Have to disagree on that point.
Unless we are discussing FTA deals (which I'd take a 50% cut for....we need to expose the game to as many people as possible), then Pay TV is Pay TV, regardless of it's apparent "reach"....I'd grab every penny going. As it is, Sky have dumped us into the SS3 wilderness at present.

Agree about the other bunch getting more though. I think they get 200 million over 5 years for the 6 Nations alone.....stupid money for 75 games

whoops

So what your saying is, we all need a big win on the horses and then start buying land rovers.

Exactly.
As a plan it has significantly more detail than any produced from Red Hall...

our SL deal isn't £182m over 5 years, its closer £146m over 7 years

I'm confused now.
1. How much is the current deal for SL and when does it expire?
2. Why do we care how it compares to other sports, let alone Union?

Just found this. Interesting how it opposes the view of the dozens of media rights experts on here who wailed that no other sport would renew a deal two years before expiry. . . . Clearly RU is as clueless as RL.

“Aviva Premiership Rugby is in great health with a number of new commercial partners on board and it is testimony to the strength of the competition and our clubs that we have renewed more than two years before the current deal with BT Sport ends."

I don't know who Ian Lenegan's equivalent is in union but he must be furious (after initially voting in favour of the deal of course).

Where did you come by this figure? A link would be appreciated.

The headline figure was roughly 200m, made up of 145m for SL 15m for the championship, 2m for c1, 20 for internationals and cc, and 18m in 'charitable donations'

It's a 5 year deal is the new tv deal.

It's a 5 year extension to a deal which had 2 years to run.

If anyone thinks SL is getting 36m a year from SKY from 2017 they are crazy. That would be 3m a year for clubs.

Clubs are also getting an increase from this year, not in two years time .

What is the "true value of our sport" and how do you calaculate whether (or not)its been "massively undersold" ?

Just doing a lazy comparision of TV deals achieved by other sports isn't actually putting a value to RL. Can anyone demonstrate where the subject line is factually accurate ?

www.totalrl.com/ins-outs-super-l ... w-tv-deal/

www.totalrl.com/ins-outs-super-l ... w-tv-deal/

It's a 5 year deal. Continuing on from when the current deal ends. Some payments have been brought forward to provide an instant boost to clubs but that's irrelevent really. It doesn't replace the current deal from now, it continues on from when the current deal finishes.

SL gets £146m over 5 years.
That's roughly £2.5m per club per year. Now we don't know whether that is the actual amount to clubs or whether the current distribution structure (whereby the Championships & RFL receive some of the SL TV money) still applies. You would've thought the RFL would need at least a portion of it, reducing again the amount each SL club would get per year to around just over £2m.

If the clubs are getting 2m (which they aren't) that would mean the RFL are getting £6m a year for administration. That's a crazy figure.

We can work it out pretty easily.

Clubs are getting about 1,6m from the tv deal plus some grants and donations to charitable donations etc. 146m/7/13 (SL clubs + rfl, the 13 shareholders of sle) = 1.6m

Whether you want to call it a 7 year deal, a 5 year deal or a 5 + 2 year deal is a little irrelevant. Over the next 7 years SL will receive 146m in tv rights.

The SL element of the deal is £146m. Over 5 years. Just because clubs have received a payment (not a full years worth) early makes no difference. It's a 5 year deal. It does not replace the current tv deal. It continues after the current one finishes.

It's £146m / 5 = £29.2m
Now if ALL of that went to SL clubs (ie none to RFL) that would = £2.43m per club per year.
But it's highly likely the RFL will take a cut. They'll have to. So that's would make it £2.246m per club per year.

Or if the current distribution system is maintained then the Championships clubs get a share too. Plus £2m is taken from the deal and shared equally to all the clubs.
That would make it:
£146m - £2m = £144m
£144m / 5 = £28.8m
£28.8m / 14 = £2.057m plus an equal share of the £2m.

This isn't about what the clubs are CURRENTLY getting as that's under the CURRENT TV deal. The new TV deal, which starts AFTER the current one ends, is £146m for 5 years. That some payments under that are brought forward is irrelevent to the amount and length of the deal.

