New European Rugby cup (or whatever it is called) - Qualification agreed

First topic message reminder :

I have heard it is:

6 French
6 English
7 Pro12 (1 guaranteed from each country, 3 on league position)
1 play-off (7th English and 7th French team)

Trying to find out is correct as we speak

Look, the French bloke said earlier this year that the PRL teams can only play in a European Competition that has BT as its broadcaster. Thats why the PRL especially want to kill the ERC.

mystiroakey wrote:They also broadcast in Ireland as well!

In Ireland (republic of) you get BT Sport free with a Setanta subscription.

Jenifer McLadyboy wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:They also broadcast in Ireland as well!

In Ireland (republic of) you get BT Sport free with a Setanta subscription.

I only found out a couple of weeks ago that i get it free with my Virgin subscription!!

I actually went to the pub on two occasions to watch games(PL games) without realising i had the games on at home!!

You also get it free with any BT broadband subscription..

BT sport are trying to get into the market without pushing it on anyone. Yes it will cost a  significant amount in the short term. However before we all know it we may not be able to live without it. And it could directly compete with sky on everything. Which IMO is a very good thing

With Sky getting to show some Rabo games next year what's the chances of BT sponsoring the whole PRO 12 league as Rabodirect are pulling out.

Would be a bit of a coup for BT for the Sky commentators to have to say the BT Pro12 every 5 minutes.

andyi wrote:

Sin é wrote:

andyi wrote:Its seems that with the Unions having agreed to the PRL/LNR's requirements with regard to qualification and revenue sharing ideas, the last stumbling blocks to a new agreement are:

Governance.
The Unions will want to dig their heels in on this, after conceding everything else. I'd imagine that a new body will be set up (ERC is finished, I think most people see that) involving more say for the clubs but not enough to have Majority Control.  

Commercial.
This is the one that will make or break the deal IMO. The clubs major problem with ERC was it's failure to capitalise on possible TV Income for the competitions (not helped by the fact that the Amlin is a pile of s**t at present).
Assuming the Unions get their way on Governance, they should probably set up a club/region driven sub committee to handle the commercial deals.

As for the TV moving foward. In terms of UK rights, PRL have a deal in place with BT for English games (but I dont see how they can claim jurisdiction over the away games!) and ERC have a deal with SKY for the whole lot.
As ERC probably wont exist anymore, the SKY deal will be off the table. Better to negotiate domestic and international rights for each country and throw them all into a central pot. That way, at least the French and English (with the bigger deals) are sharing something, and it should be enough to give everyone an increase over the ERC deal.

A few facts for you to bear in mind when talking about TV viewing numbers.
Leicester v Northampton game - average no viewers - 179,000 (best this season for BT's rugby coverage).
Munster v Leinster game - average viewers - 232,000 (RTE) average no. viewers.
Both broadcast the same day.

Secondly, there is an ERC Commercial Committee. Dominic Gallagher is the PRL rep on it. Mick Dawson (Leinster CEO) is the Irish rep.

You are comparing a National FTA broadcaster with a PAYTV broadcaster with a far smaller reach.

The Audience figures are not what drive PAYTV. Subscriptions do.

The Premier league is worth billions to Sky and only gets 2m viewers (although plenty more in boozers) when FA cup games on ITV get far more. So why is the FA cup worth far less than the PL?

BT have probably double the number of Broadband subscribers in England (8m+) to the pop. of Republic of Ireland (about 4m now), so it is comparable at the moment while BT are giving out free subs.

doctornickolas wrote:With Sky getting to show some Rabo games next year what's the chances of BT sponsoring the whole PRO 12 league as Rabodirect are pulling out.

Would be a bit of a coup for BT for the Sky commentators to have to say the BT Pro12 every 5 minutes.

That would be funny but you can be sure the Rabo would demand its pound of flesh from BT to do it.

Is the RFU the only ones who have seen the BT deal

One way to fix the two cups is the Rabo unions say yes we will enter our 12 teams into the RCC and then send the B&I teams. I would love to see their face.

