Six Nations 'free TV' protection urged by minister

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-33243969

Not much to it really other than a Welsh minister putting pressure on the UK government to protect it. No mention of any Welsh games already being protected (unlike what some of our posters keep saying).

Personally I don't think enforced license fees should be used for popular events (although some should remain FTA). BBC should be covering the stuff we 'should' have access to but no-one wants to pay for (although that's a political thing).

Side note, but BT Sports have put their subscription costs up to £20 (I think). I'm going to drop mine and just watch the games online on the league website. And it's now £5 if you have BT broadband.

personally I believe its very important to keep major sporting eventsw free to air - that why you get the uncommitted watching and thier kids - this is the next generation of fans. without free to air numbers interested in the game drops and the fan base drops/ This has happened to other sports like cricket.

I could be wrong, but I was told that if you keep a fiver in your account with one of the online betting companies you can stream most of the games at reasonable quality from their site

There's a lot to be said of big sporting events being free to watch as it does inspire people. How many extra people will have seen that wonderful last day and watch again, join a team etc.

I dislike the rubbish use of stats in that article though. There's no way that 24 million different people saw the rugby in the uk at 41%.

Are Welsh games already protected?


My problem with sky is that most of the subscription money goes into the pockets of soccer players and I don't watch it. A dedicated rugby channel would be nice.

No they're not. Only rugby (Union) game that is protected (in the UK) is the World Cup final. There was a review, which suggested that the home Welsh games in the 6 nations should be protected, but it was never implemented and keeps getting put off. In the above article it's claimed someone in parliament said there are no plans to review it (no idea if this includes implementing the previous revisions).

WELL-PAST-IT wrote:I could be wrong, but I was told that if you keep a fiver in your account with one of the online betting companies you can stream most of the games at reasonable quality from their site

Its no problem for the committed - but we need to keep recruiting kids whos dads / mums may not be committed enough to get subscriptions. Cricket is dying in the UK after a decade of pay per view only.

I wish this would happen, rugby needs to be as accessible as possible you lock it away on a sky channel you just remove people from less well off backgrounds and i think the often overlooked elderly from enjoying the game. I watched the six nations chief executive whining on tv about anyone protecting the rights as it may damage "competitiveness" bull sh*t it damages the money men's Wallets.

Im of the opinion the more money thrown at a game the worse the people become in it, with the players becoming mere pawns.
Rugby is to important to allow to be just another money men's source of income. Its not there game its ours.

It would be interesting to see if there is any correlation between participation and broadcast airtime. OTOH broadcasting FTA probably does have a direct correlation with an increase in TV spectators!
Showjumping used to be more popular than football on TV but it didn't mean people rushed out and bought a horse.
I'd like to see the 6N staying FTA but wouldn't be incensed if it the money generated from selling the rights went to promote kids playing the game at grassroots level.

I can see the argument for it being free to air and overall think it should be but from a personal point of view I either go to the games or at worst the pub.

The Argument tends to be that if a sport is declared FTA then that allows terrestrial broadcasting companies to offer way below what would be offered by Satellite companies.

So far so seemingly reasonable (from the 6N people who say that to have their negotiating hands tied behind their back, by compulsory FTA restraints, is to sell their sport below proper value.)

But what is proper value?  The most you can get - or - the true value of the sport to advertisers as calculated by the size of the watching audience?

There is still more than one Terrestrial channel out there so the idea of a bidding war can still exist - but I'd suggest within a realistic marketing framework, unlike the majority of Satellite contracts.  
Terrestrial companies have the biggest extant audiences and therefore advertising revenues are calculated from that biggest audience and therefore so too is their coverage offers.
Satellite companies have a smaller existing audience that uses subscription to subsidise their sporting coverage (in addition to advertising revenues).  They also use the popularity and advertising capacity of one sport to subsidise the coverage of lesser sports (taking those sports away from bigger audiences but paying an inflated price to do so)  In a real sense I'd suggest satellite companies are eternally false economies where inflation is constant yet audiences always limited.

