SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[His name is]

17 minutes ago, kila said:

 

BBC Alba put more effort in for the whole game than Sky - cost isn't the issue just people who care and try.

 

Using the viewing figures post from the previous page, here's some rough averages/guestimates (assuming all top 6 of course!). OF (home) v Hearts is rarely shown on TV, so I won't count them. Also this isn't including Hearts v St Mirren/Hamilton etc as I imagine they'll vary between 20k - 50k.

 

4 x Old Firm games

= 2 million viewers

 

2 x Hearts v Celtic (160,000 per game)

2 x Hearts v Rangers (160,000 per game)

4 x Hearts v Hibs  (110,00 per game)

3 x Hearts v Aberdeen (60,000 per game)

= 1.5 million viewers

 

 

OK these figures are somewhat pulled out of the air but the point is the OF derby viewing figures are not the sole earner for broadcaster with more obviously watching non-OF derbies in total.

 

 

The new year old firm game got 1.4m viewers.

 

https://spfl.co.uk/news/press-release-record-tv-audience

 

I was looking for a full list of Scottish football TV viewing figures but can find any.

[David McCaig]

6 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

Brian McLaughlin gave a breakdown of what 'might' be due back to Sky and BT.

 

It was a scary amount for Sky because of the 2 non OF games not being televised and ran into millions.

 

 

 

It would be nice to think that Sky are lobbying for Hearts to remain in the SPL as part of their negotiations for compensation for the SPFLs breach of contract.

[Deevers]

31 minutes ago, Paint the town maroon said:

Its not unlawful. Please. The clubs voted for it. It’s a members organisation.

Oh it is. They are all commercial organisations and if they contravene their own rules leading to another being financially disadvantaged or what is possible in this case being unable to trade then they are in breach of restriction of trade. Being a members organisation means nothing in a  commercial sense and even less when they wilfully breach their own rules leading to said disadvantage.

[Hagar the Horrible]

What are we paying ND for. If AB is running about doing his job?

 

Another thought half the lower 3 leagues want mothballed and half want to play. If all 3 lower leagues end up mothballed we dont win promotion for 2 years. August 2022. Get that into your psyche? Whats worse is 1 or 2 spl clubs wont last either. And the club that finished bottom wont vote for relegation when there is nothing to be relegated to. But they are all happy to gloat on our expulsion. 

 

Court action is first about delaying any decision then its to restrict income, then its about killing off as many clubs as we can.

[Mikey1874]

If you are not willing to play you should be expelled from the league. 

 

I accept the issue with costs but there are ways to limit these including the testing. 

[IronJambo]

15 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

I disagree.

That's just delusional though. Sky wouldn't insist on having the ugly sisters play each other 4 times per season if they could make the same revenue from just sticking Hearts on instead. 

[kila]

2 minutes ago, His name is said:

The new year old firm game got 1.4m viewers.

 

https://spfl.co.uk/news/press-release-record-tv-audience

 

I was looking for a full list of Scottish football TV viewing figures but can find any.

 

Timing of the fixture helps too if there is no big EPL clash. They won't get 1.4m every OF game though my average of 2 million clearly too low.

 

Hearts v Old Firm is a big drawer and more Old Firm fan will tune into that than watch their team play Hamilton. Then the Edinburgh Derby, Hearts v Aberdeen...

 

The loss of televising any games involving Hearts is not just a drop in the ocean is what my point was.

 

[Boof]

50 minutes ago, Marvin said:

 

I see hibs were first to start social distancing. Hopefully I have embedded from the correct point if not you want to start from 0:42. 

 

Wish I knew what Elliot said to their keeper at 2:40.

 

And 6:03 - the commentator saying "It doesn't get much better than this. Beating your fierce rivals in a Scottish Cup semi." Hurrrr hurrrrr  

Edited May 23, 2020 by Boof

[Pasquale for King]

9 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

He doesn't necessarily want us to struggle. It might be a placed article to encourage reconstruction, which would actually be a good sign.

You sure about that, he’s done nothing but slate us the last few weeks. It might scare clubs into reconstruction but I doubt if it’s his aim.

[Jambof3tornado]

2 hours ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

Some don’t think it is is a problem if we play in the Championship because we’ve got FOH.  And if the benefactors don’t put their hands in their pockets?   They’re living in a fantasy world.  We would be the worst affected in the Championship by far. 