I'm sure ponty and galla would love it too

Sin é wrote:

andyi wrote:

Sin é wrote:

andyi wrote:Its seems that with the Unions having agreed to the PRL/LNR's requirements with regard to qualification and revenue sharing ideas, the last stumbling blocks to a new agreement are:

Governance.
The Unions will want to dig their heels in on this, after conceding everything else. I'd imagine that a new body will be set up (ERC is finished, I think most people see that) involving more say for the clubs but not enough to have Majority Control.  

Commercial.
This is the one that will make or break the deal IMO. The clubs major problem with ERC was it's failure to capitalise on possible TV Income for the competitions (not helped by the fact that the Amlin is a pile of s**t at present).
Assuming the Unions get their way on Governance, they should probably set up a club/region driven sub committee to handle the commercial deals.

As for the TV moving foward. In terms of UK rights, PRL have a deal in place with BT for English games (but I dont see how they can claim jurisdiction over the away games!) and ERC have a deal with SKY for the whole lot.
As ERC probably wont exist anymore, the SKY deal will be off the table. Better to negotiate domestic and international rights for each country and throw them all into a central pot. That way, at least the French and English (with the bigger deals) are sharing something, and it should be enough to give everyone an increase over the ERC deal.

A few facts for you to bear in mind when talking about TV viewing numbers.
Leicester v Northampton game - average no viewers - 179,000 (best this season for BT's rugby coverage).
Munster v Leinster game - average viewers - 232,000 (RTE) average no. viewers.
Both broadcast the same day.

Secondly, there is an ERC Commercial Committee. Dominic Gallagher is the PRL rep on it. Mick Dawson (Leinster CEO) is the Irish rep.

You are comparing a National FTA broadcaster with a PAYTV broadcaster with a far smaller reach.

The Audience figures are not what drive PAYTV. Subscriptions do.

The Premier league is worth billions to Sky and only gets 2m viewers (although plenty more in boozers) when FA cup games on ITV get far more. So why is the FA cup worth far less than the PL?

BT have probably double the number of Broadband subscribers in England (8m+) to the pop. of Republic of Ireland (about 4m now), so it is comparable at the moment while BT are giving out free subs.

Yes but how many people with BT Broadband have taken up BT sport? It's no where near 100% as its not available on a lot of Platforms.

Check their weekly reach figures on BARB and you will see theirs is well below SKY sports.

It's a pointless debate anyway, as TV rights deals are driven by size of the potential market and France and England will bring in the biggest deals. Do you actually doubt this?

Sin é wrote:Look, the French bloke said earlier this year that the PRL teams can only play in a European Competition that has BT as its broadcaster. Thats why the PRL especially want to kill the ERC.

And JP Lux has been right about everything hasnt he. especially a contract he hasnt seen. 

"The Premier league is worth billions to Sky and only gets 2m viewers (although plenty more in boozers) when FA cup games on ITV get far more. So why is the FA cup worth far less than the PL?"


That isn't necessarily due to the subscribers within the UK. Its more about the export.


The premier league is the most watched sporting league on the planet, it is broadcast to over 200 different countries with 80 different broadcasters.  however the majority of the other nations that show PL games use and pay sky(as well as the Pl for the rights to show) for their broadcasts!


The PL is global... Its not just about domestic subscriptions or ratings. Sky make a fortune on it globally not just domestically


 

"Yes but how many people with BT Broadband have taken up BT sport? It's no where near 100% as its not available on a lot of Platforms."




everyone that wants it- its free.


You dont have to watch it through a sky box or whatever- You can watch it online for free. 


yes many people aren't that clued up about things like that and many dont even realise they can watch free sport!! But it won't take long before almost everyone is tech savvy and knows about BT sport

quinsforever wrote:

Sin é wrote:Look, the French bloke said earlier this year that the PRL teams can only play in a European Competition that has BT as its broadcaster. Thats why the PRL especially want to kill the ERC.

And JP Lux has been right about everything hasnt he. especially a contract he hasnt seen. 

   

“The ERC is dead,” LNR president Paul Goze
Posted on October 25, 2013 by Nick Verdier in Breaking News with 0 Comments

LNR president Paul Goze last night persisted with the argument that the ERC was “dead” despite the announcement a consensus had been reached in Dublin.

The deal signed by Premiership rugby with BT Sport from next season to show whichever competition the English clubs are involved in conflicts with the deal between the ERC and Sky.

He said: “The ERC is dead because of the two TV rights deal, there can’t be a competition ran by the ERC.

