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

by niwatts Sat 23 Nov 2013, 4:46 pm

First topic message reminder :

TJ wrote:What the PRL said. They were saying how much the RCC was worth and how much each union would get from it. That implies they had "sold" all the games.

They haven't specifically said how much it will be worth, just that there will be more money than the ERC have negotiated because of what they've managed to negotiate and what the French are expecting to get. They won't know for certain what it is worth until the French have sold their rights. The LNR ccertainly wouldn't be on board with the PLR if they had sold rights to their games, and there wouldn't be the money they are alluding to if they had.

by mystiroakey Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:36 pm

the bt element was only for AP games

by Guest Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:41 pm

mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games

Do you really know that, mystir? Have you a link to any article which lays out exactly what it was that BT were willing to pay for?

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:44 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:You see, I don't get that - if that was my trump card, and to all intents and purposes, it pretty much was for PRL, then I'd be showing folks just how much everyone could make in the new world to convince them to join me - their reluctance to do so just led to everyone assuming that there were 'less palatable' clauses contained therein ... or else, in fact, it was simply a smoke screen to mask the true objective?
You think they should have shown their entire domestic broadcast contract?

No, its not relevant, only the pertinent details needed showing

HammerofThunor wrote:Are they even allowed to by BT?

Who knows

HammerofThunor wrote:Did they show the relevant bits? Or nothing? How much do needed to be seen?

Enough to convince them

HammerofThunor wrote:What true objective?

Who knows

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:46 pm

mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games

No, it wasn't, strokey

by mystiroakey Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:46 pm

Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games
Do you really know that, mystir? Have you a link to any article which lays out exactly what it was that BT were willing to pay for?

what I heard was that the AP clubs agreed a deal with BT to sell exclusive rights to all games including AP teams irrespective of being in a european comp or doemstic.

by Sin é Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:47 pm

mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games

Thats worse if that is the case. They shackle the other people involved by looking after only themselves. Shocked

They expect the others (who have a sponsor and a broadcaster) to chance their arm that they will be able to flog this new competition.

derek mcgrath wrote:But the only bit known about that package is the BT element which would only make up £20 million, odd. No one has seen that contract so no one knows what it represents. And where’s the other £50 million coming from? Any French TV deal by law would have to have approval of the FFR (French Federation Rugby) and they say they won’t be. So it’s hardly achievable, from a business point of view, and yet this is supposed to be a better business model.

by HammerofThunor Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:48 pm

Sin é wrote:I think the issue was that nothing was put down on paper, more than anything else. As you have experienced, it was hard enough to find that information (buried in an interview a few months back with the CEO of ERC).

McCafferty, Wray & Co. were happy to mislead everyone into thinking that the RCC Cup was going to be worth 60 or 70m and that the Unions were mad not to go with it, whereas in reality it was worth 20m, and the RCC had no sponsor.

They weren't misleading. The RCC was not the original proposal. It was the original proposal (which is pretty much what was agreed a few weeks ago) that was suggested to be worth 60-70m. The RCC was never fully organised as the French pulled out so we have no idea how much it would have been worth.

I reality the governance thing was always going to block the move forward so who knows what would have been put on paper if they actually got to a point where they moved forward?

by broadlandboy Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:49 pm

I don't think any one is argueing that the HEC is not a great comp, some are saying that it is not be all & end all & there is more to rugby.
PRL/BT have not stated the amount for Aviva & Europe separately as this would give information to Sky. However PRL have stated that PRL clubs will be better off with just the Aviva under the BT deal than they are now with the present combined Aviva/Europe.
The BT deal is for Aviva with an agreement that BT will have PRL's rights in any European comp.

by HammerofThunor Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:52 pm

Sin é wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games
Thats worse if that is the case. They shackle the other people involved by looking after only themselves. They expect the others (who have a sponsor and a broadcaster) to chance their arm that they will be able to flog this new competition.

derek mcgrath wrote:But the only bit known about that package is the BT element which would only make up £20 million, odd. No one has seen that contract so no one knows what it represents. And where’s the other £50 million coming from? Any French TV deal by law would have to have approval of the FFR (French Federation Rugby) and they say they won’t be. So it’s hardly achievable, from a business point of view, and yet this is supposed to be a better business model.

All the money was going into a pot so they (PRL) would be just as effected.

