No TV deal?

[mickthemuppet]

The attendances at the tracks have never gone up in all  the time there has been regular televised Speedway

[A ORLOV]

2 hours ago, mickthemuppet said:

The attendances at the tracks have never gone up in all  the time there has been regular televised Speedway

That is possibly because having seen a live meeting with all the delays etc they were put off, which is why a highlights prog would be a good option.   If the bspa get rid of all the delays and pointless restarts more people might return to the sport.

Edited February 17, 2018 by A ORLOV

[steve roberts]

27 minutes ago, A ORLOV said:

That is possibly because having seen a lie meeting with all the delays etc they were put off, which is why a highlights prog would be a good option.   If the bspa get rid of all the delays and pointless restarts more people might return to the sport.

...couldn't agree more!

[steve roberts]

48 minutes ago, RobMcCaffery said:

Thanks for remembering. It was a very long time ago. 

That show came about after we'd set up the deal to show a prerecorded match once a week. I offered to contribute speedway news to the station's news department (mainly ex-Piccadilly Radio journos who at least knew of Belle Vue) to be read by one of the presenters as part of their new bulletins.

I phoned in the first set to the programme controller, Chris Fear (ex-Westward TV and a speedway man) whose response was to invite me up to the studios the following Saturday to present the news myself, initially with him interviewing me then after a couple of weeks 'solo'. 

Resources were minimal - we couldn't even afford a shoestring. What we did have was the recording of the match to be shown the following night so we took a heat from that as a preview. The whole speedway project was initially run by K.M.Video on their own who recorded several matches for video each week, normally at places like Hackney, Wimbledon and Reading. At each meeting we would record interviews to insert into the weekly news review. We weren't allowed to show any action.

So we would only be able to show the one race and the few video companies also making speedway tapes at the time simply weren't producing material technically good enough to broadcast. Indeed KM's equipment wasn't up to the job and after the first match at Hackney an outside firm, Video Anglia was brought in to provide better, vision-mixed cameras working from an admittedly tiny 'scanner' truck (a Renault Trafic where I did the commentary  from the front passenger seat).

I usually managed to find a guest to help me through the Saturday half hour, starting with Chris Morton. 

So the format was one race,  a couple of interviews, possibly a guest, a comprehensive listing of fixtures for the night and week ahead. The rest was me, working from notes perched on my knee, with slide inserts to relieve the viewer's agony ;-) No, we couldn't run to autocue.

No, none exist as far as I can ascertain. We ran weekly through the main season and monthly through the winter so there were over thirty shows a year. We tried.

The only feedback we got from the BSPA was "Canterbury are complaining that you're hitting their crowd". Our programme was over by 6 every Saturday...

Depressingly it comes as no surprise that some BSPA members are still stupid enough to believe that TV isn't a help. After 30+ years you would hope they'd learned. 

People wonder why I get frustrated with certain people in speedway?  

 

 

. 

I used to look forward to Screensports 'Match of the Week'...Sundays evenings initially if I recall?

Living in Oxford we were fortunate in receiving cable (Swindon was another area) before it became nationwide and then of course satellite kicked in...something I've never subscribed to.

[RobMcCaffery]

4 hours ago, steve roberts said:

I used to look forward to Screensports 'Match of the Week'...Sundays evenings initially if I recall?

Living in Oxford we were fortunate in receiving cable (Swindon was another area) before it became nationwide and then of course satellite kicked in...something I've never subscribed to.

Thanks again Steve. It was scheduled for late on Sunday specifically so it didn't clash with any live speedway meetings. In those days the only Sunday evening track we had to consider was Boston who were normally finished by 9 pm, having a 6.45 start.

As you can see we did everything we could not to be a problem.

Yes Oxford was one of the areas covered. In those early days we were carried mainly on Rediffusion's 4-channel service which sadly only had patchy coverage over the country. The expected multi-channel cable systems of today were authorised in the 80s but mostly not built until the next decade, by which time Sky was dominant, Screensport had morphed into a European network, and I was long gone. 

[RobMcCaffery]

5 hours ago, mickthemuppet said:

The attendances at the tracks have never gone up in all  the time there has been regular televised Speedway

On the other hand how much lower would they have gone if not propped up by TV coverage? You can never know. The money earnt by the sport should have enabled it to invest in itself and thus attract new customers.

