CBX1985

The football pyramid would be a lot  better if it was a straight 5 up 5 down in every league

You offer a bundle which includes: SKY Sports but also crucially Sky Broadband, Sky home insurance, Sky mobile etc, and the base TV package (which is Sky TVs greatest driver of profit) The sport element has made a loss for Sky every year in it's history, but by bundling lots of other things in to the package the sports budget (and formally, but less so now Movies) becomes negligible overall but it drives all the other subs.  Few people subscribe without wanting Sport or Movies.
What they are doing here is trying to get a percentage of the EFL fan market to subscribe.  The individual matches will make eye watering losses but are designed to drive enough people to subscribe to enough "extras" to make it worth it.  You need lots of add on products to make this model work, which is what makes the numbers appear uneconomic and yet they are highly successful.  

Not sure I agree.
If you were going to do that, you'd just do it.  There is a base level of income for the games.  Once you exceed this, you get very little more for each game available.  Therefore, I doubt that showing all the games would get more than a 10% increase.  I think Sky may be reluctant to even agree to it.
This deal has a further component.  Lg 2 teams, like Accrington, have very small fan bases.  Their fans might be less likely to go if Man Utd are on TV (I doubt EFL would stop many just because it's on TV).  They would receive less TV cash and may impact attendences.  Keeping 3pm is for them.
The core fact to the deal is this: all the clubs voted in favour.  Every. Single. One.  If you take away blackout, you would need to offer all the clubs - not simply Championship - way way more money to agree.  This is basically a compromise: loads more of everyone's games are to be televised, but 3PM remains. There is a natural limit to about 30 games per season broadcast.  All clubs get more money, with an exclusive slot (the lower you are the more 3pms you have).
If you break from these principles, teams in league 2 start voting against the deal en-mass.  While those clubs get much less TV money, they have a vote - and if you alienate Lg 2 and half of League 1, you might well lose it.  

Indeed.  A further, agents are liable to telling white lies:
My client is reviewing their options and is unwilling to sign "at this time".  It puts out the word that they might be interested in a change and makes the club up wage offer.
Always be sceptical it might all be smoke and mirrors.  

You offer a bundle which includes: SKY Sports but also crucially Sky Broadband, Sky home insurance, Sky mobile etc, and the base TV package (which is Sky TVs greatest driver of profit) The sport element has made a loss for Sky every year in it's history, but by bundling lots of other things in to the package the sports budget (and formally, but less so now Movies) becomes negligible overall but it drives all the other subs.  Few people subscribe without wanting Sport or Movies.
What they are doing here is trying to get a percentage of the EFL fan market to subscribe.  The individual matches will make eye watering losses but are designed to drive enough people to subscribe to enough "extras" to make it worth it.  You need lots of add on products to make this model work, which is what makes the numbers appear uneconomic and yet they are highly successful.  

As I explained in a different thread, the model for streaming games is just not there.  It probably never will be as it is the one area normal TV has a distinct, and almost impossible to penetrate competitive advantage.  MM either did not understand this or did and was trying to frighten the horses at Sky to give clubs more.
Basic example.
Sky are giving us £9m for next season.  This will be £195,652 per match whether broadcast or not.  This will be VAT free to DCFC.
To match that, at £10 per game (assuming each is broadcast) we would need 19,562 domestic subscribers.  However, we would only receive £8 in £10 due to tax.  Therefore, to break even we would need 24,456 people to pay for each match home and away to break even.
Home matches would clearly have lower subscriber numbers as you might as well go if you are going to charge.  Therefore, on any reasonable analysis to simply match Sky money we would need as many people watching EVERY game on TV (irrespective of home crowd) as were attending.  We would then need to pay for the production (which would need to have very good values to justify the subscriber needs), which Sky take care of.  
Sky do this by economic aggregation.  The overall number of subscribers is so high that individual payments (to clubs) are relatively low (but high to them).  We would never have this luxury and can never realistically over come the sheer weight of the numbers I outline.
 
 

No it won't, every year someone says it will, yet attendances are rarely impacted. People enjoy going to games, it's often about the experience something you can't get on TV.
People moan about sky, but the money it pumps into the game is why we have the strongest leagues in the world, the best stadiums, the best league structure and a national team full of rising talent. I will follow the Rams everywhere, but still have sky, because simply put, I enjoy watching football, they haven't ruined the game, just changed it.

It’s all on the EFL website, Q and A.

As I explained in a different thread, the model for streaming games is just not there.  It probably never will be as it is the one area normal TV has a distinct, and almost impossible to penetrate competitive advantage.  MM either did not understand this or did and was trying to frighten the horses at Sky to give clubs more.
Basic example.
Sky are giving us £9m for next season.  This will be £195,652 per match whether broadcast or not.  This will be VAT free to DCFC.
To match that, at £10 per game (assuming each is broadcast) we would need 19,562 domestic subscribers.  However, we would only receive £8 in £10 due to tax.  Therefore, to break even we would need 24,456 people to pay for each match home and away to break even.
Home matches would clearly have lower subscriber numbers as you might as well go if you are going to charge.  Therefore, on any reasonable analysis to simply match Sky money we would need as many people watching EVERY game on TV (irrespective of home crowd) as were attending.  We would then need to pay for the production (which would need to have very good values to justify the subscriber needs), which Sky take care of.  
Sky do this by economic aggregation.  The overall number of subscribers is so high that individual payments (to clubs) are relatively low (but high to them).  We would never have this luxury and can never realistically over come the sheer weight of the numbers I outline.
 
