wuffster Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 33 minutes ago, Salvo Montalbano said: 1 hour ago, wuffster said: I doubt a highlights show is a possibility. Would need cameras at the other 4 Championship games. Cost probably prohibitive? You could use the clubs own TV footage in most cases - some of the footage on YouTube channels and the like are are good as any single camera highlights we used to see on Sportscene etc. That seems to be how League One and Two, and Vanarama League highlights are done down south going by some of the more amateur looking angles etc. I doubt Club TVs would give them any footage. I certainly would not give them Ayr footage unless ordered from above. In 12 years of videoing games only two organisations have ever paid for it: Ayr United William Hill (for the early Scottish Cup rounds) Fair play to the both of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.A.F.C Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 A Monday night highlights show would be preferable to occasional alba game on a Friday imo. It was pretty insulting to see it covered only when rangers were relegated. All of my favourite memories of watching Dunfermline have been in the second tier. It’s the best league in Scotland and has been since the 1980s. Some of the end of season dramas have been outstanding and deserved live games. i.e. the biggest fife derby ever with a 11,000 crowd. Not even highlights ffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted October 2, 2018 Share Posted October 2, 2018 I'm fine with money from tv deals going into the general pot regardless of who is being shown. But we should consider payment of a hosting fee to cover lower attendances? Would also love some smaller payment of the payment to go directly to the away teams to help get fans to games, free buses etc. Would make the system fairer and more fan centric, surely not a bad thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
callum-ayr Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 9 hours ago, wuffster said: I doubt Club TVs would give them any footage. I certainly would not give them Ayr footage unless ordered from above. In 12 years of videoing games only two organisations have ever paid for it: Ayr United William Hill (for the early Scottish Cup rounds) Fair play to the both of them. You charge Ayr Utd for your highlights? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poet of the Macabre Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 14 hours ago, The Master said: They'd be better going for Monday nights and combining the live game with a highlights package from the weekend. In weeks without a live game, still show the highlights at the same time in a 30-minute or so slot. No punditry; just 5 minutes or so of action from each game. A fan of this idea. 12 hours ago, jagfox99 said: There were less than 3000 fans at East End park on Friday. How dare you. DAFC announced 4740 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuffster Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 You charge Ayr Utd for your highlights?I get a nominal fee (not just for highlights by the way). I appreciate the contribution to cover some of my costs and it puts me on a more professional basis with the club i.e. it is easy to get rid of me if i don't meet expectations - which I am happy with. I've never claimed to be a volunteer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toby Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 11 hours ago, wuffster said: I doubt Club TVs would give them any footage. I certainly would not give them Ayr footage unless ordered from above. In 12 years of videoing games only two organisations have ever paid for it: Ayr United William Hill (for the early Scottish Cup rounds) Fair play to the both of them. Doesn’t the footage belong to the SPFL, rather than yourself and Ayr United though? It’s their product, so it would be easy enough for them to prevent you broadcasting it without their permission, rather than the other way around. And by giving Ayr their cut of the TV deal, the SPFL are paying for your footage- it’s just going to the club, and getting filtered down to you under the terms of your agreement. The SPFL would hold the cards here, not Ayr United, or any similar club. And certainly not you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Master Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 19 minutes ago, Toby said: Doesn’t the footage belong to the SPFL, rather than yourself and Ayr United though? It’s their product, so it would be easy enough for them to prevent you broadcasting it without their permission, rather than the other way around. And by giving Ayr their cut of the TV deal, the SPFL are paying for your footage- it’s just going to the club, and getting filtered down to you under the terms of your agreement. The SPFL would hold the cards here, not Ayr United, or any similar club. And certainly not you. Correct. Quote The Clubs and the clubs participating in the Competition and each of them agree to centrally pool and market their rights, facilities and properties relating to and concerning, Radio Transmission and Transmission of Matches for exclusive exploitation by the Company of Radio Transmission and Transmission of Matches. Where "transmission" is defined as, basically, TV. The wording would make Sir Humphrey proud, but the rule is basically saying "the SPFL owns all recordings of games made by the clubs". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wuffster Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 Doesn’t the footage belong to the SPFL, rather than yourself and Ayr United though? It’s their product, so it would be easy enough for them to prevent you broadcasting it without their permission, rather than the other way around. And by giving Ayr their cut of the TV deal, the SPFL are paying for your footage- it’s just going to the club, and getting filtered down to you under the terms of your agreement. The SPFL would hold the cards here, not Ayr United, or any similar club. And certainly not you.Absolutely, I largely agree. That is almost the exact argument put forward by the old SFL when they wanted to take control of lower league club highlights. Clubs didn't like it. The footage belongs to the SPFL after it is produced by clubs. There is no penalty for not producing footage. If the SPFL makes it too burdensome for clubs who produce footage, clubs will stop production. In my case, If a highlights show deal happened I would have to come to an agreement with my club or stop doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 Like many of these other discussions we seem to forget that the SPFL is a member organisation. This is not a decision being taken by one or two individuals. If the Championship clubs were opposed to this they would be quick enough to voice their opposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 Will they have rights to either