Jump to content

BT


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, TEFTONG said:

Do you think we should have allowed both to enter Ibrox on Thursday night...?

Yes, it's pretty embarrassing and it's European competition with a national broadcaster, but it doesn't matter what I think. 

The narrative set by Sutton with his tweet after it is what annoyed me. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sent Boyd and Nacho to Parkhead to cover the Prague game.. let's see what happens 

Aww wait tht wouldn't happen coz its a fucking stupid idea!

Bt have known for at least a year that Sutton wasn't welcome at Ibrox, BT told Rangers late on Wednesday night that this was the plan..

Bt have make this a story nobody else

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, psb07158 said:

Yes, it's pretty embarrassing and it's European competition with a national broadcaster, but it doesn't matter what I think. 

The narrative set by Sutton with his tweet after it is what annoyed me. 

He told a lie in his tweet. That proves he is correctly banned from Ibrox. And BT knew he is banned from Ibrox.

Lennon pished himself laughing at us on a live BT broadcast. So he is not welcome either. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, mitre_mouldmaster said:

I stated I was talking about domestic only. Europe is a different kettle of fish, even the £30m CL money is tied to the TV deal in England strangely.

We already run a system for RTV in providing coverage. Its not always the best, but it is there and could be worked on.

I pay £20 a month currently for Rangers only through the app happily. Other than that the only thing im interested in Sky for is the golf majors and Ryder Cup, ill just do them through NowTV this year. I would expect that if we brought it inhouse we could offer a far more comprehensive coverage than is currently offered.

Going by what everyone is saying on here, it seems that people are genuinely believing that the deals we get are in line with what we should expect, and that it is not an absolute piss take. Genuinely I find that surprising. 

We aren't getting what we should expect - but that's down to negligence/incompetence from Doncaster and the SPFL. 

Our TV deal should be getting both us and the filth about £6-7m a year I'd say, which is double what we get currently, but I believe we can get that through maximising our current setup rather than deciding to go and become an island.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, psb07158 said:

£3.4m , £2.4m if you finish 2nd

So if we are to set the target at say £3.4m per year.

If we charge £30 per month for access to games, that are not available on any other platform, except possibly other clubs channels. Then someone would pay approximately £360 per year.

£3.4m / 360 equates to around 9,445 paying subscribers to bring in a revenue similar. Obviously revenue is not profit, so lets say we have to double that number of subscribers to hit the same profit. That is still less than 20k subscribers.

I honestly think that we could get significantly more than 20k subscribers.

You do raise a good point about having to negotiate with the other teams to ensure that we have the rights to broadcast, which could very well be the stake through the heart of the idea.

I just refuse to believe we are getting a good deal as things stand, and absolutely fucking nothing is going to change unless somehow we shake it up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

So if we are to set the target at say £3.4m per year.

If we charge £30 per month for access to games, that are not available on any other platform, except possibly other clubs channels. Then someone would pay approximately £360 per year.

£3.4m / 360 equates to around 9,445 paying subscribers to bring in a revenue similar. Obviously revenue is not profit, so lets say we have to double that number of subscribers to hit the same profit. That is still less than 20k subscribers.

I honestly think that we could get significantly more than 20k subscribers.

You do raise a good point about having to negotiate with the other teams to ensure that we have the rights to broadcast, which could very well be the stake through the heart of the idea.

I just refuse to believe we are getting a good deal as things stand, and absolutely fucking nothing is going to change unless somehow we shake it up.

The idea that I do like, if we can't maximise what we get from the 'traditional' route via Sky/BT is to do exactly what they do for the NBA / NFL League Pass apps. 

All teams band together, build an app up, invest in video technology etc so you just download one single 'SPFL' app and you can either then subscribe to a 'team' or 'league' pass. You can then sell single games to broadcasters if they decide to pay over the odds for it e.g. you could sell an old firm to Sky for £3/4m and have a blackout on the app for people in the UK. 

Again though, there is absolutely not a single person in the SPFL or at Rangers who has the capability, know-how or appetite to follow this route. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, GeeSS said:

But it is far more than we could generate ourselves that’s the sad truth  jeez we couldn’t even make a success of a share issue on the back of 55 ! Embarrassing 

Get this one booted 

billscott likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck them. Mjallby, even Maloney, Strachan etc have all done games at Ibrox, the minute it’s a full house group stage game they send two of the most inflammatory individuals in Scottish football? 
 

They knew what they were doing and the reaction it would get. They have a number of others with knowledge of the Scottish game and Rangers to pick from. 
 

Would they send Nacho Novo or Mo Johnston to celtic park? No

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GeeSS said:

I am totally against the clubs approach to the media in general it looks like we are trying to stifle free speech leaving aside the two individuals our press conferences are terrible and very amateur with podcaster fans asking stupid questions which have so obviously been vetted

 All we are doing is turning everyone against us ( most were alreadyI know )  but this isn’t the way to get them onside   it’s not the way a well run club should be acting  it is pandering to the lowest form of our support ( which unfortunately is about 60%)   You know the ones I mean the FTP brigade 

we really need to be much smarter here turns sky BT BBC against us is not the way forward we need them on board to attract sponsors in the future and keep the ones we have now  

we have been trying for years to get the bbc onside and they still fuck us over at every turn 

Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, psb07158 said:

Yes, it's pretty embarrassing and it's European competition with a national broadcaster, but it doesn't matter what I think. 

