How Scotland compares to the rest of Europe

[Beast Boy]

You obviously have not read the report. And if you have, then you have not understood it.

I read it and understood it. We are behind a lot of other small countries in terms of TV revenue. I assume they have national broadcasters who put their domestic competitions before those from foreign countries.

[Bazzas right boot]

Did you read the report that this thread is about?

Answered by earl.

[DanishTam10]

I read it and understood it. We are behind a lot of other small countries in terms of TV revenue. I assume they have national broadcasters who put their domestic competitions before those from foreign countries.

 

Ok. You read it. Which countries are we behind? 

We aren't behind Poland for instance. 

 

And you are trying to make an argument, then you say "assume". A lot of people would investigate and discover those facts before relying on it.

[Beast Boy]

Ok. You read it. Which countries are we behind?

We aren't behind Poland for instance.

 

And you are trying to make an argument, then you say "assume". A lot of people would investigate and discover those facts before relying on it.

The Scottish TV deal was the 16th best in Europe, taking in an aggregate ?17m. It sits above Austria (?15m), Sweden (?16m) and Switzerland (?12m). It was behind Norway (?22m), Romania (?24m) and Poland (?26m).

 

We are almost ten million euros behind Poland actually. Poland is a much bigger country though. So that's fair enough. Norway on the other hand, receive more than us.

[DanishTam10]

I read it and understood it. We are behind a lot of other small countries in terms of TV revenue. I assume they have national broadcasters who put their domestic competitions before those from foreign countries.

 

The Scottish TV deal was the 16th best in Europe, taking in an aggregate ?17m. It sits above Austria (?15m), Sweden (?16m) and Switzerland (?12m). It was behind Norway (?22m), Romania (?24m) and Poland (?26m).

 

We are almost ten million euros behind Poland actually. Poland is a much bigger country though. So that's fair enough. Norway on the other hand, receive more than us.

 

You said you had read the report, and Scotland was behind "a lot" of other small countries. Norway is 1. What are the others? 

[Beast Boy]

You said you had read the report, and Scotland was behind "a lot" of other small countries. Norway is 1. What are the others?

Not Poland, that's for sure. Did you read and understand the report Tam?

[DanishTam10]

Not Poland, that's for sure. Did you read and understand the report Tam?

 

So what are the "lots" of other countries that we are behind? It seems like you don't know. 

And do these "lots" of countries that Scotland is behind, make their better than 17M Euros via a state broadcaster?

[Beast Boy]

So what are the "lots" of other countries that we are behind? It seems like you don't know.

And do these "lots" of countries that Scotland is behind, make their better than 17M Euros via a state broadcaster?

Only Poland, I think.

[Bazzas right boot]

What does it matter?

 

We are getting the piss ripped out of us, generally. although in football our governing body is also a shambles has no vision, leadership or inovation.

 

It's strange to be argueing that Scotland can do well in lots of areas with other Scottish folk who don't think so.

 

Have a bit self belief!

Anyway I go off topic slightly.

[DanishTam10]

I read it and understood it. We are behind a lot of other small countries in terms of TV revenue. I assume they have national broadcasters who put their domestic competitions before those from foreign countries.

 

So at first you said "lots", now it is only "Poland", in your opinion.

 

So which countries make more than us from their state broadcasters, as you assumed?

[The Comedian]

What does it matter?

 

We are getting the piss ripped out of us, generally. although in football our governing body is also a shambles has no vision, leadership or inovation.

 

It's strange to be argueing that Scotland can do well in lots of areas with other Scottish folk who don't think so.

 

Have a bit self belief!

Anyway I go off topic slightly.

They should plug our game better to be honest.

 

"Come and watch the most uncompetitive league in the world"

 

That sort of thing.

[DanishTam10]

What does it matter?

 

We are getting the piss ripped out of us, generally. although in football our governing body is also a shambles has no vision, leadership or inovation.

 

It's strange to be argueing that Scotland can do well in lots of areas with other Scottish folk who don't think so.

 

Have a bit self belief!

Anyway I go off topic slightly.

 

What do facts matter? Is this what you are saying

 

They matter a great deal Tosh. This thread is about a report, which contains a lot of details. 

