Like being on TV?

[whelk]

Going to be more frequently on TV for 2nd half of season. Other than annoying me for not being Sat 3pm which sits nicely for pub routine the additional exposure and revenue has to be a good thing.

 

Although unless on more than 10 times there is no direct increase in 'facility fees'. Sky/BT are obliged to show each club 10 times but may chose not to but club will still get associated money. Stoke only got shown 7 times last season thankfully!

 

So evey game over 10 is worth around £750-£800k.

 

Anyway no real debating point and comes with Pl status but found Swiss Rambles table in his West Ham article interesting to see significance of TV over merit payments.

 

Edited 11 January, 2015 by whelk

[whelk]

Although things may change if open up Saturday 3pm games http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/premier-league-set-tv-revolution-4956046

[Redslo]

Although things may change if open up Saturday 3pm games http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/premier-league-set-tv-revolution-4956046

 

Assuming the deal is structured fairly, a big if, this has the potential to equalize revenues more fairly and reduce the advantages of the bigger clubs. Or maybe not.

[CB Fry]

Assuming the deal is structured fairly, a big if, this has the potential to equalize revenues more fairly and reduce the advantages of the bigger clubs. Or maybe not.

Unlikely to be the primary motivation. Any streaming rights would probably be packaged up in a similar way to the TV deals.

[Golden Balls]

Personally would rather we weren't on tv much. Like Saturday 3pm KO.

[Redslo]

Unlikely to be the primary motivation. Any streaming rights would probably be packaged up in a similar way to the TV deals.

 

Yes, but TV money is distributed more evenly than match day or commercial revenue so anything that switches the relative importance of TV money is better for all but the biggest six clubs.

[Batman]

The TV money is much fairer in the UK than most leagues. Isn't it?

[Verbal Kint]

The TV money is much fairer in the UK than most leagues. Isn't it?

 

Depends on your definition of 'fair'. It's certainly more evenly distributed

[Batman]

Depends on your definition of 'fair'. It's certainly more evenly distributed

 

Which is fairer. Isn't it?

[ALWAYS_SFC]

Would love all the away games to be televised...

[Verbal Kint]

Which is fairer. Isn't it?

 

It's certainly beneficial to the smaller clubs. Some might argue United and Liverpool should get a bigger share as they're the clubs bringing in the casual viewers. But for the sake of argument, yes it is fairer

[Redslo]

The TV money is much fairer in the UK than most leagues. Isn't it?

 

MLS splits money even more evenly (as do most USA professional sports leagues) which is probably possible because there is no relegation. I know Spain is very unequal and Italy puts a lot of emphasis on historical performance. I have not researched other leagues.

[Batman]

MLS splits money even more evenly (as do most USA professional sports leagues) which is probably possible because there is no relegation. I know Spain is very unequal and Italy puts a lot of emphasis on historical performance. I have not researched other leagues.

 

Germany is pretty unequal (I think)

 

I think the distribution in England is pretty fair

[Wiggles31]

Fingers crossed they can broadcast 3pm Saturday games. My boss hates me for swapping shifts about ++ to accommodate watching Saints when the games are moved for TV.