sponsors who would want their brand on the service and there's more money to be made.
NFL do it, nba, ufc etc. Gaa should be positioning themselves for a similar service.

ProudDUB

The NFL & NBA do not have an exclusive broadcasting channel for their own games. They do have some of them on subscription based services, but for the average fan, there are still more than enough games airing on regular telly stations. It's not a valid comparison.

threeball

ProudDUB wrote: »

The NFL & NBA do not have an exclusive broadcasting channel for their own games. They do have some of them on subscription based services, but for the average fan, there are still more than enough games airing on regular telly stations. It's not a valid comparison.

So what are NFL game pass, nba league pass and ufc fight pass in that case.

ProudDUB

Dunno about the ufc, but the other two are telly season tickets to watch any game, in any city, at any time. But the broadcast networks (NBC, ABC, FOX etc) & cable networks (ESPN, TBS, TNT, WGN etc) still have A LOT of games for people to watch. When I lived in Atlanta, I never had the NBA or the NFL season pass. Nor did I ever subscribe to Direct TV. I still had no problem watching plenty of Braves, Falcons & Hawks games, as well as other non Atlanta franchise games.

The US sports scene is massive entity, with lots of different stakeholders & a massive population to bank roll it all. Little ole Ireland just doesn't have that, so it's not a valid comparison imo.

Paulzx

Bambi wrote: »

Watching a game for the pundits..bit weird in my book.

I agree. I couldn't give a sh@$e who or what the pundits are saying. I only want to see the match and can make up my own mind on what's happening.

Fr Tod Umptious

threeball wrote: »

So what are NFL game pass, nba league pass and ufc fight pass in that case.

Gamepass is not available in the US, heck the games that are on Sky are not even available here in Ireland or the UK.

And I don't think you can be comparing the NFL with the GAA

The NFL is a hugely popular, bulti-billion dollar league. Where Gamepass is available it's not cheap, e160 more in some places, maybe a little less in others.

But you get really good stuff for that
The NFL is a very "condensed" season, every game is important to a lot of people and to the outcome of the league
Plus the professional nature of the game allows for all the ancillary stuff, Hard Knocks, player interviews, the combine, the draft etc

You are not going to get the same uptake from GAA
Feck all people are interested in Louth v Antrim in a 1st round qualifier.
And you do not have enough ancillary content to fill the gaps.

howiya

threeball wrote: »

So what are NFL game pass, nba league pass and ufc fight pass in that case.

Neither NFL Game Pass or the NBA League Pass are available in the United States. A bit like GAAGO here...

howiya

threeball wrote: »

So you reckon you couldn't get 100,000 subscribers worldwide? I think you'd get close to that in Ireland alone before you go near expats. Plus you're ignoring the main TV deal which would be worth between 4-5 million.

You said in Ireland. Maybe you would get them worldwide.

The main TV deal would have little worth if games could be watched somewhere else. You're just making up figures with your 4-5 million

threeball

ProudDUB wrote: »

Dunno about the ufc, but the other two are telly season tickets to watch any game, in any city, at any time. But the broadcast networks (NBC, ABC, FOX etc) & cable networks (ESPN, TBS, TNT, WGN etc) still have A LOT of games for people to watch. When I lived in Atlanta, I never had the NBA or the NFL season pass. Nor did I ever subscribe to Direct TV. I still had no problem watching plenty of Braves, Falcons & Hawks games, as well as other non Atlanta franchise games.

The US sports scene is massive entity, with lots of different stakeholders & a massive population to bank roll it all. Little ole Ireland just doesn't have that, so it's not a valid comparison imo.

And a broadcast network would still have the main games here but you could then access lesser matches and other content on the GAAGo service. Its a perfectly valid comparison. No one is expecting 10 million subscribers but 100,000 is more than achievable and will provide a far greater revenue stream than any tv company will pay while simultaneously giving people the world over the opportunity to watch Gaelic games as it suits them and not have to fork out €60 a month to a subscription channel.
Are you saying that is the GAA had a service with games that weren't on TV, had classic GAA games etc etc. you wouldn't sign up to it for €100-€150?

Fr Tod Umptious

threeball wrote: »

And a broadcast network would still have the main games here but you could then access lesser matches and other content on the GAAGo service. Its a perfectly valid comparison. No one is expecting 10 million subscribers but 100,000 is more than achievable and will provide a far greater revenue stream than any tv company will pay while simultaneously giving people the world over the opportunity to watch Gaelic games as it suits them and not have to fork out €60 a month to a subscription channel.
Are you saying that is the GAA had a service with games that weren't on TV, had classic GAA games etc etc. you wouldn't sign up to it for €100-€150?

No one is going to pay €100 to €150 for what you describe.

Cosmo Kramer

Well Rachel Wyse's tweet a couple of weeks ago certainly made it sound like Sky won't be involved after this year. That's a shame as their coverage is way ahead of anything RTE produce. However, I'd say very few subscribed to Sky for their GAA coverage, they probably get far more takeup for their Rugby League and cricket.