Of course we would be the worst affected due to the players under contracts.

 

For me the worst case scenario is NO football outwith the top flight at all in season 20/21. That is quite possible but lots of things can still happen between now and august.

[King prawn]

26 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

I disagree.

1.4m viewers tuned in for Celtic vs Rangers on Sky in January. I don’t think any other fixture will get anything close to that hence why Sky only care about the uglies. 
 

I haven’t posted it anywhere else but I’ll add it here since it’s half relevant. Sky’s coverage of any other Scottish game including the Edinburgh derby is scandalous. They can’t go 5 minutes without talking about Celtic or Rangers. 

[wavydavy]

36 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

I meant in terms of the staff we have left. It was interesting to read that Jamie Brandon and Lewis Moore have both been offered new contracts. Hardly the decision of a club who is going to go to the wall according to the DR article. As far as the wages of the players who will be remaining with us go, they have already been cut to Championship level. There won’t be further courts there unless the players agree.

 

I agree we will be making savings by losing some players. None of those are high earners though but everything counts. CL and AMcP leaving saves us effectively 2 and 1/2 months FOH money.

 

In my opinion the Hearts board have shown to be creative thinkers in terms of finding ways to increase income streams. I am confident they will come up with innovative ways to bring in more income as we move forward.

 

 

 

 

 

Can'r disagree with any of that really.

[Deevers]

Just now, Pasquale for King said:

You sure about that, he’s done nothing but slate us the last few weeks. It might scare clubs into reconstruction but I doubt if it’s his aim.

He’s Lawells media man these days. Anything he writes has had the nod from that direction. I would not be at all surprised of the SPFL were now trying to paint themselves as being reasonable and benefactors. I think they are shitting themselves at the thought of litigation.

[Pasquale for King]

Just now, Deevers said:

He’s Lawells media man these days. Anything he writes has had the nod from that direction. I would not be at all surprised of the SPFL were now trying to paint themselves as being reasonable and benefactors. I think they are shitting themselves at the thought of litigation.

Absolutely.

[husref musemic]

54 minutes ago, Jamboelite said:

Just to put into context for those that say we are in a better position than most.

 

Our operating costs were £800k a month, even with wage cuts and stripping back everything do we actually believe £135k from FOH and what £100k a month equivalent in ST sales (3000*£300/12) is going to cover that ?

 

We are going to be running at a loss and a significant one I'm not sure how long we could do that for before we are in trouble.

 

Yes there will be a parachute payment and merchandise sales but that wont be alot of cash.

 

Make no mistake we are in the shit at present.

redundancies ala Dunfermline style cures running cost issues. IMO this should be done sooner rather than later

[wavydavy]

1 minute ago, King prawn said:

1.4m viewers tuned in for Celtic vs Rangers on Sky in January. I don’t think any other fixture will get anything close to that hence why Sky only care about the uglies. 
 

I haven’t posted it anywhere else but I’ll add it here since it’s half relevant. Sky’s coverage of any other Scottish game including the Edinburgh derby is scandalous. They can’t go 5 minutes without talking about Celtic or Rangers. 

 

Just like most of the media. They always manage to twist a story about another club to get a mention for the uglies.

[Mikey1874]

8 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

What are we paying ND for. If AB is running about doing his job?

 

Another thought half the lower 3 leagues want mothballed and half want to play. If all 3 lower leagues end up mothballed we dont win promotion for 2 years. August 2022. Get that into your psyche? Whats worse is 1 or 2 spl clubs wont last either. And the club that finished bottom wont vote for relegation when there is nothing to be relegated to. But they are all happy to gloat on our expulsion. 

 

Court action is first about delaying any decision then its to restrict income, then its about killing off as many clubs as we can.

 

Reconstruction should have been part of talks on dealing with the crisis. 

 

Bizarre its a mix of 1. Clubs already demoted 2. Reconstruction proposal 3. Separate working groups on how to start again. 

 

It is true that individual club self interest has brought us here. All this empty talk of 'working together'. 

[Tommy Brown]

55 minutes ago, Jamboelite said:

Just to put into context for those that say we are in a better position than most.

 

Our operating costs were £800k a month, even with wage cuts and stripping back everything do we actually believe £135k from FOH and what £100k a month equivalent in ST sales (3000*£300/12) is going to cover that ?

 

We are going to be running at a loss and a significant one I'm not sure how long we could do that for before we are in trouble.

