The Famous Aberdeen - Season 2022/23

[coprolite]

 I can't see much wrong with what he's saying to be honest.

It's more detail than we usually get, so thats positive in itself. 

I'd like us to be able to get more for tv rights, but we're in the UK market and the third most marketable league in that market. 

[lubo_blaha]

The price per game argument is pointless. You could sell the four cheeks games for £5million each and have an amazing price per game but your clubs are still taking home less money than many of their European counterparts.

That being said, given that the current deal is around £25mil p/yr, if we’re being offered £38mil with the option of 5 ppv games each, we should definitely take it.

[Dons_1988]

9 minutes ago, coprolite said:

 I can't see much wrong with what he's saying to be honest.

It's more detail than we usually get, so thats positive in itself. 

I'd like us to be able to get more for tv rights, but we're in the UK market and the third most marketable league in that market. 

I don’t believe there’s a massive tv deal waiting for us out there either, I just don’t appreciate him fiddling numbers to make a bad faith argument. 

 

[coprolite]

28 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

I don’t believe there’s a massive tv deal waiting for us out there either, I just don’t appreciate him fiddling numbers to make a bad faith argument. 

 

I guess that's subjective. The figures aren't wrong or made up. There's a bit of an apples and oranges problem in comparing internationally and he's using one view of it to make a point. 

What that journo guy is saying isn't correct either. The league hasn't sold sky rights to broadcast all the games. They've sold rights to broadcast any 48 and sold an undertaking that they won't sell games to any other broadcaster. 

If Sky only want 48 games, the question is whether the amount they pay for exclusivity (over and above the rights to first pick of the 48) plus the amount we saveby not cannibalising other income streams is more than what other broadcasters would pay to show them. If we belive that Netherlands  or Belgium is the comparable, then we're probably falling short. If we believe it's Austria or Denmark then the new deal seems right. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domestic_football_league_broadcast_deals_by_country

I'd say he's guilty of oversimplification rather than hoodwinking. 

[AJF]

15 minutes ago, coprolite said:

I guess that's subjective. The figures aren't wrong or made up. There's a bit of an apples and oranges problem in comparing internationally and he's using one view of it to make a point. 

What that journo guy is saying isn't correct either. The league hasn't sold sky rights to broadcast all the games. They've sold rights to broadcast any 48 and sold an undertaking that they won't sell games to any other broadcaster. 

If Sky only want 48 games, the question is whether the amount they pay for exclusivity (over and above the rights to first pick of the 48) plus the amount we saveby not cannibalising other income streams is more than what other broadcasters would pay to show them. If we belive that Netherlands  or Belgium is the comparable, then we're probably falling short. If we believe it's Austria or Denmark then the new deal seems right. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domestic_football_league_broadcast_deals_by_country

I'd say he's guilty of oversimplification rather than hoodwinking. 

He has absolutely framed the figures to suit a narrative.

[coprolite]

5 minutes ago, AJF said:

He has absolutely framed the figures to suit a narrative.

No argument there.

He's trying to get support for the deal he wants everyone to sign so he's making an argument in support of that deal. I don't think he's pretending to provide a dispassionate analysis including all the pros and cons. It's a sales job. And it's way less disingenuous than any figures i presented going door to door for N power. 

[lubo_blaha]

He has absolutely framed the figures to suit a narrative.

[Dons_1988]

11 minutes ago, coprolite said:

No argument there.

He's trying to get support for the deal he wants everyone to sign so he's making an argument in support of that deal. I don't think he's pretending to provide a dispassionate analysis including all the pros and cons. It's a sales job. And it's way less disingenuous than any figures i presented going door to door for N power. 

Well if that’s how he wants to play it and he wants to act like a second hand car salesman then I’ll act like a consumer. 

A football club like ours relies on the good faith of its fan base, that’s why people buy season tickets when you’re literally banned from the stadium or plough in a monthly direct debit without knowing where it truly goes. 

the rest of the statement is pish too by the way. We don’t need to go out to tender to know it’s the best deal? Seriously? 

Also at no point is the most pertinent point to fans noted - the quality of the deal aside from monetary value. Sky sports hold Scottish football in contempt and their coverage doesn’t even try and hide it. 

[coprolite]

1 hour ago, Dons_1988 said:

Well if that’s how he wants to play it and he wants to act like a second hand car salesman then I’ll act like a consumer. 

A football club like ours relies on the good faith of its fan base, that’s why people buy season tickets when you’re literally banned from the stadium or plough in a monthly direct debit without knowing where it truly goes. 

the rest of the statement is pish too by the way. We don’t need to go out to tender to know it’s the best deal? Seriously? 

Also at no point is the most pertinent point to fans noted - the quality of the deal aside from monetary value. Sky sports hold Scottish football in contempt and their coverage doesn’t even try and hide it. 

Not sure what going to tender is going to acheive when the only realistic competition has already said they're not interested and that only leaves premier, who are presumably in regular contact with the organisation for their cup games. 

If all the options are shit, then your best option is still going to be shit. As sky is and will be. 

I think the sub plot here is likely to be a certain club from the dark side wanting to break away from a central, whole league, deal. If that is right, individual deals might just about benefit us but would be a disaster for the league. I think that's a far more likely alternative outcome of rejecting this deal than the league getting a better deal. 

[kingjoey]

1 hour ago, AJF said:

He has absolutely framed the figures to suit a narrative.

I don't see much wrong with what he's said. I know that folk, particularly some Aberdeen fans, like giving Davie a good kicking, but I feel that he has represented what actually happens in a more accurate and fairer light than the Stewart Robertson statement. 

[Rodhull]

It just seems bizarre to me that after Aberdeen and other clubs released a study about how the Scottish game could better promote itself that one of the first actions taken after that is to accept a similarly crappy deal years before the current contract is ending without even attempting to look and see what the alternatives are.

Especially as Sky doing a shoddy job of promoting Scottish football is one of its main problems.

[Dons_1988]

1 hour ago, coprolite said:

Not sure what going to tender is going to acheive when the only realistic competition has already said they're not interested and that only leaves premier, who are presumably in regular contact with the organisation for their cup games. 

If all the options are shit, then your best option is still going to be shit. As sky is and will be. 

I think the sub plot here is likely to be a certain club from the dark side wanting to break away from a central, whole league, deal. If that is right, individual deals might just about benefit us but would be a disaster for the league. I think that's a far more likely alternative outcome of rejecting this deal than the league getting a better deal. 

You might be right, my gripe is less with the deal on the table than it is with daves way of communicating. 

 

33 minutes ago, kingjoey said:

I don't see much wrong with what he's said. I know that folk, particularly some Aberdeen fans, like giving Davie a good kicking, but I feel that he has represented what actually happens in a more accurate and fairer light than the Stewart Robertson statement. 

I’ve praised him when he deserves it and criticised similar. Arsehole behaviour to dismiss folk as just giving him a kicking. 

Edited September 25, 2022 by Dons_1988

[AJF]

1 hour ago, kingjoey said:

I don't see much wrong with what he's said. I know that folk, particularly some Aberdeen fans, like giving Davie a good kicking, but I feel that he has represented what actually happens in a more accurate and fairer light than the Stewart Robertson statement. 

The thread I posted before details how he is painting a disingenuous picture of this proposed deal. 

Edited September 25, 2022 by AJF

[kingjoey]

14 minutes ago, AJF said:

The thread I posted before details how he is painting a disingenuous picture of this proposed deal. 

My understanding, and if I'm wrong I'll happily admit as much, is that Sweden sell all of their matches to be shown live, whereas, although Sky have the rights to show any matches from the Scottish Premiership live they can only show 48 games. That's certainly not a  level playing field to use as a comparison to put the boot into the Sky deal.

[Clown Job]

1 hour ago, Rodhull said:

It just seems bizarre to me that after Aberdeen and other clubs released a study about how the Scottish game could better promote itself that one of the first actions taken after that is to accept a similarly crappy deal years before the current contract is ending without even attempting to look and see what the alternatives are.

Especially as Sky doing a shoddy job of promoting Scottish football is one of its main problems.

Sky would love us all to be EPL fanboys

Its absolutely ridiculous we expected to cough up the same subscription fee to watch Scottish football as the English leagues

[coprolite]

1 hour ago, Dons_1988 said:

You might be right, my gripe is less with the deal on the table than it is with daves way of communicating. 

 

 

I think the criticism of his stats abuse is warranted but the rest looks like a fairly open disclosure of where we're at.

It's shit news to hear that we can't do any better. I'm sure if we could we would. It makes no sense for the clubs to try to push through a deal if there's better out there. 

1 hour ago, Rodhull said:

It just seems bizarre to me that after Aberdeen and other clubs released a study about how the Scottish game could better promote itself that one of the first actions taken after that is to accept a similarly crappy deal years before the current contract is ending without even attempting to look and see what the alternatives are.

Especially as Sky doing a shoddy job of promoting Scottish football is one of its main problems.

It does seem odd that it's more of the same and not, for example, exploring a streaming platform or something. I guess that having a longer term commitment with a known quantity makes it easier to budget and raise finance as well as allowing SPFL effort and resource to go into the other stuff (whatever that may be, committees and reports probably). 

It would be good if the new deal involves some marketing and promotion obligations for Sky but i won't hold my breath. 

[Rodhull]

2 hours ago, coprolite said:

 

It's shit news to hear that we can't do any better. I'm sure if we could we would. It makes no sense for the clubs to try to push through a deal if there's better out there. 

It looks like the clubs have shat it. Sky have clearly come to them early and made this offer and either threatened or implied that if they don't accept it now they'll take the offer off the table completely or reduce it if it goes out to tender and the spfl teams are either too afraid or unwilling to take the risk or do the extra work. To quote the Simpsons with regards to the TV deal it very much seems to be a case of "We've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas."

Now obviously it can be said fair enough it maybe is understandable that clubs don't want to take a risk like that but they can't also at the same time bleat on about the game being undersold and pretending they're putting together a great vision for the future. It makes it all the more likely that all this talk is exactly that, a talking shop where nothing is achieved besides making themselves feel pro-active/important.

Edited September 25, 2022 by Rodhull

[Leith Green]

7 hours ago, Rodhull said:

they can't also at the same time bleat on about the game being undersold and pretending they're putting together a great vision for the future. It makes it all the more likely that all this talk is exactly that, a talking shop where nothing is achieved besides making themselves feel pro-active/important.

While I understand unhappiness with DC statement and how he has phrased it, he may not have had too much choice. Even if 5 clubs want to go "another way", there are still many who will happily accept the status quo.

FWIW, I know that Hibs (and I suspect Aberdeen and the others in that wee group) were looking into what some other countries do about selling rights live on matchdays - not just to fans abroad - kinda like we had during covid.

I fully expect some similar mealy mouthed pish from our owner too.

[AJF]

10 hours ago, kingjoey said:

My understanding, and if I'm wrong I'll happily admit as much, is that Sweden sell all of their matches to be shown live, whereas, although Sky have the rights to show any matches from the Scottish Premiership live they can only show 48 games. That's certainly not a  level playing field to use as a comparison to put the boot into the Sky deal.

Yes, I believe that is correct. But the way I see it, while Sky may only show 48 games, the deal we have in place with them prevents us from brokering a deal with another broadcaster to show any more. So in effect, the deal with Sky is for all of our matches because it prohibits our ability to sell the remainder to anyone even if they don't get shown on Sky.

That's why I think the value per game stuff is all a bit misleading.

[big al]

So fans protest about crap kick off times, but also complain that all the games aren’t on tv?