And the quote is a bit nonsensical because the whole point is that if everyone was on board it could generate 60-70m. So why would the FFR block it? And if they did, then not everyone will take part and it obviously won't make the proposed amount.

by Guest Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:54 pm

mystiroakey wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games
Do you really know that, mystir? Have you a link to any article which lays out exactly what it was that BT were willing to pay for?
what I heard was that the AP agreed a deal with BT to sell exclusive rights to all AP games irrespective of being in a european comp or doemstic.

Yes, I understand that part of it, but not convinced it was confined to AP only. I have read articles suggesting UK rights, but none that specifies AP only. BT talked of owning a European competition. Maybe it was just talking up an AP only deal, but if so, it seems a rather grand way of wording it.

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:56 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:I think the issue was that nothing was put down on paper, more than anything else. As you have experienced, it was hard enough to find that information (buried in an interview a few months back with the CEO of ERC).

McCafferty, Wray & Co. were happy to mislead everyone into thinking that the RCC Cup was going to be worth 60 or 70m and that the Unions were mad not to go with it, whereas in reality it was worth 20m, and the RCC had no sponsor.

They weren't misleading. The RCC was not the original proposal. It was the original proposal (which is pretty much what was agreed a few weeks ago) that was suggested to be worth 60-70m. The RCC was never fully organised as the French pulled out so we have no idea how much it would have been worth.

I reality the governance thing was always going to block the move forward so who knows what would have been put on paper if they actually got to a point where they moved forward?

Perhaps the 'true objective'?

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:57 pm

mystiroakey wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games
Do you really know that, mystir? Have you a link to any article which lays out exactly what it was that BT were willing to pay for?
what I heard was that the AP clubs agreed a deal with BT to sell exclusive rights to all games including AP teams irrespective of being in a european comp or doemstic.

So that's more than just AP game, strokey?

by mystiroakey Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:59 pm

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games
Do you really know that, mystir? Have you a link to any article which lays out exactly what it was that BT were willing to pay for?
what I heard was that the AP clubs agreed a deal with BT to sell exclusive rights to all games including AP teams irrespective of being in a european comp or doemstic.
So that's more than just AP game, strokey?

yes i did word it incorrectly ASBO, i meant AP teams

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:59 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games
Thats worse if that is the case. They shackle the other people involved by looking after only themselves. They expect the others (who have a sponsor and a broadcaster) to chance their arm that they will be able to flog this new competition.

derek mcgrath wrote:But the only bit known about that package is the BT element which would only make up £20 million, odd. No one has seen that contract so no one knows what it represents. And where’s the other £50 million coming from? Any French TV deal by law would have to have approval of the FFR (French Federation Rugby) and they say they won’t be. So it’s hardly achievable, from a business point of view, and yet this is supposed to be a better business model.
All the money was going into a pot so they (PRL) would be just as effected.

And the quote is a bit nonsensical because the whole point is that if everyone was on board it could generate 60-70m. So why would the FFR block it? And if they did, then not everyone will take part and it obviously won't make the proposed amount.

Perhaps the French might consider that they could sell their European games for more than whatever they might make from the speculative 60-70m?

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Tue 03 Dec 2013, 4:59 pm

mystiroakey wrote:
yes i did word it incorrectly ASBO, i meant AP teams

by Sin é Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:03 pm

All what money? They had none. Wales & Scotland wouldn't get anything for their matches because all their England-Welsh/England Scottish / English Ulster games would be on FTA in the UK.

The French usually hold onto their own money. (and certainly hadn't agreed to put their broadcasting rights in the pot).
They (& the Welsh) agreed nothing in writing (and no wonder the they ran rings around McCafferty).

THey might have been on board if they had received a concrete proposal rather than threats of oblivion if they didn't join in.

It looks to me like the only ones who are up to all their bloddy tricks are the Irish & Scots. No wonder they want rid of the ERC and move the base to Switzerland away from Ireland. Wink

by HammerofThunor Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:03 pm

broadlandboy wrote:I don't think any one is argueing that the HEC is not a great comp, some are saying that it is not be all & end all & there is more to rugby.
PRL/BT have not stated the amount for Aviva & Europe separately as this would give information to Sky. However PRL have stated that PRL clubs will be better off with just the Aviva under the BT deal than they are now with the present combined Aviva/Europe.
The BT deal is for Aviva with an agreement that BT will have PRL's rights in any European comp.

It sounds like they have. The quote from Sin e suggests the BT part is worth about 20-odd million per year. Assuming he's talking in Euros and that 20-odd is about 20 (certainly reads that way). Over three years so thats 60 million. So that's about £50MM. Assuming that's top amount and therefore releases the whole "up to" £152M it means there is between £102M for the Premiership over four years. So thats £25M per year. Previous Sky/ESPN deal was for around £54M for 3 years, or about £18M per year. So that's an extra £7M a year for the Premeirship.