“It can’t survive because the English clubs can’t take part in an ERC-run competition and we don’t want to play in a competition without the English. The only solution is a new competition.

The ERC really killed themselves by signing that deal with sky out of some stubborn t!t for tat battle. They themselves have nailed their own coffin lid on!!

How many BT executives are here today?  Great pitching guys..but easy on the figures and locations.  Don't want to appear desperate now

Play it cool'n'easy...............

andyi wrote:
Yes but how many people with BT Broadband have taken up BT sport? It's no where near 100% as its not available on a lot of Platforms.

Check their weekly reach figures on BARB and you will see theirs is well below SKY sports.

It's a pointless debate anyway, as TV rights deals are driven by size of the potential market and France and England will bring in the biggest deals. Do you actually doubt this?

I'd say a lot have because its free and they want to watch Premiership football.

Check the BARB figures and you will see as many if not more watch Heineken Cup Rugby that has an Irish team in it than when there are two English teams in it. And that wouldn't have the Irish viewers in those figures outside of the UK.

What about showing the Heineken Cup in the Southern Hemisphere. Are BT going to do that or do they expect Sky to buy it from them and transmit it on their network?

mystiroakey wrote:The ERC really killed themselves by signing that deal with sky out of some stubborn t!t for tat battle. They themselves have nailed their own coffin lid on!!

PRL might have killed themselves by signing its deal..
If somebody walks on you and spits "Thit" in your eye, you're not going to knock him down and kick "Tat" between his legs?

My, my, we do have a collection of passivists here today.  Just roll over and die when your challenger orders you to?  Easier life?

Grand.

SecretFly wrote:How many BT executives are here today?  Great pitching guys..but easy on the figures and locations.  Don't want to appear desperate now

Play it cool'n'easy...............

Well i think you should have told the ERC to do that before they signed a sky deal without trying to scope out a better one just to try and shut the door on the french and english..

If they hadn't done that- the deal would have just gone to BT with much better money for everyone and the ERC could have even remained in control!!

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

Sin é wrote:Look, the French bloke said earlier this year that the PRL teams can only play in a European Competition that has BT as its broadcaster. Thats why the PRL especially want to kill the ERC.

And JP Lux has been right about everything hasnt he. especially a contract he hasnt seen. 

   

“The ERC is dead,” LNR president Paul Goze
Posted on October 25, 2013 by Nick Verdier in Breaking News with 0 Comments

LNR president Paul Goze last night persisted with the argument that the ERC was “dead” despite the announcement a consensus had been reached in Dublin.

The deal signed by Premiership rugby with BT Sport from next season to show whichever competition the English clubs are involved in conflicts with the deal between the ERC and Sky.

He said: “The ERC is dead because of the two TV rights deal, there can’t be a competition ran by the ERC.

“It can’t survive because the English clubs can’t take part in an ERC-run competition and we don’t want to play in a competition without the English. The only solution is a new competition.

  fair play. Lux also said the same thing, and you didnt say which french bloke.

to be fair, neither of them have claimed to have seen the contract. if prl clubs are committed to BT/RCC because they have no downside (even if there is no euro rugby next year) then this rational decision would be indistinguishable (by us outsiders and Goze) from any legally binding contracts or commitments.

and i think prl genuinely have the financial backing from the BT deal to allow them to stick 2 fingers up at ERC. PRL would like other clubs to join the RCC, but if its only Eng/Fr/Wal clubs, and ERC attempts to limp along with the remainder, PRL clubs will still be getting abetter deal than they did when they were a part of ERC.

mystiroakey wrote:"The Premier league is worth billions to Sky and only gets 2m viewers (although plenty more in boozers) when FA cup games on ITV get far more. So why is the FA cup worth far less than the PL?"


That isn't necessarily due to the subscribers within the UK. Its more about the export.


The premier league is the most watched sporting league on the planet, it is broadcast to over 200 different countries with 80 different broadcasters.  however the majority of the other nations that show PL games use and pay sky(as well as the Pl for the rights to show) for their broadcasts!


The PL is global... Its not just about domestic subscriptions or ratings. Sky make a fortune on it globally not just domestically


 

Sorry Mysti, you wrong. The premier league is massive and global but sells its own international deals. They are nothing do with SKY.

