Porro deal is off

comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle, just in case, I'm so... (U4388)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
Dont be daft.

Brentford contribute to the Sky deal by being a part of the Premier League, in the same way that Lisbon contribute to the UCL deal by being a part of it.

Its not being financially doped, it is to qualify for a highly prestigious and financially wealthy tournament.

They qualify, ergo they contribute to its value.

As for its value, the Scottish league has no attraction outside Scotland. None!

The PL sold the last lot of Global TV rights (2022-25) for £5.3bn, that is more than the £4.8bn paid for the domestic rights.

the PL is shown in 188 countries, and last season estimated that it was watched by 3.2bn viewers world wide.

So of course the amount of views is critical as it is the subscriptions that pay for it and the greater the viewers the more valuable the advertising space. IN addition, the ability to reach a global audience also makes it far more valuable.

Would like to hear how many viewers the Scottish PL gets. Using some basic maths it needs to be about 10million viewers to be proportionate to the PL, based on the SPL TV deal of £30m a year....but you probably have the numbers at your finger tips so happy to be shown wrong.

AND, you do have a chip. Irked by the fact that small PL clubs blow Big Rangers finances out of the water....Always going on about the "doped PL" like some bitter sibling with an inferiority complex.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't disagree with all that but will say that Celtic and Rangers do have a decent sized world wide following and I'd imagine the TV viewing figures would be quite high? sadly a lot to do with the religious aspect oftentimes but if they were EPL clubs they would bring something to the table

That said I don't agree with the "financial doping" thing, the EPL is huge worldwide and must generate absolute fortunes more than any other domestic league and perhaps only the Champs league would be slightly comparable?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rangers & Celtic undoubtedly have 'large' following and could probably attest to having a bigger global fan base than Man City, but their problem is the product of the SPL.

This answers whodunnit's question but he just will not see it. The value to the PL comes from the collective, the entertaining competitive nature of the PL combined with the quality The spread of the income allows this to happen. The SPL falls flat in both respects. Poor quality, no contest, therefore low value to broadcasters and advertisers.

It is no wonder he wishes to have individual TV rights because guess what, the Glasgow clubs would dominate but at the cost of their league which would become even less of a contest. I dunnon who is bottom of the league but how many subscribers could they hope to get and would it crush attendances?

The fact the SPL only gets £30m TV rights a year shows it would not be a golden ticket for either club in terms of being able to compete on a global scale. The Championship earns 10 times as much from TV but is one of the most competitive leagues out there.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
competitiveness does not drive up prices, viewers do. its all about sponsorship.

I would love to have individual rights ofcourse I would cos then clubs would get what they deserve. they would earn depending on how many people tune in to watch them which is the way it should be.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

The quality of the product is what drives demand for it and competitiveness is a part of that. A non-contest or a 2 horse race, over and over is not a quality product. The jeopardy of relegation is also a massive thing. The race for top 4. All these things drive the interest

In the PL there is an understanding that the model works because the characteristics that make up the quality of the product, the appeal on the global stage, are made possible by this share of income. Yes the big clubs want a bigger share but actually they see the bigger picture. As i said before, its the European Super League model vs the PL model. One sees the rich get massively richer while almost a closed shop, the other sees the rich continue to benefit significantly while sharing the value of the overall product with the other clubs who play a vitally important role in the attraction of the product, which goes way beyond just who wins.

Anyone who thinks giving Scottish clubs their own TV deals would be a good thing for their game is blinkered. It will drive other teams in their league out of business and then what kind of product are you selling to viewers or sponsors. It's already a league decided in 4 games of the season

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle, just in case, I'm so... (U4388)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
Dont be daft.

Brentford contribute to the Sky deal by being a part of the Premier League, in the same way that Lisbon contribute to the UCL deal by being a part of it.

Its not being financially doped, it is to qualify for a highly prestigious and financially wealthy tournament.

They qualify, ergo they contribute to its value.

As for its value, the Scottish league has no attraction outside Scotland. None!

The PL sold the last lot of Global TV rights (2022-25) for £5.3bn, that is more than the £4.8bn paid for the domestic rights.

the PL is shown in 188 countries, and last season estimated that it was watched by 3.2bn viewers world wide.

So of course the amount of views is critical as it is the subscriptions that pay for it and the greater the viewers the more valuable the advertising space. IN addition, the ability to reach a global audience also makes it far more valuable.