 

Yes there will be a parachute payment and merchandise sales but that wont be alot of cash.

 

Make no mistake we are in the shit at present.

 

parachute is £300k, not much against your figures.

 

good post 

[Pasquale for King]

1 hour ago, IronJambo said:

Their viewing figures tell them that Scottish football isn't worth it to them without the ugly sisters. Hearts aren't a big deal to them at all.

It defends on when games are on,what they’re competing with. Someone said  three of their top four viewing figures for games involve us, I think they’d rather have us in the top league if there was a choice.

[Mikey1874]

To divert a little furlough not being cut too much it seems. 

 

Employer contribution going from 20% to 25% from August it seems. 

 

 

[Pasquale for King]

3 minutes ago, husref musemic said:

redundancies ala Dunfermline style cures running cost issues. IMO this should be done sooner rather than later

Not extending 17 players contracts isn’t redundancies and they could’ve given them another few months contracts if they had wished to do so. They would be liable for tax though.

[WorldChampions1902]

2 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

It must be a reasonable possibility they could include that in any court action.

Totally agree.

 

This strengthens our legal case without question IMHO.

 

Slowly, slowly catchy monkey.

[Ethan Hunt]

9 hours ago, Last Laff said:

If there was a sound legal basis we would be going down that route just now.

 

Im not from that background, you obviously are, advise us why then please why we will have a very good case against the ruling. And who we are taking it to, and why they would rule against the judgement that’s been made.
 

Ive not got a big mouth either.  I’m scared to ****. People on here thinking and shouting it’s going to be okay and other clubs are going to go bust and we will take them for millions makes no sense though:  you think that does good? Suppose Craig only needs one more window also or injuries.   

That’s been done to death mate. There are literally hundreds of posts on that subject. I should know cos I’ve written my fair share of them!! You’ve either not seen them (dunno how cos there’s been enough) chosen to ignore them, or dismissed them as you have your own opinion based on what, I dunno, but you obviously have your own ideas.

 

Maybe you need to spend a day going back through this thread. Too many people seem to be forgetting too much important information, mainly because they are allowing themselves to get bogged down in shite.

[Bickfest]

52 minutes ago, Paint the town maroon said:

Its not unlawful. Please. The clubs voted for it. It’s a members organisation.

The point is, the clubs did NOT vote for it. If you read the PT counsel's opinion, Dundee's vote was cast when it was sent, which was a no. Therefore, there was not a sufficient vote for it.

[Pasquale for King]

4 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

To divert a little furlough not being cut too much it seems. 

 

Employer contribution going from 20% to 25% from August it seems. 

 

 

You still have tax to pay.

 

[Fozzyonthefence]

13 minutes ago, husref musemic said:

redundancies ala Dunfermline style cures running cost issues. IMO this should be done sooner rather than later

Dunfermline didn’t have any redundancies, they just didn’t renew the contracts of 17 players.  It’s not the same thing and we don’t have anything like 17 players out of contract.  Article 12 might be the only option for us or at least use it as a bargaining tool which could work if no football til January but wouldn’t work so well if the season starts in July / August.

Edited May 23, 2020 by Fozzyonthefence

[SMJ_1874]

2 hours ago, Gambo said:

Apologies if already covered, but where you or selkirkjambo able to share what info you had both heard on Thursday?

Not at the moment mate but pm me a mobile number and I’ll do it offline. Think everyone is keeping quiet until Monday until our reconstruction plans are submitted.  

[GorgieRules22]

2 minutes ago, Saughton Jambo said:

Not at the moment mate but pm me a mobile number and I’ll do it offline. Think everyone is keeping quiet until Monday until our reconstruction plans are submitted.  

Are things looking up for us mate, can you say that much ?

[Jammy T]

I don’t care for the tone but I think the Daily Record article helps us considerably.

 

The league is in reality only about two clubs but to consign the 3rd biggest club to potential liquidation (let’s play along with it) when it didn’t have to?

 

There would be an absolute meltdown. 
 

And whether other clubs like it or not - our TV games figures are generally excellent and at the top end of the averages. I genuinely don’t think Sky would want a league without us and a league without Edinburgh derbies.

 

I know I have maroon goggles on but I don’t think the above is an overinflated view of our relative importance to Scottish football - particularly at this time in history.