About

by HammerofThunor Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:05 pm

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games
Thats worse if that is the case. They shackle the other people involved by looking after only themselves. They expect the others (who have a sponsor and a broadcaster) to chance their arm that they will be able to flog this new competition.

derek mcgrath wrote:But the only bit known about that package is the BT element which would only make up £20 million, odd. No one has seen that contract so no one knows what it represents. And where’s the other £50 million coming from? Any French TV deal by law would have to have approval of the FFR (French Federation Rugby) and they say they won’t be. So it’s hardly achievable, from a business point of view, and yet this is supposed to be a better business model.
All the money was going into a pot so they (PRL) would be just as effected.

And the quote is a bit nonsensical because the whole point is that if everyone was on board it could generate 60-70m. So why would the FFR block it? And if they did, then not everyone will take part and it obviously won't make the proposed amount.
Perhaps the French might consider that they could sell their European games for more than whatever they might make from the speculative 60-70m?

In which case they don't get a share from the pot and you don't need to reach 60-70. You need 40-50 (or 20-30 for the Celtic and Italian games, and sponsorship).

by HammerofThunor Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:06 pm

Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games
Do you really know that, mystir? Have you a link to any article which lays out exactly what it was that BT were willing to pay for?
what I heard was that the AP agreed a deal with BT to sell exclusive rights to all AP games irrespective of being in a european comp or doemstic.

Yes, I understand that part of it, but not convinced it was confined to AP only. I have read articles suggesting UK rights, but none that specifies AP only. BT talked of owning a European competition. Maybe it was just talking up an AP only deal, but if so, it seems a rather grand way of wording it.

No they didn't. They talked about owning a sport at club level.

by HammerofThunor Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:07 pm

Sin é wrote:All what money? They had none. Wales & Scotland wouldn't get anything for their matches because all their England-Welsh/England Scottish / English Ulster games would be on FTA in the UK.

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:15 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games
Do you really know that, mystir? Have you a link to any article which lays out exactly what it was that BT were willing to pay for?
what I heard was that the AP agreed a deal with BT to sell exclusive rights to all AP games irrespective of being in a european comp or doemstic.

Yes, I understand that part of it, but not convinced it was confined to AP only. I have read articles suggesting UK rights, but none that specifies AP only. BT talked of owning a European competition. Maybe it was just talking up an AP only deal, but if so, it seems a rather grand way of wording it.
No they didn't. They talked about owning a sport at club level.

Am I the only one for whom that raises the hair on the back of my neck? An abhorrent idea

by mystiroakey Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:16 pm

^ I just think they worded it strangely and wrongly- I dont even know what that means to be honest. BT will never own a sport!!

by HammerofThunor Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:17 pm

Well they own the broadcast rights to all the PRL club games (except the LV cup which is covered by the RFU TV agreement).

Someone has to own them. Current Sky own them for the ERC competitions.

by Sin é Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:17 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:I don't think any one is argueing that the HEC is not a great comp, some are saying that it is not be all & end all & there is more to rugby.
PRL/BT have not stated the amount for Aviva & Europe separately as this would give information to Sky. However PRL have stated that PRL clubs will be better off with just the Aviva under the BT deal than they are now with the present combined Aviva/Europe.
The BT deal is for Aviva with an agreement that BT will have PRL's rights in any European comp.
It sounds like they have. The quote from Sin e suggests the BT part is worth about 20-odd million per year. Assuming he's talking in Euros and that 20-odd is about 20 (certainly reads that way). Over three years so thats 60 million. So that's about £50MM. Assuming that's top amount and therefore releases the whole "up to" £152M it means there is between £102M for the Premiership over four years. So thats £25M per year. Previous Sky/ESPN deal was for around £54M for 3 years, or about £18M per year. So that's an extra £7M a year for the Premeirship.

About

Thats working out ok so for the AP clubs. They now have a little over £2m for tv rights this year. Last year they got £1.9m (between AP & ERC).