SKY pay £760m a year for the right to broadcast of matches in the UK only!

SKY and BT paid in £3.018 Billion in total for 3 years for the UK rights. The foreign rights will be worth almost as much again! (EDIT: £2.23 billion apparently)

mystiroakey wrote:The ERC really killed themselves by signing that deal with sky out of some stubborn t!t for tat battle. They themselves have nailed their own coffin lid on!!

You think that was the plan of the RFU (as they would have been at that Board meeting that agreed to do that).

mystiroakey wrote:"Yes but how many people with BT Broadband have taken up BT sport? It's no where near 100% as its not available on a lot of Platforms."




everyone that wants it- its free.


You dont have to watch it through a sky box or whatever- You can watch it online for free. 


yes many people aren't that clued up about things like that and many dont even realise they can watch free sport!! But it won't take long before almost everyone is tech savvy and knows about BT sport

I would think most UK, and Ireland Sports fans are already aware of BT Sport. Those BT broadband subscribers that are not aware most likely have no interest in the sport that's on offer.
SKY has been ripping customers off for years so a bit of healthy competition is a bonus as SKY may be forced to offer better, cheaper, packages. SKY are massive in sport broadcasting though, and I have no doubt they will respond by taking on the challenge of BT. BT are practically giving away sports viewing for now, but this will not be sustainable long term, and a fight with SKY will prove very costly.

content is king. of course it should be expensive for the broadcasters with deep pockets bidding against each other. and the beneficiary should have been ERC. except they flubbed it  

mystiroakey wrote:

its free.

 Quote of the month mystir.

"It's Free!"

as all executions are for the condemned.

By the way, very bad business show by BT offering it all for free.  That is a lot of possible money  going down the drain that could have been put into rugby schools for the blind in Burnley.  Quins will be most displeased.

andyi wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:"The Premier league is worth billions to Sky and only gets 2m viewers (although plenty more in boozers) when FA cup games on ITV get far more. So why is the FA cup worth far less than the PL?"


That isn't necessarily due to the subscribers within the UK. Its more about the export.


The premier league is the most watched sporting league on the planet, it is broadcast to over 200 different countries with 80 different broadcasters.  however the majority of the other nations that show PL games use and pay sky(as well as the Pl for the rights to show) for their broadcasts!


The PL is global... Its not just about domestic subscriptions or ratings. Sky make a fortune on it globally not just domestically


 

Sorry Mysti, you wrong. The premier league is massive and global but sells its own international deals. They are nothing do with SKY.

SKY pay £760m a year for the right to broadcast of matches in the UK only!

SKY and BT paid in £3.018 Billion in total for 3 years for the UK rights. The foreign rights will be worth almost as much again!!

Please re read what was said. You may learn something

quinsforever wrote:  fair play. Lux also said the same thing, and you didnt say which french bloke.

to be fair, neither of them have claimed to have seen the contract. if prl clubs are committed to BT/RCC because they have no downside (even if there is no euro rugby next year) then this rational decision would be indistinguishable (by us outsiders and Goze) from any legally binding contracts or commitments.

and i think prl genuinely have the financial backing from the BT deal to allow them to stick 2 fingers up at ERC. PRL would like other clubs to join the RCC, but if its only Eng/Fr/Wal clubs, and ERC attempts to limp along with the remainder, PRL clubs will still be getting abetter deal than they did when they were a part of ERC.

So Lux is worth listening to then.  

And you seriously think that the LNR wouldn't have seen the details of the financial backing for this new competition before throwing their lot in with it    

BT are arming the PRL to try and kill Sky. To do that, they have to kill off the ERC. Its all so obvious I can't believe you can't see this.

 thats funny. i'm sure i'm missing the point of your dig, but its funny nonetheless.

see above re content is king. who cares what the broadcasters business model is. up to them whether it works out for them. as long as there are at least 2 big ones competing, then the commercial potential will be realised.

BT selling illicit arms to unhinged despots???!!!!!!!!!!!!

That'll be on the Six O'Clock news for sure!

SecretFly wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

its free.

 Quote of the month mystir.

"It's Free!"

as all executions are for the condemned.

