I thought we were all doomed: http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/4463718/Our-TV-deals-in-the-bag.html If this is correct (and signed) then it's £12m a season for SPL with £1m a season for Rangers games! Only £3m a season less than the original £80m/5 year deal on offer (but not yet signed)! About £300k shortfall for each club if divided evenly. But Scottish Football was doomed without in the top flight Rangers was it not?
Maybe but surely this fills a big gap of the shortfall in revenue a lot of clubs were worried about missing out on.
Not even. The current deal is actually £13M In 2004 the SPL agreed a 4 year, £54M deal with Setanta. (£13.5M a season) In 2008, the SPL signed an extension signed with Setanta for another 2008-09 & 2009-10 on the same terms. (£13.5M a season) It was also announced that they had signed a deal worth £125M over 5 years from season 2010-11. (£25M a season) This deal never actually commenced as Setanta went bust. In 2009 The SPL hurriedly signed a £65M deal for 5 seasons with SKY & ESPN. This was roughly the same terms as the (then) current Setanta deal. Thats is the current deal which is Worth £13M a season. In November 2011 it was announced the SPL had agreed a new deal with SKY & ESPN worth £80M over 5 years. (£16M a season) this is the deal that went unsigned in the wake of Hunmageddon. So this new deal worth £12M a season (SPL) is basically worth the same £13M we've had in place since 2009 and isn't that much of a reduction on the actual cash clubs have previously received. It would only have been a big reduction based on the (unsigned) £80M deal.
The huns were capturing pictures of Doncaster and Lawwell last night on their mobiles and posting them on Follow Follow as proof that there was a conspiracy.
BT have won the rights to ESPN's Premier League games from next season - so if we want to get all the football we currently get we're going to need to bung BT about another 15 quid a month now
A guy on the huddleboard put forward this analysis. I had thought that only the champions would be worse off but by his calculations it seems only a few clubs will be worse off (accounting for the fact that the team who finished second no longer exist); most clubs won't be taking a massive hit like what was once predicted. Any club seeing a massive decrease in TV revenue this season will be due to their poor league form, in finishing significantly lower than the previous season. Last year's TV split :- 01 - (+13.00%) - 17.00% - £2,720 k 02 - (+11.00%) - 15.00% - £2,400 k 03 - (+05.50%) - 09.50% - £1,520 k 04 - (+04.50%) - 08.50% - £1,360 k 05 - (+04.00%) - 08.00% - £1,280 k 06 - (+03.50%) - 07.50% - £1,200 k 07 - (+03.00%) - 07.00% - £1,120 k 08 - (+02.50%) - 06.50% - £1,040 k 09 - (+02.00%) - 06.00% - £960 k 10 - (+01.50%) - 05.50% - £880 k 11 - (+01.00%) - 05.00% - £800 k 12 - (+00.50%) - 04.50% - £720 k An example of this £13m split, evenly distributed (with £1m taken out for SFL) :- 01 - (+04.50%) - 11.00% - £1,320 k 02 - (+03.75%) - 10.25% - £1,230 k 03 - (+02.50%) - 09.00% - £1,080 k 04 - (+02.25%) - 08.75% - £1,050 k 05 - (+02.00%) - 08.50% - £1,020 k 06 - (+01.75%) - 08.25% - £990 k 07 - (+01.50%) - 08.00% - £960 k 08 - (+01.25%) - 07.75% - £930 k 09 - (+01.00%) - 07.50% - £900 k 10 - (+00.75%) - 07.25% - £870 k 11 - (+00.50%) - 07.00% - £840 k 12 - (+00.25%) - 06.75% - £810 k Should everyone finish in their same respective positions at the end of this season with Dundee finishing 12th, you would see the following approximate difference in money and what additional season bukes would be required to cover any loss (SBs @ £350 for us and £250 for the rest) :- 01 - £2720 k to £1320 k = -£1400 k var. 4000 season bukes req. 02 - £1520 k to £1230 k = -£0290 k var. 1160 SB's req. 03 - £1360 k to £1080 k = -£0280 k var. 1120 SB's req. 04 - £1280 k to £1050 k = -£0230 k var. 920 SB's req. 05 - £1200 k to £1020 k = -£0180 k var. 720 SB's req. 06 - £1120 k to £0990 k = -£0130 k var. 520 SB's req. 07 - £1040 k to £0960 k = -£0080 k var. 320 SB's req. 08 - £0960 k to £0930 k = -£0030 k var. 120 SB's req. 09 - £0880 k to £0900 k = £0020 k var. -80 SB's req. 10 - £0800 k to £0870 k = £0070 k var. -280 SB's req. 11 - £0720 k to £0840 k = £0120 k var. -480 SB's req. 12 - £0000 k to £0810 k = £0810 k var. -3240 SB's req. Most clubs won't be better off unless they see an increase in season bukes or finish higher in the league than last season.
As Dhoncaster and Rhegan have painted a post apocalyptic picture of ARMAGEDDON and a **** product then retaining the SPL brand value to the extent that they have is quite something.
Someone is taking the piss with the adverts linked to Rangers articles for the Record... please log in to view this image
The adverts are linked to what you have been searching for recently. You in deep with the wrong kinda people? People remember that the SPL now owe the SFL £3 million a season as opposed to the £2 million in the past. Also, how are Kilmarnock going to manage when Dundee don't take the thousands of fans that have been budgeted for? Time will tell.
That's the thing ML, I always thought the DR ads were cookie based too, but I ain't searched for anything like that.
Kilmarnock will manage by cutting costs to match what they have coming in. Not the massive difference that some would have you believe. They probably made more than the sortfall this season in extra revenue last season with a cup win. They will also be better placed to finish higher this season than last with Rangers now dead and earning more in prize money. If they can't manage that is down to awful club management and I think you know what we think should happen to clubs that do that.
I went on there and had ones for ground engineering solutions, so they must be cookie based. Wouldn't want to see what the adverts would be on my home computer
They keep showing me adverts for gay dating services, which indicates they have profiled me as a potential **** - I really would love to see how their algorithms have worked that out from my browsing history