Down guarantee of 3 home sell-out games (plus corporate entertainment ect).

by HammerofThunor Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:20 pm

Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:I don't think any one is argueing that the HEC is not a great comp, some are saying that it is not be all & end all & there is more to rugby.
PRL/BT have not stated the amount for Aviva & Europe separately as this would give information to Sky. However PRL have stated that PRL clubs will be better off with just the Aviva under the BT deal than they are now with the present combined Aviva/Europe.
The BT deal is for Aviva with an agreement that BT will have PRL's rights in any European comp.
It sounds like they have. The quote from Sin e suggests the BT part is worth about 20-odd million per year. Assuming he's talking in Euros and that 20-odd is about 20 (certainly reads that way). Over three years so thats 60 million. So that's about £50MM. Assuming that's top amount and therefore releases the whole "up to" £152M it means there is between £102M for the Premiership over four years. So thats £25M per year. Previous Sky/ESPN deal was for around £54M for 3 years, or about £18M per year. So that's an extra £7M a year for the Premeirship.

About
Thats working out ok so for the AP clubs. They now have a little over £2m for tv rights this year. Last year they got £1.9m (between AP & ERC).

Down guarantee of 3 home sell-out games (plus corporate entertainment ect).

They weren't sell outs. Even Tigers didn't sell out all the ERC games. But they can replace it with an English cup. Won't make as much but will probably make enough. Would be great if the Championship sides got involved and got an equal share (per team).

by AsLongAsBut100ofUs Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:21 pm

Personally I'd prefer some of the prem clubs to rebel and play in the continuing HEC - but v unlikely to happen

by Sin é Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:22 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:All what money? They had none. Wales & Scotland wouldn't get anything for their matches because all their England-Welsh/England Scottish / English Ulster games would be on FTA in the UK.

Why do you not get it? BT have been sold the broadcasting rights to the England games (which is part of the UK broadcasting area), so no one else will be bothered paying to show them.

by Dubbelyew L Overate Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:22 pm

Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:I don't think any one is argueing that the HEC is not a great comp, some are saying that it is not be all & end all & there is more to rugby.
PRL/BT have not stated the amount for Aviva & Europe separately as this would give information to Sky. However PRL have stated that PRL clubs will be better off with just the Aviva under the BT deal than they are now with the present combined Aviva/Europe.
The BT deal is for Aviva with an agreement that BT will have PRL's rights in any European comp.
It sounds like they have. The quote from Sin e suggests the BT part is worth about 20-odd million per year. Assuming he's talking in Euros and that 20-odd is about 20 (certainly reads that way). Over three years so thats 60 million. So that's about £50MM. Assuming that's top amount and therefore releases the whole "up to" £152M it means there is between £102M for the Premiership over four years. So thats £25M per year. Previous Sky/ESPN deal was for around £54M for 3 years, or about £18M per year. So that's an extra £7M a year for the Premeirship.

About
Thats working out ok so for the AP clubs. They now have a little over £2m for tv rights this year. Last year they got £1.9m (between AP & ERC).

Down guarantee of 3 home sell-out games (plus corporate entertainment ect).

A tad optimistic for the half of them in the Amlin, and fairly optimistic for those in HC.

by quinsforever Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:23 pm

Sin é wrote:Quiners, you need to have a word with O'Shea

conor o'shea wrote:"We all want to be playing in Europe," said O'Shea. "We want to be there. We had a poor start to the season, but the competitive juices started flowing after Clermont. These are the matches you want to play in because of the he atmosphere, the hostility, the quality of players you are up against. Our guys would really miss it if they were not involved in those big games, and hopefully there is still a chance they will be.

"The players enjoy it because it is a break from the norm. It is just fun for everyone. In your own league, you can always tell what is going to happen from one week to the next, but it is less predictable when you go into Europe. Everybody wants it. So many of the hurdles have already been crossed in terms of qualification and distribution of finance. Everyone seems to be in agreement, so let's just get across the line. Maybe someone will have to swallow their pride a bit, but it is better for the game and that's what we all want."
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/a-european-competition-without-english-involvement-is-not-a-european-competition-at-al.22847422

why? he is as entitled to an opinion as you are Sin e.

but unless he wants to buy the club, his opinion will remain about as relevant as yours. Smile

by broadlandboy Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:23 pm

IIRC the Quote about the amount came from an Irish source, It has neither been confirmed or denied by PRL/BT

by HammerofThunor Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:24 pm

Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:All what money? They had none. Wales & Scotland wouldn't get anything for their matches because all their England-Welsh/England Scottish / English Ulster games would be on FTA in the UK.

Why do you not get it? BT have been sold the broadcasting rights to the England games (which is part of the UK broadcasting area), so no one else will be bothered paying to show them.

