[mitchec1]

UEFA today announced the award of a major package of UEFA Champions League media rights for 2009-2012 in the United Kingdom to BSkyB.

http://www.uefa.com/uefa/keytopics/k...id=673355.html


Good news for HD football fans BSkyB emerged as the clear winner for a number of rights packages including exclusive coverage of all live matches and highlights on a Tuesday and all games on a Wednesday with the exception of the first-choice fixture. BSkyB's package also includes simultaneous coverage of the UEFA Champions League final and UEFA Super Cup, comprehensive highlights, delayed match coverage and magazine programmes.

[sukhy5]

All we need now is for BBC (who are far from perfect) to nick the rights from ITV (god awful).

[mitchec1]

Would be nice no crappy ITV picture on champions league

[morty192]

when will we hear if ITV have lost thier rights?

[johnboy]

Having my first look at Setanta tonight, God it's bad, Sky's £10 a month HD sub is worth double if this is the best the others can offer, truely shocking quality

[mitchec1]

Originally Posted by morty192

when will we hear if ITV have lost thier rights?

The remaining rights have entered a 2nd round of bidding so we're just waiting

[Bernie Steak]

Please, please, PLEASE not ITV....











Unless they get a HD channel going in time, and maybe change presenters and.....

[hdsport]

Originally Posted by sukhy5

All we need now is for BBC (who are far from perfect) to nick the rights from ITV (god awful).

You've got to say that's quite likely, ITV much prefer Tuesday's for scheduling reasons now a second round of bidding will test how much they really want to keep them.

Messrs Lineker, Hansen et al will be happy it opens the door to them but there's still the sponsors question and they will lose some FTA exposure even if ITV get the rights ..and even more if the Beeb get them...so it is going to be interesting.

I suppose you can't rule out SKY or Setanta getting it but I really doubt UEFA would go for a complete PAY tv deal. Five are also rumoured with RTL making cash available but it's much more likely to be a fight between the BBC and ITV.

Of course the big winners (besides SKY) are TEAM/UEFA lots of lovely £££ or should that be €€€

[chelsea.tone]

Lets hope sky gets the exclusive Premiership rights back as and when they're up Get rid of crappy Setanta

[bingham67]

Originally Posted by chelsea.tone

Lets hope sky gets the exclusive Premiership rights back as and when they're up Get rid of crappy Setanta

Indeed

[tristan2]

the picture really is SHOCKING

[Oakwood]

If you believe the papers, the BBC are prepared to offer more money than ITV. Interesting as well unless I"ve missed something, that there is only one live match being offered here as opposed to the deal that ITV had where they played a match on ITV1 as well as one on ITV4. It"s good that SKY are right in there, and I for one would be happy if the BBC took it away from ITV, and not just for the fact the technical quality would be better.

[KeanosMagicHat]

I don't care who gets it out of the BBC or ITV as long as they live broadcast the matches (at least those involving British clubs) in HD.

[hdsport]

Originally Posted by chelsea.tone

Lets hope sky gets the exclusive Premiership rights back as and when they're up Get rid of crappy Setanta

Not gonna happen..all that could happen is (if the rights are sold in the same way) SKY get 5 (instead of 4) of 6 packages...the EU have dictated no one broadcaster can win all the live rights...

Of course ESPN are rumored to be interested in getting in on the act. How that would happen I'm not sure...e.g. do they buy out the rest of Setanta? They have already bought NASN from them or do they go it alone and else we might have 3 competing premium sports providers. So you might need 3 subscriptions next time round!!!!

[Goooner]

Originally Posted by hdsport

Not gonna happen..all that could happen is (if the rights are sold in the same way) SKY get 5 (instead of 4) of 6 packages...the EU have dictated no one broadcaster can win all the live rights...

Yep, 'fraid so. It's better/fairer for the consumer, dontcha know? Well that was the general idea behind it anyway. So now we have to pay more for an inferior product. Well done to the EU

[Greg]

Let's hope the Beeb get something as if they lose this, that will be no live footie on the Beeb at all.