Would like to hear how many viewers the Scottish PL gets. Using some basic maths it needs to be about 10million viewers to be proportionate to the PL, based on the SPL TV deal of £30m a year....but you probably have the numbers at your finger tips so happy to be shown wrong.

AND, you do have a chip. Irked by the fact that small PL clubs blow Big Rangers finances out of the water....Always going on about the "doped PL" like some bitter sibling with an inferiority complex.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't disagree with all that but will say that Celtic and Rangers do have a decent sized world wide following and I'd imagine the TV viewing figures would be quite high? sadly a lot to do with the religious aspect oftentimes but if they were EPL clubs they would bring something to the table

That said I don't agree with the "financial doping" thing, the EPL is huge worldwide and must generate absolute fortunes more than any other domestic league and perhaps only the Champs league would be slightly comparable?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rangers & Celtic undoubtedly have 'large' following and could probably attest to having a bigger global fan base than Man City, but their problem is the product of the SPL.

This answers whodunnit's question but he just will not see it. The value to the PL comes from the collective, the entertaining competitive nature of the PL combined with the quality The spread of the income allows this to happen. The SPL falls flat in both respects. Poor quality, no contest, therefore low value to broadcasters and advertisers.

It is no wonder he wishes to have individual TV rights because guess what, the Glasgow clubs would dominate but at the cost of their league which would become even less of a contest. I dunnon who is bottom of the league but how many subscribers could they hope to get and would it crush attendances?

The fact the SPL only gets £30m TV rights a year shows it would not be a golden ticket for either club in terms of being able to compete on a global scale. The Championship earns 10 times as much from TV but is one of the most competitive leagues out there.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
competitiveness does not drive up prices, viewers do. its all about sponsorship.

I would love to have individual rights ofcourse I would cos then clubs would get what they deserve. they would earn depending on how many people tune in to watch them which is the way it should be.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

The quality of the product is what drives demand for it and competitiveness is a part of that. A non-contest or a 2 horse race, over and over is not a quality product. The jeopardy of relegation is also a massive thing. The race for top 4. All these things drive the interest

In the PL there is an understanding that the model works because the characteristics that make up the quality of the product, the appeal on the global stage, are made possible by this share of income. Yes the big clubs want a bigger share but actually they see the bigger picture. As i said before, its the European Super League model vs the PL model. One sees the rich get massively richer while almost a closed shop, the other sees the rich continue to benefit significantly while sharing the value of the overall product with the other clubs who play a vitally important role in the attraction of the product, which goes way beyond just who wins.

Anyone who thinks giving Scottish clubs their own TV deals would be a good thing for their game is blinkered. It will drive other teams in their league out of business and then what kind of product are you selling to viewers or sponsors. It's already a league decided in 4 games of the season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
then you dont know our game then.....

Rangers and celtic also massively subsidise these teams ... far more than the palry 600k a year does!

If rangers and celtic fans had to pay to watch the games on the smaller teams site, they would massively make more.

You cannot shoot an idea down til you see the structure of it.

Now you are getting teams like Wolves plundering teams Porto,Benfica Ajax for players. thats how bad it has got, the english pound by every year using the rest of the world more and more day by day.

You dont care however and why would you its to the benefit of your own teams and league.

But that is the current state of affairs

Fab thinks PP is still coming, talks on going 🤞


https://twitter.com/FabrizioRomano/status/1620093873275146240?cxt=HHwWgMDQtemy3fssAAAA

comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle, just in case, I'm so... (U4388)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
Dont be daft.

Brentford contribute to the Sky deal by being a part of the Premier League, in the same way that Lisbon contribute to the UCL deal by being a part of it.

Its not being financially doped, it is to qualify for a highly prestigious and financially wealthy tournament.

They qualify, ergo they contribute to its value.

As for its value, the Scottish league has no attraction outside Scotland. None!

The PL sold the last lot of Global TV rights (2022-25) for £5.3bn, that is more than the £4.8bn paid for the domestic rights.

the PL is shown in 188 countries, and last season estimated that it was watched by 3.2bn viewers world wide.

So of course the amount of views is critical as it is the subscriptions that pay for it and the greater the viewers the more valuable the advertising space. IN addition, the ability to reach a global audience also makes it far more valuable.

Would like to hear how many viewers the Scottish PL gets. Using some basic maths it needs to be about 10million viewers to be proportionate to the PL, based on the SPL TV deal of £30m a year....but you probably have the numbers at your finger tips so happy to be shown wrong.

AND, you do have a chip. Irked by the fact that small PL clubs blow Big Rangers finances out of the water....Always going on about the "doped PL" like some bitter sibling with an inferiority complex.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't disagree with all that but will say that Celtic and Rangers do have a decent sized world wide following and I'd imagine the TV viewing figures would be quite high? sadly a lot to do with the religious aspect oftentimes but if they were EPL clubs they would bring something to the table

That said I don't agree with the "financial doping" thing, the EPL is huge worldwide and must generate absolute fortunes more than any other domestic league and perhaps only the Champs league would be slightly comparable?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rangers & Celtic undoubtedly have 'large' following and could probably attest to having a bigger global fan base than Man City, but their problem is the product of the SPL.

This answers whodunnit's question but he just will not see it. The value to the PL comes from the collective, the entertaining competitive nature of the PL combined with the quality The spread of the income allows this to happen. The SPL falls flat in both respects. Poor quality, no contest, therefore low value to broadcasters and advertisers.

It is no wonder he wishes to have individual TV rights because guess what, the Glasgow clubs would dominate but at the cost of their league which would become even less of a contest. I dunnon who is bottom of the league but how many subscribers could they hope to get and would it crush attendances?

The fact the SPL only gets £30m TV rights a year shows it would not be a golden ticket for either club in terms of being able to compete on a global scale. The Championship earns 10 times as much from TV but is one of the most competitive leagues out there.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
competitiveness does not drive up prices, viewers do. its all about sponsorship.

I would love to have individual rights ofcourse I would cos then clubs would get what they deserve. they would earn depending on how many people tune in to watch them which is the way it should be.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

The quality of the product is what drives demand for it and competitiveness is a part of that. A non-contest or a 2 horse race, over and over is not a quality product. The jeopardy of relegation is also a massive thing. The race for top 4. All these things drive the interest

In the PL there is an understanding that the model works because the characteristics that make up the quality of the product, the appeal on the global stage, are made possible by this share of income. Yes the big clubs want a bigger share but actually they see the bigger picture. As i said before, its the European Super League model vs the PL model. One sees the rich get massively richer while almost a closed shop, the other sees the rich continue to benefit significantly while sharing the value of the overall product with the other clubs who play a vitally important role in the attraction of the product, which goes way beyond just who wins.

Anyone who thinks giving Scottish clubs their own TV deals would be a good thing for their game is blinkered. It will drive other teams in their league out of business and then what kind of product are you selling to viewers or sponsors. It's already a league decided in 4 games of the season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
then you dont know our game then.....

Rangers and celtic also massively subsidise these teams ... far more than the palry 600k a year does!

If rangers and celtic fans had to pay to watch the games on the smaller teams site, they would massively make more.

You cannot shoot an idea down til you see the structure of it.

Now you are getting teams like Wolves plundering teams Porto,Benfica Ajax for players. thats how bad it has got, the english pound by every year using the rest of the world more and more day by day.

You dont care however and why would you its to the benefit of your own teams and league.

But that is the current state of affairs
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You are contradicting yourself.

You want Ranges to have their own TV deal to make more money and be more competitive, and for the PL to stop being so successful at making money.

The PL is just a bigger very well run thing. There is no reason why La Liga or Serie A or the Bundesliga could not be our equals, but they aint.

I dont see why the PL clubs or fans should feel bad about that or for "ruining football" because we are so successful. Should we strive to be worse?

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 21 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Insufferable-Piffle, just in case, I'm so... (U4388)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
Dont be daft.

Brentford contribute to the Sky deal by being a part of the Premier League, in the same way that Lisbon contribute to the UCL deal by being a part of it.

Its not being financially doped, it is to qualify for a highly prestigious and financially wealthy tournament.

They qualify, ergo they contribute to its value.

As for its value, the Scottish league has no attraction outside Scotland. None!

The PL sold the last lot of Global TV rights (2022-25) for £5.3bn, that is more than the £4.8bn paid for the domestic rights.

the PL is shown in 188 countries, and last season estimated that it was watched by 3.2bn viewers world wide.

So of course the amount of views is critical as it is the subscriptions that pay for it and the greater the viewers the more valuable the advertising space. IN addition, the ability to reach a global audience also makes it far more valuable.

Would like to hear how many viewers the Scottish PL gets. Using some basic maths it needs to be about 10million viewers to be proportionate to the PL, based on the SPL TV deal of £30m a year....but you probably have the numbers at your finger tips so happy to be shown wrong.

AND, you do have a chip. Irked by the fact that small PL clubs blow Big Rangers finances out of the water....Always going on about the "doped PL" like some bitter sibling with an inferiority complex.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't disagree with all that but will say that Celtic and Rangers do have a decent sized world wide following and I'd imagine the TV viewing figures would be quite high? sadly a lot to do with the religious aspect oftentimes but if they were EPL clubs they would bring something to the table

That said I don't agree with the "financial doping" thing, the EPL is huge worldwide and must generate absolute fortunes more than any other domestic league and perhaps only the Champs league would be slightly comparable?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Rangers & Celtic undoubtedly have 'large' following and could probably attest to having a bigger global fan base than Man City, but their problem is the product of the SPL.

This answers whodunnit's question but he just will not see it. The value to the PL comes from the collective, the entertaining competitive nature of the PL combined with the quality The spread of the income allows this to happen. The SPL falls flat in both respects. Poor quality, no contest, therefore low value to broadcasters and advertisers.

It is no wonder he wishes to have individual TV rights because guess what, the Glasgow clubs would dominate but at the cost of their league which would become even less of a contest. I dunnon who is bottom of the league but how many subscribers could they hope to get and would it crush attendances?

The fact the SPL only gets £30m TV rights a year shows it would not be a golden ticket for either club in terms of being able to compete on a global scale. The Championship earns 10 times as much from TV but is one of the most competitive leagues out there.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
competitiveness does not drive up prices, viewers do. its all about sponsorship.

I would love to have individual rights ofcourse I would cos then clubs would get what they deserve. they would earn depending on how many people tune in to watch them which is the way it should be.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

The quality of the product is what drives demand for it and competitiveness is a part of that. A non-contest or a 2 horse race, over and over is not a quality product. The jeopardy of relegation is also a massive thing. The race for top 4. All these things drive the interest

In the PL there is an understanding that the model works because the characteristics that make up the quality of the product, the appeal on the global stage, are made possible by this share of income. Yes the big clubs want a bigger share but actually they see the bigger picture. As i said before, its the European Super League model vs the PL model. One sees the rich get massively richer while almost a closed shop, the other sees the rich continue to benefit significantly while sharing the value of the overall product with the other clubs who play a vitally important role in the attraction of the product, which goes way beyond just who wins.

Anyone who thinks giving Scottish clubs their own TV deals would be a good thing for their game is blinkered. It will drive other teams in their league out of business and then what kind of product are you selling to viewers or sponsors. It's already a league decided in 4 games of the season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
then you dont know our game then.....

Rangers and celtic also massively subsidise these teams ... far more than the palry 600k a year does!

If rangers and celtic fans had to pay to watch the games on the smaller teams site, they would massively make more.

You cannot shoot an idea down til you see the structure of it.

Now you are getting teams like Wolves plundering teams Porto,Benfica Ajax for players. thats how bad it has got, the english pound by every year using the rest of the world more and more day by day.

You dont care however and why would you its to the benefit of your own teams and league.

But that is the current state of affairs
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You are contradicting yourself.

You want Ranges to have their own TV deal to make more money and be more competitive, and for the PL to stop being so successful at making money.

The PL is just a bigger very well run thing. There is no reason why La Liga or Serie A or the Bundesliga could not be our equals, but they aint.

I dont see why the PL clubs or fans should feel bad about that or for "ruining football" because we are so successful. Should we strive to be worse?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I want all teams all around the world to do it.

Id like to see the actual big teams earn the money they should due to their standing in the game and not just their geography.

I dont expect you to feel bad, why would you. Your the only country in world football benefitting from it!

comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 6 hours, 32 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by Gillespie Rd. (U18361)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 55 minutes ago
comment by Conn & Duncan..Scottish Legends (U15636)
posted 4 minutes ago
Clubs are asking too much for players these days…

Brighton want £70-£80m for Caicado… ridiculous…

It’s all getting out of hand…

Blame the likes of Chelsea… overpaying for every player they sign… gives selling clubs a yardstick to go by…
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeh football has seriously lost the plot. Gordon, an Everton reserve has just been sold for £45 million, when he is probably worth about £10 million tops.

