Overseas TV money

[FOX Franks]

If you were starting it from scratch, it makes perfect sense to do it this way.

However, we're not, so anyone outside the top six is stupid to vote FOR getting less money.

Ambition is good, but voting for the guy in front of you in a race to be able to run faster because maybe you'll take over him is just bizarre.

 

[Moose]

It’s funny how football brings out the socialist in everyone.

On the one hand overseas tv money is generated mostly by the top-6. Liverpool v Man Utd will attract probably several times more overseas viewers than Leicester v West Brom. Man Utd sell more shirts abroad as well but you wouldn’t expect them to share that money out with everyone else.

On the other hand it’s sport not business and it’s important for the integrity of the sport that the top-6 aren’t given any unnecessary advantages. But how far do you go, should clubs in all four leagues get an equal share of the overseas tv money even though overseas viewers have probably never even heard of minnows like Derby County or Coventry City? What about non-league clubs? Don’t they deserve a share too? I play five a side a couple of times a year, can I have some money too?

You’ve got even redistribution of the money all the way down the football pyramid at one extreme, and clubs taking the share they’ve generated for themselves at the other. In the middle you’ve got a whole bunch of ****s trying to claim they and only they know the perfect balance required to achieve supreme morality. **** em all.

 

[Mike - True Blue Tinter]

Presumably there are stats to show how many viewers overseas there are for the matches, to see if there is a significant 'top 6' distortion?

 

[big_mac4824]

It’s funny how football brings out the socialist in everyone.

On the one hand overseas tv money is generated mostly by the top-6. Liverpool v Man Utd will attract probably several times more overseas viewers than Leicester v West Brom. Man Utd sell more shirts abroad as well but you wouldn’t expect them to share that money out with everyone else.

On the other hand it’s sport not business and it’s important for the integrity of the sport that the top-6 aren’t given any unnecessary advantages. But how far do you go, should clubs in all four leagues get an equal share of the overseas tv money even though overseas viewers have probably never even heard of minnows like Derby County or Coventry City? What about non-league clubs? Don’t they deserve a share too? I play five a side a couple of times a year, can I have some money too?

You’ve got even redistribution of the money all the way down the football pyramid at one extreme, and clubs taking the share they've generated for themselves at the other. In the middle you’ve got a whole bunch of ****s trying to claim they and only they know the perfect balance required to achieve supreme morality. **** em all.

If you are looking to keep a good standard through out your leagues then the answer is yes otherwise it becomes a league like Scotland where the top 6 fight it out and it becomes boring that was probably why a few years back more people were watching the championship as it was tightly contested.

 

[jb5000]

Absolutely - the business is a sporting contest, so if there is no sporting contest there very soon will be no business. The craven socialists running American major league sports cracked on to this long ago