No one CAN show them. BT bought the exclusive rights for the UK. But are you saying the games played in Wales, NI and Scotland aren't worth anything? And what's the FTA bit?

by HammerofThunor Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:27 pm

broadlandboy wrote:IIRC the Quote about the amount came from an Irish source, It has neither been confirmed or denied by PRL/BT

True but it sounds sensible and fits with the idea they're getting about 50% more for the Premiership.

by quinsforever Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:27 pm

Sin é wrote:
Derek McGrath erc wrote:“The alternative is to start up a new competition based on the BT contract. It’s been said that this completion could generate £60 to £70 million. But the only bit known about that package is the BT element which would only make up £20 million, odd. No one has seen that contract so no one knows what it represents. And where’s the other £50 million coming from? Any French TV deal by law would have to have approval of the FFR (French Federation Rugby) and they say they won’t be. So it’s hardly achievable, from a business point of view, and yet this is supposed to be a better business model.
'We' were not looking for insider information. And ''we'' don't need to be given the details. The potential partners in this new cup would need to see that it was viable and the only conclusion one can come to for not being let see the contract, that there is something that the PRL don't want them to see.

yes. the contract. thats what they dont want everyone to see. not until people commit to the concept. otherwise its a free option, front-running, call it what you like. this is pretty standard practice. seems like its mostly the fanboys here who get upset about this particular aspect.

by Sin é Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:28 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:I don't think any one is argueing that the HEC is not a great comp, some are saying that it is not be all & end all & there is more to rugby.
PRL/BT have not stated the amount for Aviva & Europe separately as this would give information to Sky. However PRL have stated that PRL clubs will be better off with just the Aviva under the BT deal than they are now with the present combined Aviva/Europe.
The BT deal is for Aviva with an agreement that BT will have PRL's rights in any European comp.
It sounds like they have. The quote from Sin e suggests the BT part is worth about 20-odd million per year. Assuming he's talking in Euros and that 20-odd is about 20 (certainly reads that way). Over three years so thats 60 million. So that's about £50MM. Assuming that's top amount and therefore releases the whole "up to" £152M it means there is between £102M for the Premiership over four years. So thats £25M per year. Previous Sky/ESPN deal was for around £54M for 3 years, or about £18M per year. So that's an extra £7M a year for the Premeirship.

About
Thats working out ok so for the AP clubs. They now have a little over £2m for tv rights this year. Last year they got £1.9m (between AP & ERC).

Down guarantee of 3 home sell-out games (plus corporate entertainment ect).
They weren't sell outs. Even Tigers didn't sell out all the ERC games. But they can replace it with an English cup. Won't make as much but will probably make enough. Would be great if the Championship sides got involved and got an equal share (per team).

I wouldn't expect Tigers to sell out as they have a fairly big stadium, but clubs like Exeter were selling out (average 10k for HCup). Average about 7K for Aviva Premiership last year.

by Guest Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:29 pm

HammerofThunor wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games
Do you really know that, mystir? Have you a link to any article which lays out exactly what it was that BT were willing to pay for?
what I heard was that the AP agreed a deal with BT to sell exclusive rights to all AP games irrespective of being in a european comp or doemstic.

Yes, I understand that part of it, but not convinced it was confined to AP only. I have read articles suggesting UK rights, but none that specifies AP only. BT talked of owning a European competition. Maybe it was just talking up an AP only deal, but if so, it seems a rather grand way of wording it.
No they didn't. They talked about owning a sport at club level.

Well, they talked about owning a sport at club level. They didn't only say that though. They went much further:

BT believe they have backed the right horse, with their chief executive Marc Watson boldly declaring their agreement with PRL has paved the way for a ‘successor to the Heineken Cup’.
‘We saw in rugby an opportunity to own a sport exclusively, certainly at club level, and the rights that we’ve bought give us an opportunity to do that,’ he said. ‘We are looking to set up, or at least help set up, a dazzling new European tournament.’

So it was a new European rugby championship that BT were interested in, and a competition that they were to 'set up, or at least help set up'. More than an interest in simply broadcasting AP games then.

by quinsforever Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:30 pm

Sin é wrote:I think the issue was that nothing was put down on paper, more than anything else. As you have experienced, it was hard enough to find that information (buried in an interview a few months back with the CEO of ERC).

