www.hullfc.com/article/32674/sup ... sky-sports I just hope this is an improved money deal a lot of clubs are struggling, the sport has been undervalued by sky for a long time when you consider what they are apparently paying for union, and how popular our sport is to sky's viewing, rugby league should be properly rewarded and covered hope this deal is a shot in the arm our game needs

www.hullfc.com/article/32674/sup ... sky-sports I just hope this is an improved money deal a lot of clubs are struggling, the sport has been undervalued by sky for a long time when you consider what they are apparently paying for union, and how popular our sport is to sky's viewing, rugby league should be properly rewarded and covered hope this deal is a shot in the arm our game needs

I like sky and all that, but they need a serious shake up when it comes to the commentary team. Eddie and Stevo are clueles. No one could care less about the pointless facts Clarkey dishes out. Would personally love a character like Vossy at the helm, the guys rugby league mad and I enjoyed the games over the world cup so much more when he was commentating! Just adds that passion and enthusiasm for the game.

could not agree more Eddie and Steveo had their day 6 years ago, full revamp in definite order more ex super league players involved like Carney he at least been a breath of fresh air , lets hope sky not got us on the cheap again though

200 million from 2016 to 2021. Current deal till 2016 worth 127. Not sure how it's cut though with championship being back on sky. 100 games a year

Catalan home games to be shown to .

That will be why they voted for the new structure then, they will have been promised a bit more of the cake from sky and it will not have an impact on there gates as the French do not get it from sky errmmm

I think Catalan abstained they were originally against the new structure but since seemed to have been persuaded to at least abstain, perhaps now we know why. They will be getting a bit more cake but the rest of Super League won't be getting much of a hike in their grant from the Sky money at all, as the lion share is to go to the Championship Clubs who it is rumoured will see their salary cap extended to £900,000. From a personal point of view tying ourselves to one company until 2021 is a worry when you consider what sort of players BT sports and Premier Sport might be by then, and the sort of commentators Sky seem to think are fitting for our great game, a shorter deal would have kept sky on their toes and left an opening for re-negotiation in the future.

What annoys me about sky is they pretend there promoting the game when in reality they do not want to pay what its worth to them in reflection to the viewing figures they receive, like you say the lack of a serious competitor is the real problem, disappointing if we and the other super league clubs have received little or no increase due to the fact most clubs apart from a couple are not self financed and are relying on a rich owner, the league should have at least left some scope to sell rights to other channels like the premier league. I have noticed an increase in good games now only on BT sport and I am left watching championship games on sky its a disgrace sky have lost the explicit right to broadcast the premier league but not dropped their price, in truth I only get it for the rugby but its a real cheek we should do the same, sell so many games to Premier or one of the main channels to raise more cash for clubs

This isn't true, even split 25 (all clubs in sl and sl2 get an even share plus the rfl) ways the clubs will still be getting 1.6million, which is the first time it is higher than the original deal.

The policy review states the top 2 clubs of the championship will get a half share each of a full super league share, with the rest getting a base of 600,000 (I believe I'll have to check) with add ons for final league position. This is vastly improved but still leaving a much bigger pot for super league clubs

Whilst a rough guess, I'd imagine the clubs should be getting around 2million a year from this deal. Considering bt paid 152million for union (a year less but European competition rights as well) the 200million deal we have seems very good indeed.

Gives the game stability but I do feel the RFL are lazy in accepting a long deal.

They now can sit on their laurels and leave Sky to do the marketing and chasing big partners.

Selfishly as a Hull resident who has to pay to get BT Sport, I'm glad that its staying with SKY so that I only have 1 bill to pay.

the next thing they need to do with the TV deals is push the BBC to show the Super League Show nationwide in a regular time slot (Sunday night at 11pm after MOTD2 seemed to work for the World Cup Highlights) we also need to get the BBC to return to showing 2 Challenge Cup games per round.

Well I bow to your better judgement I was just basing my comments on what I was told went on at yesterdays Super league Clubs meeting. We'll have to wait and see. But the Super league Clubs won't be getting £2m from Sky!

It's not lazy really though. It's financially solid knowing you've a solid income for many years. When it's stable sponsors will be more ready to commit to both the main body and the individual teams. The whole thing is starting to make more sense now.
imagine for instance Wakefield get relegated if it was a straight up down system coming in. Their sponsor then has their product stuck in a lower division with little coverage
this new system gives the championship higher profile and keeps even relegated teams in the spotlight!
But with greater TV monies the teams can invest more to stay up and compete, but should they go down their profile stays higher due to the coverage of the championship and more so when they integrate later in the season. Much more attractive to a potential sponsor which is yet more money!

A week or so ago the new system didn't seem such a good idea to me, but combined with this better deal it is starting to look like the shake up the games needed in this country!

Also the deal was apparently as good as it was due to the threat of bt and premier. So in a way the competition has been good but we've signed with the still and likely to be strongest for a long time of them!

So lets work this out.