[Beast Boy]

Here's the breakdown here:

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Beast Boy]

So at first you said "lots", now it is only "Poland", in your opinion.

 

So which countries make more than us from their state broadcasters, as you assumed?

I'm not being serious about Poland, Thomas. They receive more than us, and it's hard to argue against that, as they are a comparatively huge country. I only keep mentioning them since you burst on to the thread claiming I hadn't read the report or failed to understand it, then claimed we receive more money than Poland... when the report clearly states we don't. Meaning you either did not read the report, or you failed to understand it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DanishTam10]

I read it and understood it. We are behind a lot of other small countries in terms of TV revenue. I assume they have national broadcasters who put their domestic competitions before those from foreign countries.

 

Which other small countries are we behind? And which of those, you assume, make ?M from their state broadcasters?

[Beast Boy]

Which other small countries are we behind? And which of those, you assume, make ?M from their state broadcasters?

Calm down. There's a wee picture above that shows the data to answer the first part of your post. The second part would involve more googling than I'm prepared to do at 10pm on a Monday evening.

 

uspokoi?, jeste? z?y wariat

[DanishTam10]

Calm down. There's a wee picture above that shows the data to answer the first part of your post. The second part would involve more googling than I'm prepared to do at 10pm on a Monday evening.

 

uspokoi?, jeste? z?y wariat

 

Maybe check your facts first next time. Then make a point. 

 

 

W przeciwnym razie s? bezcelowe.

[Beast Boy]

Maybe check your facts first next time. Then make a point.

 

 

W przeciwnym razie s? bezcelowe.

I will do it tomorrow. Can't be arsed right now. Likewise you should probably check that you have read something properly before stating it in a post where you accuse someone else of not understanding it.

 

Wr?c? do tego jutro

[DanishTam10]

I will do it tomorrow. Can't be arsed right now. Likewise you should probably check that you have read something properly before stating it in a post where you accuse someone else of not understanding it.

 

Wr?c? do tego jutro

 

Yes. You argued that "I read it and understood it. We are behind a lot of other small countries in terms of TV revenue. I assume they have national broadcasters who put their domestic competitions before those from foreign countries." 

 

Is anything you say accurate? Or are you just assuming it all, and hoping.

[Beast Boy]

Yes. You argued that "I read it and understood it. We are behind a lot of other small countries in terms of TV revenue. I assume they have national broadcasters who put their domestic competitions before those from foreign countries."

 

Is anything you say accurate? Or are you just assuming it all, and hoping.

Quite staggering hypocrisy from someone who didn't read and understand the article, before making false statements based upon its contents, but there you go. As I said, I'll try and find time to put figures to it tomorrow.

[DanishTam10]

Quite staggering hypocrisy from someone who didn't read and understand the article, before making false statements based upon its contents, but there you go. As I said, I'll try and find time to put figures to it tomorrow.

 

How so? 

[Beast Boy]

Ok. You read it. Which countries are we behind?

We aren't behind Poland for instance.

 

Yes we are.

[DanishTam10]

Quite staggering hypocrisy from someone who didn't read and understand the article, before making false statements based upon its contents, but there you go. As I said, I'll try and find time to put figures to it tomorrow.

 

How so?

[Beast Boy]

How so?

See above.

[DanishTam10]

See above.

 

So your whole shtick now is me saying Poland? 

 

(Population 38M, tv deal 26M Euros: Scotland population 5M, tv deal 17M euros ) 

 

 

I read it and understood it. We are behind a lot of other small countries in terms of TV revenue. I assume they have national broadcasters who put their domestic competitions before those from foreign countries.

 

I look forward to your googled explanation of this statement. It will be a cracker. 

[Beast Boy]

So your whole shtick now is me saying Poland?

 

(Population 38M, tv deal 26M Euros: Scotland population 5M, tv deal 17M euros )

 

 

 

I look forward to your googled explanation of this statement. It will be a cracker.

I've already said I understand why they get more, I used population as the reason. You must not have read that post, or failed to understand it. Just like you did with the linked report. You know, when you read it and failed to understand it, then said we get more TV money than Poland.

[Sydney]

There are 54 "countries" in UEFA and we are ranked 23rd based on performances, yet we have the 16th highest average TV revenue per club.  It looks to me as though we are under-performing based on the TV revenue we're receiving.

