We must be fecking lucky down here then. Only about 3 games I haven't seen!

You get to see all the game's anyhow but its the revnue that we miss it out on,bloody joke really.

 

We don't miss the revenue from the TV money.

 

We get paid for the minimum number of televised games (somewhere between 5 and 10) but Sky don't need to actually show that number of games.

 

 

As Gartside said recently, its the exposure on TV that helps to attract sponsors that is the problem with the new TV deal, not the amount of money received.

To be honest it does not really help when the Chairman of the club, Philip Gartside, REFUSES television rights like he did last season for a couple of the UEFA games.

 

This in turn then lets the TV companies (Sky and Setanta more than anyone else) think that we do not really need the coverage or the money as we can refuse the rights. Therefore they will show less.

 

If anything, it is not about being a frashionable team but it is a results of actions the club has taken in recent history.

 

Anyway, there is always the net if one cannot make it to the games.

I think he refused them because they were offering next to nowt for them.

I think he refused them because they were offering next to nowt for them.

 

 

Even so - it shows to the media companies that we do not need the coverage if we refuse and so they do not cover us. WBA havde had more games than us, so has Citeh, villa, Boro etc...

 

 

I think the stance Phil took last season has damaged us with the media - it may have been peanuts but it could have been money used to help reduce the club debt or even go towards even more signings/wages for players.

the cash being offered wasn't enough to justify messing the fans about by kicking off at some ridiculous time

 

i, and most match going whites, would applaud that

 

in fact, i can't see why anybody wouldn't

Edited April 16, 200917 yr by Casino

the cash being offered wasn't enough to justify messing the fans about by kicking off at some ridiculous time

 

i, and most match going whites, would applaud that

 

in fact, i can't see why anybody wouldn't

 

 

Again, apologies if I seem to argue a fact here but....

 

The matches in question were shown at 730pm - is that an ungodly time to have a match? (apart from Russia and couple of FAR Eastern European countries what time do the UEFA - or from next season Europa League - matches get shown? between 730 and 8 KO's right or wrong?) - also UEFA matches mean either ITV or Five showing the match - would they want to interrupt their viewing pulling schedule (i.e. early evening soaps, gameshows etc - or in case of BBC3 doesn't start until 7pm!) - the part that brings more revenue in for the companies than the whole football match? How many UEFA cup games have either Sky or Setanta actually shown?

 

But lets see it from a Tv company point of view.... A club refuses to give rights to televise a match, what would you do in return? The club seems to be in a well position not to have the money, so give them the basic money (although number of matches will be less) and the club will be happy.(this can happen whether it be a PL game or European game due to the fact that the club refused its rights to at least one company - word of mouth type scenario). It is a fiscal/self advertising point of view with regards to the companies and nothing to do with what is in fashion or not.

 

That fatal decision by Phil made the TV companies decide that we are not worth televising as we do not need the coverage - clubs admission by refusing the rights.

Again, apologies if I seem to argue a fact here but....

 

The matches in question were shown at 730pm - is that an ungodly time to have a match? (apart from Russia and couple of FAR Eastern European countries what time do the UEFA - or from next season Europa League - matches get shown? between 730 and 8 KO's right or wrong?) - also UEFA matches mean either ITV or Five showing the match - would they want to interrupt their viewing pulling schedule (i.e. early evening soaps, gameshows etc - or in case of BBC3 doesn't start until 7pm!) - the part that brings more revenue in for the companies than the whole football match? How many UEFA cup games have either Sky or Setanta actually shown?

 

But lets see it from a Tv company point of view.... A club refuses to give rights to televise a match, what would you do in return? The club seems to be in a well position not to have the money, so give them the basic money (although number of matches will be less) and the club will be happy.(this can happen whether it be a PL game or European game due to the fact that the club refused its rights to at least one company - word of mouth type scenario). It is a fiscal/self advertising point of view with regards to the companies and nothing to do with what is in fashion or not.