By the way, very bad business show by BT offering it all for free.  That is a lot of possible money  going down the drain that could have been put into rugby schools for the blind in Burnley.  Quins will be most displeased.

You dont quite understand business or different ways of penetrating markets do you.. It could be risky but possibly a great move by BT . BT are such a huge group and make 2b in profits a year. They are using this push(not forcing the product on others) as a way of penetrating the market. It May not work but i would put money on it working in the long run..BT are a solid business with an amazing reputation..

They dont just look at things in the naive way you do!

Sin é wrote:

quinsforever wrote:  fair play. Lux also said the same thing, and you didnt say which french bloke.

to be fair, neither of them have claimed to have seen the contract. if prl clubs are committed to BT/RCC because they have no downside (even if there is no euro rugby next year) then this rational decision would be indistinguishable (by us outsiders and Goze) from any legally binding contracts or commitments.

and i think prl genuinely have the financial backing from the BT deal to allow them to stick 2 fingers up at ERC. PRL would like other clubs to join the RCC, but if its only Eng/Fr/Wal clubs, and ERC attempts to limp along with the remainder, PRL clubs will still be getting abetter deal than they did when they were a part of ERC.

So Lux is worth listening to then.  

And you seriously think that the LNR wouldn't have seen the details of the financial backing for this new competition before throwing their lot in with it    

BT are arming the PRL to try and kill Sky. To do that, they have to kill off the ERC. Its all so obvious I can't believe you can't see this.

of course BT are trying to kill SKY.

ERC are incidental. collateral damage. if they hadnt stupidly rushed out that SKY extension (when they knew eng/fr teams had pulled out) maybe the PRL could have brought the BT deal into ERC in exchange for the format changes they wanted. ERC killed themselves.

Part Deux

Par Deux to come.

Beware.

mystiroakey wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

its free.

 Quote of the month mystir.

"It's Free!"

as all executions are for the condemned.

By the way, very bad business show by BT offering it all for free.  That is a lot of possible money  going down the drain that could have been put into rugby schools for the blind in Burnley.  Quins will be most displeased.

You dont quite understand business or different ways of penetrating markets do you.. It could be risky but possibly a great move by BT . BT are such a huge group and make 2b in profits a year. They are using this push(not forcing the product on others) as a way of penetrating the market. It May not work but i would put money on it working in the long run..BT are a solid business with an amazing reputation..

They dont just look at things in the naive way you do!

I get you mystir. It's the Profit Finance and Large Crowd Cup. It's been spoken about before.

To be fair what is the point to only being able to see certain games on your tv and not see others because your country couldn't be bothered to buy rights.

What Irish TV will be rights to games not involving irish so we get a Rabo situation where the tournement doesn't become a product but more just your country.

Brendan wrote:To be fair what is the point to only being able to see certain games on your tv and not see others because your country couldn't be bothered to buy rights.

What Irish TV will be rights to games not involving irish so we get a Rabo situation where the tournement doesn't become a product but more just your country.

bit confused by that brendan. what is your qn?

Sin é wrote:

andyi wrote:
Yes but how many people with BT Broadband have taken up BT sport? It's no where near 100% as its not available on a lot of Platforms.

Check their weekly reach figures on BARB and you will see theirs is well below SKY sports.

It's a pointless debate anyway, as TV rights deals are driven by size of the potential market and France and England will bring in the biggest deals. Do you actually doubt this?

I'd say a lot have because its free and they want to watch Premiership football.

Check the BARB figures and you will see as many if not more watch Heineken Cup Rugby that has an Irish team in it than when there are two English teams in it. And that wouldn't have the Irish viewers in those figures outside of the UK.

What about showing the Heineken Cup in the Southern Hemisphere. Are BT going to do that or do they expect Sky to buy it from them and transmit it on their network?

Where do you get your figures from? Had a look at the site, quite interesting in fact.  Only had data from first week of HC rugby, none for last week yet. Anything from last season didn't state the games, just European Cup rugby.

Anyhow

Here was the breakdown

Quins vs Scarlets - 242k
Exeter vs Cardiff - 190k
Ospreys vs Leinster - 157k
Toulon vs Glasgow - 137k
Edinbugh vs Munster - 90k

SecretFly wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

its free.

 Quote of the month mystir.

"It's Free!"

as all executions are for the condemned.