[Bazzas right boot]

What do facts matter? Is this what you are saying

 

They matter a great deal Tosh. This thread is about a report, which contains a lot of details.

Tbh, it opens up a can of worms, for example Scotland has one of, if not the best attendance % in Europe. Asking more questions.

 

So when discussing, our game and it's Potential it opens up the debate, allot.

 

When discussing potential, the recent hibs game ( 2nd tier) that had over 18k at it, begs the question why we are not only behind, but imo why aren't we infront leading the sport and select two pieces that back my stance that Scotland ( football) in this case is being underfunded and sold short at the expense of England

 

I, of course generalised my feelings and CBA debating something that has been done to death.

 

When discussing potential and change it's harder to counter with fact, as by nature it's not happened yet, a small leap of faith is required, along with data trends and projection, which I admit is open to interpretation and disagreement.

[Bazzas right boot]

There are 54 "countries" in UEFA and we are ranked 23rd based on performances, yet we have the 16th highest average TV revenue per club. It looks to me as though we are under-performing based on the TV revenue we're receiving.

Underperforming is not up for debate. The reasons why are.

Also the potential of the game compared to other countries can also be debated.

 

We are underperforming, not only for financial reasons.imo.

[DanishTam10]

Tbh, it opens up a can of worms, for example Scotland has one of, if not the best attendance % in Europe. Asking more questions.

 

So when discussing, our game and it's Potential it opens up the debate, allot.

 

When discussing potential, the recent hibs game ( 2nd tier) that had over 18k at it, begs the question why we are not only behind, but imo why aren't we infront leading the sport and select two pieces that back my stance that Scotland ( football) in this case is being underfunded and sold short at the expense of England

 

I, of course generalised my feelings and CBA debating something that has been done to death.

 

When discussing potential and change it's harder to counter with fact, as by nature it's not happened yet, a small leap of faith is required, along with data trends and projection, which I admit is open to interpretation and disagreement.

 

So in terms of "how Scotland compares to Europe" you talk about Hibs. And you don't seem like you have read the article. 

 

It's a relevant and interesting article. Basically, the English Premier League, is dominating Europe.

 

Still, who in the world would not pay a subscriber based Scottish channel to watch Hibs. 

[Bazzas right boot]

So in terms of "how Scotland compares to Europe" you talk about Hibs. And you don't seem like you have read the article.

 

It's a relevant and interesting article. Basically, the English Premier League, is dominating Europe.

 

Still, who in the world would not pay a subscriber based Scottish channel to watch Hibs.

I was referring to potential and used the cried of a second division game to highlight it.

 

No need to get aggressive.

 

I'm out.

[DanishTam10]

I was referring to potential and used the cried of a second division game to highlight it.

 

No need to get aggressive.

 

I'm out.

 

You talked about attendance at Hibs match, in a thread about how Scotland compares to Europe. . 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Population is certainly a factor in how much TV money a league should rightfully be able to expect, but the popularity of the sport should factor in too.  To get at popularity, attendance at matches surely would be an indicator of the sport's appeal.

 

Looking at mid-season attendance figures for the top league in Poland, if these are still relatively accurate, Hearts would be among the biggest clubs there.  They have no clubs the size of the uglies, and their top league includes clubs with smaller average attendances than Ross County.

 

http://www.worldfootball.net/attendance/pol-ekstraklasa-2014-2015/1/

 

Add to that Poland's median household income being about 60% of the UK's (?15k vs ?27k) and it seems perfectly legitimate to expect that Scotland should have a TV deal that's at least comparable to Poland. 

[Sydney]

Tbh, it opens up a can of worms, for example Scotland has one of, if not the best attendance % in Europe. Asking more questions.

 

 

I think we need to be careful about the attendance % for Scottish football.

 

Rangers and Celtic make up about 50% of the total attendances in all four divisions in Scotland.  Take them away, and we have pretty poor attendances.

[DanishTam10]

Population is certainly a factor in how much TV money a league should rightfully be able to expect, but the popularity of the sport should factor in too.  To get at popularity, attendance at matches surely would be an indicator of the sport's appeal.