I thank God most Premiership Football went to satellite.  It certainly freed up terrestrial networks to show more diverse programming of a non-sporting nature..... only downside being that most of the diverse programming seems to be candy floss Reality TV, 'Comedy' Gameshows and Soaps!!  You can't ever win.  

But my point is that for a lot of people that don't DO Sky or BT or any of the others, one day English football just up and disappeared from the airwaves.  And I've personally heard little from it since - Thank God.   Is that where we'd like rugby to go for the majority of our populations?

I thought regional language channells were allowed national games as a right, so S4C, Alba, and TG4? Were allowed their internationals games?

Did I just dream that up?

Fanster wrote:I thought regional language channells were allowed national games as a right, so S4C, Alba, and TG4? Were allowed their internationals games?

Did I just dream that up?

Try telling that to the BBC (England) where English is the 'regional language' and they still have no rights to cover their National game of football

SecretFly wrote:

Fanster wrote:I thought regional language channells were allowed national games as a right, so S4C, Alba, and TG4? Were allowed their internationals games?

Did I just dream that up?

Try telling that to the BBC (England) where English is the 'regional language' and they still have no rights to cover their National game of football

Maybe they just lost interest in English international football, it's not like they make a splash these days, even the junior system is proving group stage quality this year, just ask Joey Barton.

I was going to quote Joey Barton. Very interesting comments from him when you consider what he's talking about - the transfer of the National game to pay-tv and the subsequent financial clout given to the Club game over and above the National interests of the International game.

Very interesting observation in light of our own political/purchasing/power transfer issues in the last few seasons.

SecretFly wrote:I was going to quote Joey Barton.  Very interesting comments from him when you consider what he's talking about - the transfer of the National game to pay-tv and the subsequent financial clout given to the Club game over and above the National interests of the International game.

Very interesting observation in light of our own political/purchasing/power transfer issues in the last few seasons.

I thought the same, and it rang the 'LNR taking rugby over' bell (Not that I want to get into that argument.

profitius wrote:Are Welsh games already protected?


My problem with sky is that most of the subscription money goes into the pockets of soccer players and I don't watch it. A dedicated rugby channel would be nice.

In New Zealand we have pretty much always had a Rugby channel , but Sky (NZ) are cunning, they still put all the important games ie ITM cup, Super rugby, NZRFU teams and Rugby programmes on one of the normal Pay to view sports channels and broadcast them live simultaneously, things like Schoolboy Rugby(Istxv) is replayed during the week following, often several times.
So where we end up is that there really isnt a lot of advantage in subscribing to the Rugby channel apart from for a bit of Northern Hemisphere Rugby and Currie Cup. But in fairness money does go back to the NZRFU, Soccer players down here get nothing.

HammerofThunor wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-33243969

Not much to it really other than a Welsh minister putting pressure on the UK government to protect it. No mention of any Welsh games already being protected (unlike what some of our posters keep saying).

Personally I don't think enforced license fees should be used for popular events (although some should remain FTA). BBC should be covering the stuff we 'should' have access to but no-one wants to pay for (although that's a political thing).

Side note, but BT Sports have put their subscription costs up to £20 (I think). I'm going to drop mine and just watch the games online on the league website. And it's now £5 if you have BT broadband.

I think it's only £5 if you want both channels and I think the rugby is still shown on the free channel

Edit: just read up on it, you will have to pay £5 a month for but Europe which will host the champions league.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/broadband/2015/06/beat-bt-sports-price-rise

nathan wrote:http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/broadband/2015/06/beat-bt-sports-price-rise

My feeling is the Six Nations is one of the real unique events in any sport.  
It is also a Brit treasure, and as such, should remain with the BBC.

HammerofThunor wrote:Not much to it really other than a Welsh minister putting pressure on the UK government to protect it. No mention of any Welsh games already being protected (unlike what some of our posters keep saying).