£127M/5=£25.4M
£25.4M/16=£1.58m for 16 shares (14 teams,1 share for the RFL and 1 share to the none SL clubs)

£200M/5=£40M
13 (12 teams and 1 RFL share for the RFL)x£1.58M=£20.63M
Now even if every SL2 team (12) got 600K (That isn't what is happening) that would only equate to £7.2M

£20.63M+£7.2M=£27.83M
So where is the other £12.17M going (As I said it's actually more than that). It looks like the SL1 clubs are due around £1M more each a year at the least.

Included in this is EVERY Catalans home game shown on red button which is 10 more SL games then currently as well as championship rugby back on Sky.

Have I missed anything?

I like my numbers, but the deal clincher should have been Voss.

Que?

Edit -You mean Andrew Voss don't you. That would have been a superb bonus I agree.

It's at the point now where Sky need to act on Eddie and Stevo. It's like Last of the Summer Wine, 15 years past it sell-by date, a tad less funny and more cringe-worthy with each passing year. Because the deterioration is so incremental, you notice it less. Then Vossy arrives with wit, insight, passion and warmth and you realise the potential for Sky to take massive strides forward in its presentation. In its current guise, the commentary is simply unacceptable and unworthy of a sport trying to move forwards and engage a new generation. Why do they not see it?

Andy Grey was the same for them in the premier league and if he hadn't been caught being sexist he would still be there now. I think it's that SKY think fans like familiarity even if the commentators are dinosaurs.

You'll have no complaints from me .. I've heard Premier sports have ditch plans to show the Championship this year . Maybe Dave woods could be tempted over ! but Voss would be a great coup for Sky .

Where has the idea that SL is undervalued come from, we get may more than the sport is worth to Sky already.

And Dave Woods, sorry, but he's as bad as DDD, likewise George (I only talk about L**ds) Riley

I suspect the reason Sky pay more for Union is something to do with the fact the average union fan probably has more disposable income than the average League fan. Meaning Sky can charge a premium for advertising during Union.

The same reason you are more likely to get luxury car manufacturers advertising in Rugby World, rather than in Rugby League Monthly, or whatever the equivalent publication is.

www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/f ... rd-rfl-sky And also..... Wigan chairman Ian Lenagan questions Rugby Football League chairman Brian Barwick's decision to negotiate Super League's next television deal three years before its current package ends. The sport has announced a new five-year deal with Sky Sports worth around £200m, with the current £127m deal set to expire at the end of 2016. Lenagan says: "I believe it is a dreadful commercial decision to be agreeing in 2014, with three years still to go on Super League's current deal, a new deal for Super League TV rights for the five future years at only a 30% increase and without going out to tender. "Super League should have achieved considerably more than that from committing the next eight years or should have extended for two years only, leaving us then able to renegotiate for 2017-21 in what appears to be an increasingly competitive market in favour of sellers." He also says that the clubs were given 24 hours to make a decision and he regrets agreeing to it. Are these guys right ? Imo koukash gets it right (well on most of his opinions on the link above)

www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/f ... rd-rfl-sky And also..... Wigan chairman Ian Lenagan questions Rugby Football League chairman Brian Barwick's decision to negotiate Super League's next television deal three years before its current package ends. The sport has announced a new five-year deal with Sky Sports worth around £200m, with the current £127m deal set to expire at the end of 2016. Lenagan says: "I believe it is a dreadful commercial decision to be agreeing in 2014, with three years still to go on Super League's current deal, a new deal for Super League TV rights for the five future years at only a 30% increase and without going out to tender. "Super League should have achieved considerably more than that from committing the next eight years or should have extended for two years only, leaving us then able to renegotiate for 2017-21 in what appears to be an increasingly competitive market in favour of sellers." He also says that the clubs were given 24 hours to make a decision and he regrets agreeing to it. Are these guys right ? Imo koukash gets it right (well on most of his opinions on the link above)

There was a similar article yesterday: www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/f ... ee-players Quote Each of the 14 Super League clubs will receive a £300,000 top-up on their £1.2m allocation from the existing Sky deal this season, and from next year the 12 that survive – with the bottom two being demoted this September, the first time there has been automatic relegation from the Super League in seven years – will receive more than £1.8m each'" Worth getting relegated.

There was a similar article yesterday: www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/f ... ee-players Quote Each of the 14 Super League clubs will receive a £300,000 top-up on their £1.2m allocation from the existing Sky deal this season, and from next year the 12 that survive – with the bottom two being demoted this September, the first time there has been automatic relegation from the Super League in seven years – will receive more than £1.8m each'" Worth getting relegated.

speaks volumes about the promotion and marketing of our great game that one of its own supporters doesn't know its own magazine rugby league world (not a dig at you just the games own marketing )

we need a tv ad promotion similar to the one they did in Australia with tina turner to attract new interest ,I know we cannot compare countrys

The problem is the Premier League football clubs will get £5b for their new 2015 3 year deal! Most of that from Sky. The previous 2012 deal which was around £3b was a 70% increase on the one before that. We clearly should be doing better and agreeing a deal for so long before the current one has expired seems to be pretty stupid but it's perhaps surprising that Sky even talk to the RFL because the game is so far down the pecking order and is becoming the flat cap joke that it was at the BBC with Eddie Waring. The NRL just don't have that sort of competition.