As sky had Scottish football by the baws, after the sentanta fiasco... now we have SKY v BT... Sky just got their arse felt by BT. As I said, if there are 4 "Old Firm" games a season, it becomes more markateable. SPFL can then look to bolster the deal. Not saying there would be masses of cash available but it would be an improvment on current deal.
Sorry, but you have no proof of that. You cannot provide any evidence to back up that claim. History shows it to be bullshit. You're just falling into the trap of the media again. They ****ed up on their "no TV deal without Rangers" so are resorting to "a better TV deal with Rangers". It's bullshit.
Ok... Ok. Scottish football won't instantly become more attactive with 4 "old firm" games a season. No one will care, no one wants to watch Celtic v Rangers. Not Celtic or Rangers fans - who probably dont subscribe to sky currently as watching Celtic pump Ross County is not much fun. Not "old firm" fans living in England. Not ex pats. If you honestly believe that 4 "old firm" games a season won't make scottish football more attractive to TV companies then I think you're being blinkered.
No, my opinion is based on fact. Your opinion is based on speculation. We have the evidence of the TV deal being ****e with Rangers in the SPL. It's no worse without them. If you can show me evidence of a TV deal being better with Rangers in the league as opposed to being out of it then I'll concede defeat.
The £55m Sky and ESPN paid was almost half what Sky had bid against Setanta (£100m) a year earlier. The Old Firm games are a draw, they are the only games in Scotland that get near the viewing figures for a Premier League game (featuring a title contender). Next bidding around Sky will be on the defensive, they can't afford to lose another football contract to BT - and obviously BT would like an exclusive on Scottish football. As long as the SPFL board don't do something stupid (like allow a joint bid) we should hopefully see the next TV contract go above £100m again. Even then though £100m over 4 years won't make a lot of difference to us (£4m a season, instead of £2m) but it will keep the other clubs afloat and hopefully help increase the general standard a bit.
The TV deal was ****e with them in it... SPL went to SKY tail between thier leagues and begged for a TV deal due to the Sentanta **** up. Before Sentanta, SPL got a reasonable TV deal. The new one is ****e without them ... However, if you factor in that Sky now have real competition for UK football right, then Celti v Rangers make SPFL a more attractive proposition.
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one then. Either way, we'll get a **** deal. Competition between two companies may seem attractive but SPL football even with both Celtic and Rangers in it isn't that attractive. Companies aren't going to pay decent money for four games per season. As was my original point, it's just another spin by the media as a way of trying to make the return of Rangers to the SFL more palatable for non-Rangers Scottish football supporters. The "no TV deal" didn't work now they're trying a different slant.
I'm not basing my opinion on what the Scottish media are saying ... As I said, in my opinion, it will be an improvement - there won't be a massive inscrease but there will be an increase. Will it still be ****e... Yes, it is scottish football, but it will be ****e with a bow on it. We will have to wait and see I suppose... When will Rangers III make it to SPFL?
I think you're all forgetting the Chinese TV deal, which will obviously be quadrupled (at least) upon the arrival of Ra Berz. Everyone knows that Rangers have 500million fans worldwide who would surely be willing to pay billions to watch Rangers v St Mirren. Boom times are coming.
I cannot understand the publicity surrounding the return of A Celtic v Rangers ( of some type) match. Surely wishing or wanting a Celtic /rangers tie is trying to breath life into the dead club . Is that what we want . Rangers have died and they may just be hanging on , we should avoid trying to help them .
