Bill 13,717 Posted September 6, 2022 Share Posted September 6, 2022 (edited) I wonder what is actually going on. It's clear the Record has no idea. I wish we'd go back to banning quotes from the Sun and the Record. It's always bullshit. Edited September 6, 2022 by Bill 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 743 Posted September 7, 2022 Share Posted September 7, 2022 15 hours ago, RANGERRAB said: £30m is still a derisory deal but the SPFL is mostly just clubs with little or no ambition except us & them Thats what I was thinking and wondered if doubling up somehow to use two broadcasters was possible. In saying that we dont want to lose SKY after the Setanta disaster years back. On another note, am I missing something that Doncaster can simply issue a new / revised ‘commercial resolution’ to change the voting structure? While in the past when it came to league reconstruction and other matters this couldnt be done. Sounds more like making the rules up as they go along again. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChelseaBoy 2,236 Posted September 7, 2022 Share Posted September 7, 2022 5 hours ago, Gribz said: Thats what I was thinking and wondered if doubling up somehow to use two broadcasters was possible. In saying that we dont want to lose SKY after the Setanta disaster years back. On another note, am I missing something that Doncaster can simply issue a new / revised ‘commercial resolution’ to change the voting structure? While in the past when it came to league reconstruction and other matters this couldnt be done. Sounds more like making the rules up as they go along again. Whose to stop them? It seems endemic in Scotland at the moment that authorities can alter regulations or dismiss valid criticism at will. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Bear 508 Posted September 24, 2022 Share Posted September 24, 2022 Something odd here. It was originally reported that Rangers were the only SPFL club not to agree the deal. Doncaster was then going to change the rules so that only 11 were needed to agree a deal and not all 12. It now transpires that neither Rangers nor Livingston are yet to agree the deal. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sutton_blows_goats 4,222 Posted September 24, 2022 Share Posted September 24, 2022 4 hours ago, Yorkie Bear said: Something odd here. It was originally reported that Rangers were the only SPFL club not to agree the deal. Doncaster was then going to change the rules so that only 11 were needed to agree a deal and not all 12. It now transpires that neither Rangers nor Livingston are yet to agree the deal. The record was fed lies for the original story from Doncaster and Co to put pressure on Rangers to cave in, as if we had already lost. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,419 Posted September 25, 2022 Share Posted September 25, 2022 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ascender 352 Posted September 25, 2022 Share Posted September 25, 2022 (edited) I’ve seen at least three threads this evening calling the Aberdeen statement out for the flawed bull*hit it is. Edited September 25, 2022 by ascender 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted September 25, 2022 Share Posted September 25, 2022 9 minutes ago, ascender said: I’ve seen at least three threads this evening calling the Aberdeen statement out for the flawed bull*hit it is. It says a lot about Aberdeen FC that they actually believed they were making a valid point. No wonder Scottish football is the hopeless mess it is. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 1,876 Posted September 25, 2022 Share Posted September 25, 2022 This whole thing has been riddled with contradictions since they first floated it. They went and spend a no-doubt 6-figure sum to Deloitte to research that the game is being undervalued. So to on the other half of their forked tongue, make out that locking in a deal that continues to under value the product… at a time of high inflation which is only going to make it worse… defies any sort of logic. the other suggestion that PPV extras needs to be tested is also bogus. It already has many times over. This is propaganda, and it is amazing to see so many clubs fall into line to be fucked over. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,829 Posted September 25, 2022 Author Share Posted September 25, 2022 Grant Russell on Twitter. "The reality is that Sweden has sold all 240 top league games per season to live television. The SPFL currently sells only 48." Can't believe I'm reading this from a club chairman. The SPFL sells away the rights to all 228 games, of which 48 are broadcast. That's the fact. The "value per game" chart is a complete and utter distortion of the facts. It can only potentially be valid if clubs are handed back the rights to all non-broadcast games to do as they see fit. Clubs ran PPV all through 2021/22 while grounds were fully operational. Where is the evidence that it had an impact on what's mentioned? This is from our "Innovation and Strategy Group". This is what they're coming out with? Twisted sums, gross assumptions and no innovation or strategy in sight. Start panicking. The solution is staring them in the face. Take the Sky deal on the basis it's only for rights to games shown. What's behind the inability to structure it that way? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.