Seeing as that is probably a dig at me, I will tell you that the Welsh games in the 6N  ARE protected:-

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Listed+sporting+events

Click on that link and go to Listed sporting events - Parliament. On there you will find the document.

You then need to scroll down to point 3.1 and it gives you all the protected sports on free to air. They are:-

 FIFA World Cup Finals Tournament
 UEFA European Football Championship Finals Tournament
 The Grand National
 The FA Cup Final (in England, Wales and Northern Ireland only)
 The Scottish FA Cup (in Scotland only)
 Home and away qualification matches in the FIFA World Cup and UEFA
European Football Championships (listed in the Home Nation to which they
relate)
 The All-England Wimbledon Lawn Tennis Championship (listed in its entirety)
 The Open Golf Championship
 Cricket’s Home Ashes Test matches
 The Rugby Union World Cup Tournament
 Wales matches in the Six Nations Rugby Championship (in Wales only)

Point 3.1 was the new recommended list from the commission back in 2008. It has not actually been passed into law. Therefore the current list is still active which places all 6Ns matches as Cat B listed:

2.2 Group B: secondary coverage protected
 Cricket Test matches played in England
 Non-Finals play in the Wimbledon Tournament
 All other matches in the Rugby World Cup Finals Tournament
 Six Nations Rugby Tournament matches involving home countries
 The Commonwealth Games
 The World Athletics Championship
 The Cricket World Cup - the final, semi-finals and matches involving home
nations' teams
 The Ryder Cup
 The Open Golf Championship8

Events listed in Group B may have live coverage on subscription television provided that
secondary coverage (“highlights”) is offered to the free-to-air broadcasters.

LondonTiger wrote:Point 3.1 was the new recommended list from the commission back in 2008. It has not actually been passed into law. Therefore the current list is still active which places all 6Ns matches as Cat B listed:

2.2 Group B: secondary coverage protected
 Cricket Test matches played in England
 Non-Finals play in the Wimbledon Tournament
 All other matches in the Rugby World Cup Finals Tournament
 Six Nations Rugby Tournament matches involving home countries
 The Commonwealth Games
 The World Athletics Championship
 The Cricket World Cup - the final, semi-finals and matches involving home
nations' teams
 The Ryder Cup
 The Open Golf Championship8

Events listed in Group B may have live coverage on subscription television provided that
secondary coverage (“highlights”) is offered to the free-to-air broadcasters.

Read further down, it was revised and put in place, 2008 was the old one, it was revised after and then the new one was done.

3.1 Report published (November 2009)
The Panel’s report was published in November 200911 and said that “in current
circumstances it supported the principle of protecting some major sporting events for the
widest possible television audience, if necessary by means of listing them.”12
The Panel
concluded that guaranteeing only the highlights of a major event could no longer be seen as
a sufficient substitute for live coverage13 and that there should be a single list of live events
protected for free-to-air television.
Decisions on which events to include in a single list should be based on the following “major
event criteria”:
"In order to be eligible to be listed, an event must have a special national resonance
and not simply a significance to those who ordinarily follow the sport concerned.
Such an event is likely to fall into one or both of the following categories:
 it is a pre-eminent national or international event in sport;
 it involves the national team or national representatives in the sport concerned.
It should also be likely to command a large television audience.” 14
Given the changing media landscape, the Panel observed that listed events might not have a
“long-term future.”15
The Panel said that the impact of the Secretary of State’s final decisions should be monitored
closely and that the list should be reviewed more regularly than it has been so far

In December 2008 the Labour Government announced that a review of the list would be
carried out by an independent advisory panel. The panel reported in November 2009 and
supported the continued protection of some major sporting events. However it did
recommend that there should be a single list of live events, with some events de-listed.
In July 2010, the Government said that any decision on the future of the list would be
deferred until after the conclusion of digital switchover.