Edited May 23, 2020 by Jammy T

[Bickfest]

Contrary to some views, I think Ann Budge may actually be playing a bit of a blinder here (and quite possibly guided by legal advice). As I understand it, you cannot gain relief by means of an interim interdict unless there is something tangible (ie clearly identifiable/indisputable) to gain relief from. I think you may also have to demonsrate that you took every possible step to prevent or minimise loss to gain compensation. Whilst reconstruction remains a possibility, Hearts are not facing relegation in absolute terms. It is still feasible that the clubs may vote in favour which would render an interdict irrelevant. So that process must run its course before an interdict can be sought (I think). By taking part in the proposal for reconstruction, AB is demontrating a willingness to effect the necessary change which would alleviate losses. So, if the SPFL then refuse to ratify reconstruction, Hearts can go to court and seek interim relief and ultimately compensation for loss.

[Jammy T]

We might see a 16 team league after all for one season - there may be some sort of fudge that Does all it can to guarantees 4 old firm games.

 

The top four teams have home and away Knock out play offs to see who wins the league?

Edited May 23, 2020 by Jammy T

[Ethan Hunt]

3 hours ago, cb1874 said:

https://twitter.com/iain_mac/status/1263791308696682496?s=20

I see our resident legal action chaser has passed comment.

 

[JamboGraham]

10 minutes ago, husref musemic said:

redundancies ala Dunfermline style cures running cost issues. IMO this should be done sooner rather than later

 

As far as I can tell Dunfermline have not made the players redundant. They have simply chosen not to extend or renew fixed term contracts at the end of the agreed contract period. This is very easy and inexpensive for an employer to do. A redundancy is ending employment before the agreed contract end date and requires a package (or compensation as football language dictates). This is expensive for employers and eats currently available cash which in turn presents a greater immediate risk to a business. Cash flow and available cash is what kills business.

 

There are lots of terms and labels and some will argue that all contract ending is redundancy, etc. but the short of it is contracts at an end are zero or minimal cost to business. Given the current risk over football it would be logical for most clubs to take every opportunity they have to do this (unless they have the cash flow in place).

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

28 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

If you are not willing to play you should be expelled from the league. 

 

I accept the issue with costs but there are ways to limit these including the testing. 

If you can't afford to play,  self expulsion seems the best option. 

 

Recalibrate the League system for 5 years,  increasing promotion and relegation,  needs to be a long term approach to give every club the opportunity to find their level. 

 

While maintaining the strategy   year 3 you review and decide how the League is formed in 2025  giving everyone plenty chance to adapt 

[His name is]

28 minutes ago, kila said:

 

The loss of televising any games involving Hearts is not just a drop in the ocean is what my point was.

 

Agreed, im hoping sky have had a quiet word, hence the talk of reconstruction back on the table

[GorgieRules22]

3 minutes ago, Jammy T said:

We might see a 16 team league after all for one season - there will be some sort of fudge that guarantees 4 old firm games.

 

The top four teams have home and away Knock out play offs to see who wins the league?

Just a hunch or more than that ?

[mitch41]

1 hour ago, Pilmuir said:

Very much agree with all of that.

 

Sadly, it seems that the outcome will be Budge/Hearts getting blamed for everything. Convenient.

Blaming Ann Budge and Hearts by ignorant, selfish, and the biased media is their problem because these league clubs are all about looking after no.1 and as we have been trying to make everyone happy, well I say sod them all. This lot have no respect or sporting integrity for Hearts and football considering we are going through a virus that is not only making people ill but causing deaths. Leagues and their clubs should have a duty to look after each other at a time like this and Hearts, Partick Th etc have been singled out to be excluded by being relegated with massive financial consequences. Like I said before, sod them and let’s see what a court has to say.

[SMJ_1874]

22 minutes ago, GorgieRules22 said:

Are things looking up for us mate, can you say that much ?

Don’t go celebrating any time soon mate as I’m sure there’s a few twists and turns to come. PM me a mobile no if you want and I’ll see what I can do

[Ethan Hunt]

3 hours ago, Paint the town maroon said:

On reconstruction. Not sure if this has been raised before - I know the focus is on the 11-1 likely vote but the Championship need to vote 75% in favour.

 

The right and wrongs of ICT position is one we shouldn’t underestimate. It was clear from

the EGM vote that only ICT voted in favour and the rest were all against.The bun fight in the media with endless statements between ICT and other clubs has driven what look like a huge divide. 
 

