The Open 2016 - TV Coverage

[GB72]

But sports rights and coverage are massively more expensive. Would you or your family pay double or treble the licence fee to retain them

 

[Deleted member 15344]

But sports rights and coverage are massively more expensive. Would you or your family pay double or treble the licence fee to retain them

No idea - some would and some wouldn't

The question is why are they expensive - because of greed of the sports and indeed the people that play them - Sky pay £15mil for 5 years ? Yesterday's prize fund was over £6mil - has the extra money that the R&A got just gone to boost up the prize fund for the players ?

 

[USER1999]

I love the idea that 11 pounds is too expensive to watch a weekends golf, so the answer is to watch it down the pub. That's going to be cheaper then. They just love customers hogging the TV, sat drinking tap water.

 

[351DRIVER]

with ice

 

[Deleted member 16999]

just think if no one took out a SKY subscription then ALL sport would be free....

Maybe if all stop paying mortgages banks will give out houses for free or not paying for shopping in ASDA they'll give us free food.

Or nobody would broadcast Sport as it's not financially viable and it'll give Pathe News a chance to start showing newsreels in cinemas again!

 

[User62651]

£433,000 for JB Holmes for 3rd spot at The Open for maybe 18 hours work (fun) actually golfing four rounds. It would take most UK people 10 -15 years of working to gross that same amount. I understand that's market forces at work and it could be said JB Holmes is a world class golfer (debatable) so is worthy but in the scheme of things is he really? It doesn't even sound that much by todays standards in football, tennis and formula one but it is a vast amount. He was hardly shown on tv at all over the 4 days, money for old rope imo. Money in golf went silly with Tiger Woods and too many also rans riding on Tigers coat-tails with no big incentive to actually win, just get a good paycheque with average play. At £80+ per punter to get in for one day at The Open, that is going to keep people away which will be to the detriment of the Open moving forward. At least kids are getting in free still but looking at crowds there didn't seem to be that many youngsters there imo and wouldn't be surprised if they change that rule too. Money is ruining professional sports for joe public....imo

 

[Alex1975]

seen as an very uncool, white dominated, middle-class, snobby - everything the BBC tries so very hard not to be - sport
Also understand very few of the decision makers play golf

Hmmm, ok I get it I guess.

 

[Deleted member 21258]

Did you know you didn't need to have a sky box/ sky sports subscription to watch the Open?
Did you know you could have taken out a NOW TV pass to watch the whole of Open week for £10.99
Did you know that you can watch NOW TV on a host of devices - one of which is probably whatever you are using to look at this post - at home or, data allowance permitting, on the move without wifi?
Is £10.99 really too much to ask for 40 plus hours of broadcasting one of the biggest golfing events of the year?
Have we all been weaned on free content to the point that we have the mindset of "I want tons of great content, but I don't want to pay for it"

Answers:-

1) I found out when I looked on the sky website, but not prior to Friday
2) Yes but only by this forum and really this post. However our internet is not great here some due to the lines/slight rural and some due to the house wifi not being great as it has thick walls and I think NowTV is internet based
3) See 2. above
4) However I would not pay £10.99 due to above and I don't watch 40 hours of the Open golf or anywhere near it. Therefore was happy with the highlights with bbc and free featured groups on the computer(via sky/r&a) that is hard wired to the computer/router in the office, so more reliable to watch.


It is a shame as people like me came to the sport from seeing it live on telly, as no one in my family played golf but now my wife and son do and I fancied it after seeing it on bbc in my late twenties. At that time if it had been on sky, I would never have watched it and therefore never have come to the sport.

 

[GB72]

We do seem to be missing a point here, it was not an option of BBC or Sky, it was Sky or nothing. The BBC had the rights and bailed on their contract, they were not outbid, they pulled out of negotiations and they refused a joint broadcasting offer. The R&A are blameless here as Sky was the only real option.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

We do seem to be missing a point here, it was not an option of BBC or Sky, it was Sky or nothing. The BBC had the rights and bailed on their contract, they were not outbid, they pulled out of negotiations and they refused a joint broadcasting offer. The R&A are blameless here as Sky was the only real option.

Didn't Sky first outbid BBC though when the live rights were up for bidding ? BBC bid around what they normal paid and Sky went in higher and BBC weren't going to match so pulled out giving Sky rights from 2017 - then to save money they pulled out a year early giving Sky it this year

The R&A could have accepted BBC first offer and ignored Sky's but obviously practically that wouldn't happen.

The R&A made the choice to go to Sky because of the money on offer from them and because the Open was no longer on the gold protected list

A while back someone pointed a finger at the government - it's up to them which sport events must stay on terrestrial television - I'm not sure how they determine that and on top of forcing the BBC to restrain the budget

If the Open was in the same cat as the Olympics and Wimbledon etc then ITV etc could have been involved but what Mike says about how the sport is seen is prob not to far away from how the sport is

 

[Hacker Khan]

I suppose the number of people that will be talking about/saw the final round yesterday will be the same that will be talking about/saw the Miracle at Medina. And I think that unless it is on terrestrial TV, no sporting event will be talked about and revered in such hushed tones as those in the past, as basically only a very small percentage of the sporting viewing public will have seen it.

Personally if they are to put any golf event on terrestrial TV to excite the great unwashed then it is The Ryder Cup. You could argue that as there is no prize money then why do they need a big TV rights fee? But I understand that it is the main money maker for The European Tour when it is held in Europe, so I doubt we'll ever see that on terrestrial TV. Shame, as I think it would help much more than trying to get people interested in 72 hole stroke play.

