NEW EFL tv rights deal 5 years 595 million

KevinMcallister

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,355
Likes
736
Location
Leeds
Supports
Bielsa's bucket
Thread starter #1
35% increase on the previous deal

it's still nice knowing Ipswich play annually once on TV and get the same tv money as Leeds, Derby and Villa who combined make up 75% of the tv fixtures

well in EFL

WHAT do we want? equal share of tv games not Leeds on 28 times , Villa 22 and Derby 18 and Ipswich on once!
 

Luke_1884

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,928
Likes
560
Location
Doncaster
Supports
Derby County
Twitter
@Barraclive
#3
Can imagine our Mel will still be going ape.

Why not, way too much money being thrown about for Huddersfield vs Brighton in the big league.
 

SMH

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,404
Likes
322
Location
Cheshire
Supports
Wigan
#4
Maybe next time they shouldn’t go throwing around threats unless they have the bollocks to back it up...
 

Tom_ITFC

Active Member
Messages
769
Likes
115
Supports
Ipswich
#5
Frankly, whether you’re on 28 times or just the once, the money SHOULD be equal. Why should Leeds get the edge on the league when something out of the other clubs control would dictate it

It is quite ironic though, fans moan about them being on tv and ruining the schedule but want more money from sky...
 
Last edited:

QPR_Matt

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,133
Likes
186
Location
Hampton
Supports
QPR
#6
How do they share out the live games in the Premiership? It does seem totally screwed with the variation of how many times certain teams are on compared to others. But then from a Sky POV they have to go with who will bring in the viewers.

I think having a more equal spread is the better way to do it, as it is unfair on the bigger teams. But, the split should be the same, like it is in the Premiership or you end up with La Liga situation where it is very hard for other teams to challenge.

Especially when clubs get relegated. They would end up with more money from tv plus parachute payments. Everyone else would be fucked.

From a selfish point of view, it works for me with the red button. I don't go to many away games and being on telly has no impact on my decision making. But I pay for Sky so makes it more worth the money for me.
 

Tom_ITFC

Active Member
Messages
769
Likes
115
Supports
Ipswich
#7
How do they share it out in the Premiership? It does seem totally screwed with the variation of how many times certain teams are on compared to others. But then from a Sky POV they have to go with who will bring in the viewers.

From a selfish point of view, it works for me with the red button. I don't go to many away games and being on telly has no impact on my decision making. But I pay for Sky so makes it more worth the money for me.
The red button has definitely hit our mid week attendances. We have always had a drop in mid week as I imagine a fair few of our fans come a fair way plus the drop in away fans. Now with the red button, I’d say this has added another 600/700 drop
 

AFCB_Mark

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
Messages
3,473
Likes
1,062
Supports
A single unitary authority for urban Dorset
#8
How do they share out the live games in the Premiership? It does seem totally screwed with the variation of how many times certain teams are on compared to others. But then from a Sky POV they have to go with who will bring in the viewers.

I think having a more equal spread is the better way to do it, as it is unfair on the bigger teams. But, the split should be the same, like it is in the Premiership or you end up with La Liga situation where it is very hard for other teams to challenge.

Especially when clubs get relegated. They would end up with more money from tv plus parachute payments. Everyone else would be fucked.

From a selfish point of view, it works for me with the red button. I don't go to many away games and being on telly has no impact on my decision making. But I pay for Sky so makes it more worth the money for me.
The more well known clubs with more viewers will get picked for TV more often. As one of the smallest clubs, Bournemouth only appear on tele maybe half a dozen times a season, and usually that's when up against one of the big clubs.

The overall TV money pot that gets split between all 20, but to give the big clubs a slight advantage there's a weighting geared to your final league position. 2m extra per position. So if 20th get's 100m, 1st get's 140m, etc. So that grants the big clubs a bonus. Also you do get a couple hundred thousand match fee for being picked, so again the big clubs will collect more over the course of the season as they get picked most weeks, but still the 'cannon fodder' clubs do alright out of it.

Though there are mumblings in the PL about why the small clubs who aren't so marketable for Sky, should get quite so much. It allows us to at least vaguely compete with, and occasionally bloody the nose of a Liverpool or Chelsea etc. Which they consider to be rather rude of us. After all we're supposed to just roll over and have our bellies tickled.
 

SF_

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,139
Likes
2,048
Supports
Preston North End
#9
The FL should negotiate an equal number of matches to be televised for each team.

Sky will kick off because obviously Leeds and Villa get more viewers but they shouldn't be holding the power here.
 