Transfer fees have been badly inflated by the financially doped clubs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I hope you're referring to the gang of 20 financially doped clubs that is the Premier League. 20 clubs that are guaranteed at least £120m worth of TV money every season before they even kick a ball or sell a single ticket.

Not to mention the other 72 clubs down the English pyramid that are also financially doped thanks to the Premier League's largesse in the form of annual "solidarity payments".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
shhhhhhh


they dont wanna hear the truth.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The PL aint doped. It's money earned you clown?

Doped clubs have had owners who have pumped in 100s of millions or billions of pounds which the club didnt earn

----------------------------------------------------------------------



Both City and Chelsea fit the bill for financially doped clubs. Both spent money the club haven't earnt.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"earned" Brentford : 120m a year in tv revenue alone
Ajax: : 8m
Porto/Benfica: 14m
Rangers/Celtic : 600k

Brentford get more than double of any other club in the world outside England in domestic tv revenue.

earned !!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brentford have earned the right to play in the most watched league in the world. Why should Brentford care about the fact other big European clubs dont earn as much.

La Liga have copied a lot of things from the PL because they know competition is what makes a football league exciting. The problem for them is, they don't have the following in Asia like the PL has.

Celtic and Rangers need to follow the Dutch and Portuguese clubs of scouting players in South America and selling them for big profits. Even Brighton is doing that.

comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You are contradicting yourself.

You want Ranges to have their own TV deal to make more money and be more competitive, and for the PL to stop being so successful at making money.

The PL is just a bigger very well run thing. There is no reason why La Liga or Serie A or the Bundesliga could not be our equals, but they aint.

I dont see why the PL clubs or fans should feel bad about that or for "ruining football" because we are so successful. Should we strive to be worse?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I want all teams all around the world to do it.

Id like to see the actual big teams earn the money they should due to their standing in the game and not just their geography.

I dont expect you to feel bad, why would you. Your the only country in world football benefitting from it!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You're hilarious. You want this because you think Rangers are a big club and should get a share of the football gravy.

You are basically making the ESL case that big clubs deserve more because, they're big, closed shop. And yet you are making the case the the PL is unfair as it gives team like Brentford huge sums of money.

You want it based on Big club not geography. Rangers aint a big club mate. You are a big fish in a small pond and if you want to swim in the big pond then there are clubs like Ipswich and N. Forest who have better European pedigree than Rangers.

If they were dishing out the gravy on a big club basis Rangers would be well down the list.

EXCL: Tottenham are resolving all the issues with Sporting and are finally expected to complete Pedro Porro deal on #DeadlineDay! ⚪️🏁 #THFC

Long meeting just finished with full agreement in place — Spurs waiting for documents and contracts to make sure it’s 100% sealed.

comment by LukaBrasi COYS (U22178)
posted 1 hour, 15 minutes ago
EXCL: Tottenham are resolving all the issues with Sporting and are finally expected to complete Pedro Porro deal on #DeadlineDay! ⚪️🏁 #THFC

Long meeting just finished with full agreement in place — Spurs waiting for documents and contracts to make sure it’s 100% sealed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes

But we've been here last night...I want to see the player at the Spurs ground, wearing Spurs top before I get excited

It will get done imo because otherwise Levy is emigrating to outer Mongolia on Wednesday

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 13 hours, 53 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 3 minutes ago

----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------
I want all teams all around the world to do it.

Id like to see the actual big teams earn the money they should due to their standing in the game and not just their geography.

I dont expect you to feel bad, why would you. Your the only country in world football benefitting from it!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You're hilarious. You want this because you think Rangers are a big club and should get a share of the football gravy.

You are basically making the ESL case that big clubs deserve more because, they're big, closed shop. And yet you are making the case the the PL is unfair as it gives team like Brentford huge sums of money.

You want it based on Big club not geography. Rangers aint a big club mate. You are a big fish in a small pond and if you want to swim in the big pond then there are clubs like Ipswich and N. Forest who have better European pedigree than Rangers.

If they were dishing out the gravy on a big club basis Rangers would be well down the list.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why thank you i try to be funn now and then....

explain to me how you come ot the conclusion that I only want this in so my club can benefit but you then say that we are not a big club so wont benefit, then go back to saying were a big fish in a wee pond, then try to belittle me by saying Forrest and Ipswich have won more in europe than us, as if I care??!

you have contradicted yourself about 4 times there in the one post , thats quite an achievment.