No more domestic broadcasts online as of next season

[sephjnr]

Source (EFL)

Massive step backwards IMO. Way to get people more reliant on Sky's bloated, outdated subscription models. Also taking money directly out of the clubs' pockets.

[Lrrr]

5 minutes ago, sephjnr said:

Also taking money directly out of the clubs' pockets

Looks like it’s a 50% increase on the current deal, whether that relates to each club seeing 50% more will be seen but if it does it would bring in more then the club makes off streaming games. 

[Davefevs]

Remember seeing the original deal details, and thought it alluded to this.

Question becomes whether RTV has enough benefit for overseas (and VPN) alone to continue being its own service or not.

[sephjnr]

8 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Looks like it’s a 50% increase on the current deal, whether that relates to each club seeing 50% more will be seen but if it does it would bring in more then the club makes off streaming games. 

That's revenue to the EFL itself, not the clubs. It's taking control of the cash directly out of the clubs so I don't see they can report online streaming as revenue in any cases of FFFP questionning.

[Bat Fastard]

7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Remember seeing the original deal details, and thought it alluded to this.

Question becomes whether RTV has enough benefit for overseas (and VPN) alone to continue being its own service or not.

I really hope RTV does continue or it will be misery for a great many loyal and lifelong fans, who, for one reason or another, are unable to get to the Gate to watch their team. Maybe if the club raised the price to £12.50 perf match, it would pay for their trouble. If they hired a full time team, they could also maybe cover reserve matches and even the WFL matches.

[Eddie Hitler]

May I just note how hugely disappointed I am that ourt expert in the world of sports broadcasting, @Never to the dark side, didn't start this topic

[Ashtonboy]

Does this mean that Robin's tv cannot broadcast domestically at all?

[Mr Popodopolous]

This deal with Sky for what a £2-2.5m increase for a typical Championship club

Less possible disruption and hits to Gate Receipts with the whole kick-off times being here, there and everywhere.

Less revenue from club T.V. channels.

Maybe the costs outweigh the benefits but a Cost-Benefit Analysis would be interesting..on the other hand, in theory (although IPTV etc) no domestic streaming means it can incentivise fans showing up a bit more.

[exAtyeoMax]

Just now, Mr Popodopolous said:

This deal with Sky for what a £2-2.5m increase for a typical Championship club

Less possible disruption and hits to Gate Receipts with the whole kick-off times being here, there and everywhere.

Less revenue from club T.V. channels.

Maybe the costs outweigh the benefits but a Cost-Benefit Analysis would be interesting..on the other hand, in theory (although IPTV etc) no domestic streaming means it can incentivise fans showing up a bit more.

Not if it's a Monday night! *******

[Mr Popodopolous]

13 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

Not if it's a Monday night! *******

I remember one Monday night game but then I'm fortunate to life relatively close to AG less than an hour walk each way).

Crystal Palace under GJ. Warnock was not best pleased at how that one ended of course..

Edited April 12 by Mr Popodopolous

[Roe]

Seems pretty mental to keep the 3pm block only to just move half the games outside of that window to avoid the block anyway

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, Roe said:

Seems pretty mental to keep the 3pm block only to just move half the games outside of that window to avoid the block anyway

Ultimately to try to protect the Lower Leagues and grassroots. 

A free for all..how many would then just watch Liverpool, Man United or whoever is popular and attendances below the PL fall further.

Modern trends that really irritates "But who is your PL side, or your favoured PL side" (in addition to main side).

Edited April 12 by Mr Popodopolous

[exAtyeoMax]

21 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I remember one Monday night game but then I'm fortunate to life relatively close to AG less than an hour walk each way).

Crystal Palace under GJ. Warnock was not best pleased at how that one ended of course..

I'm sure a lot of kids won't coming on a school night. 

Too complicated for me to come on a Monday night, and possibly a Friday night. 

I just wished they'd leave the **** alone.

 

 

[Roe]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Ultimately to try to protect the Lower Leagues and grassroots. 

A free for all..how many would then just watch Liverpool, Man United or whoever is popular and attendances below the PL fall further.

Modern trends that really irritates "But who is your PL side, or your favoured PL side" (in addition to main side).

I guess that's true, although I'm not sure that really helps any more.

Enough people already get their football fix from the "big" games and couldn't give a toss about their local teams regardless of what time the games are

[RedRoss]

Aren't they just saying you can stream from Sky Sports instead of Robins TV or iFollow for other clubs? Looks like you can use a Now TV day pass or month pass if your not a Sky customer already. 

As long as the prices are similar it's not a huge difference really just paying someone else? Unless I'm missing something. 