SMH

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,404
Likes
322
Location
Cheshire
Supports
Wigan
#10
The FL should negotiate an equal number of matches to be televised for each team.

Sky will kick off because obviously Leeds and Villa get more viewers but they shouldn't be holding the power here.
The problem then would be that Sky simply wouldn’t pay the money it currently is for the deal and there’s little chance any other broadcaster would either. It makes zero financial sense for them to do so when they are only allowed to show their biggest cash cow teams in terms of viewers, a few times a season. And what about when the season gets the final third and Sky want to cover the promotion games but can’t because they’ve already reached their limit of games televising a certain team/teams in the promotion race over the season?

Sky/other prospective broadcasters will always have the power in these sorts of negotiations because they have the money and without it, we’ll all be up the creek financially. The only time the EFL gain power is when a number of broadcasters want the rights and they can start an auction. Unfortunately the Championship/EFL can’t attract that sort of bidding interest like the Premier League can.
 

SF_

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,139
Likes
2,048
Supports
Preston North End
#11
The problem then would be that Sky simply wouldn’t pay the money it currently is for the deal and there’s little chance any other broadcaster would either. It makes zero financial sense for them to do so when they are only allowed to show their biggest cash cow teams in terms of viewers, a few times a season. And what about when the season gets the final third and Sky want to cover the promotion games but can’t because they’ve already reached their limit of games televising a certain team/teams in the promotion race over the season?

Sky/other prospective broadcasters will always have the power in these sorts of negotiations because they have the money and without it, we’ll all be up the creek financially. The only time the EFL gain power is when a number of broadcasters want the rights and they can start an auction. Unfortunately the Championship/EFL can’t attract that sort of bidding interest like the Premier League can.
I'm sure someone like ITV could afford it, don't see any potential issues with that..
 

SMH

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,404
Likes
322
Location
Cheshire
Supports
Wigan
#12
I'm sure someone like ITV could afford it, don't see any potential issues with that..
I don’t think the EFL would do any sort of business with ITV after the ITV Digital collapse.

The EFL would be best off breaking the Championship away from L1 and L2 and auction off two separate TV deals IMO. It would be throwing L1 and L2 and it’s teams under the bus financially as no one would pay any sort of decent money for them, but it would probably increase the value of the Championship TV rights and get more money for it’s teams.
 

SF_

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,139
Likes
2,048
Supports
Preston North End
#13
I don’t think the EFL would do any sort of business with ITV after the ITV Digital collapse.

The EFL would be best off breaking the Championship away from L1 and L2 and auction off two separate TV deals IMO. It would be throwing L1 and L2 and it’s teams under the bus financially as no one would pay any sort of decent money for them, but it would probably increase the value of the Championship TV rights and get more money for it’s teams.
Yeah, I was taking the piss.
 

Tom_ITFC

Active Member
Messages
769
Likes
115
Supports
Ipswich
#14
I don’t think the EFL would do any sort of business with ITV after the ITV Digital collapse.

The EFL would be best off breaking the Championship away from L1 and L2 and auction off two separate TV deals IMO. It would be throwing L1 and L2 and it’s teams under the bus financially as no one would pay any sort of decent money for them, but it would probably increase the value of the Championship TV rights and get more money for it’s teams.
Surely your second point would just take the argument down a level? Championship clubs not happy about the prem being separate would then be League 1 not happy with the Championship.

It’d be our luck if that did happen considering where we are at the moment and where we were when ITV Digital collapsed!
 

SMH

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,404
Likes
322
Location
Cheshire
Supports
Wigan
#15
Yeah, I was taking the piss.
Apologies, I’m a tit.
Surely your second point would just take the argument down a level? Championship clubs not happy about the prem being separate would then be League 1 not happy with the Championship.

It’d be our luck if that did happen considering where we are at the moment and where we were when ITV Digital collapsed!
It would no doubt. L1 and L2 would rightly be furious as the gap (already significant) would widen even further between the Championship and the bottom two leagues. But I suspect if the big Championship clubs want a better deal, that is probably the only way they’ll get it. Marketing the Championship separately and without the burden of having to televise L1 and L2 games would provide the carrot for TV broadcasters both here and oversees.
 