By the way, very bad business show by BT offering it all for free.  That is a lot of possible money  going down the drain that could have been put into rugby schools for the blind in Burnley.  Quins will be most displeased.

You dont quite understand business or different ways of penetrating markets do you.. It could be risky but possibly a great move by BT . BT are such a huge group and make 2b in profits a year. They are using this push(not forcing the product on others) as a way of penetrating the market. It May not work but i would put money on it working in the long run..BT are a solid business with an amazing reputation..

They dont just look at things in the naive way you do!

I get you mystir.  It's the Profit Finance and Large Crowd Cup.  It's been spoken about before.

I would doubt the shareholders of BT will allow the company to bid again for any deals if their next deal is not profit making in each year.
Value of the euro competition is you watch it all. Can you imagine watching the six nations with only your country' games or even worse just your home games.

andyi wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:

andyi wrote: BT don't sponsor the AVIVA premiership. They have a deal for the broadcast rights in the UK.England
 

FIXED

I'm afraid not. They broadcast the Aviva premiership in England, Wales, Scotland and N.I

Don't mix it up with any potential deal for the RCC.

I see the problem you meant to say 'They have a deal for the Broadcasting rights, to the Aviva, in the UK'
What they dont have is 'A deal for the Broadcasting rights in the UK' (in toto)

Need to improve on your sentence construction dear boy.

The salient point, of course, is BT have no contractural right to broadcast games where a Pro 12 team are at home, in any competition.

I still think that rugby is small beer to BT in this - their primary focus and selling point is the Premiership - and I don't think they envisioned the whole saga that this would become -BT wanted the rugby primarily to sell advertising and the USP is that rugby attracts a (theoriectially) higher social viewer group, with more disposable income.
There's considerable scope here for this to become an electoral hot potato outside of England, the Scots Nats will love the idea of being able to blame London based BT for the decline of Scots rugby at club and national level, simialrly in Northern Ireland where the "British" in BT would be fuel to the fire for certain political groups.
I know that BT have also got the rights to womens tennis - are there these sort of struggles going on the Tennis forums or are the WLTA happy to take the money safe that no-one is actually watching?
One of the contradictions in non-terrestrial broadcasting is that competition actually increases the cost to the public as you have to purchase access to several platforms rather than one.
The real test of the BT platform comes when they have to start charging their broadband subscribers for the TV service or increasing the cost of the broadband service package to include it.
As well as the current repercussions of the possible collapse of European competition and even the compromised form will still leave a lot of bitterness, looking longer into the future if BT decide that rugby is a lot of money for not a lot of viewers, for example if they get more Premiership games in the next deal what happens to the PRL clubs if BT decide to offer a much lower deal than the current one or just go, sorry we don't want you anymore as we can fit in an extra football game in your timeslot.

Brendan wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

its free.

 Quote of the month mystir.

"It's Free!"

as all executions are for the condemned.

By the way, very bad business show by BT offering it all for free.  That is a lot of possible money  going down the drain that could have been put into rugby schools for the blind in Burnley.  Quins will be most displeased.

You dont quite understand business or different ways of penetrating markets do you.. It could be risky but possibly a great move by BT . BT are such a huge group and make 2b in profits a year. They are using this push(not forcing the product on others) as a way of penetrating the market. It May not work but i would put money on it working in the long run..BT are a solid business with an amazing reputation..

They dont just look at things in the naive way you do!

I get you mystir.  It's the Profit Finance and Large Crowd Cup.  It's been spoken about before.

I would doubt the shareholders of BT will allow the company to bid again for any deals if their next deal is not profit making in each year.
Value of the euro competition is you watch it all.  Can you imagine watching the six nations with only your country' games or even worse just your home games.

I am pretty sure that this is a structured 5-10 year plan or something, there know they are going to run huge loses on this subsidiary in the short term, but as long as that loss starts coming down at some point then its all good. BT make a lot as a group and they can afford to pump this industry with some money.


Setanta r have shown how hard it is to get the viewers in this country as a new sports broadcaster and lost that gamble with a very basic 10 pound a month deal.. Its good to see a different innovative approach to get into the game that sky controls!!


