All these people going on about reading at home, put that book down and support your team. The club is missing out on much needed revenue at a time we really need it.
@LX1 said:
All these people going on about reading at home, put that book down and support your team. The club is missing out on much needed revenue at a time we really need it.
As long as you make sure there is a Bolton your door, and your house is safe, I agree!
Sky would have to reduce the number of Leeds matches they show to get on board with the nations sweethearts Salford City.
I can't see a commercial TV company doing that but I must admit the Salford City love in could make it tempting.
I agree though. The TV companies should make more of an effort to support the teams who could use the cash better.
This is not me blindly defending the company that I’ve worked for over the past 20 years, but I should point out how the allocation of TV income to the EFL actually works.
The Sky money goes into a pot which the EFL then shares out among its 72 member clubs. Each club receives an amount commensurate to the division they play in, irrespective of whether or not any of their games are chosen to be televised live.
However, it is also the case that when Sky selects a game to be shown live, there is an additional ‘match fee’ paid to both clubs. I can’t remember the figures but they are fairly modest and intended to compensate for any reduction in the number of paying spectators because the game is being televised.
I’m not defending the system, simply explaining it.
It’s a different-and arguably fairer-system in the Premier League where every club is guaranteed a certain number of live games over the season, although here,too, there’s an imbalance. Manchester United will get more live games (and more ‘match fees’) than,say, Bournemouth, simply because they attract bigger audiences.
Don’t shoot the messenger!
Thanks for that @glasshalffull. I’d rather forgotten about the pooling and sharing aspect. I really should have said “....attract the largest audience”.
Comments
Decent local derby
Probs one of the best ties we could hope for.
Haven't played them for ages either.
What odds Salford v Leeds is televised.
Hopefully a big crowd for this one - and an upset!
Great start to the season. Bolton at home followed by a second week of matches against Bristol Rovers, Reading and MK Dons.
Might push the holiday forward to late July.
All these people going on about reading at home, put that book down and support your team. The club is missing out on much needed revenue at a time we really need it.
That's the right spirit @LX1
As long as you make sure there is a Bolton your door, and your house is safe, I agree!
Get ready for a season of a Sky love-in for Salford
Will be interesting to see if Isleworth based Sky will have the same love for Salford as the Salford based BBC.
Of course they will
its the complete bullsh#t 'romantic' story of the Class of '92
Being funded by a multi-millionaire businessman and paying higher wages than a Scottish Premier League team can offer makes a joke of the whole thing.
I wish Sky / BBC supported those clubs that are fan funded (not just us) / run so that make a profit / v small loses.
Lets be honest we could all play the 'Football Manager' version of running a football club
Sky would have to reduce the number of Leeds matches they show to get on board with the nations sweethearts Salford City.
I can't see a commercial TV company doing that but I must admit the Salford City love in could make it tempting.
I agree though. The TV companies should make more of an effort to support the teams who could use the cash better.
Their efforts will be entirely in the direction of what they expect to make them the most cash.
This is not me blindly defending the company that I’ve worked for over the past 20 years, but I should point out how the allocation of TV income to the EFL actually works.
The Sky money goes into a pot which the EFL then shares out among its 72 member clubs. Each club receives an amount commensurate to the division they play in, irrespective of whether or not any of their games are chosen to be televised live.
However, it is also the case that when Sky selects a game to be shown live, there is an additional ‘match fee’ paid to both clubs. I can’t remember the figures but they are fairly modest and intended to compensate for any reduction in the number of paying spectators because the game is being televised.
I’m not defending the system, simply explaining it.
It’s a different-and arguably fairer-system in the Premier League where every club is guaranteed a certain number of live games over the season, although here,too, there’s an imbalance. Manchester United will get more live games (and more ‘match fees’) than,say, Bournemouth, simply because they attract bigger audiences.
Don’t shoot the messenger!
Thanks for that @glasshalffull. I’d rather forgotten about the pooling and sharing aspect. I really should have said “....attract the largest audience”.