 

[TheDiablo]

Everyone in the UK now has access to a minimum internet speed of 2 mb/s (or can apply for a grant to improve their speed to this level). This is easily enough to live stream a standard def picture - so can people (person) please stop spouting the myth over and over again that millions dont have access to good enough internet? Just because you say it over and over again doesn't make it true...

 

[Pin-seeker]

Everyone in the UK now has access to a minimum internet speed of 2 mb/s (or can apply for a grant to improve their speed to this level). This is easily enough to live stream a standard def picture - so can people (person) please stop spouting the myth over and over again that millions dont have access to good enough internet? Just because you say it over and over again doesn't make it true...

And you can also pick up a tablet to watch it on for peanuts.
If you can't afford it then you really are going to struggle to afford golf as a hobby.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Everyone in the UK now has access to a minimum internet speed of 2 mb/s (or can apply for a grant to improve their speed to this level). This is easily enough to live stream a standard def picture - so can people (person) please stop spouting the myth over and over again that millions dont have access to good enough internet? Just because you say it over and over again doesn't make it true...

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...ds-than-mount-everest-base-camp-a6912176.html

Rwally ? Everyone ?

Sorry but that's false there are plenty areas around the UK that can't get 2mg

And just because it's available doesn't mean that people actually have it - costs aren't the cheapest

 

[Deleted member 21258]

Everyone in the UK now has access to a minimum internet speed of 2 mb/s (or can apply for a grant to improve their speed to this level). This is easily enough to live stream a standard def picture - so can people (person) please stop spouting the myth over and over again that millions dont have access to good enough internet? Just because you say it over and over again doesn't make it true...

With regards to my post if this is aimed at mine, I said the line and the house wifi is hit and miss.

That said it is not that unusual that we lose a good internet connection for shortish period during peak times in our village, I have business broadband which I understand from BT takes priority as well ! When running it runs way over 2mb. BT have told me they can not turn up the signal anymore on my line. Whilst I do not have the new fibre line that has been installed to the local box I understand this still goes down from time to time at peak times per people in the village.

Just like we still get power cuts about monthly for quick periods or sometimes longer than a few minutes.

Prior I lived in Essex for most of my life and these things were a bit of a shock to me, so therefore I can say the above is true that internet is not that great here.....

 

[Aztecs27]

Everyone in the UK now has access to a minimum internet speed of 2 mb/s (or can apply for a grant to improve their speed to this level). This is easily enough to live stream a standard def picture - so can people (person) please stop spouting the myth over and over again that millions dont have access to good enough internet? Just because you say it over and over again doesn't make it true...

I get a paltry 2mb (I live 10 minutes drive from the centre of a large city, so how it's so bad, I'll never know) and I have no problems with SkyGo, Netflix, NFL Game Pass - even in low-level HD sometimes (if the wind is blowing in the right direction).

I appreciate there are people who live out in the sticks who don't have this speed, but as you say, you can apply for a grant to get it improved...maybe people aren't aware of this?

It's embarrassing how bad the broadband is here in the UK.

 

[Junior]

hello all
been reading this thread with interest
Think everyone knows by now my views on how golf has been covered by the BBC/Sky winning live rights to show the Open so wont repeat those but very keen to get an understanding of awareness of the fact you didn't need SKY to watch the Open so if you have 2 mins can you give me some answers/views on the below

Did you know you didn't need to have a sky box/ sky sports subscription to watch the Open?
Did you know you could have taken out a NOW TV pass to watch the whole of Open week for £10.99
Did you know that you can watch NOW TV on a host of devices - one of which is probably whatever you are using to look at this post - at home or, data allowance permitting, on the move without wifi?
Is £10.99 really too much to ask for 40 plus hours of broadcasting one of the biggest golfing events of the year?
Have we all been weaned on free content to the point that we have the mindset of "I want tons of great content, but I don't want to pay for it"

No to all of the above Mike. Although I have Sky. If i didnt, then i would have looked to stream coverage from somewhere and would have hopefully discovered now tv. £10.99 is a great deal for a weeks viewing.....maybe as a golf-nut i am bias.

Sky did a superb job. I really enjoyed the coverage and commentary ..... even when Faldo and Monty were on talking about their past experiences.....fascinating.

Sadly, the bbc has minimal interest in Sport and it wont be long before they lose what little they have left. I wouldnt be surprised if Sky got the rest. With advertisements they can make a lot of money and can afford to outbid the beeb. The beeb is an institution thats trying to roll with the times but is doing a very bad job of it.

 

[Val]

Sky have done more for broadcasting live sport than any broadcaster, we should be thankful of that and thankful they have the rights to the open

 

[Deleted member 1740]

It seems there's plenty of people who just like to moan about everything!!

Why not sit back and enjoy the golf that was produced instead of complaining about who was Co commentating or the adverts or any of the other feeble reasons people have used to complain.

Imagine having to sit round a wireless listening to crackling commentary that sounded like it was coming from the other side of the world?

Sky produced a much better show over the week than the BBC have ever done and that's a fact.

 

[Deleted member 1740]

Sky have done more for broadcasting live sport than any broadcaster, we should be thankful of that and thankful they have the rights to the open

Very well putt val but they do tend to over egg the analysis at times especially in football. On the whole though as much as I hate the organisation I've got to admit they smashed the open coverage outta the Range:smirk: