Disgrace of Scottish TV rights

[EdTheDuck]

41 minutes ago, sparky88 said:

I heard about  that, if there isnt even a decent audience for football league highlights, why would Scotland be different?

But I suppose having them included as part of the existing programme makes sense- though would make for a late finish time .

Channel 5 were getting 500,000 viewers compared to BBC's 1,000,000

Maybe that has something to do with timing? BBC used to have EFL on right after MotD whereas C5 programme started at 9pm or something - too early? Folk still in the pub? Maybe it was the presenters? No idea but it was strange that so many viewers were lost just because it moved from the beeb, eh?

I'd probably watch the lower league stuff if it was bundled up with the Prem highlights where I might not if it was on separately...though I probably would...probably

[topcat(The most tip top)]

Channel 5 were getting 500,000 viewers compared to BBC's 1,000,000
Maybe that has something to do with timing? BBC used to have EFL on right after MotD whereas C5 programme started at 9pm or something - too early? Folk still in the pub? Maybe it was the presenters? No idea but it was strange that so many viewers were lost just because it moved from the beeb, eh?
I'd probably watch the lower league stuff if it was bundled up with the Prem highlights where I might not if it was on separately...though I probably would...probably

Straight after match of the day meant that people who like football were already tuned in and would have to actually turn over to not watch the lower leagues

It would probably work for “today in the championship” presented by VT and I’m Roger

[vikingTON]

8 hours ago, sparky88 said:

Channel 5 pays that money because people want to watch highlights of lower league English football. STV, who use to show highlights of lower league Scottish football, cant justify spending money on it when hardly anyone was watching. 

If there is a commercial market for TV rights then the BBC probably shouldn't be bidding for them; so by the same token, the fact that there is not a commercial SPFL highlights means that BBC Scotland should be paying for them. You can't play the 'millions of pounds to professional clubs' and the 'too wee, too poor' cards at the same time. The BBC should absolutely be broadcasting the national sport of Scotland in depth and in the native language of the vast majority of its population. That is broadcasting in the public interest. If STV or some other broadcaster then want to bid for the rights instead then they can have them. Which is what happened when the Setanta deal went down the tubes; the BBC stepped in until a new deal was sold.

Entirely straightforward stuff. 

Quote

I know you and your pals might watch highlights of lower league Scottish football, but not many more people would. I presume you don't have any more evidence than this that the Scottish public want to watch highlights of Scottish league 2 football?

How many people in Scotland watch equestrian, hockey, women's football highlights, rugby league highlights, athletics or any of the other absolute dross that the BBC broadcasts within its thrilling sports package this week? You could add the total watching each of those sports, times it by ten and you still wouldn't get close to the average audience for Scottish lower league highlights.  Swing and a miss. 

Quote

 

' the proper deal that its standing merits within this country'

 

Football is the overwhelmingly dominant sport in Scotland - on a level incomparable even to England or the continent - and the Scottish domestic leagues form a major part of that interest. BBC Scotland should therefore be paying to cover Scottish domestic football in depth rather than some horses jumping over a fence. It's not necessarily a political point, but it is no surprise to see the staunch desperately circling the wagons around a Unionist institution despite its clear failure to serve  the interests of its Scottish licence fee payers and Scotland's national game. 

[Ivo den Bieman]

I think BBC Scotland's calculations are much cruder than this noble Reithian projection about the good of the nation.

If amateur and semi-pro cameramen/ journalists are willing to put 5 minute highlights packages of their club's weekend clash on youtube by Sunday night, for free, and the SPFL's youtube channel sums these packages up on a "strictly when we can be arsed" basis, then why on earth would the BBC pay to do it? For years now the mainstream media has largely ignored the lower leagues in Scotland as they expect citizen journalists, bloggers, and volunteers to fill the gap they feel they can no longer afford to occupy. If bloggers and viners put together match reports and highlights then again, why would the BBC invest beyond paying an annual fee to PA / Reuters to have a stringer write the (pish and sometimes made up) match reports for them? No one reads or takes them seriously anyway. Fans who care about their clubs and go regularly to games will come to forums like these, or go directly to clubs and players social media, for instant reaction and serious discussion of the games.

don't get me wrong- I'd love to see a nice TV deal for the lower leagues. However, it's like calling for Morton's first team to be bought a new fleet of Hillman Imps.

Sadly BBC Alba is as good as it will get in the current media landscape. And I'm pretty sure the number of Gaelic speakers actually watching the games and listening to the Gaelic commentary could be transported to the game and put up in a decent hotel with a bit of spending money for the night, for cheaper than what it costs BBC Alba to show the games. The vast majority of folk (certainly in Montrose and the wider North East) that I know of watch the games with the sound off as they are unable to follow the commentary. I can see why Alba are doing it- a distant echo of Murdoch's using football's "battering ram" to drive more of an interest in the Gaelic language, but I'm not sure if it's working.