On 21 July 2010, Hugh Robertson, the then Minister for Sport and the Olympics, announced
that any decision on the future of the current list would be deferred until 2013

OFCOMs list from 2014:

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/broadcast/other-codes/ofcom_code_on_sport.pdf


Thus I still assert that Welsh home 6Ns listing has not been enacted.

The list was changed though, the origonal one was deemed to be not sufficient, so they amended it, to suit. But it is due to be looked at again, and that is why that Welsh minister is piping up as he thinks that the 6N should remain protected.

No, the list was never changed. It was merely a recommendation as the document you linked to states. Any decision to actually change it, because overall it would reduce the number listed, was delayed again as stated by the document you linked.

If you then read the OFCOM list from last year, it is unchanged. People just assume that the list was changed - it was not. That is why the R&A have been able to move The Open to Sky, and the Ashes will be on Sky this summer. Both not allowed if the list had been changed in line with the recommendations.

LordDowlais, not just you but you do seem to be one of those that refuses to accept the official list off the official Ofcom website.

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/code-sports-events/

Note that the document was updated in 2014 but still only has the World Cup final as the protected rugby game.

I must admit I have a real problem understanding the economics of the whole sport on TV business. An average football match shown on BBC will get 6-8 million, a big game like Arsenal v Man in this year's FA Cup got over 10 million. The top Premier League on Sky, say Man U v Liverpool, probably won't get 2 million. I reckon the same game on FTA would get well over 10 million.

I really do not understand why coming off FTA is a good thing ... apart from from the sports point of view the money. Football went from being the plaything of ITV/BBC (at one point not wanted) to being a vital piece in the battle for subscriptions. Now ITV lament losing UCL. There is a strong feeling among the football circles that for years BBC/ITV underpaid for the rights, considering how much even then the draw of the Football League Division 1 was in those days overseas.

I am not a cricket fan, but I remember that BBC2 on Sundays and during summer tests was a no go because it was endless cricket (yawn) ... long periods of quiet punctuated by the occasional sound of bat on ball. Now, if you don't have Sky, you have a job finding cricket to watch (not that I lament that too much).

Formula 1 - old Bernie was delighted when Sky stepped. It really is astonishing how on the one hand he is taking races away from historic European tracks in favour of new ones, yet recognises that the bulk of TV income is based on the European viewing markets.

Rugby. I sense that Rugby wants to have its cake and eat it. It wants the riches and profile of football, but also to retain what it (often times pompously) regards as its higher ideals. You cannot deny that from a purely money point of view, the football model works. It works so well that the sport is now riddled with prospectors and money men. If Rugby grows and becomes a key sport in the battle for subscriptions, it too will become a target for money men. But for people who love the sport, this is a great time to be a fan, even as an armchair fan.

As regards attendances, well both football and rugby (union + league) have enjoyed sustained periods of booming attendances. When football's current boom started in the mid 90s (I would suggest more as a result of Gazza, Italia 90 and Man Utd and Newcastle Utd rise in 95 than purely down to the emergence of the EPL), everyone called it a fad, but 20 years later the appetite for the real live experience is as big as ever. This doesn't seem to tally with the argument that reduced FTA impacts the demand. Again this is another aspect I don't understand.

To a simple minded man like me, it's all a bit counter intuitive.

As regards the cry of exposure to create the next generation of fans .... I never understood why this in itself is a reason to keep it FTA. If there was no sport, people would find something else.

HammerofThunor wrote:

nathan wrote:http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/broadband/2015/06/beat-bt-sports-price-rise

Cheers for that boys, my wife looked into it. We have been paying since August

Eurosport (Discovery) have bought the European rights for the Olympic games. It is designated FTA but maybe they will only give the FTA channels limited access??

I think FIFA tried to challenge it last time the World Cup was sorted. They failed and the UK protected event status was upheld. So it should be FTA.