That fatal decision by Phil made the TV companies decide that we are not worth televising as we do not need the coverage - clubs admission by refusing the rights.

 

we would have been kicking off at 6 iirc - the clubs explanation was 'kicking off much earlier'

 

are you saying if united refused an offer theyd never be shown again?

 

don't talk bollocks

 

anybody would think all our previous uefa games had been shown live - plenty weren't

 

the game you refer to - as i think there was only 1 - clashed with channel 5 coverage of spurs

 

now maybe, just maybe, spurs would have been told to kick off at 6, but somehow i reckon theyd have suggested the tv execs take a running jump

we would have been kicking off at 6 iirc - the clubs explanation was 'kicking off much earlier'

 

are you saying if united refused an offer theyd never be shown again?

 

don't talk bollocks

 

anybody would think all our previous uefa games had been shown live - plenty weren't

 

the game you refer to - as i think there was only 1 - clashed with channel 5 coverage of spurs

 

now maybe, just maybe, spurs would have been told to kick off at 6, but somehow i reckon theyd have suggested the tv execs take a running jump

 

 

But the precedent has now been set and do not forget that Bolton Wanderers is there to make money. It is a business first and foremost before being a fans club!

 

The game in question was wanting to be bought by either ITV to be shown on ITV4, but they were facing competition from BBC (BBC3 transmission) and Channel 5.

 

Yes if Five had won the rights it would have been shown earlier to accomodate the other game - but Bolton could have (which they rightly did) refused that bid. But why, o why, did they refuse the bids from both ITV and BBC (fact of this knowledge is shown in statements from both companies which is accessible on their websites)?

 

Bolton are now in an awkward position (which they should not be in) because they refused money!!! Money is what we require to survive at all costs in the PL. (also do not forget that Bolton Wanderers is a business and is there to make money and NOT just for the fans)

 

Bolton do not bring attractive advertisers to the TV companies like Scum, Gunners, Russians and Scousers do but the free advertising that Bolton would have gained, along with the revenue is what the club is crying out for.

 

Do not forget in the Champions League it is not the club that is selling the TV rights but UEFA itself (just like the FA and FL do in England), unlike UEFA cup, therefore United cannot refuse TV rights. This changes next season as UEFA Cup changes to the Europa League and it will be UEFA that will be selling the TV rights. (and the UK broadcaster for the Europa League Games next season is Channel Five)

 

In other words at least this situation can no longer come about with regards to European games but it has had the detrimental effect with regards to the 2 main football broadcasters taken notice of what Bolton did and reacting to it.

 

Business is business and fans come a poor second to commerce.

Edited April 17, 200917 yr by DutchWhites

But the precedent has now been set and do not forget that Bolton Wanderers is there to make money. It is a business first and foremost before being a fans club!

 

The game in question was wanting to be bought by either ITV to be shown on ITV4, but they were facing competition from BBC (BBC3 transmission) and Channel 5.

 

Yes if Five had won the rights it would have been shown earlier to accomodate the other game - but Bolton could have (which they rightly did) refused that bid. But why, o why, did they refuse the bids from both ITV and BBC (fact of this knowledge is shown in statements from both companies which is accessible on their websites)?

 

Bolton are now in an awkward position (which they should not be in) because they refused money!!! Money is what we require to survive at all costs in the PL. (also do not forget that Bolton Wanderers is a business and is there to make money and NOT just for the fans)

 

Bolton do not bring attractive advertisers to the TV companies like Scum, Gunners, Russians and Scousers do but the free advertising that Bolton would have gained, along with the revenue is what the club is crying out for.

 

Do not forget in the Champions League it is not the club that is selling the TV rights but UEFA itself (just like the FA and FL do in England), unlike UEFA cup, therefore United cannot refuse TV rights. This changes next season as UEFA Cup changes to the Europa League and it will be UEFA that will be selling the TV rights. (and the UK broadcaster for the Europa League Games next season is Channel Five)

 

In other words at least this situation can no longer come about with regards to European games but it has had the detrimental effect with regards to the 2 main football broadcasters taken notice of what Bolton did and reacting to it.