the promotion or the relegation playoffs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 13 minutes ago, Bully Wee Villa said: Will they have rights to either the promotion or the relegation playoffs? I think BT have the rights to all the promotion (ie Premiership) play-offs, even though they usually choose not to show the quarter-finals. Hopefully the relegation (ie Championship) play-offs could be moved across to this from Alba, but that would obviously depend on the existing rights structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donathan Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 12 minutes ago, craigkillie said: I think BT have the rights to all the promotion (ie Premiership) play-offs, even though they usually choose not to show the quarter-finals. Hopefully the relegation (ie Championship) play-offs could be moved across to this from Alba, but that would obviously depend on the existing rights structure. Would be good if BT would sell on the quarter finals for a small fee if they're choosing not to show it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honestly united Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 If they changed the allocation of money so the home team gets a set fee per match, then keep they split as is I dont think there could be any complaints. But the fact it equates to £7k for some teams (not withstanding the potential additional sponsorship / advertising) then it doesn't seem like a good deal. Even 15 / 20 k per match would probably cover the potential loss from gate receipts for any club and would still leave a good chunk going in the prize money pot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sludden123 Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 2 hours ago, wuffster said: I get a nominal fee (not just for highlights by the way). I appreciate the contribution to cover some of my costs and it puts me on a more professional basis with the club i.e. it is easy to get rid of me if i don't meet expectations - which I am happy with. I've never claimed to be a volunteer. You do a good job wuffster. I would imagine all the camera equipment is quite expensive, so a nominal fee seems fair to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 I always think the TV coverage argument and how it affects attendances at our level is debatable, basically most fans who follow our clubs will be season ticket holders or hardcore fans who will be going in any event, on the other hand, having TV coverage brings you to the attention of lapsed fans and even a whole new audience who may like what they see and then start attending matches. I'd also say that it would be beneficial for fans of teams such as Inverness, Ross County who are playing away at the likes of Dumfries and Ayr (and vice versa) as realistically few would be travelling and the ones that were would more than likely still go in any case. The bottom line is that publicity of any kind is generally good and even more so when on mainstream, although like others here, I'd have hoped for a better spread of the wealth to the Chamionship Clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iain Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 1 hour ago, Sludden123 said: You do a good job wuffster. I would imagine all the camera equipment is quite expensive, so a nominal fee seems fair to me. Market price would be fair. A nominal fee is taking advantage of a supporter's goodwill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 2 hours ago, honestly united said: If they changed the allocation of money so the home team gets a set fee per match, then keep they split as is I dont think there could be any complaints. But the fact it equates to £7k for some teams (not withstanding the potential additional sponsorship / advertising) then it doesn't seem like a good deal. Even 15 / 20 k per match would probably cover the potential loss from gate receipts for any club and would still leave a good chunk going in the prize money pot. Eh? Whose gate receipts lost from live tv equate to £15k? Never in a month of Sundays is the potential loss as much as that. Even at £20 per adult and all affected supporters being adults that means a reduction of 1,000 in gate. Hardly likely. Depending on who the away team is (because the biggest reduction will likely be in visiting supporters) it may mean a few hundred at most. Likely in most cases not as much as that. The reported £7k which is just a rough average would likely cover any loss for most games. 3 hours ago, wuffster said: Absolutely, I largely agree. That is almost the exact argument put forward by the old SFL when they wanted to take control of lower league club highlights. Clubs didn't like it. The footage belongs to the SPFL after it is produced by clubs. There is no penalty for not producing footage. If the SPFL makes it too burdensome for clubs who produce footage, clubs will stop production. In my case, If a highlights show deal happened I would have to come to an agreement with my club or stop doing it. "Its my ba and I'm taking it away". The SPFL allows you to do what you do at the moment and get a nominal fee for it. If they put together a highlights show (which I have heard absolutely no suggestion of so its probably a redundant discussion) then what you do is unaffected by it one bit. But you would want more money from your club for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 33 minutes ago, Iain said: Market price would be fair. A nominal fee is taking advantage of a supporter's goodwill. Most supporters at this level do that kind of thing for free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
honestly united Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 3 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said: Eh? Whose gate receipts lost from live tv equate to £15k? Never in a month of Sundays is the potential loss as much as that. Even at £20 per adult and all affected supporters being adults that means a reduction of 1,000 in gate. Hardly likely. Depending on who the away team is (because the biggest reduction will likely be in visiting supporters) it may mean a few hundred at most. Likely in most cases not as much as that. The reported £7k which is just a rough average would likely cover any loss for most games. "Its my ba and I'm taking it away". The SPFL allows you to do what you do at the moment and get a nominal fee for it. If they put together a highlights show (which I have heard absolutely no suggestion of so its probably a redundant discussion) then what you do is unaffected by it one bit. But you would want more money from your club for it? I appreaciate that its a plucked out the air figure, but 20 games means 2 home games, per team, and its not just gate money, its hospitality, catering income etc as well which £7k probably wouldnt cover It would also mean more money overall for championship clubs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.