There were few sports that utterly wasted the opportunity and money but somehow ours managed to. 

5 hours ago, A ORLOV said:

That is possibly because having seen a live meeting with all the delays etc they were put off, which is why a highlights prog would be a good option.   If the bspa get rid of all the delays and pointless restarts more people might return to the sport.

No, the move for years now in sports TV has been away from highlights to live, full-match coverage. Why should be go in the other direction just because we can't run matches efficiently?

There is a real world out there and it seems it's not just the BSPA who are unaware. Study the sports TV schedules and see for yourselves how few sports have highlights shows only instead of full coverage. There's not many, and for a very good reason - people want live, full matches, as proved by Sky for nearly thirty years now. 

[A ORLOV]

10 hours ago, RobMcCaffery said:

On the other hand how much lower would they have gone if not propped up by TV coverage? You can never know. The money earnt by the sport should have enabled it to invest in itself and thus attract new customers.

There were few sports that utterly wasted the opportunity and money but somehow ours managed to. 

No, the move for years now in sports TV has been away from highlights to live, full-match coverage. Why should be go in the other direction just because we can't run matches efficiently?

There is a real world out there and it seems it's not just the BSPA who are unaware. Study the sports TV schedules and see for yourselves how few sports have highlights shows only instead of full coverage. There's not many, and for a very good reason - people want live, full matches, as proved by Sky for nearly thirty years now. 

Three main sports have highlights in addition to as well as live coverage that i know of.

BBC has football highlights each week, the same with rugby and often the F1 coverage is highlights only.

If the tv companies will not pay a decent amount for live meetings and some clubs feel the payment does not cover their loss,  as seems to have been a possible issue this year, then coverage will be limited so a highlights prog is next best, the alternative is no coverage at all.

People might want live matches but if the clubs decide against it then so be it, again highlights are better than nothing.   

 

Edited February 18, 2018 by A ORLOV

[Hot Shoe]

22 hours ago, RobMcCaffery said:

BT aren't the ones with the problem re the Premier League deal - that's firmly Sky's problem. 

The lesson has been learnt and the next deal will be less on both sides. BT's resources dwarf Sky's so I wouldn't be worried about their finances. They are leaving Sky to make the desperate deals and are clearly looking to ensure that future deals in all sports are financially justifiable. It looks like they've tested the BSPA this year with their initial offer. 

It is frightening that members of the BSPA still can't see the value of a TV deal. Most other minority sports would be biting BT's hand off.

But then there is the real world, the sporting world and then British Speedway's......

 

 

BT Sport spent far too much on their last TV deal and i think that is common knowledge.

I'm not worried about either of their finances but simply pointing out that putting on speedway which is a tiny outlay compared to the other sports they show it brings in subscribers they otherwise wouldn't have and that helps pay for their football contract.

 

 

 

[bigcatdiary]

8 hours ago, Hot Shoe said:

BT Sport spent far too much on their last TV deal and i think that is common knowledge.

I'm not worried about either of their finances but simply pointing out that putting on speedway which is a tiny outlay compared to the other sports they show it brings in subscribers they otherwise wouldn't have and that helps pay for their football contract.

 

 

 

It’s apparent that putting on Speedway incurs some quite decent production costs running into thousands for each televised match but that must on the whole affect every live production by tv companies to cover sport.

i would be interested to know what it costs to put a programme on but it must be well into 5 figures.

[Starman2006]

1 hour ago, bigcatdiary said:

It’s apparent that putting on Speedway incurs some quite decent production costs running into thousands for each televised match but that must on the whole affect every live production by tv companies to cover sport.

i would be interested to know what it costs to put a programme on but it must be well into 5 figures.

Definately 5 figures, i was told how much it cost the Sky production to put it on, i cant remember now but it was a small fortune, even for one transmitting unit..

[mikebv]

3 hours ago, Starman2006 said:

Definately 5 figures, i was told how much it cost the Sky production to put it on, i cant remember now but it was a small fortune, even for one transmitting unit..