The narrative set by Sutton with his tweet after it is what annoyed me. 

Don’t agree with the first part but the second is spot on. 
 

We need to get out in front of these stories. It should’ve been us saying he’s not welcome because he is one of the most inflammatory individuals in the Scottish game. Instead the narrative is big bad Rangers fans would’ve attacked me 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

If we were trying to get them onside wouldn't we just let their reporter back in?

why the fuck should we let that baldy cunt in after what he did  we have been trying to sort this out with him not allowed and they will not move  it is all one way with these people same as this bt stunt

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Club should just come out and say that Lennon is banned for his Sectarian language used in the past against us and is therefore incompatible with the 'Everyone, Anyone' campaign.

Just doing the same as we have for fans who were guilty of similar.

That would be absolutely fucking sensational. Would love to see them squirming, trying to find a way out of that one after starting all this shit in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, psb07158 said:

Firstly, it would have to be for domestic only as for Europe you'd still have to deal with the national broadcaster UEFA sell rights to otherwise you won't be allowed in the competition.

Secondly, Rangers isn't a professional media company. They don't have the equipment or know-how to provide a system. They'd have to negotiate and agree a price for a broadcasting feed from every single team they play domestically. This is easier when it's Annan in the cup (but another logistical nightmare) but harder when it's Hibs or the filth. 

Thirdly, the economics of this just don't stack up I'm afraid. You think people will pay £30 a month solely for Rangers? They're currently paying Sky £30 a month and getting access to all of Scottish football, the Premier League, cricket, golf, etc etc etc. 

This isn't happening. A complete pipedream.

Edit: that is to say, it isn't happening unilaterally. If every club got together and agreed to put together one app offering feeds to all games and marketing it directly themselves (like the NBA app or NFL app) then there's potential. They can't agree on fuck all though, so it won't work.

Good points.

I’d add in that it would be difficult domestically, too, as aren’t the SPFL & SFA the ultimate rights holders, with whom we’d need to negotiate?

Suspect it would be a cold day in hell before they let us free to negotiate our own deals…

Zappa6995 likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, billscott said:

why the fuck should we let that baldy cunt in after what he did  we have been trying to sort this out with him not allowed and they will not move  it is all one way with these people same as this bt stunt

I'm not suggesting we let him in. I'm asking why we're not doing the simple thing in doing so if we're trying to get the beeb onside as you suggest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, plymouthranger said:

Apparently considering not to use Ibrox for studio coverage in protest over the Sutton/TLB exclusion. 
 

As much as I like the clubs approach with the tabloids who print pish, I am beginning to question what our approach is in general with media partners. 
 

It seems we’ve now pissed off both Sky over the Cinch deal and BT with this. That’s not a clever thing to do long-term, as it’s not going to do us any favours. As much as we all despise those 2 “pundits”, this isn’t something you’d see EPL/CL level clubs doing regardless of rivalries. 
 

Thoughts? 

For the pittance they pay for Scottish football they can go fuck themselves 

Link to post
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

So if we are to set the target at say £3.4m per year.

If we charge £30 per month for access to games, that are not available on any other platform, except possibly other clubs channels. Then someone would pay approximately £360 per year.

£3.4m / 360 equates to around 9,445 paying subscribers to bring in a revenue similar. Obviously revenue is not profit, so lets say we have to double that number of subscribers to hit the same profit. That is still less than 20k subscribers.

I honestly think that we could get significantly more than 20k subscribers.

You do raise a good point about having to negotiate with the other teams to ensure that we have the rights to broadcast, which could very well be the stake through the heart of the idea.

I just refuse to believe we are getting a good deal as things stand, and absolutely fucking nothing is going to change unless somehow we shake it up.

50% profit? Seems a bit unlikely. As does 25% profit which would need 40,000 subscribers. Can’t see it, tbh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, AdzKyle said:

They don’t have McCoist and Souness(just an example)on for celtic games. It’s always an ex Tim. So why should we always have tims for ours. It’s deliberate make no mistake 

I don't think they would have been doing our game, they would have done the papes game then most likely would have been replaced at around 7.45pm for coverage of our game....if bt were genuinely thinking of using those 2 as pundits for our game the club should have said so and basically told bt they were at it

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, left winger said:

50% profit? Seems a bit unlikely. As does 25% profit which would need 40,000 subscribers. Can’t see it, tbh.

Economy of scale.

Do you think that it would cost magnitudes higher than we are currently doing for our RTV platform which is broadcasting to a lesser amount of people for a cheaper price?

Given there is no physical product, manufacturing costs are basically non-existent.

Increasing the volume of viewers would basically just require an uplift in bandwidth with no significant upscale in production costs.

I might be wrong and RTV might be running at a massive loss currently, but I dont imagine we would keep it running if this was the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, hammer93 said:

I don't think they would have been doing our game, they would have done the papes game then most likely would have been replaced at around 7.45pm for coverage of our game....if bt were genuinely thinking of using those 2 as pundits for our game the club should have said so and basically told bt they were at it

They weren't doing ours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Upcoming Events

    • 01 December 2021 19:45 Until 21:45
      0  
      Hibernian v Rangers
      Easter Road
      Scottish Premiership
      Live on Sky Sports Football and Sky Sports Main Event
×
×
  • Create New...