The mancityfans.net football forum

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:

Tokyo Blue wrote:

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:To all those against this proposal, what are your thoughts on the way the domestic TV money is distributed in the PL? Should that be the same model too? Just an equal share across the board regardless of number of times shown live and position?

Yes.

Fair enough, so why is it I never hear any complaints about this model? In fact it's held up by many as an example for other leagues to follow because of the fairness of it.

It's not perfect but it is fairer than some models. And when it was brought in there were a lot of complaints about it.

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:

Tokyo Blue wrote:

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:To all those against this proposal, what are your thoughts on the way the domestic TV money is distributed in the PL? Should that be the same model too? Just an equal share across the board regardless of number of times shown live and position?

Yes.

Fair enough, so why is it I never hear any complaints about this model? In fact it's held up by many as an example for other leagues to follow because of the fairness of it.

Sorry to takle into a gentlemen conversation, but I think that an "all emotions" bare Yes is ways far from fair enough.
Twice the more when coming out the bright mind of my Zen Cult Hero.

to periphrase a savvy's words:

Tokyo Blue wrote:Very easy to dismiss others' suggestions opinions while making none of your own. So, which homegrown left-back would you have suggested we bought through which model you would have suggested to better compromise fair competition and flamboyant entertaiment featuring the likes of Silvas, Aguero, KdB, Sane, Sterling, Jesus all in one company, in turn, also constantly increasing that "previously negligible" appetite, then?

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:To all those against this proposal, what are your thoughts on the way the domestic TV money is distributed in the PL? Should that be the same model too? Just an equal share across the board regardless of number of times shown live and position?

I'd say there needs to be a weighting of minimum 50% split evenly, then the rest calculated by an algorithm factoring in number of times shown and final league position.

On the foreign market, the PL should be sold as a package, and at least 80% split evenly.

A HUGE problem with using a 'games shown' calculation is that in Europe (possibly elsewhere) only 1 3pm kick off can be shown. If a team progresses past a certain point in the FA Cup, their games are rescheduled to midweek, and therefore fall outside of this allocation. They'll therefore be shown more often, and earn money disproportionate to that offered by the Cup itself. You'll then see mid-table teams throwing Prem games for the hope of cup progress and the re-scheduling of an otherwise unfanciable fixture, in order to pick up the foreign TV cash on offer, which will be worth more financially than finishing a place or two higher in the league. This'll detract from the PL in the long run.

BlueinBosnia wrote:

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:To all those against this proposal, what are your thoughts on the way the domestic TV money is distributed in the PL? Should that be the same model too? Just an equal share across the board regardless of number of times shown live and position?

I'd say there needs to be a weighting of minimum 50% split evenly, then the rest calculated by an algorithm factoring in number of times shown and final league position.

On the foreign market, the PL should be sold as a package, and at least 80% split evenly.

A HUGE problem with using a 'games shown' calculation is that in Europe (possibly elsewhere) only 1 3pm kick off can be shown. If a team progresses past a certain point in the FA Cup, their games are rescheduled to midweek, and therefore fall outside of this allocation. They'll therefore be shown more often, and earn money disproportionate to that offered by the Cup itself. You'll then see mid-table teams throwing Prem games for the hope of cup progress and the re-scheduling of an otherwise unfanciable fixture, in order to pick up the foreign TV cash on offer, which will be worth more financially than finishing a place or two higher in the league. This'll detract from the PL in the long run.

Fair points. I do believe there should be some reward for placement in leagues from TV money but like your idea of a higher proportion of the pot split equally than currently stands on the domestic deal.


The proposal that has been made on the foreign TV money is not that far removed from the current domestic TV deal but I acceot your point about rewards for times shown. There's room for negotiation here I feel.

Not aimed at you mate but I think the notion that if this goes through we'll become a La Liga is absurd.

so who is the big six, a few years ago it was the big 4, then we came in with our owners, pushed a couple of teams out, and now its the big 6, if a couple of other teams come good and push a couple of the big 6 out, will it become the big 8. ALL TV MONEY SHOULD BE SHARED OUT BETWEEN ALL 20 TEAMS. I think that we are getting like our team in Salford,

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:Not aimed at you mate but I think the notion that if this goes through we'll become a La Liga is absurd.

I don't think we'll become a La Liga, but there is a certain degree of 'pulling up the ladder behind you' to it now that we've reached a level of 'full internationalization' of broadcasting, as there was with the formation of the Premier League. It'll also provide a massive safety net to teams with wider international support (imagine if the Rags finished 14th, but earned more money than someone like Southampton finishing 8th), and also exacerbate the potential for scenarios where players are bought due to potential TV markets they'll open, rather than on merit.

I don't think payment should have anything to do with number of games shown. Doing so has the effect of the TV companies pushing money to the most popular clubs already in the domestic TV deal and we see it 100% in the FA and League Cups where the red teams are (nearly) always shown and ourselves rarely.

stevefromdonny wrote:so who is the big six, a few years ago it was the big 4, then we came in with our owners, pushed a couple of teams out, and now its the big 6, if a couple of other teams come good and push a couple of the big 6 out, will it become the big 8. ALL TV MONEY SHOULD BE SHARED OUT BETWEEN ALL 20 TEAMS. I think that we are getting like our team in Salford,

IDYLLIC
but then, You should also teach me how to sell WBA's football to NBC for that money. I would not be that good.

or how to sip again a pina colada in Venezuela, after only a decade of "let's happily share everything with every cunt... la la"

fair investments demands fair retribution.