Wasn't it over £100k for a five camera production? Hence rain offs were a costly nightmare and everything was then done to put the meeting on whether conditions were 100% rideable (never mind raceable)..?

Edited February 18, 2018 by mikebv

[Starman2006]

19 minutes ago, mikebv said:

Wasn't it over £100k for a five camera production? Hence rain offs were a costly nightmare and everything was then done to put the meeting on whether conditions were 100% rideable (never mind raceable) or not..?

Well yes that did seem to be the case rain off's were costly for everyone, and yes i think that sort of figure was banded about. The thing is Speedway does not get the exposure the same as football does, as you know, and to my mind that has always been the sports downfall as you know, speedway used to hit the national papers in the 70's 80's, for the right reasons, good exposure, our local papers coverage is very good. Also the problem nowadays compared to the 60's 70's people have so much more choice of things to do, im not just talking about watching the junk on the TV week in week out, and costs for fans does come into it, thats why imo you have to dangle a carrot to get fans in for the TV meetings. although i dont think the money BT offer clubs is as much as sky did, so even if fans do not turn up the club still gets the money which should, break them at least even, but the aim for promotions should be to lure fans in. Of course the chap who said on here we should have a highlights programme, and really plug it, he's right.
Speedway has to move with the times, you cannot stand still, if a football club does not improve there squad year after year the likelyhood being they will struggle or get religated..Speedway should do the same.. improve its presentation and keep the fans happy.

Edited February 18, 2018 by Starman2006

[Tsunami]

4 hours ago, Starman2006 said:

Well yes that did seem to be the case rain off's were costly for everyone, and yes i think that sort of figure was banded about. The thing is Speedway does not get the exposure the same as football does, as you know, and to my mind that has always been the sports downfall as you know, speedway used to hit the national papers in the 70's 80's, for the right reasons, good exposure, our local papers coverage is very good. Also the problem nowadays compared to the 60's 70's people have so much more choice of things to do, im not just talking about watching the junk on the TV week in week out, and costs for fans does come into it, thats why imo you have to dangle a carrot to get fans in for the TV meetings. although i dont think the money BT offer clubs is as much as sky did, so even if fans do not turn up the club still gets the money which should, break them at least even, but the aim for promotions should be to lure fans in. Of course the chap who said on here we should have a highlights programme, and really plug it, he's right.
Speedway has to move with the times, you cannot stand still, if a football club does not improve there squad year after year the likelyhood being they will struggle or get religated..Speedway should do the same.. improve its presentation and keep the fans happy.

I don't think BT offered anything in terms of money, but were given the opportunity by the BSPA, and funded by the SKY money which was paid up in lieu of the paid up contract. It had been hoped that BT were pleased with what they saw, and had identified where they could perform better this year. There was talk on here about  production costs being paid and small money for the rights to continue, but it would seem we need to wait and see if the BSPA can draw all promotions in to accept a decent deal. 

[RobMcCaffery]

20 hours ago, A ORLOV said:

Three main sports have highlights in addition to as well as live coverage that i know of.

BBC has football highlights each week, the same with rugby and often the F1 coverage is highlights only.

If the tv companies will not pay a decent amount for live meetings and some clubs feel the payment does not cover their loss,  as seems to have been a possible issue this year, then coverage will be limited so a highlights prog is next best, the alternative is no coverage at all.

People might want live matches but if the clubs decide against it then so be it, again highlights are better than nothing.   

 

Yes they do have highlights IN ADDITION to live coverage. I specifically stated that few sports ONLY have highlights packages.

I'm rather familiar with Match of The Day......

It would help if people read what I say rather than assume. 

[A ORLOV]

2 minutes ago, RobMcCaffery said:

Yes they do have highlights IN ADDITION to live coverage. I specifically stated that few sports ONLY have highlights packages.

I'm rather familiar with Match of The Day......

It would help if people read what I say rather than assume. 

I did read it and just pointed out the highlight progs on tv.

[RobMcCaffery]

18 hours ago, Hot Shoe said:

BT Sport spent far too much on their last TV deal and i think that is common knowledge.

I'm not worried about either of their finances but simply pointing out that putting on speedway which is a tiny outlay compared to the other sports they show it brings in subscribers they otherwise wouldn't have and that helps pay for their football contract.