McCafferty, Wray & Co. were happy to mislead everyone into thinking that the RCC Cup was going to be worth 60 or 70m and that the Unions were mad not to go with it, whereas in reality it was worth 20m, and the RCC had no sponsor.

this is complete unmitigated nonsense. you are claiming as "fact", comments from mcgrath who acknowledges he hasnt seen the BT deal? how is this anything other than misinformation?

by broadlandboy Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:31 pm

BT have bought the PRL rights which seem to be games played under the jurisdiction of the RFU( played in England) the rights to games outside of England were still up for sale.ERC sold Sky the rights to all matches in UK & IRE although they had been told that they didn't have the PRL rights.

by quinsforever Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:34 pm

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games
Thats worse if that is the case. They shackle the other people involved by looking after only themselves. They expect the others (who have a sponsor and a broadcaster) to chance their arm that they will be able to flog this new competition.

derek mcgrath wrote:But the only bit known about that package is the BT element which would only make up £20 million, odd. No one has seen that contract so no one knows what it represents. And where’s the other £50 million coming from? Any French TV deal by law would have to have approval of the FFR (French Federation Rugby) and they say they won’t be. So it’s hardly achievable, from a business point of view, and yet this is supposed to be a better business model.
All the money was going into a pot so they (PRL) would be just as effected.

And the quote is a bit nonsensical because the whole point is that if everyone was on board it could generate 60-70m. So why would the FFR block it? And if they did, then not everyone will take part and it obviously won't make the proposed amount.
Perhaps the French might consider that they could sell their European games for more than whatever they might make from the speculative 60-70m?

not within ERC they cant. as all those rights go to SKY who then sell them on. The french league doesnt get to sell its own TV rights to ERC and keep the money itself. those rights belong to the ERC, and the money gets distributed according to the "subsidy" model Wink

by Dubbelyew L Overate Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:34 pm

Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
Sin é wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
broadlandboy wrote:I don't think any one is argueing that the HEC is not a great comp, some are saying that it is not be all & end all & there is more to rugby.
PRL/BT have not stated the amount for Aviva & Europe separately as this would give information to Sky. However PRL have stated that PRL clubs will be better off with just the Aviva under the BT deal than they are now with the present combined Aviva/Europe.
The BT deal is for Aviva with an agreement that BT will have PRL's rights in any European comp.
It sounds like they have. The quote from Sin e suggests the BT part is worth about 20-odd million per year. Assuming he's talking in Euros and that 20-odd is about 20 (certainly reads that way). Over three years so thats 60 million. So that's about £50MM. Assuming that's top amount and therefore releases the whole "up to" £152M it means there is between £102M for the Premiership over four years. So thats £25M per year. Previous Sky/ESPN deal was for around £54M for 3 years, or about £18M per year. So that's an extra £7M a year for the Premeirship.

About
Thats working out ok so for the AP clubs. They now have a little over £2m for tv rights this year. Last year they got £1.9m (between AP & ERC).

Down guarantee of 3 home sell-out games (plus corporate entertainment ect).
They weren't sell outs. Even Tigers didn't sell out all the ERC games. But they can replace it with an English cup. Won't make as much but will probably make enough. Would be great if the Championship sides got involved and got an equal share (per team).
I wouldn't expect Tigers to sell out as they have a fairly big stadium, but clubs like Exeter were selling out (average 10k for HCup). Average about 7K for Aviva Premiership last year.

No HC sell-outs at Sandy Park last year (not even for Leinster), and the AP average was a little higher.

by Sin é Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:34 pm

broadlandboy wrote:IIRC the Quote about the amount came from an Irish source, It has neither been confirmed or denied by PRL/BT

Yep, I wonder why that is?

What's wrong with an Irish source? Are you intimating that just because he is Irish, he is a liar?

by quinsforever Tue 03 Dec 2013, 5:36 pm

AsLongAsBut100ofUs wrote:
HammerofThunor wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:
Munchkin wrote:
mystiroakey wrote:the bt element was only for AP games
Do you really know that, mystir? Have you a link to any article which lays out exactly what it was that BT were willing to pay for?
what I heard was that the AP agreed a deal with BT to sell exclusive rights to all AP games irrespective of being in a european comp or doemstic.

Yes, I understand that part of it, but not convinced it was confined to AP only. I have read articles suggesting UK rights, but none that specifies AP only. BT talked of owning a European competition. Maybe it was just talking up an AP only deal, but if so, it seems a rather grand way of wording it.
No they didn't. They talked about owning a sport at club level.
Am I the only one for whom that raises the hair on the back of my neck? An abhorrent idea

i lived in the US for 7 years in the late 90s so no this just sounds like all the professional sports leagues in the US. It's entertainment and it's a business. and they almost all make money.

-------

https://www.606v2.com/viewtopic.forum?t=50236

by Sponsored content