 

Looking at mid-season attendance figures for the top league in Poland, if these are still relatively accurate, Hearts would be among the biggest clubs there.  They have no clubs the size of the uglies, and their top league includes clubs with smaller average attendances than Ross County.

 

http://www.worldfootball.net/attendance/pol-ekstraklasa-2014-2015/1/

 

Add to that Poland's median household income being about 60% of the UK's (?15k vs ?27k) and it seems perfectly legitimate to expect that Scotland should have a TV deal that's at least comparable to Poland. 

 

Do you think that the 17M euros that Scotland receives, is less than is to be expected?  

[Sydney]

Do you think that the 17M euros that Scotland receives, is less than is to be expected?  

 

We get the 13th highest broadcast revenue euros per head of population, for a league that is ranked 23rd in Europe.  Seems we do ok.

[PeterintheRain]

I think we need to be careful about the attendance % for Scottish football.

 

Rangers and Celtic make up about 50% of the total attendances in all four divisions in Scotland.  Take them away, and we have pretty poor attendances.

 

 See every cup final without the arse cheeks.

 

  See the vermin match last Friday.  

 

 See 250,000 Jambos on the streets in 1998.

 

See the largest audiences in season 2005/6 being for our matches and not the old scum.

 

  Take the Glasgow bigots away and every other team would sell outs every week. 

 

   We're being screwed sideways.   Sky pays pennies for Scottish matches yet makes their biggest profit from them in terms of cost per viewer and advertising reach.

[PeterintheRain]

We get the 13th highest broadcast revenue euros per head of population, for a league that is ranked 23rd in Europe.  Seems we do ok.

 

  23rd in Europe in attendances, TV viewers or subscriptions?  Try harder.

[DanishTam10]

 See every cup final without the arse cheeks.

 

  See the vermin match last Friday.  

 

 See 250,000 Jambos on the streets in 1998.

 

See the largest audiences in season 2005/6 being for our matches and not the old scum.

 

  Take the Glasgow bigots away and every other team would sell outs every week. 

 

   We're being screwed sideways.   Sky pays pennies for Scottish matches yet makes their biggest profit from them in terms of cost per viewer and advertising reach.

 

Pennies as in millions of pennies?

And when you say "yet makes their biggest profit from them..." are you just making this up?

[DanishTam10]

  23rd in Europe in attendances, TV viewers or subscriptions?  Try harder.

 

23rd in UEFA coefficient, I think. 

[Stephen Muddie]

There are 54 "countries" in UEFA and we are ranked 23rd based on performances, yet we have the 16th highest average TV revenue per club. It looks to me as though we are under-performing based on the TV revenue we're receiving.

There are 54 countries in uefa. Some aren't European and some aren't countries. Mostly British teams, the "countries"

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Do you think that the 17M euros that Scotland receives, is less than is to be expected?  

 

Yes. For a product with as much history, quality, and following as Scottish football, ?17M seems a paltry sum.

 

The American Athletic Conference, a lower-tier conference consisting entirely of schools you've never heard of, with sports teams that in good years achieve middling results, gets $18M/year from its TV deal. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Athletic_Conference) Scottish football is worth more than that.

[DanishTam10]

Yes. For a product with as much history, quality, and following as Scottish football, ?17M seems a paltry sum.

 

The American Athletic Conference, a lower-tier conference consisting entirely of schools you've never heard of, with sports teams that in good years achieve middling results, gets $18M/year from its TV deal. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Athletic_Conference) Scottish football is worth more than that.

 

And you believe comparing American football in the USA is relevant? (edit and lots of other sports, with a population of about 9M people! )

 

What makes you believe that 17M Euros is paltry compared to other deals in Europe for football?

 

(Quality?)

[Watt-Zeefuik]

And you believe comparing American football in the USA is relevant? (edit and lots of other sports, with a population of about 9M people! )

 

What makes you believe that 17M Euros is paltry compared to other deals in Europe for football?

 

(Quality?)

 

The comparisons to other deals in Europe had been done -- I was looking for a comparable.

 

I already made the argument above -- I think the expected TV deal should be based on two things -- 1) popularity of the sport, and 2) wealth of the country where the TV deal is being sold.  Scottish football is more popular in raw numbers than Polish football in a richer country.  It should be worth more.