We aren't getting 182m over the next 7 years. Clubs aren't getting over £2m when the new contract starts. The certainly aren't getting 2.5m

They are getting in total, with grants and a 'charitable contribution' about 1.8m but closer to 1.6m in just money. They were getting closer to 1.2m

We have signed a new 5 year deal. That deal means SL will get 146m over the next 7 years (including this one);

Pay TV makes money from subscriptions and advertising not from viewing figures. What if 100k of RL viewers also watch soccer and would have Sky TV anyway? What if only 10k of RU viewers also watch soccer and wouldn't have BT Sport if it wasn't for the RU. What if RU fans are happy to pay for a subscription but only watch 1 in 4 games? We got the best ever deal and a significant increase, that's a result and that's what business is about not about comparing yourselves endlessly to a sport that we split from 120 years ago.

The TV deal is broken down as follows :-

SLE £146.76m
Championship £14.58m
League One £1.82m
Challenge Cup & Internationals £20.04m
Charitable Foundations £17.80m

The share out of the SLE value is pretty complicated so I'll try to explain it as best I can.

Firstly, the RFL take a 10% cut of the full value as their fee for brokering the deal (previously SLE were paying ~15% to IMG for this). This leaves £132.08m to be shared out by SLE.

The clubs have already had £300k each of the deal as an advance payment (note - 14 clubs received this not 12) which accounted for a further £4.2m of the money. Furthermore, the 12 SL clubs are receiving top ups to the current deal this year and next year as advances against the next contract (£350k each this year, £400k each next year). This accounts for a further £9.0m of the money.

So, by the time the contract kicks in a total of £13.2m will already have been paid out to the clubs in advance.

This leaves £118.8m to be divided over 5 years between the members of SLE. There are of course 13 members of SLE - the 12 clubs and the RFL. Therefore, each member will receive £9.13m over the duration of the 5 year deal. Which equates to ~£1.825m per member per season.

So basically the entire premise of this thread was based on massively wrong figures and now we are into the debate of how much was the actual figure.

Surely somewhere it say the deal is for x years at y amount of money.

If a player signs a new contract for the next 3 years, they don't call it a 4 year deal. It's a 3 year extention to the current deal. Therefore a 3 year deal.

If the RFL have made a 5 year extention, that does not make it 7 years, because it was signed 2 years in advance.

Indeed, and thanks to the clarification from Derwent we now have all the answers

The rfl are taking nearly £30m between now and 2021? Plus the cc and international money? That is absolutely mental. What on earth are they doing with that money considering they have sport England money for amateur and youth development, and a grant for elite development. What are the spending so much money on?

No, I never claimed it didn't happen, it was pretty obvious I'd made a mistake, a bit like yours stating that RU were getting less, care to retract that or are you insisting that we are getting a better deal financially? Either way my point is still valid, we've being massively undersold.

My comparison of the total amount for the SKY deal of £182 over 5 years for almost everything makes it even worse when you break down what the ESL portion is. I would hazard a guess the RFL didn't even bother contacting other organisation's to try to get more, far too easy to say look, we got all this. When 'this' isn't what we are worth, not by a long chalk.
The problem being that that is what the clubs are stuck with, there is little if any room for manoeuvre re salaries, in fact as it stands the amount of money a club can spend on its squad is approximately 30% less in real terms since the £1.8M cap was introduced. That it hasn't increased is (in part) a direct result of the failure of the RFL to market and garner a higher sum for the sport.

No, your mistake was claiming our sport was being "massively undersold" before you realised your figures were £92m out. We're not being massively undersold in any way.

RU is a bigger sport, at league level not by much but it is. Their TV deal is bigger than ours, not by much but it is and they've had to settle for BTSport which has significantly less subscribers than SKY. I wonder why didn't SKY outbid BT.

This massively undersold TV deal was voted for by ALL SL chairmen, except a multimillionnaire who's new to the sport and whose decisions so far have a left quite a bit to be desired.

This thread is ridiculous.

But if all the "ridiculous" threads were removed it would be a very quiet forum