[Barrs Court Red]

8 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Ultimately to try to protect the Lower Leagues and grassroots. 

A free for all..how many would then just watch Liverpool, Man United or whoever is popular and attendances below the PL fall further.

Modern trends that really irritates "But who is your PL side, or your favoured PL side" (in addition to main side).

The cynic in my thinks the 3pm block will disappear if non-league crowds continue to grow. 

[Silvio Dante]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Remember seeing the original deal details, and thought it alluded to this.

Question becomes whether RTV has enough benefit for overseas (and VPN) alone to continue being its own service or not.

The article says that existing overseas video and audio streaming services will continue, as will audio for domestic services. In practical terms most RTV income comes from VPN or overseas so I can’t see much changing

55 minutes ago, Ashtonboy said:

Does this mean that Robin's tv cannot broadcast domestically at all?

Yep, for video. It only could (non VPN) for non Saturday games anyway so it’s the midweek games being lost.

3 minutes ago, RedRoss said:

Aren't they just saying you can stream from Sky Sports instead of Robins TV or iFollow for other clubs? Looks like you can use a Now TV day pass or month pass if your not a Sky customer already. 

As long as the prices are similar it's not a huge difference really just paying someone else? Unless I'm missing something. 

Kind of, yeah. Example here is Plymouth on Easter Monday - that was available domestically on RTV as it fell outside the  blackout period. It’ll now be available via a Sky Stream instead (or on VPN instead should you so wish).

——

Effectively the extra games streamed here are the additional ones moved to non 3pm Saturday (and ones such as Swansea home this year that weren’t streamed domestically) - scale and frequency will be the big deal here. For 3pm kickoffs they still won’t be streamed but VPN and Robins TV remains your friend.

[Davefevs]

47 minutes ago, sephjnr said:

That's revenue to the EFL itself, not the clubs. It's taking control of the cash directly out of the clubs so I don't see they can report online streaming as revenue in any cases of FFFP questionning.

As Mr P states, clubs are expected to receive circa £2-2.5m extra in revenue from the EFL as a result.  In return, I expect online broadcasting revenue to decrease.  These are our Broadcasting revenues in recent years:

This will include plenty more than RTV, ie RTV is a smallish percentage of these…and this will go down.

We will undoubtedly see lower attendances (like for like) and all the revenue that comes from that.

I can only assume the £2-2.5m more than makes up for any lost revenues?

44 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

I really hope RTV does continue or it will be misery for a great many loyal and lifelong fans, who, for one reason or another, are unable to get to the Gate to watch their team. Maybe if the club raised the price to £12.50 perf match, it would pay for their trouble. If they hired a full time team, they could also maybe cover reserve matches and even the WFL matches.

There will be something for overseas (VPN) viewers.  I do wonder whether we will revert to using iFollow.  I have no idea though.

39 minutes ago, Ashtonboy said:

Does this mean that Robin's tv cannot broadcast domestically at all?

Correct.

[Davefevs]

5 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Kind of, yeah. Example here is Plymouth on Easter Monday - that was available domestically on RTV as it fell outside the  blackout period. It’ll now be available via a Sky Stream instead (or on VPN instead should you so wish).

I really hope Sky Stream has a record or watch later option.

[sephjnr]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

As Mr P states, clubs are expected to receive circa £2-2.5m extra in revenue from the EFL as a result.  In return, I expect online broadcasting revenue to decrease.  These are our Broadcasting revenues in recent years:

This will include plenty more than RTV, ie RTV is a smallish percentage of these…and this will go down.

We will undoubtedly see lower attendances (like for like) and all the revenue that comes from that.

I can only assume the £2-2.5m more than makes up for any lost revenues?

In terms of how it can be reported to be FFFP compliant I don't see - at face value - how it's an equivalent. There may be some allowances for this, I don't know.

[Bristol Rob]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I really hope Sky Stream has a record or watch later option.

If the Red button service from Virgin Media is anything to go by, I'll be grateful if it works.

[sephjnr]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I really hope Sky Stream has a record or watch later option.

This is the issue I have - if the delivery is just having more matches for their existing channels then this is not an improvement for the average viewer. If Sky themselves start an on-demand service that can sit alongside or replace either their main broadcasts or NOW then that's an option that wil markedly increase revenue from people who don't want to pay three figures a month. Such was the main way of breaking Sky's dominance for good, and if they've bought the right to it in-house that's one of their main problems no longer being an issue.

Edited April 12 by sephjnr

[RedRoss]

Just now, sephjnr said:

This is the issue I have - if the delivery is just having more matches for their existing channels then this is not an improvement for the average viewer. If Sky themselves start an on-demand service that can sit alongside or replace either their main broadcasts or NOW then that's an option that wil markedly increase revenue for people who don't want to pay three figures a month. Such was the main way of breaking Sky's dominance for good, and if they've bought the right to it in-house that's one of their main problems no longer an issue.

