Quote: tank123 "Sky would have monopolised football if it was allowed to, its not under current contractually regulations. That's why it has to share with other providers. That is the only reason why BT have got some football games. Sky will keep what it wants if it can. Basically if it can make money out of it then they will take it if they can. And no one TV provider can compete with them.
They could have taken the rights to RU but as they have found out the viewing figures are not that great much less than Super League games for domestic games. I agree with you Mash Butty its a big win for SL that RU has gone to a new channel that will be very much dependant on footbal for its subscriptions.
ESPN is a much bigger company than BT its run by Disney and they did not go for the right to RU or if it did it was not willing to pay as much as BT and that says something for you. BT are paying too much for the Union rights. The union clubs will be happy that they will get this money but BT will realise quickly they will not recoup the investment. They are as Dave says giving free sports package with broadband so they are already losing money on the deal. You can not take on the King and expect to survive as many broadcasters have found out to its costs take on SKY adn you lose. Only ESPN can live with them and that's due to its backing by Disney.'"
The ESPN / Disney view is a misrepresentation of business priorities. Whilst the ESPN UK formed an arm of the ESPN / Disney business, there was never a commitment to take on Sky as it was an expansion market based on opportunism rather than a serious power play. Setanta's failure gift wrapped a footy package that Sky couldn't take and terrestrial couldn't afford, and they swooped on RU rights when Sky called the RFU's bluff. They got burned on the latter deal, which did not have the subscription draw expected and were already starting to cut their losses, by sacrificing other UK rights - NHL, NASCAR - before losing the footy package and RU.
On the other hand, BT are a much more serious player in their core market. The tv rights aspect is a power play in the bigger struggle with Sky over the lucrative telephone / broadband market. They are smarter than ESPN and Setanta in understanding that they will never compete with Sky for tv subscriptions alone, despite having their own service (like Virgin Media), so are enticing Sky TV subscribers to their other services. Like it or not they are a serious player in a game much bigger than just tv and consequently RU are in no danger by taking their side.
