Time To Pull The Plug On Premier Sports?

Ian

Ian began writing Twohundredpercent in May 2006. He lives in Brighton. He has also written for, amongst others, Pitch Invasion, FC Business Magazine, The Score, When Saturday Comes, Stand Against Modern Football and The Football Supporter. Ian was the first winner of the Socrates Award For Not Being Dead Yet at the 2010 NOPA awards for football bloggers.

You may also like...

13 Responses

  1. piggeh says:

    “To the surprise of nobody – with the possible exception of those that signed the deal in the first place – that “nominal level” has not been reached, and the clubs of the league will not receive a penny for the televising of their matches this season.”

    Sorry, but you’re wrong.

    The clubs who were not shown (ie Histon) will not receive any money fro this deal. If the nominal level of subscribers was reached, they would have received some payment.

    The clubs who were shown, have received revenue, depending on how many times they were/are shown, and have made money from it.

  2. Dave says:

    The only future for Non League TV broadcasting is the interweb; the majority of viewers are likely to be vanity viewers (people at the game wanting to see highlights) or people who would loved to have been at the game but couldn’t get there.

    There might be an audience out there who might be switched on through wider exposure, but the costs of reaching that through the TV / satellite route is never likely to be economical.

    The happy follow on though is that the audience to hit is resolutely local, and much better targeted through the interweb using small scale viral marketing. Non-league’s best route forward is also the one which fits its revenue profile (ie best is also cheapest).

    Sadly, with a few exceptions aside, I don’t think these people are the people to deliver this:

    http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=8162&st=12:34:09

  3. piggeh says:

    If the landlady wins the EU Court battle to show 3pm football matches, then it will open up the possibilities to the Conference of maybe streaming 3pm kick offs, which could be quite lucrative. In the meanwhile a highlights show would probably be best, but I understand there wasnt one on the table anyway.

  4. Ian says:

    Cheers, Russ – have amended accordingly.

    The danger for the clubs is affecting the income revenue from gate receipts. BSP clubs are still more reliant on that income than other clubs higher up the ladder. This is why I believe that highlights are the way forward – offering a taster and possibly getting bums on seats at 3.00 on a Saturday afternoon.

  5. SW19 Womble says:

    Any pathetic dribbling of money from TinPot TV we got is far outweighed by the cost borne by the fans who paid out for train tickets and even hotels, only to find the game changed at short notice. But screw the fans and their finances it seems: at least a few Conference clubs got an extra few thousand in their bank account.

  6. Ian says:

    Indeed, and angering your key audience… well, that’s crazy.

  7. Albert Ross says:

    When it’s been talked about on the Non-League Show, one of the justifications given by the Conference has effectively been that with the TV coverage come additional revenues – such as advertising boards at grounds, and shirt sponsors being more interested. However this can surely only hold true if people are watching the channel to provide the extra exposure advertisers or sponsors are looking for.

    One gets the feeling that in some ways this needed to happen to wake some people up to the fact that there isn’t another Setanta out there prepared to throw money at Conference Football as they did. I felt at times listening to the debate that the Conference Board found themselves under pressure to get a TV Deal, and Premier were about the only ones prepared to make an offer. That it is not a particularly worthwhile one should make those expecting even a small pot of gold from TV realise that their product is not one seen as commercially appealing…..

  8. piggeh says:

    This season was affected by the deal being arranged so late. I think re moving games at short notice, it should be judged on next season’s performance. If PS still cannot sort their schedule in good time, then they will deserve all the ill feeling that will no doubt be mustered against them.

  9. Stuart says:

    I always understood the BBC offered the Conference a highlights package and they turned it down in favour of premier sports as they offered more money. A very short sighted view imo.

  10. Micky F says:

    I believe Stuart is right, the BBC offer would’ve given the league a much higher level of coverage and possibly encouraged some people to go and watch their local team. However the BSP would rather sell the rights in return for some vague promise of jam tomorrow. Idiots!

  11. Does this not say more about the dominance of SKY tv, they have such a monopoly that no-one else is sustainable in the market. Setanta couldn’t do it and seemingly neither can premier sports

  12. jertzeedon says:

    I have it on good authority from one of the Conference club’s execs that there never was a BBC deal…..

  13. Paul Hammers says:

    Premier Sports is owned and run by Michael O’Rourke, who also ran Setanta… no surprises there, then…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>