Assuming ICT would ‘benefit’ from reconstruction, I would expect a lot of tactical voting against them? Have I called that wrong?

Yes. By not voting for reconstruction they would be signing their own clubs death warrant.

 

It’s pretty clear what should have happened here. A resolution to call the league with promotion but no relegation. Reconstruct the leagues. Batten down the hatches and have 42 clubs (although more likely 44 to include Kelty Hearts and Brora) pulling all their time, effort, resources, and innovation into helping the whole of Scottish football survive this.  Survival was key. Regaining strength thereafter would take time, but survival is critical. That is ultimately what the function of the SPFL is, to have a duty of care for all members and protect their interests.

 

Instead of the above we ended up with a divisive, flawed, and incompetent resolution which put 44 clubs at each other’s throats, promoted an I’m alright Jack mentality, and will ultimately lead to the demise of a number of clubs and Scottish football as we know it.  

 

The SPFL board should never survive this. There are individuals on that board who have consciously made decisions that will result in Scotland forever losing clubs, history, jobs, and community fabric. They are a fecking disgrace and should be dragged by the bollocks through the courts.

 

Edited May 23, 2020 by Ethan Hunt

[Gizmo]

1 hour ago, AlimOzturk said:

 

Think if we are in trouble the fans will bail the club out - again. There is simply no comparison in football when it comes to the loyality Hearts fans show when this club is in jeopardy. I have zero doubts that once again we would step like we have always done. 

 

We also have benefactors as well. 

Say we needed to find £500k a month after Season Ticket and FoH income is factored in, that would be about £60 each for every member of FoH. A big ask for many in the current climate. 
 

28 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

If you are not willing to play you should be expelled from the league. 

 

I accept the issue with costs but there are ways to limit these including the testing. 

I don't think we should expel any clubs. Instead, I think we should have two leagues. Those who can play, play in one large league - with a dedicated testing unit set-up at the "hubs" to minimize costs - which would have to be the likes of Hampden and Murrayfield if we have fans in grounds but socially distanced. The rest mothball as tightly as possible for the season to try and survive the crisis.

If social distancing, given the issues with getting to grounds safely and in/out of turnstiles safely, isn't a goer then we have to try a season ticket tied to pay-per-view played behind closed doors. Far from ideal but its clear most clubs are not set-up to survive without regular income streams. Not just us, I'll add (**** you, Daily Weegie).  

[Worthing Jambo]

1 hour ago, kila said:

 

BBC Alba put more effort in for the whole game than Sky - cost isn't the issue just people who care and try.

 

Using the viewing figures post from the previous page, here's some rough averages/guestimates (assuming all top 6 of course!). OF (home) v Hearts is rarely shown on TV, so I won't count them. Also this isn't including Hearts v St Mirren/Hamilton etc as I imagine they'll vary between 20k - 50k.

 

4 x Old Firm games

= 2 million viewers

 

2 x Hearts v Celtic (160,000 per game)

2 x Hearts v Rangers (160,000 per game)

4 x Hearts v Hibs  (110,00 per game)

3 x Hearts v Aberdeen (60,000 per game)

= 1.5 million viewers

 

 

OK these figures are somewhat pulled out of the air but the point is the OF derby viewing figures are not the sole earner for broadcaster with more obviously watching non-OF derbies in total.

 

 

The majority though will be the same people watching each match.

The breakdown of who and why they are watching would be telling.

Are they all just fans of each club or is there a good number football fans in general?

Sky believe that anyone Scottish living in England are only interested in the uglies and anyone else will maybe watch an uglies derby at a push.

I’ve not subscribed to Sky for a few years now and haven’t missed it all.

They had very few Hearts games on.

BT on the other hand covered quite a few and I’m disappointed they are pulling out.

[OldGorgie]

43 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

 

Just like most of the media. They always manage to twist a story about another club to get a mention for the uglies.

That’s because sectarianism is rife in the sporting media.

[Beast Boy]

2 hours ago, wavydavy said:

They are in much better shape than many other clubs financially. Weir looked after them with his legacy.

They are facing not being able to play for at least a year.

[gashauskis9]

Apologies if I'm being thick again, but let's assume we take the SPFL clubs to court for failing in their duty of care towards us and we win, which leads to clubs going bust through the cost on them to pay up towards our compo.  Could those clubs technically put a counter claim in on us for forcing them out of business?

[Lfhearts]

32 minutes ago, Bickfest said:

Contrary to some views, I think Ann Budge may actually be playing a bit of a blinder here (and quite possibly guided by legal advice). As I understand it, you cannot gain relief by means of an interim interdict unless there is something tangible (ie clearly identifiable/indisputable) to gain relief from. I think you may also have to demonsrate that you took every possible step to prevent or minimise loss to gain compensation. Whilst reconstruction remains a possibility, Hearts are not facing relegation in absolute terms. It is still feasible that the clubs may vote in favour which would render an interdict irrelevant. So that process must run its course before an interdict can be sought (I think). By taking part in the proposal for reconstruction, AB is demontrating a willingness to effect the necessary change which would alleviate losses. So, if the SPFL then refuse to ratify reconstruction, Hearts can go to court and seek interim relief and ultimately compensation for loss.

Here here sir someone gets it.

[Cruyff]

Did I just read "Ann might be playing a blinder"

 

It's her ****ing fault ffs! Wake up. 

 

[buzzbomb]

6 minutes ago, Worthing Jambo said:

The majority though will be the same people watching each match.

The breakdown of who and why they are watching would be telling.

Are they all just fans of each club or is there a good number football fans in general?

Sky believe that anyone Scottish living in England are only interested in the uglies and anyone else will maybe watch an uglies derby at a push.

I’ve not subscribed to Sky for a few years now and haven’t missed it all.

They had very few Hearts games on.

BT on the other hand covered quite a few and I’m disappointed they are pulling out.

I’d be interested to know the viewing figures for sky in Norway, Sweden, Denmark who all have comparable/better deals than us. Doubt there’s a worldwide appeal for any of these leagues.

[Ethan Hunt]

3 hours ago, Paint the town maroon said:

Fantasy stuff I am afraid! The best we will get in court and I suspect it will never get to court will be some level of compensation. 
 

I don’t get why this isn’t landing. The clubs voted for this. THE CLUBS VOTED FOT THIS! It is unfair but the members of a members organisation voted over 80% in favour for this. The board took this mandate and made it happen.

 

Reconstruction is best option. Legal action might get compensate us but I have still to hear a single strong argument if you take out the emotion, the unfairness, the suggestion of dodgy dealings etc.

When the dust settles on this then some serious questions need to be asked. The irony is - what is happening just now is stopping Ann Budge being hounded out the club.

You need to pay more attention to the things that can positively impact the outcome for Hearts, and less time promoting negative agendas.

 

 

[Hashimoto]

Apologies If already covered elsewhere!......Today's DR article headline regarding Hearts going bust!.......Why highlight Hearts in this matter, surely Hearts are the one club in Scotland to have made certain contingency to cover these financial issues irrespective of which league we find ourselves in!......This is just more SPFL (Celtic) propaganda via the DR to scaremonger clubs to stepping back into line!.....At the end of the day do Hearts really need rags like the DR and S*n to publish material relating to our club......A warning shot should be fired telling them that any Hearts related material is strictly off limit to them, refuse co-operation and strangle any future news source. Any unsubstantiated future publications would leave them possibly open to slander. Just remember Hearts do not appear to have many friends in the press or amongst our so called football fraternity......Let's not forget!   

[kila]

Just now, Worthing Jambo said:

The majority though will be the same people watching each match.

The breakdown of who and why they are watching would be telling.

Are they all just fans of each club or is there a good number football fans in general?

Sky believe that anyone Scottish living in England are only interested in the uglies and anyone else will maybe watch an uglies derby at a push.

I’ve not subscribed to Sky for a few years now and haven’t missed it all.

They had very few Hearts games on.

BT on the other hand covered quite a few and I’m disappointed they are pulling out.

 

Re first point - probably. But ad revenue doesn't care if the same person sees the same ad 50 times a year, especially if it is for a targeted audience.

 

And that person, let's say it is a Celtic fan, might not watch Hamilton v Celtic because they expect to win it or there is a more interesting fixture on in the EPL. These sort of fans only want to watch the higher profile games, and one against Hearts they'd definitely be tuning into.

 

I'd wager the Friday night fixtures were a good drawer, especially if there was no games on in England - Hearts v Aberdeen under the floodlights on a Friday evening, wonder what sort of draw that would get.

 

Scottish football keeps underselling itself and the broadcasters aren't going to throw more than they need to. All this is linked to the governance of the game of course and clowns like Neil Doncaster.