A weekly lower league highlights package is a commercial non-starter, I'm afraid, hence it won't happen. The TV is saturated with much better quality football nowadays and only obsessives and a small proportion of the 20,000 people who, on a good week, watch the championship plus seaside leagues, would tune in.

Not sure your "dross" argument re some of the minority sports you mention really is the best argument to select; when 0-0 draws between Berwick and Stenhousemuir, or Paul Hartley dourly setting up for a point at a largely empty Caledonian Stadium, come to mind. It may be of interest to the likes of us but to most non football people (the vast majority of Scots whichever way you cut it) it's the very definition of "dross".

 

 

 

[sparky88]

9 minutes ago, virginton said:

If there is a commercial market for TV rights then the BBC probably shouldn't be bidding for them; so by the same token, the fact that there is not a commercial SPFL highlights means that BBC Scotland should be paying for them. You can't play the 'millions of pounds to professional clubs' and the 'too wee, too poor' cards at the same time. The BBC should absolutely be broadcasting the national sport of Scotland in depth and in the native language of the vast majority of its population. That is broadcasting in the public interest. If STV or some other broadcaster then want to bid for the rights instead then they can have them. Which is what happened when the Setanta deal went down the tubes; the BBC stepped in until a new deal was sold.

Entirely straightforward stuff. 

How many people in Scotland watch equestrian, hockey, women's football highlights, rugby league highlights, athletics or any of the other absolute dross that the BBC broadcasts within its thrilling sports package this week? You could add the total watching each of those sports, times it by ten and you still wouldn't get close to the average audience for Scottish lower league highlights.  Swing and a miss. 

Football is the overwhelmingly dominant sport in Scotland - on a level incomparable even to England or the continent - and the Scottish domestic leagues form a major part of that interest. BBC Scotland should therefore be paying to cover Scottish domestic football in depth rather than some horses jumping over a fence. It's not necessarily a political point, but it is no surprise to see the staunch desperately circling the wagons around a Unionist institution despite its clear failure to serve  the interests of its Scottish licence fee payers and Scotland's national game. 

You just sound like a wee bairn greeting that you can't see your team on the tv. Lower league Scottish football is a minority pursuit  and it's nothing to do with media coverage. 

You haven't got a clue how many people watch those sports, not unless you have access to detailed viewing figures, which you don't. Making up shite about multiplying fantasy figures by 10 and it not coming to some other figure you have in your head won't cut it.

Yet more 'football is part of every one of us' meaningless shite. Again not backed up by anything other than bluster. 

[The Master]

11 hours ago, virginton said:

Erm yes - because Channel 5's bid won the multi-million pound rights package to provide lower league highlights back in 2015:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/may/05/channel-5-football-league-highlights-saturday-9pm

It’s not a multi-million pound contract to show the highlights. 

The EFL are paying ITN millions of pounds to film the non-live games. 

The actual cost of Channel 5’s deal was never publicised, which suggests it’s peanuts. They didn’t win an auction against the BBC; the BBC didn’t bother to bid because they needed to find budget cuts. 

Quote

So there is in fact much more coverage of English lower league football on Scottish free-to-air TV than its own leagues - as there also was before 2015 when the BBC broadcast the lower league highlights after MOTD each week. Last time I checked, however,  there is no multi-million pound bidding war that BBC Scotland would face to either produce a more comprehensive highlights package of the country's only national sport, or to simply broadcast the games that it already has rights to on a proper channel and in the native language of 99% of the country's population. 

BBC Scotland doesn’t have the rights to live lower-league SPFL games. BBC Alba does. 

BBC Alba is a joint venture between the BBC and MG Alba. You can’t expect MG Alba to effectively put up half the money (even if it is next to nothing) only for BBC Scotland to say, actually we want to show the games on BBC1/2. 

 

[topcat(The most tip top)]

Most arguments about the BBC boil down to

 

They should be showing more of the kind of stuff that I like and less of the pish that other people like

 

[Blootoon87]

When does the current TV deal run out?

[Firhill_Basin]

I see the SPFL have managed to get a deal in the States again. They've signed a multi-year deal with Turner Sports who are in the process of launching a Bleacher Report live streaming channel. They also own the rights to the Champions League going forward in the States. Its available free online until June as its still in the beta testing stage, you will need a VPN. They showed the Old Firm game at the weekend, and the Thistle v Ross County game is on tomorrow night. 

[Bazil85]

I don't understand how people can moan about a poor TV deal money in this country.

There's so little appetite for people to watch Scottish football. Who wants to watch games in a top league where the Champions are known before a ball has been kicked? The quality of the majority of teams in our top flight is English League 1 level or lower. The appeal of the one historical crowd drawing fixture (Rangers and Celtic) has also been diluted so much given it's on five-six times a season and it doesn't represent quality or competition anymore. More people watched an English Championship game than watched the Glasgow derby New Year fixture this season. 