They've linked to their Now TV options for non Sky customers. Its 11.99 for the day or £26 for the month. Not massively different to RTV or iFollow. It won't be three figures a month. 

Can't see any issue with this, we look to be increasing our revenue with this deal as shown by Dave. 

[cheese]

It says that Sky will stream 328 matches per season for the Championship.  I didn't realise Leeds played that many games in a season.

[sephjnr]

3 minutes ago, RedRoss said:

They've linked to their Now TV options for non Sky customers. Its 11.99 for the day or £26 for the month. Not massively different to RTV or iFollow. It won't be three figures a month. 

Can't see any issue with this, we look to be increasing our revenue with this deal as shown by Dave. 

The issue is that it will still be whatever Sky feels like streaming. And the question as to whether or not that revenue granted by the league (instead of taken from customers) can be declared as a mitigator in financial reports is still unanswered.

Edited April 12 by sephjnr

[Sleepy1968]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Remember seeing the original deal details, and thought it alluded to this.

Question becomes whether RTV has enough benefit for overseas (and VPN) alone to continue being its own service or not.

I know it's hindsight, but the EFL not taking 25% of a combined PL+EFL combined deal that the PL offered back in the day was the worst move ever.

On second point, don't most overseas RTV subscribers have residence in the UK? So hopefully little impact on numbers. Also as all the broadcast facilities are in place, hopefully the broadcast costs are quite low.

What worries me is that sky sports restructure the sports pass, making costs prohibitive.

[Silvio Dante]

3 minutes ago, RedRoss said:

They've linked to their Now TV options for non Sky customers. Its 11.99 for the day or £26 for the month. Not massively different to RTV or iFollow. It won't be three figures a month. 

Can't see any issue with this, we look to be increasing our revenue with this deal as shown by Dave. 

It’s the knock on impact tbh. Base level game we make more money - but there will be lost revenue as less people attend each game.
 

On the ST thread a few people made the point they’d see how the new deal impacted the number of games they could attend and that may impact their decision in 25/26. I don’t think therefore we’ll see the net impact until the season after next as that’ll show how many attendees we’re losing (and subsequent ticket/match day income) - noting that’s not binary and a promotion challenge next year would drive renewals even if ST holders could attend less games.

The counterbalance here is that Saturday workers and “Downs League” players may be able to attend more games. I’d hope the club are looking at innovative ticket ideas to tap into that.

[Davefevs]

23 minutes ago, sephjnr said:

In terms of how it can be reported to be FFFP compliant I don't see - at face value - how it's an equivalent. There may be some allowances for this, I don't know.

I’m not sure I understand the question.  Sorry.

In summary (at simplistic level) for FFP we report our profit & loss to the EFL and are allowed to deduct a few costs, e.g. Depreciation costs, Women's costs, Academy costs.  The resultant figure is our EFL P&S (FFP) “loss” (could be a profit).  Add the 3 years together and hopefully it’s less than £39m.

Top 3 items likely to go down.  4th item gonna go up by £2-£2.5m.

There will be no allowances for lost broadcasting or gate / matchday or any other revenue losses.  The EFL (member clubs) have agreed that the extra revenue each club receives will more than offset other lost revenue.

 

[exAtyeoMax]

9 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

It’s the knock on impact tbh. Base level game we make more money - but there will be lost revenue as less people attend each game.
 

On the ST thread a few people made the point they’d see how the new deal impacted the number of games they could attend and that may impact their decision in 25/26. I don’t think therefore we’ll see the net impact until the season after next as that’ll show how many attendees we’re losing (and subsequent ticket/match day income) - noting that’s not binary and a promotion challenge next year would drive renewals even if ST holders could attend less games.

The counterbalance here is that Saturday workers and “Downs League” players may be able to attend more games. I’d hope the club are looking at innovative ticket ideas to tap into that.

Yes, I suppose it depends when the SKY schedule is published, how far in advance they will change KO times. At the moment there seems to be a total disregard of fans and how they can actually attend games. 

[Bristol Rob]

2 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

Yes, I suppose it depends when the SKY schedule is published, how far in advance they will change KO times. At the moment there seems to be a total disregard of fans and how they can actually attend games. 

Sure it was posted on here that once Sky have got their mitts on the fixture list, the games will be selected until January.

At which point, you would expect them to pick games based on form/goals/playoffs.

Obviously the moment the rains starts to fall and games get postponed this could all go out the window.