Personally I'd like to see the whole thing taken off RTE for a few years to wake them up a bit, their coverage of the football is a disgrace. If Sky are gone, maybe split it between TV 3 and TG4 for a while, they both take or have taken their coverage more seriously for the games that they have had. Most likely RTE will retain the main rights though, the 'true gaels' that won't pay for Sky wouldn't have it any other way.

ceegee

threeball wrote: »

And a broadcast network would still have the main games here but you could then access lesser matches and other content on the GAAGo service. Its a perfectly valid comparison. No one is expecting 10 million subscribers but 100,000 is more than achievable and will provide a far greater revenue stream than any tv company will pay while simultaneously giving people the world over the opportunity to watch Gaelic games as it suits them and not have to fork out €60 a month to a subscription channel.
Are you saying that is the GAA had a service with games that weren't on TV, had classic GAA games etc etc. you wouldn't sign up to it for €100-€150?

Nobody is forking out 150 quid to see a few qualifiers and league matches.

The only way people would sign up to a subscription service would be if they could see all their county's matches but the cost of covering all games would be way too high for the gaa to consider it.

howiya

howiya wrote: »

That's nonsense to be fair. People did all of those things for their clubs before matches were widely available on TV.

Why do you expect free TV coverage in return? Why do you not look for free intercounty jerseys, match tickets etc? Why is it the TV coverage that you feel should be free?

The point is, the GAA is meant to be a democratic organization with delegates sent from every club in Ireland. Its original intent was not capitalistic, it was social.

This is a symbol of a divide that is occurring between ''HQ'' and the grassroots. County players are first and foremost club players and they are the ones who provide the spectacle. There should have been a vote on whether the biggest platform for showing the games was sold off. What if you are a pioneer or religious and don't want to go to a bar to watch it? What if you (like my family) just can't afford Sky? Or if you are a patient in a hospital or just can't pay for sky and yet you have paid for the licence fee.

The games are not about profit they are firstly about players expressing themselves and later a milieu of something Irish whatever that nebulous quality is. British people saying on twitter how mad hurling is not worth it.

BonnieSituation

You do know that the GAA are a private organisation with absolutely no onus on them to do anything for the greater good of the country? They do, but they don't have to do anything.

howiya

Deleted User wrote: »

The point is, the GAA is meant to be a democratic organization with delegates sent from every club in Ireland. Its original intent was not capitalistic, it was social.

This is a symbol of a divide that is occurring between ''HQ'' and the grassroots. County players are first and foremost club players and they are the ones who provide the spectacle. There should have been a vote on whether the biggest platform for showing the games was sold off. What if you are a pioneer or religious and don't want to go to a bar to watch it? What if you (like my family) just can't afford Sky? Or if you are a patient in a hospital or just can't pay for sky and yet you have paid for the licence fee.

The games are not about profit they are firstly about players expressing themselves and later a milieu of something Irish whatever that nebulous quality is. British people saying on twitter how mad hurling is not worth it.

What has your license fee got to do with the GAA?

bruschi

Deleted User wrote: »

The point is, the GAA is meant to be a democratic organization with delegates sent from every club in Ireland. Its original intent was not capitalistic, it was social.

This is a symbol of a divide that is occurring between ''HQ'' and the grassroots. County players are first and foremost club players and they are the ones who provide the spectacle. There should have been a vote on whether the biggest platform for showing the games was sold off. What if you are a pioneer or religious and don't want to go to a bar to watch it? What if you (like my family) just can't afford Sky? Or if you are a patient in a hospital or just can't pay for sky and yet you have paid for the licence fee.

The games are not about profit they are firstly about players expressing themselves and later a milieu of something Irish whatever that nebulous quality is. British people saying on twitter how mad hurling is not worth it.

hyperbole much? It was 14 games out of 88 championship games.

you obviously have internet access. If people want to watch games so badly and wont go to the actual game, its very, very easy to watch them online.

Fr Tod Umptious

News is that the next deal is going to be 5 years with RTE (25) and Sky (14) getting exclusive championship games and Eir (Setanta) retaining the Saturday night league games.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/gaelic-games/fans-set-for-five-more-years-of-sky-with-gaa-on-the-brink-of-55m-rights-deal-35162069.html

Queue the outrage.

Mehapoy

Back in the 80's there must have been no volunteers in the GAA since there were what 3 or 4 games on TV?

threeball

howiya wrote: »

The main TV deal would have little worth if games could be watched somewhere else. You're just making up figures with your 4-5 million

Well what d'ya know, almost exactly 4-5 million (little bit above actually for just 2/3's of the games (RTE's part) in the new deal. Seems I wasn't so far out after all.

intellectual dosser

I'd like to see conditions on the start times of games in the new deal. 7pm throw-ins on a Saturday evening needs to be an absolute no go. Travelling supporters who believe "nothing beats being there" and actually attend the game dont get home until the small hours.

People might argue it's nothing to do with the TV deal, but I've no doubt those timings could only be made to suit TV viewers and this is the perfect opportunity to set those constraints.

Prop Joe

Absolute joke of a decision,Time and time again it has shown that nobody is watching these games on SKY,Padraic Duffy wants a Super 8 competition from QF stage onwards but wants these big games played with no-one watching...Mind Boggling