PREMIER SPORTS TV LATEST
Post by Premier Sports TV on Facebook, 06 April 2011:
"It is a shame the number did not reach the point were revenue sharing became an option. It is also a shame we have learnt the Bsq is not much more popluar than NRL and NASCAR in GB when it comes to people parting with cash to watch it. We put on Barrow match at last minute as we needed to cover a game and having listened to fans did not want to move it at short notice so it clashed with Barca game. 80 games a season would cost 1.2 million so I don't think that would work unless you got 25,000 people paying for it! We never promised a highlights show it was just mentioned as something we would look at. We look and decided at £200,000 a year it could not be justified. Anyway, enjoy the end of the season."
"Rob, forgot to mention your headline is a bit mis-leading. It will make money but not for everyone. It might have been better if the conference shared the pot out equally but then clubs on TV would argue it having games on TV would affect their gate. Not sure if that argument totally holds up mind you."
"You maybe correct Rob. The viewing figures were very good for Setanta but I guess you look at that and think if you have 100,000-150,000 viewing some games you only need 10% to actually pay for it to work."
Full thread at --->
Was posted in response to
Conference boss: Premier Sports deal won't make money
Interesting to hear that Brian Lee was in the parliament today giving evidence and said that only the clubs that have been shown live will make any money from the Blue Square Bet deal, from their appearance fees. Suggests that subscription levels (unsurprisingly) didn't reach the level to trigger a cash distribution to all clubs.
Proposal posted by Martin Shaw
"Why don't you take the FA Trophy final? Doesn't look like any other TV
company is taking it, but I reckon that would pull in some subscribers."
Latest | April 2011