[Miss Chief]

The problem with the Beeb getting the rights (or some of them at least) is the advertisers that pay through the nose for guaranteed advertising during the breaks, fillers at the beginning and end of every break and the start and end of the programs. With the beeb there will be none of this so the story goes that the Beeb will have to bid more in order to offset this extra coverage that Sony etc have already paid Uefa for. If said advertisers say they're not willing to be 'paid off' then the BBC bid is likely to be thrown out straight away. Then there's the idea that BBC, and therefore public money should be used to pay off advertisers or be forced to bid more because they don't have advertising.

IMO it's about time UEFA and the Premier League decided that money isn't the be-all and end-all and that having coverage on terrestrial TV might actually be a GOOD THING.

[Starburst]

Originally Posted by Skytech

IMO it's about time UEFA and the Premier League decided that money isn't the be-all and end-all and that having coverage on terrestrial TV might actually be a GOOD THING.

Now back to the real world


There is no reason UEFA should pander to the eccentricities of the BBC funding method when public television in other EU countries seem to manage fairly well and as for commercial competitors if they can generate the revenue from advertising and sponsorship to outbid PAY telly then every other aspect operates on a level playing field.

In terms of the EPL then I don't see how FTA broadcaster has any practical benefit in terms of promotion of the league, it's pretty much in the stratosphere in terms of awareness and profile despite being a PAY product since 1992.

At the end of the day it would be stupid for the EPL Chairman to turn down a deal offering upto £30 million extra each just to make sure of FTA coverage for two big reasons. The first is obviously the money which like it or not the EPL is budgeted on and any reduction even a known one with a years warning would seriously undermine all buy two or three of the clubs. The second is that we already have complaints of too much footy on TV, factor in Premiership and you would get more complaints not only from non footy fans but other sports who see FTA TV coverage shrink.


There was a good argument to be made that the ECB should have retained FTA coverage as seen when England were doing well and CH4 has serious viewing figures but alas when the bids were being made CH4 looked at the average audiences and refused to increase their existing price.
SKY valued cricket more than CH4 and didn't have to rely on the fickle audience and were prepared to pay for the rights.

It's ironic that in this world of political pressure to prevent monopolies in sports rights we still have a situation where only the BBC can practically bid for Wimbledon and name their own price.
No one would argue that the BBC do a first rate job in coverage but Wimbledon and the LTA would get so much more cash if the Crown Jewels restrictions were lifted, the BBC would still probably win but would have to pay market value which would then increase the resources for British tennis.

[Bachstrad]

Originally Posted by Starburst

Now back to the real world


There is no reason UEFA should pander to the eccentricities of the BBC funding method when public television in other EU countries seem to manage fairly well and as for commercial competitors if they can generate the revenue from advertising and sponsorship to outbid PAY telly then every other aspect operates on a level playing field.

In terms of the EPL then I don't see how FTA broadcaster has any practical benefit in terms of promotion of the league, it's pretty much in the stratosphere in terms of awareness and profile despite being a PAY product since 1992.

At the end of the day it would be stupid for the EPL Chairman to turn down a deal offering upto £30 million extra each just to make sure of FTA coverage for two big reasons. The first is obviously the money which like it or not the EPL is budgeted on and any reduction even a known one with a years warning would seriously undermine all buy two or three of the clubs. The second is that we already have complaints of too much footy on TV, factor in Premiership and you would get more complaints not only from non footy fans but other sports who see FTA TV coverage shrink.


There was a good argument to be made that the ECB should have retained FTA coverage as seen when England were doing well and CH4 has serious viewing figures but alas when the bids were being made CH4 looked at the average audiences and refused to increase their existing price.
SKY valued cricket more than CH4 and didn't have to rely on the fickle audience and were prepared to pay for the rights.

It's ironic that in this world of political pressure to prevent monopolies in sports rights we still have a situation where only the BBC can practically bid for Wimbledon and name their own price.
No one would argue that the BBC do a first rate job in coverage but Wimbledon and the LTA would get so much more cash if the Crown Jewels restrictions were lifted, the BBC would still probably win but would have to pay market value which would then increase the resources for British tennis.

And it's the same with the Open golf tounament. I hate the BBC having it every year, recent years have seen an improvement with longer coverage coverage on BBC 2, but there's nothing more frustrating than watching on BBC to hear " and now we're off to Newmarket for the 2.30!"!