Something different had to be tried.. Setanta lost out in the UK because it couldn't get the subscribers. BT can now get the subscribers- without us even knowing about it.. Now they need to get quality sports deals and quality coverage.. If that happens - they will be able to charge more for the product.

Its a risk, we will see what happens. but its innovative, and its a company that can AFFORD to be. Not only can it afford to be but it is a tech/communications firm already, they have the resources and knowledge on a technical scale which make things cheaper to do..

quinsforever wrote:

Brendan wrote:To be fair what is the point to only being able to see certain games on your tv and not see others because your country couldn't be bothered to buy rights.

What Irish TV will be rights to games not involving irish so we get a Rabo situation where the tournement doesn't become a product but more just your country.

bit confused by that brendan. what is your qn?

As far as i understand it all home games involving  English clubs home games will be on BT.
If i wanted to watch as an example Sarries v Toulouse no irish tv company is going to show that.
As a result Irish viewers would only watch 4 games a week at most.

Also how do the WRU & SRU & IRFU(NI) sell their rights to the competition for their TV viewers as my understanding is the BT deal is for english teams for the UK so they have sold other unions rights

BT Sports is free with BT, Sky, Virgin and Setanta so not quite sure how it can be claimed that it is a pay station compared to RTE being free.

When the T14 sign their new tv deal next year, it is likely to be eye watering for all this side of the channel and make the BT deal look like small change. The T14 with significant revenue and no capital expenditure required will be a challenge the home unions will have to rise to.

Brendan wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

Brendan wrote:To be fair what is the point to only being able to see certain games on your tv and not see others because your country couldn't be bothered to buy rights.

What Irish TV will be rights to games not involving irish so we get a Rabo situation where the tournement doesn't become a product but more just your country.

bit confused by that brendan. what is your qn?

As far as i understand it all home games involving  English clubs home games will be on BT.
If i wanted to watch as an example Sarries v Toulouse no irish tv company is going to show that.
As a result Irish viewers would only watch 4 games a week at most.

Also how do the WRU & SRU & IRFU(NI) sell their rights to the competition for their TV viewers as my understanding is the BT deal is for english teams for the UK so they have sold other unions rights

sarries v toulouse is an english home game. Ireland have access to BT sport! its a UK and Irish network.

geoff998rugby wrote:BT Sports is free with BT, Sky, Virgin and Setanta so not quite sure how it can be claimed that it is a pay station compared to RTE  being free.

Geoff it's not free with Sky it's £12 a month - it is free if you get BT Broadband as it is on all the UK platforms - Virgin doing a freebie if you are on their top deal, I think that's a continuation of a deal they had with ESPN, but you pay extra if you don't have a Virgin full package.

Also of course RTE and BBC/ITV are free (beyond the licence fee) whereas you pay an additonal monthly fee for all the above.

mystiroakey wrote:

Brendan wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

Brendan wrote:To be fair what is the point to only being able to see certain games on your tv and not see others because your country couldn't be bothered to buy rights.

What Irish TV will be rights to games not involving irish so we get a Rabo situation where the tournement doesn't become a product but more just your country.

bit confused by that brendan. what is your qn?

As far as i understand it all home games involving  English clubs home games will be on BT.
If i wanted to watch as an example Sarries v Toulouse no irish tv company is going to show that.
As a result Irish viewers would only watch 4 games a week at most.

Also how do the WRU & SRU & IRFU(NI) sell their rights to the competition for their TV viewers as my understanding is the BT deal is for english teams for the UK so they have sold other unions rights

sarries v toulouse is an english home game. Ireland have access to BT sport! its a UK and Irish network.

So part of the BT deal is sold in IRFU area without their permission. What if the IRFU want to sell all the irish teams games to Sky sports to be shown only in ireland

Brendan wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:

Brendan wrote:

quinsforever wrote:

Brendan wrote:To be fair what is the point to only being able to see certain games on your tv and not see others because your country couldn't be bothered to buy rights.

What Irish TV will be rights to games not involving irish so we get a Rabo situation where the tournement doesn't become a product but more just your country.

bit confused by that brendan. what is your qn?

As far as i understand it all home games involving  English clubs home games will be on BT.
If i wanted to watch as an example Sarries v Toulouse no irish tv company is going to show that.
As a result Irish viewers would only watch 4 games a week at most.

