Boycott of Sky TV?

[On the Left Wing]

IMHO one of the main reasons for the cash crisis at so many clubs is the formation of the Premiership and the SKY TV sponsorship which has created a chasm of inequality between the 20 and the 72.

I began arguing a case last night on 606 for a redistribution of TV football money to involve negotiations with the FA, Football League, Sky TV, The Premiership and the Government.

On the face of it, it seems an impossible task, and must admit I can pay only lip service to the idea.

However, some Scunthorpe, Grimsby and Wrexham fans are now seriously talking about a 72 club boycott of Sky TV for one month in April. From a PR perspective the national press (tabloids in particular) and mabe even the BBC would devour this as a story. It may have some effect as part of an ongoing lobby for a fairer share of the treasure and may even save some clubs from liquidation.

I am four square behind the idea in principle, but wonder what others think - would welcome feedback on either (or any) side

Cheers

 

[dougdeep]

I don't think it would do much good. But I agree that the Prem has done nothing for English football.

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Might get a bit of publicity in the press so surely cannot hurt.

Just dont make it the day when there is a decent game on...

 

[Tesco in Disguise]

personally, i think its a tragedy that itv never paid the money they owed to the then-nationwide clubs. if granada had the money, and they did, thei links with itv should have forced them to stump up the cash.

this was just a football-related example of how impotent the government is when it comes to business interests.

 

[Wardy]

It would be very hard to get people to get behind imo. One day would mot make any difference to sky unless you could get some of the big compainies that advertise on there onboard. While the smaller clubs have a large percentage of "real" fans. The top clubs have so many armchair fans they would not even be aware of the ban, let alone understand what it was for and take part in it.

 

[On the Left Wing]

Lot of the argument here:

http://www.red-passion.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3489

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Hmmm.

I could have sworn that the first thread said 'one day'.

 

[Curious Orange]

The top flight clubs won't ever agree to losing their cash cow; no matter what football fans think.

 

[Wardy]

Hmmm.

I could have sworn that the first thread said 'one day'.

It did

 

[On the Left Wing]

My correction - a typo sorry!

One guy has calculated the possible effect thus:

£40 a month
for 1 month

1,000 football fans from each club
72 league clubs
= £72,000

= £72,000 x 40 = £2,880,000

think thats right!

 

[The Laughing Bluebird]

From a PR perspective the national press (tabloids in particular) and maybe even the BBC would devour this as a story. It may have some effect as part of an ongoing lobby for a fairer share of the treasure and may even save some clubs from liquidation.

Why would the BBC be interested? The BBC's 'Match of the Day' programme covers PREMIERSHIP GAMES ONLY. They give ABSOLUTELY f*** ALL to the Coca Cola League sides. Or hadn't you spotted that?

 

[DJ Leon]

Hmmm. It might get a bit of publicity, but it's most likely effect will be to annoy Sky - who provide lots of clubs outside of the premiership with invalauble revenue every year. The clubs Dave mentions would be ill-advised to take any 'strike' action.

 

[The Laughing Bluebird]

Was it not SKY who came to the rescue when ITV Digital collapsed?

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Am I missing the point or will people already have paid their subscription to sky sports and therefore sky will not lose anything.

 

[Hiney]

The pure logistics of not paying your subscirption for one month will put people off, imo. If Sky get clever they will just introduce a re-connection charge and end up making even more money

Will 'persuading' Sky to distribute more money to lower league clubs really stop the grotesque mis-management of club funds by unscrupulous chairmen which is, after all, the root cause of many of the problems highlighted through Fans United.

If anything, it would give the Hamiltons and Guttermans of this world even more money to piss up against the wall.

 

[Hiney]

Was it not SKY who came to the rescue when ITV Digital collapsed?

Indeed

 

[On the Left Wing]

The pure logistics of not paying your subscirption for one month will put people off, imo. If Sky get clever they will just introduce a re-connection charge and end up making even more money

Will 'persuading' Sky to distribute more money to lower league clubs really stop the grotesque mis-management of club funds by unscrupulous chairmen which is, after all, the root cause of many of the problems highlighted through Fans United.

If anything, it would give the Hamiltons and Guttermans of this world even more money to piss up against the wall.

I agree Hiney ... but in the broad scheme of things it is thankfully just a few clubs (as a ratio of all in crisis) who are the victim of unscrupulous bastards like, Archer, Richardson, Reynolds, Hamilton et al. The majority are just penniless: Notts Co, Bury, Grimsby etc etc

I didn't want to muddy the waters on this thread, but I also began arguing that the time has come for the FA and FL to stand by their pledge of 1997 for "fit and proper" people to own and run football clubs. I see a couple of MPs took up this issue last week.

I think it is a misnomer to say Sky "came to the rescue" when ITV Digital collapsed. They put some money in, but if "rescue" was the case then we wouldn't have had Bradford City, Burnley et al

It is a complex and muddy mess and threatens to get worse. I seriously think we could lose at least three league clubs forever over the next 15 months UNLESS something is done by those in charge

 

[The Laughing Bluebird]

I think it is a misnomer to say Sky "came to the rescue" when ITV Digital collapsed. They put some money in, but if "rescue" was the case then we wouldn't have had Bradford City, Burnley et al

If SKY hadn't bought the rights to screen Football League games in the wake of ITV Digital's collapse, then who else would have?

What other TV companies would be interested in screening Friday night games between the likes of Scunthorpe and Wrexham?What other channels could actually afford to?

In the massively unlikely event that this ridiculous boycott should take off, then what would happen if SKY were to react by withdrawing their financial support for the Football League next season?

Perhaps if supporters of small clubs such as Wrexham, Scunthorpe and Grimsby decide to start boycotting SKY, the TV company may decide that it's no longer worth their while to screen lower division matches at all. And who could blame them? After all, how many people are actually interested in watching live games from the bottom two divisions? What sort of audiences do these matches attract?

 

[El Presidente]

As much as I loathe the Dirty Digger and his fascist news empire I have to agree with TLB. The problem is not that Sky are putting too much into the Prem, but that the Prem clubs keep it all to themselves so that they can pay the likes of WInston Bogard £72,000 a week despite not playing for three seasons

 

[Halftime Oranges]

True there is not a lot that can be done