At least when Sky get a sporting event, you know you'll be able to watch it! It's only the advent of Sky Sports that gave us better coverage of The Masters from the States on the BBC, they just had to change, pre Sky Sports we used to get 40 mins a night on the Thursday and Friday and slightly more on the weekend, with the only real coverage being on the Sunday night. Admitedly The Masters did restrict TV coverage themselves, but not to the extent that the BBC deprived us of coverage.

Dedicated Sports channels are the only way forward for Sports fans IMHO!

ATB

Max

[deathcab86]

why can't setanta and sky just get any game they want (i.e. broadcast the same games)

then we could all pay for whatever channel we prefer and not have to pay for both just because setanta have 3 man utd games a season

[KeanosMagicHat]

Originally Posted by deathcab86

why can't setanta and sky just get any game they want (i.e. broadcast the same games)

Well although I don't subscribe to Setanta (as I try to avoid watching football in SD wherever possible) I wouldn't want multiple channels broadcasting the same game as it immediately limits choice.

[Starburst]

Originally Posted by deathcab86

why can't setanta and sky just get any game they want (i.e. broadcast the same games)

then we could all pay for whatever channel we prefer and not have to pay for both just because setanta have 3 man utd games a season

You can't sell premium subscriptions unless the product is based on exclusivity, that is why SKY are paying £1.1 Billion for their contract and why overseas broadcasters paying a small fraction of this and then supplying UK viewers/pubs is such an issue. Setanta pay less since their package is deemed to be less attractive to UK viewers and that reflects on their subscription price and they simply can not afford to match SKY which in turn means the EPL are not prepared to package their product which means less money for them.


Bottom line the EPL arrange matters to maximise demand and value of individual packages, it's how they have contract after contract increased the value to the broadcasters.
If SKY are p

[UKflames]

Originally Posted by chelsea.tone

Lets hope sky gets the exclusive Premiership rights back as and when they're up Get rid of crappy Setanta

Why does everyone give Setanta such a hard time, $ky weren't exactly the best when they started

[Starburst]

Originally Posted by UKflames

Why does everyone give Setanta such a hard time, $ky weren't exactly the best when they started

Setanta are not a new organisation having been founded in 1992 so really no excuse for poor production quality or skimping on Dsat bandwidth.

[Bachstrad]

Originally Posted by UKflames

Why does everyone give Setanta such a hard time, $ky weren't exactly the best when they started

Because their PQ is naff!

Plus we are also worse off than when Sky had all the EPL games, not only could we then watch all the games in HD, via Prem Plus HD, but it was cheaper to do so rather than it is now by having to subscribe to Setanta for their SD offering in addition to Sky Sports to see all the available EPL games!

So by reducing Sky's monopoly by order of the EU, the consumer is worse off by a long chalk! Both visually & financially!

ATB

Max

[dazed & confuse]

Anybody know how much UEFA charge for live video to your PC
Get a much better picture that ITV

In fact I'd get a better picture on a box brownie than ITV!!

[derek500]

Originally Posted by Bachstrad

So by reducing Sky's monopoly by order of the EU, the consumer is worse off by a long chalk! Both visually & financially!

Absolutely and I've lost my US PGA golf as well. I now have to pay twice to see the same as before if I want to continue seeing it.

Who said monolopies are a bad thing??

[Bachstrad]

Originally Posted by derek500

Absolutely and I've lost my US PGA golf as well. I now have to pay twice to see the same as before if I want to continue seeing it.

Who said monolopies are a bad thing??

Not me!

.... it would seem to be the people who can't spell Sky properly and who think that the £1.1 billion Sky pay for their contract comes from charitable donations and that they should get the service for nowt!

ATB

Max

[Simon_143]

Originally Posted by Greg

Let's hope the Beeb get something as if they lose this, that will be no live footie on the Beeb at all.

The Beeb will be showing live games from the championship and also the carling cup semi finals/final during the 2009-10 seasons.

The BBC will broadcast: 10 Championship matches, the first time the corporation has screened a league game from outside the top flight; the two legs of the Carling Cup semi-finals not covered by Sky; the Carling Cup final (simultaneously with Sky) and Football League and Carling Cup highlights.