 

Business is business and fans come a poor second to commerce.

 

i've seen some bollocks written on here in my time but this beats it hands down.

 

but let me see if i understand you, so because Gartside turned down a 2 bob offer from BBC or ITV, Sky or Sultana now won't put us on telly?

 

The real reason is we're now a mid table club with a small following and a rep for hoofball, so no neutral is going to be tuning in to see our game thus Sky or Setanta won't get the big advertisers in to pay for the coverage.

i've seen some bollocks written on here in my time but this beats it hands down.

 

but let me see if i understand you, so because Gartside turned down a 2 bob offer from BBC or ITV, Sky or Sultana now won't put us on telly?

 

The real reason is we're now a mid table club with a small following and a rep for hoofball, so no neutral is going to be tuning in to see our game thus Sky or Setanta won't get the big advertisers in to pay for the coverage.

 

 

Lets see it from a business point of view. Say you are the head of Sport TV rights at sky.

 

You hear the a club has refused TV rights to show a match - what would you think?

 

Is that club worthy enough to be shown? Is that club boasting a situation in which it can afford to turn down TV rights therefore the TV company can save money (or even increase money) by not showing the club during a normal football season? The TV Company could, as a matter of fact, now offer even less money to gain TV rights from the club - is that good business sense?

 

It may seem like bollocks to you in a fan capacity but in a business capacity it was suicidal to refuse money - we are not a big club, we do not have the clout like the big 4 do so any precedent we set, such as refusing rights, WILL have a definite effect on the future of the clubs TV appearance.

 

Yes we may be mid-table fodder, but how many times has Newcastle, Villa, Portsmouth, Spurs and even West Ham been shown on TV this season (and have they ever refused TV rights deals if/when they have been in Europe?)

 

It was a bad move by Phil to refuse and now he is complaining that we do not get the attention - funnily enough before the refusal TV companies were wanting to show us and negotiate with us, so why has that all dried up?

Lets see it from a business point of view. Say you are the head of Sport TV rights at sky.

 

You hear the a club has refused TV rights to show a match - what would you think?

 

Is that club worthy enough to be shown? Is that club boasting a situation in which it can afford to turn down TV rights therefore the TV company can save money (or even increase money) by not showing the club during a normal football season? The TV Company could, as a matter of fact, now offer even less money to gain TV rights from the club - is that good business sense?

 

It may seem like bollocks to you in a fan capacity but in a business capacity it was suicidal to refuse money - we are not a big club, we do not have the clout like the big 4 do so any precedent we set, such as refusing rights, WILL have a definite effect on the future of the clubs TV appearance.

 

Yes we may be mid-table fodder, but how many times has Newcastle, Villa, Portsmouth, Spurs and even West Ham been shown on TV this season (and have they ever refused TV rights deals if/when they have been in Europe?)

 

It was a bad move by Phil to refuse and now he is complaining that we do not get the attention - funnily enough before the refusal TV companies were wanting to show us and negotiate with us, so why has that all dried up?

 

Apart from Pompey look at the size of the fan bases of the clubs you've listed, they're way bigger than our.

 

Pompey have been imploding spectacularly and won the FA cup last season so it makes sense they're on plenty of times.

 

Garty turning down offers from the beeb or ITV won't bother the bean counters at sky or Setanta one bit

Apart from Pompey look at the size of the fan bases of the clubs you've listed, they're way bigger than our.

 

Pompey have been imploding spectacularly and won the FA cup last season so it makes sense they're on plenty of times.

 

Garty turning down offers from the beeb or ITV won't bother the bean counters at sky or Setanta one bit

 

 

Fiscally speaking you WILL be surprised at how much it does bother Sky and Setanta! They saw a chance - because of the poor decision, and have now acted upon it.