 

I don't know.  Probably when shown in UK, lots for away games and a fraction for home games.
I recall during the pandemic it was about 1/3rd of normal attendance was watching (based on the company accounts).  Will be less the more people can attend games.  

You offer a bundle which includes: SKY Sports but also crucially Sky Broadband, Sky home insurance, Sky mobile etc, and the base TV package (which is Sky TVs greatest driver of profit) The sport element has made a loss for Sky every year in it's history, but by bundling lots of other things in to the package the sports budget (and formally, but less so now Movies) becomes negligible overall but it drives all the other subs.  Few people subscribe without wanting Sport or Movies.
What they are doing here is trying to get a percentage of the EFL fan market to subscribe.  The individual matches will make eye watering losses but are designed to drive enough people to subscribe to enough "extras" to make it worth it.  You need lots of add on products to make this model work, which is what makes the numbers appear uneconomic and yet they are highly successful.  

You offer a bundle which includes: SKY Sports but also crucially Sky Broadband, Sky home insurance, Sky mobile etc, and the base TV package (which is Sky TVs greatest driver of profit) The sport element has made a loss for Sky every year in it's history, but by bundling lots of other things in to the package the sports budget (and formally, but less so now Movies) becomes negligible overall but it drives all the other subs.  Few people subscribe without wanting Sport or Movies.
What they are doing here is trying to get a percentage of the EFL fan market to subscribe.  The individual matches will make eye watering losses but are designed to drive enough people to subscribe to enough "extras" to make it worth it.  You need lots of add on products to make this model work, which is what makes the numbers appear uneconomic and yet they are highly successful.  

I would normally be with you on this.  I usually feel some compassion -as we have all been in their shoes.  But having been on the train between Derby and Birmingham after the 2022 match with the repugnant BCFC fans, they deserve all they get.  
 

Currently in the autos !.... theirs to throw away in the next 46 games....😁

I think a big part of getting out of Lg 1 is acceptance you are there.  Because we were such a basket case, we took it quite well and management appeared humble enough to not feel the big I am.  If you think you are better than it, it will consume - as endless Tuesday night cup ties versus teams like Harrogate Town takes it's toll.
The budget helps, but is not all.  Where BC will have issues is if they don't mentally accept the difference and carry on as though going up is inevitable.  I found that we had the effect of being everyone's cup final: you can defeat anyone if primed for a one off match.  

I think a big part of getting out of Lg 1 is acceptance you are there.  Because we were such a basket case, we took it quite well and management appeared humble enough to not feel the big I am.  If you think you are better than it, it will consume - as endless Tuesday night cup ties versus teams like Harrogate Town takes it's toll.
The budget helps, but is not all.  Where BC will have issues is if they don't mentally accept the difference and carry on as though going up is inevitable.  I found that we had the effect of being everyone's cup final: you can defeat anyone if primed for a one off match.  

I would normally be with you on this.  I usually feel some compassion -as we have all been in their shoes.  But having been on the train between Derby and Birmingham after the 2022 match with the repugnant BCFC fans, they deserve all they get.  
 

I think a big part of getting out of Lg 1 is acceptance you are there.  Because we were such a basket case, we took it quite well and management appeared humble enough to not feel the big I am.  If you think you are better than it, it will consume - as endless Tuesday night cup ties versus teams like Harrogate Town takes it's toll.
The budget helps, but is not all.  Where BC will have issues is if they don't mentally accept the difference and carry on as though going up is inevitable.  I found that we had the effect of being everyone's cup final: you can defeat anyone if primed for a one off match.  

He has four years left in his contract as well.  

I would normally be with you on this.  I usually feel some compassion -as we have all been in their shoes.  But having been on the train between Derby and Birmingham after the 2022 match with the repugnant BCFC fans, they deserve all they get.  
 

Nah f*** them I say. They taunted us that day and took every delight in our suffering. Absolute b******* the lot of them. Hope they're crying in the s******* they call the 'second city'. 

He has four years left in his contract as well.  

I would normally be with you on this.  I usually feel some compassion -as we have all been in their shoes.  But having been on the train between Derby and Birmingham after the 2022 match with the repugnant BCFC fans, they deserve all they get.  
 

The old carrot on a stick regime.  I give us more chance of winning the Champions League in the next ten years than Birmingham having a 60,000 seater stadium. 

I would normally be with you on this.  I usually feel some compassion -as we have all been in their shoes.  But having been on the train between Derby and Birmingham after the 2022 match with the repugnant BCFC fans, they deserve all they get.