All the articles mention that there will be Free Coverage in UK of the Olympics after the current deal ends in 2022 - however it is the amount that becomes important. It would appear that the Listing states 200 hours, which sounds a lot at first but when you realise that for 2012 with all the different sports streaming via red button and website the BBC broadcast 2600 hours over the 3 weeks (of a possible 5200 hours apparently) it suddenly looks quite small.

Especially when there is so much crap that no-one really wants to watch, that can be used to fill up the 200 hours. Keeping the big stuff for subscription.

I think, but not certain, that a subscription channel would have to offer the FTA element to another broadcaster who could choose what they showed.

I thought I heard that subscriptions were looking to allow FTA everything but the finale of sports, take the 100m sprint for example, I thought only the final would be subscription only.

Have I just dreamt that?

Quite possibly

Heres a new article http://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/six-nations-lost-terrestrial-tv-9554388


If it does go to pay tv, how much do you think it should get. The current deal is £160m for 4 years, so £40m per year.

The only good thing about the Olympics going to Eurosport is that the Olympics itself will become much more sectionalised and a divided up event, with individual National TV networks only paying for the sections that will be of most national interest to them PLUS perhaps the Athletics bit (that seems to be the universally liked bit)

But the break up of those viewing patterns globally might finally call it a day in the ever increasing - and downright grotesque - requirement for the building of ever more elaborate and expensive virtual mini cities to house a simple three week sporting event.
The seismic spend on these 'cities' is becoming more and more exorbitant and thus takes away the hosting opportunity from many regions of the world that might do a good job but for the excessive 'requirements'.

The Olympics themselves should move from City events to National events - ie, a Country or series of countries should get the rights rather than individual cities - thus spreading the honours, and spreading and lowering the costs of the unjustifiable infrastructural developments that are required in advance of three weeks of sport.  This is the 21st century, if the world wants to join up for three weeks to play sport then that world should appreciate that they might have to spread themselves beyond the confines of one city to do so.

profitius wrote:Eurosport (Discovery) have bought the European rights for the Olympic games. It is designated FTA but maybe they will only give the FTA channels limited access??

Interesting. That company also owns UPC (cable tv in Ireland) and is trying to buy F1 as well. The owner of the company is an Irish American (John Malone) and he is buying everything that moves/doesn't move in Ireland including Tony O'Reilly's Castlemartyr Estate.

Very deep pockets.

edit: This company have just bought TV3 in Ireland.

Sunday Times saying that BBC are retaining the rights to 6Ns.

Snatched from Sky
Six Nations rights may stay with the BBC

Sky is set to fail in its attempt to snatch the broadcasting rights to Six Nations rugby union from the BBC.

Its defeat means the sport’s showpiece tournament will stay on free-to-air TV beyond 2017, when the current contract with the BBC expires.

Final bids in the auction for the Six Nations were tabled last week, and it is understood that Sky submitted the highest offer. But it was not substantially higher than the BBC’s, industry sources said. In the absence of a knock-out blow, it is expected that rugby bosses will opt to renew their deal with the BBC. An announcement could come this week.

Sin é wrote:Sunday Times saying that BBC are retaining the rights to 6Ns.

Snatched from Sky
Six Nations rights may stay with the BBC

Sky is set to fail in its attempt to snatch the broadcasting rights to Six Nations rugby union from the BBC.

Its defeat means the sport’s showpiece tournament will stay on free-to-air TV beyond 2017, when the current contract with the BBC expires.

Final bids in the auction for the Six Nations were tabled last week, and it is understood that Sky submitted the highest offer. But it was not substantially higher than the BBC’s, industry sources said. In the absence of a knock-out blow, it is expected that rugby bosses will opt to renew their deal with the BBC. An announcement could come this week.

That's great news if true while the Sky deal would generate more money, long term it has the potential to damage interest in the game and those who take it up which will affect the depth and quality available long term.

From a personal perspective I don't think I'd be a rugby fan without having seen the 5 Nations growing up.