 

Idf anything business-wise its a Gerald Ratner situation.

Fiscally speaking you WILL be surprised at how much it does bother Sky and Setanta! They saw a chance - because of the poor decision, and have now acted upon it.

 

Idf anything business-wise its a Gerald Ratner situation.

 

not sure that sky or setanta show any uefa cup football.

 

blackburn ended up kicking off at 5.30 for one game.

Edited April 17, 200917 yr by Ani

We don't get on the TV as much as few years ago, because we don't have the flair players we used to, don't upset the top 4 as often, and the stadium usually looks empty.

 

I thought the point of turning down C5 was to get a decent crowd on for the knockout games versus Madrid & Lisbon and I can understand that, even though I was working in London and couldnt see the game.

 

i doubt anyone at Sky or Setanta gives a flying fuck

I was under the impression that P.G. turned down the T.V. money so people would actually GO to the game, and not sit on their backsides, at home, in front of the tele. That's what I thought anyway.

Can anybody else feel an urge to press the ignore user button?

 

 

 

BTW Welcome to Wanderersways Dutch white.

Have we not already got our quota of bollocks talking, know it all business tycoons?

I was under the impression that P.G. turned down the T.V. money so people would actually GO to the game, and not sit on their backsides, at home, in front of the tele. That's what I thought anyway.

 

There was also an instance iirc where the only way we could be on tv was to have a silly late KO due to another team getting the earlier tv KO. I believe Mr. Gartside said that wouldn't be fair for the fans/players.

Ooooh, that nasty Chairman of ours!

No, if he'd taken the money, all our debts would be wiped out now. We are a business after all and the BBC wanted to broadcast Bolton Wanderers v FK Rabotniki globally. We should have accepted their ?350 million offer.

I was under the impression that P.G. turned down the T.V. money so people would actually GO to the game, and not sit on their backsides, at home, in front of the tele. That's what I thought anyway.

 

Your right, 5 wanted us to kick off at 5pm to accomodate the other game, it was midweek so most would have been at work, we made more money by selling tickets and keeping it to a 745 kick off than switching it to a 5 kick off and getting the TV money with an empty ground

I very much doubt that PG would have refused TV money if it was to be shown at 745 pm, to my knowledge no other TV company wanted to show the game!

Speaking of weird ko times, I seem to remember the Plovdiv home game kicking off at 8.15/20 or something. I think the combination of the extra 2/3 stellas in the HPI this allowed and the lack of hot food available in the south stand led to me being severely spangled that night.

I have to applaud Phil Gartside on his stance with him refusing some of the Uefa cup games on TV last year.

 

It would clearly have mean't an earlier kick off between 6pm and 7pm.

 

I work in Leeds and have to collect junior before I go to the match.It would have had mean't taking half a day's hols whereas I could finish normal time.I know a lot of people on here don't like PG foor one reason or another but I take my hat off to him for putting the fans first before any dosh.

not sure that sky or setanta show any uefa cup football.

 

blackburn ended up kicking off at 5.30 for one game.

 

 

Setanta definitely show UEFA games but they are on Setanta Ireland for Irish viewers and Bolton have had a fair few Saturday 3pm games on that channel this season! Just a pity cannot get Setanta Ireland in UK unless you have an Irish Skycard!!!

 

If I remember Blackburn were away to a Eastern European country - hence the early kickoff which would mean 730 kick-off locally!

Setanta definitely show UEFA games but they are on Setanta Ireland for Irish viewers and Bolton have had a fair few Saturday 3pm games on that channel this season! Just a pity cannot get Setanta Ireland in UK unless you have an Irish Skycard!!!

 

If I remember Blackburn were away to a Eastern European country - hence the early kickoff which would mean 730 kick-off locally!

 

I think it was when Blackburn played Leverkusen at home but im not certain