 

 

 

Yes, but not on the scale of Sky and they have cut back on the 2019 contract, reducing payments and cutting down from 42 matches to 32. It is common knowledge that until recently BT's financial resources have dwarfed those of Sky, although the Disney deal will shift the balance.

BT could afford to pay over the odds. Sky couldn't and speedway was dumped. 

[Starman2006]

2 hours ago, Tsunami said:

I don't think BT offered anything in terms of money, but were given the opportunity by the BSPA, and funded by the SKY money which was paid up in lieu of the paid up contract. It had been hoped that BT were pleased with what they saw, and had identified where they could perform better this year. There was talk on here about  production costs being paid and small money for the rights to continue, but it would seem we need to wait and see if the BSPA can draw all promotions in to accept a decent deal. 

And thats what should happen, I believe Skys cost for screening were a lot higher than BT's, But it would be in all the clubs interst to accept a deal that at least gives clubs something.

[flagrag]

Every Sky Speedway meeting cost over 35k a meeting and that does not include Sky staffing costs in Osterley or the actual airtime and satellite uplink capacity which Sky have long term lease via BT media & Broadcast. 

Obviously I am unable to go into every cost but can give you a few examples over £1000 a meeting for catering,£2500 for power,£1100 for scaffolding, £200+ for security, Temporary Internet circuits £1400 Most experienced cameraman on excess of £500 a day plus travel.

BT did a very good job in 2017 in cutting the OB and production costs but in my opinion that did show on screen with less cameras and older OB equipment. Some of the savings were Made like on catering, security and less staffing, cranes 

In 2018 I I understand that the production budget has been increased so there will be some on screen benefits which is good.

i read with great interest in the thoughts and comments about a highlight package and magazine style programme in the week.

This very nearly happened in 2014 on Sky sports in addition to the live coverage it was all costed out but the BSPA were not happy about this and it never got off the ground as some clubs feared it would affect attendances and some put pressure on local video companies to not provide footage for this and also into live productions.

It still shocks me that Speedway is not able to attract a TV programme sponsor as there are a number of high profile companies involved now with clubs but did hear that at one point that Go Speed were asking for unrealistic prices whether they would take less now who knows. Even if they only got 25k for these rights better than nothing 

[Hot Shoe]

13 hours ago, bigcatdiary said:

It’s apparent that putting on Speedway incurs some quite decent production costs running into thousands for each televised match but that must on the whole affect every live production by tv companies to cover sport.

i would be interested to know what it costs to put a programme on but it must be well into 5 figures.

Yes but the overall cost including what the contacts costs is tiny compared to football and that was my point. Showing minority sports is a cheap way for Sky and BT Sports to sign up subscribers that they normally wouldn't get.

[PHILIPRISING]

12 hours ago, flagrag said:

Every Sky Speedway meeting cost over 35k a meeting and that does not include Sky staffing costs in Osterley or the actual airtime and satellite uplink capacity which Sky have long term lease via BT media & Broadcast. 

Obviously I am unable to go into every cost but can give you a few examples over £1000 a meeting for catering,£2500 for power,£1100 for scaffolding, £200+ for security, Temporary Internet circuits £1400 Most experienced cameraman on excess of £500 a day plus travel.

BT did a very good job in 2017 in cutting the OB and production costs but in my opinion that did show on screen with less cameras and older OB equipment. Some of the savings were Made like on catering, security and less staffing, cranes 

In 2018 I I understand that the production budget has been increased so there will be some on screen benefits which is good.

i read with great interest in the thoughts and comments about a highlight package and magazine style programme in the week.

This very nearly happened in 2014 on Sky sports in addition to the live coverage it was all costed out but the BSPA were not happy about this and it never got off the ground as some clubs feared it would affect attendances and some put pressure on local video companies to not provide footage for this and also into live productions.

It still shocks me that Speedway is not able to attract a TV programme sponsor as there are a number of high profile companies involved now with clubs but did hear that at one point that Go Speed were asking for unrealistic prices whether they would take less now who knows. Even if they only got 25k for these rights better than nothing 

THANKS as ever for the info...