Also how do the WRU & SRU & IRFU(NI) sell their rights to the competition for their TV viewers as my understanding is the BT deal is for english teams for the UK so they have sold other unions rights

sarries v toulouse is an english home game. Ireland have access to BT sport! its a UK and Irish network.

So part of the BT deal is sold in IRFU area without their permission.  What if the IRFU want to sell all the irish teams games to Sky sports to be shown only in ireland

thats exactly the problem!

Recwatcher wrote:When the T14 sign their new tv deal next year,  it is likely to be eye watering for all this side of the channel and make the BT deal look like small change. The T14 with significant revenue and no capital expenditure required will be a challenge the home unions will have to rise to.

Funny how no PRL voice has mentioned the French in terms of 'inequality' as at the same time they brushed up on their Pro12 *yawn* homework to hit on the "Celtic" Joke League instead?
I mean, the PRL sides know they are at a continuous disadvantage in terms of salary caps to the French and yet still have to compete against those French sides on the supposed 'level' playing field in Europe.  No moans about it.  No whines about it.  No muttering about how the French were getting an unfair advantage through the European competition with their bottomless pit of endless money.

No - be quiet.  We don't want to stir that one.  Afterall, when we gain total administration control over any new European event, then we'll drop our own limiting capping system.  

Animal Farm politics.  All are equal, but some are more equal than others.

Also no one has discussed the groups. There will be one group with two english/french teams in it while the other country would have two groups with two teams in it. So is im possible that each year we will have a group with just English and French in it.

Plus...you talk about 'Home' Unions rising to the challenge of the French?

They certainly stuck together in the present mess. Lots of loyalty on show there.

SecretFly wrote:

Recwatcher wrote:When the T14 sign their new tv deal next year,  it is likely to be eye watering for all this side of the channel and make the BT deal look like small change. The T14 with significant revenue and no capital expenditure required will be a challenge the home unions will have to rise to.

Funny how no PRL voice has mentioned the French in terms of 'inequality' as at the same time they brushed up on their Pro12 *yawn* homework to hit on the "Celtic" Joke League instead?
I mean, the PRL sides know they are at a continuous disadvantage in terms of salary caps to the French and yet still have to compete against those French sides on the supposed 'level' playing field in Europe.  No moans about it.  No whines about it.  No muttering about how the French were getting an unfair advantage through the European competition with their bottomless pit of endless money.

No - be quiet.  We don't want to stir that one.  Afterall, when we gain total administration control over any new European event, then we'll drop our own limiting capping system.  

Animal Farm politics.  All are equal, but some are more equal than others.

Well, let's not brush it under the carpet for a second, SF, me old mucker, cos these are valid points - the breakaway pair supposedly want a level playing field - on the one side, that could include imposing a uniform salary cap, and on the other, it could seem the T14 sides demanding an extra place in the top level competition cos they have 14 sides vs 12. Thoughts?

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:

SecretFly wrote:

Recwatcher wrote:When the T14 sign their new tv deal next year,  it is likely to be eye watering for all this side of the channel and make the BT deal look like small change. The T14 with significant revenue and no capital expenditure required will be a challenge the home unions will have to rise to.

Funny how no PRL voice has mentioned the French in terms of 'inequality' as at the same time they brushed up on their Pro12 *yawn* homework to hit on the "Celtic" Joke League instead?
I mean, the PRL sides know they are at a continuous disadvantage in terms of salary caps to the French and yet still have to compete against those French sides on the supposed 'level' playing field in Europe.  No moans about it.  No whines about it.  No muttering about how the French were getting an unfair advantage through the European competition with their bottomless pit of endless money.

No - be quiet.  We don't want to stir that one.  Afterall, when we gain total administration control over any new European event, then we'll drop our own limiting capping system.  

Animal Farm politics.  All are equal, but some are more equal than others.

Well, let's not brush it under the carpet for a second, SF, me old mucker, cos these are valid points - the breakaway pair supposedly want a level playing field - on the one side, that could include imposing a uniform salary cap, and on the other, it could seem the T14 sides demanding an extra place in the top level competition cos they have 14 sides vs 12.  Thoughts?

Exactly Asbo  ...thanks for the moral support on this valuable inclusion of moneyinto a debate that never spoke about such a thing before