Phuzzy wrote:
He mentions the increased TV deal yet fails to mention that the RFL undersold it by allowing Sky to get into a position where the could make a 'take it or leave it' deal knowing we didn't have any other options. Do you think Sky offered top dollar out of the goodness of their heart in that situation?
This is bullshit with respect and it really would help if you tried to understand the dynamics of the TV deal before you go repeating talking points.
1. Sky came to the RFL/SLE several years before the contract was due to end and years before the negotiations were due to start.
2. They had a hard deadline - an upcoming stock market announcement they wanted to make revealing renegotiated packages across a whole host of sports. This to settle market nerves after the increasing threat of BT.
3. They did give a take it or leave it - the leave being, stick with the existing, lower deal which was an option. Did this place the RFL in a difficult place? Yes - Sky aren't stupid. Did the clubs, including Lenagan who has whinged about it non stop for the last 4 years vote for it? Yes they did because it was a decent deal.
The great irony is that the same people who say the last TV deal was a poor one are complaining that the next one won't match it, even if negotiated by these genius businessmen (not genius at RL but apparently outside it). Which is it to be folks?