TV Money

[Scotfox]

Just watched an interview with Sullivan of West Ham. He maintained that clubs in the Championship are paid only £60,000 if their match is featured on the box. He was very careful not to name Sky, but did compare the payment to Premiership clubs who are paid 10x this figure, for televised games. I know he's a bit of a Del Boy, but surely clubs get paid more than this. I would have to agree with Sullivan when he said this level of payment wouldn't cover the cost of lost revenue through the gates.
Does anyone have a clue if Sullivan is correct?

 

[Jeff]

Just watched an interview with Sullivan of West Ham. He maintained that clubs in the Championship are paid only £60,000 if their match is featured on the box. He was very careful not to name Sky, but did compare the payment to Premiership clubs who are paid 10x this figure, for televised games. I know he's a bit of a Del Boy, but surely clubs get paid more than this. I would have to agree with Sullivan when he said this level of payment wouldn't cover the cost of lost revenue through the gates.
Does anyone have a clue if Sullivan is correct?

The per-match fee isn't much, but it's in addition to the annual payment they get from the TV contract.

 

[Ike O'Noclassed]

Very roughly the Premier League get £600m/per season for the current TV deal. The Football League deal is about £80m/season. 10x sounds about right.

 

[David Gwilliam]

There is so much football on TV during the season that even devoted fans pick and choose. The general public are interested in a few very big clubs. When Man U play Liverpool they will get huge audience figures. Even if there is only one "interesting" tean as when Chelsea play Wolves the figures will be high. The public want to watch famous players.

TV is not giving money to football because it likes the sport but to attract audiences. Two of the biggest matches in the championship next season will be Leicester v West Ham. Its audience will be bigger than for Doncaster v Hull but it will still not bring in the numbers Arsenal vs Spurs would attract.

For Leicester in the Championship any TV money is just a bonus. The important money comes from the fans plus the fact that we are told the owners have a lot of douberries - which I understand is the name of the Thai currency.

 

[RHYDAL]

For Leicester in the Championship any TV money is just a bonus. The important money comes from the fans plus the fact that we are told the owners have a lot of douberries - which I understand is the name of the Thai currency.

You daft baht.

 

[FoxCovert]

There is so much football on TV during the season that even devoted fans pick and choose. The general public are interested in a few very big clubs. When Man U play Liverpool they will get huge audience figures. Even if there is only one "interesting" tean as when Chelsea play Wolves the figures will be high. The public want to watch famous players.

TV is not giving money to football because it likes the sport but to attract audiences. Two of the biggest matches in the championship next season will be Leicester v West Ham. Its audience will be bigger than for Doncaster v Hull but it will still not bring in the numbers Arsenal vs Spurs would attract.

For Leicester in the Championship any TV money is just a bonus. The important money comes from the fans plus the fact that we are told the owners have a lot of douberries - which I understand is the name of the Thai currency.

I believe this is a slang term for a thing or gadget DG. I'm sure this is one of Birch's oft used words. Possibly one of the reasons he got an honorary degree:icon_wink