QPR_Matt

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,133
Likes
186
Location
Hampton
Supports
QPR
#16
Wouldn't foreign tv companies be able to buy rights for just the championship? The Premier League sells packages abroad that they do not offer to UK broadcasters so could they do something like that?
 

denzel ecfc

Active Member
Messages
581
Likes
98
Supports
Exeter City
Twitter
@darrendenzel
#17
I'd happily see my club on Sky more if it meant that League Two got more than a paltry 8% of the whole deal. Though now Pompey and Coventry have been promoted they don't seem interested in showing up any more
 

denzel ecfc

Active Member
Messages
581
Likes
98
Supports
Exeter City
Twitter
@darrendenzel
#18
Apologies, I’m a tit.
I don’t think the EFL would do any sort of business with ITV after the ITV Digital collapse.

The EFL would be best off breaking the Championship away from L1 and L2 and auction off two separate TV deals IMO. It would be throwing L1 and L2 and it’s teams under the bus financially as no one would pay any sort of decent money for them, but it would probably increase the value of the Championship TV rights and get more money for it’s teams.

It would no doubt. L1 and L2 would rightly be furious as the gap (already significant) would widen even further between the Championship and the bottom two leagues. But I suspect if the big Championship clubs want a better deal, that is probably the only way they’ll get it. Marketing the Championship separately and without the burden of having to televise L1 and L2 games would provide the carrot for TV broadcasters both here and oversees.
You're right, who wants to see League One? It's not as if big teams like Leeds, Sheffield clubs, Norwich, Southampton and Leicester have played there in the last ten seasons.
 

MagpieBee

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,758
Likes
572
Supports
Brentford, Newcastle, Chicago Bears
#20
What are the audiences for EFL games compared with Prem games on SKY?
They don’t even come close. While attendances aren’t so far behind that doesn’t mean audiences of fans in other parts of the country want to watch Championship games.

I’m sure Sky would be happy to show all the teams equally if they got to show a lot more games, or got a significant discount on the price. But those are the only realistic options.
 

villa loyal

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,628
Likes
668
Location
staffordshire
Supports
aston villa
#22
What are the audiences for EFL games compared with Prem games on SKY?
Put it this way. When Leeds played Newcastle the other season, 800k people tuned in. It was a top end of the table clash and a genuine big game with both clubs having a big fanbase. That 800k figure would be considered average for a prem game, so I’d say at least twice as many people watch the prem games.
 

MagpieBee

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,758
Likes
572
Supports
Brentford, Newcastle, Chicago Bears
#23
I think I saw a figure of around 400k for Championship and 900k for Prem. But that's average and if you take out games involving the big 6 I'm sure they are about the same, if not lower
The average for the Championship is lower than that, it was under 300k on average the season before last when Newcastle were in the league, and they were driving up viewing audiences (9 of the top 10 viewed games featured Newcastle, the top game may have been over 800k but the 10th most watched game was only 392k).

That was an "outlier" season as the league had Villa, Leeds and Newcastle in it. It's usually even lower than that.
 

blademan89

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,974
Likes
1,961
Supports
sheffield united
#24
These were our peak viewing figures up until January last season, that Leeds one was the highest in the league until that point, not sure if it remained that way. To compare to a lower prem game, Cardiff v Newcastle this season had an average of 355,000 viewers throughout the game, not a vast difference.
Screenshot_20181121-190245_Samsung Internet.jpg
 

blademan89

Well-Known Member
Messages
7,974
Likes
1,961
Supports
sheffield united
#25
However between 1 and 1.5m watch most games involving the big clubs. Everton v West ham had over 900k. Prem clubs get about 10x the money but certainly not 10x the viewing figures.
 

SMH

Well-Known Member
Messages
1,404
Likes
322
Location
Cheshire
Supports
Wigan
#29
Is that all part of the sky money though, worldwide viewing?
I‘m pretty sure worldwide viewing of the EFL is part of the Sky money. Whereas the PL get a seperate TV deal/deals for worldwide viewing. That has to change as I firmly believe the EFL should be doing a lot better than they currently are at selling the Championship to other countries. However again I think having to include the other two leagues as part of any package hurts the Championship in that respect.
 
Messages
20
Likes
9
Location
Leeds
Supports
Leeds
#30
A lot of different answers!

If a "top" Championship game gets 800k and "top" Prem games get 1-1.5m that's not bad going. Obviously this doesn't mean that the same numbers drive subscriptions (which I think is more important than audience figures in terms of value to SKY), but if Everton West Ham is only pulling 900k then the Champ is doing pretty well, especially as it's often competing with Prem football on BT
 

Forum statistics

Threads
13,842
Messages
812,354
Members
4,562
Latest member
daviscool567