We get more money than we deserve IMO. 

[Melanius Mullarkey]

2 minutes ago, Bazil85 said:

I don't understand how people can moan about a poor TV deal money in this country.

There's so little appetite for people to watch Scottish football. Who wants to watch games in a top league where the Champions are known before a ball has been kicked? The quality of the majority of teams in our top flight is English League 1 level or lower. The appeal of the one historical crowd drawing fixture (Rangers and Celtic) has also been diluted so much given it's on five-six times a season and it doesn't represent quality or competition anymore. More people watched an English Championship game than watched the Glasgow derby New Year fixture this season. 

We get more money than we deserve IMO. 

^^^^^

[Bazil85]

2 minutes ago, Melanius Mullarkey said:

^^^^^

Yep, guy has an absolute futile task. If I was in charge of a broadcasting deal, they are exactly the points I'd bring up. 

[Dons_1988]

Yep, guy has an absolute futile task. If I was in charge of a broadcasting deal, they are exactly the points I'd bring up. 

It’s absolutely.

And your attitude is the main reason Scottish football will continue to be considered a backwater of football.

[Bazil85]

On 5/4/2018 at 12:41, Dons_1988 said:

 

It’s absolutely.

And your attitude is the main reason Scottish football will continue to be considered a backwater of football.
 

 

My attitude has nothing to do with it. If I had a positive outlook on Scottish football all the facts I've quoted still remain. Two ways we'll get a better broadcasting deal and both involve the broadcaster making more money.

1. Attract more neutral fans (Would be interested to hear how given the points I've made)

2. Charge fans that actually do watch it more money. 

[Lebowski]

My attitude has nothing to do with it. If I had a positive outlook on Scottish football all the facts I've quoted still remain. Two ways we'll get a better broadcasting deal and both involve the broadcaster making more money.
1. Attract more neutral fans (Would be interested to hear how given the points I've made)
2. Charge fans that actually do watch it more money. 

It's not a stand alone product. It's bundled up with all sorts of other stuff in terms of how much it costs. Sky sports is about 30 quid a month? There's other stuff in there as well in terms of rights obviously, but Sky are paying a maximum of 1/50 of their English Premiership amounts to air Scottish football. So each subscriber is paying a maximum of £0.60p (actually much less than that due to their other rights) for Scottish football. I know Scots are supposedly frugal but I think you could probably charge a bit more than that for those who want to watch it.

[John Lambie]

I'd happily pay for a full streaming package for all the teams in whatever division my team were in.  

Currently pay £13 a month for Jagzone World where the quality is better than what the BBC can muster.

£30 for the other 9 or 11 teams and I'm in,  even just for the extended highlights and games when Thistle aren't live.

Never going to happen in the top division unless it's divvied up correctly.     And we all know what that means.  90% us, 10% the rest. 

[topcat(The most tip top)]

It's not a stand alone product. It's bundled up with all sorts of other stuff in terms of how much it costs. Sky sports is about 30 quid a month? There's other stuff in there as well in terms of rights obviously, but Sky are paying a maximum of 1/50 of their English Premiership amounts to air Scottish football. So each subscriber is paying a maximum of £0.60p (actually much less than that due to their other rights) for Scottish football. I know Scots are supposedly frugal but I think you could probably charge a bit more than that for those who want to watch it.

It’s probably worth reading this article about Bundle pricing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_bundling

[hellbhoy]

On 02/05/2018 at 16:50, Blootoon87 said:

When does the current TV deal run out?

End of season 2020. BT expected to be sole broadcaster after that with sums being punted at in excess of £31 million in prize money each year.

[Gaz FFC]

On 03/05/2018 at 14:12, Bazil85 said:

I don't understand how people can moan about a poor TV deal money in this country.

There's so little appetite for people to watch Scottish football. Who wants to watch games in a top league where the Champions are known before a ball has been kicked? 

Haven't Juventus just won 7 in a row?

Haven't Bayern just won 6 in a row?

Who is surprised PSG won the French league?

Who didn't see Man City winning the English league?

I will Just ask which top league has a surprise winner?

[Bazil85]

On 5/8/2018 at 11:51, Lebowski said:

It's not a stand alone product. It's bundled up with all sorts of other stuff in terms of how much it costs. Sky sports is about 30 quid a month? There's other stuff in there as well in terms of rights obviously, but Sky are paying a maximum of 1/50 of their English Premiership amounts to air Scottish football. So each subscriber is paying a maximum of £0.60p (actually much less than that due to their other rights) for Scottish football. I know Scots are supposedly frugal but I think you could probably charge a bit more than that for those who want to watch it.

Sounds about right watching our 2nd and 3rd best team last night. Awful.