Justified logic wrote:I don't think payment should have anything to do with number of games shown. Doing so has the effect of the TV companies pushing money to the most popular clubs already in the domestic TV deal and we see it 100% in the FA and League Cups where the red teams are (nearly) always shown and ourselves rarely.

Only Liverpool shown more than us last season, 29 times to our 28, in league games. We were shown the same number of times as the rags and Chelsea.

Swales4ever wrote:

stevefromdonny wrote:so who is the big six, a few years ago it was the big 4, then we came in with our owners, pushed a couple of teams out, and now its the big 6, if a couple of other teams come good and push a couple of the big 6 out, will it become the big 8. ALL TV MONEY SHOULD BE SHARED OUT BETWEEN ALL 20 TEAMS. I think that we are getting like our team in Salford,

IDYLLIC
but then, You should also teach me how to sell WBA's football to NBC for that money. I would not be that good.

or how to sip again a pina colada in Venezuela, after only a decade of "let's happily share everything with every cunt... la la"

fair investments demands fair retribution.

So, you advocate for something more like Nigeria's system, then?

BlueinBosnia wrote:

Swales4ever wrote:

stevefromdonny wrote:so who is the big six, a few years ago it was the big 4, then we came in with our owners, pushed a couple of teams out, and now its the big 6, if a couple of other teams come good and push a couple of the big 6 out, will it become the big 8. ALL TV MONEY SHOULD BE SHARED OUT BETWEEN ALL 20 TEAMS. I think that we are getting like our team in Salford,

IDYLLIC
but then, You should also teach me how to sell WBA's football to NBC for that money. I would not be that good.

or how to sip again a pina colada in Venezuela, after only a decade of "let's happily share everything with every cunt... la la"

fair investments demands fair retribution.

So, you advocate for something more like Nigeria's system, then?

come on BIB, quoque You of all, can't just come up with ol good " it's Lenin or Howard Hughes ", can such a smart man?
I m fine with Olaf Palme middle. on topic see above, Mate.

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:

Justified logic wrote:I don't think payment should have anything to do with number of games shown. Doing so has the effect of the TV companies pushing money to the most popular clubs already in the domestic TV deal and we see it 100% in the FA and League Cups where the red teams are (nearly) always shown and ourselves rarely.

Only Liverpool shown more than us last season, 29 times to our 28, in league games. We were shown the same number of times as the rags and Chelsea.

Well that's my point about the TV deal for PL games.

It's the Top 6 who are understandably pushing for this as they are surely the most significant reason the PL has become so rich (I didn't even check).

I'm not saying I support the idea, but I get why this is happening.

Is there not an incentive involved for where you finish in the league?

Could that not also possibly affect the issue of players at safe clubs "on the beach" at the end of the season?

PrezIke wrote:It's the Top 6 who are understandably pushing for this as they are surely the most significant reason the PL has become so rich (I didn't even check).

I'm not saying I support the idea, but I get why this is happening.

Is there not an incentive involved for where you finish in the league?

Could that not also possibly affect the issue of players at safe clubs "on the beach" at the end of the season?

There is an incentive for finishing higher - through the domestic TV money.

The Premier League was already rich 10 years ago and we were definitely not part of the 'big 4/6' then.

We would have been complaining about any ideas similar to this then so we should be now.

The current system still rewards the better teams in terms of performance and appearances on TV.

As much as I enjoy our success now, to completely remove competition from any 'smaller' club is unfair and would show a complete lack of understanding from where we were 10 years ago.

aaron bond wrote:

PrezIke wrote:It's the Top 6 who are understandably pushing for this as they are surely the most significant reason the PL has become so rich (I didn't even check).

I'm not saying I support the idea, but I get why this is happening.

Is there not an incentive involved for where you finish in the league?

Could that not also possibly affect the issue of players at safe clubs "on the beach" at the end of the season?

There is an incentive for finishing higher - through the domestic TV money.

The Premier League was already rich 10 years ago and we were definitely not part of the 'big 4/6' then.

We would have been complaining about any ideas similar to this then so we should be now.

The current system still rewards the better teams in terms of performance and appearances on TV.

As much as I enjoy our success now, to completely remove competition from any 'smaller' club is unfair and would show a complete lack of understanding from where we were 10 years ago.

Exactly.

We somehow got lucky and we got to the big boys' table but I still would not want to "protect our status" by restricting competition.

The TV money should be distributed as evenly as possible imo.

Everyone hates us so fuck it!! West Brom fans and the like booing Sterling last season for no reason? Sound, we'll take all your money then. Wankers.

Isn't this like ffp and no blue would advocate ffp. We want equal competition so we can smash teams that all have class players

Nick wrote:Isn't this like ffp and no blue would advocate ffp. We want equal competition so we can smash teams that all have class players

But all the other teams that this would affect voted for FFP. A taste of their own medicine?

All in all, this just seems to leave a thoroughly sour taste in the mouth.

Seems to be for the few, not the many.

As I mentioned above, these turds voted for FFP. So they can get fucked now if they think we won't try and screw them like they tried to do us.