Well Done BBC!!

[Crow]

Not sure where you get your "facts" from but Sky have never bid for sole broadcasting rights. The packages are tendered as exactly that, packages. It's then up to the highest bidder to determine who gets what. Sky just outbid the other contenders, as happens in nearly every other tender process in business.
Flip side, do you really think that Golf, Darts, Snooker, heck even Rugby League, would have built in to the popular sports that they are currently (with the money that goes with the prizes, attracting the best players) if it had been left to BBC and other FTA providers?
Some people just talk rot for the sake of hating Rupert because that's what the rest of society tell them to do.
Like it or not, he is just a successful businessman. I sometimes struggle to understand the hatred for KRM yet the adulation for Lord AMS... Its bonkers as they are both as bad as each oth.... Oh wait, one's English and the other isn't even from around here...

I might not have all the facts on what comprises the “packages” but I’m fairly confident that Sky will bid as much as is needed for a sole rights package if there’s an option for one, so excluding the competition.

Golf, darts, snooker and rugby league were all popular sports before Sky got involved, Sky only make bids for popular sports that will make money, have you ever seen kabadi on Sky?
If when you say Sky made them popular you mean that the competitors now earn obscene amounts of money (at least in their flagship sports) for playing their sport then yes I agree.

I do hate Sky and, as he created it, I have a dislike of Murdoch (not on first name terms like yourself).

Most of the above I assume was aimed at me as you quoted my post and I’m okay with that, however, I will be extremely offended if the racist jibe you made at the end was aimed at me.

 

[GreiginFife]

I might not have all the facts on what comprises the “packages” but I’m fairly confident that Sky will bid as much as is needed for a sole rights package if there’s an option for one, so excluding the competition.

Golf, darts, snooker and rugby league were all popular sports before Sky got involved, Sky only make bids for popular sports that will make money, have you ever seen kabadi on Sky?
If when you say Sky made them popular you mean that the competitors now earn obscene amounts of money (at least in their flagship sports) for playing their sport then yes I agree.

I do hate Sky and, as he created it, I have a dislike of Murdoch (not on first name terms like yourself).

Most of the above I assume was aimed at me as you quoted my post and I’m okay with that, however, I will be extremely offended if the racist jibe you made at the end was aimed at me.

Which bit are you not getting? There is no sole rights package. There is equal opportunity for all interested parties to buy up the rights pakages through bidding. Should a company be hated for building a successful base to allow them to outbid? Of yes no wonder business in this country is doomed.
You are, ironically, defending an institution that imposes a mandatory subscription and passes it off as a license. I dont watch BBC content yet have to pay for that priviledge. Sky forces NO ONE to pay, so more fallacy on your part. Its optional.

Nothing racist in what I said so be as offended as you like. Merely a comparative question as to why the cockney rough diamond is loved but Rupert Murdoch isnt. There is no real difference other than nationality from what I can see. AMS has had his share of controversy.
Tell me, what is your dislike built on? What do you know of KRM? I am not on first name term, slightly childish there, I just acknowledge that he has a first name.

On the sports none of those I listed held anywhere near the appeal or popularity they now enjoy. Yes thay had a base but but not as large.
On the money Sky doesnt pay the players, thats the clubs that do that as it always has been. Sky pays the money to the Premier League and the FA for example.
It was not aimed at anyone actually, just a balance viewppont as I believe a debate requires on order to be a debate.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

I reckon the BBC sports section is run by Mrs Fragger
She just doesn't get sport, sees it as a total waste of time

Which is a shame as what they do broadcast they do very well indeed

 

[Fader]

I don't watch a single programme in the BBC yet I have to pay a licence fee to have it or I get a hefty fine or threat of imprisonment! That's fair isn't it a compulsory subscription I have no choice in.

Sky Sports or other packages I get through Virgin Media I can choose to have and pay for and if I downgrade and remove part of it nobody fines me or threatens to lock me up!

BBC simply choose not to air a lot of sports on a weekly basis merely choosing to try and get the biggest occasions and the odd bit here and there. Problem is sports fans don't want this type of coverage they want coverage they can follow week to week with consistency. Plus the fact the BBC coverage has never really moved into the modern era like with the golf a prime example Sky you get the shot centre & the likes of Roe/Harman using the big screen at the masters to show certain things to do with players swings and shot type! The BBC you get a bit of a slow mo with Allis's waffle or Ken on the course.

It's the same with Football they come on air 10mins before kick off & troll out commentators or pundits that haven't moved with the times and only form of analysis is to have Lineker, Lawro & Shearer chat for 5mins. On Sky you get Neville who Gives great in depth details about why and how things happened in games and showing how plays panned out.

Simply IMO the BBC can't cut it for sports coverage even when they do have it. Easy to say well sky's got the money but if you get the coverage right on BBC then maybe more will watch and that "licence" fee will be warranted for once.

 

[MegaSteve]

You are, ironically, defending an institution that imposes a mandatory subscription and passes it off as a license. I dont watch BBC content yet have to pay for that priviledge.

Your licence fee is not a "subscription" charge its a tax the same as your road fund licence... The Beeb [bless 'em] then have to apply to the goverment for their share of what the tax raises... Some goes to the independent channels or it did anyway...

Oh, and its not mandatory... You can elect to not pay it... Just don't get to watch any telly which at times would be a good thing...


As for Murdoch and Sugar... One's a London boy and one isn't... Whats to like about upsidedowners?

 

[SyR]

The bad thing about Sky is that you have to watch adverts despite paying a monthly subscription. It's just greedy to have both. Their coverage of the Masters was let down compared to the BBC's due to the adverts. The BBC used to have great coverage of sports events but cannot spend the money the other channels can.

 

[shivas irons]

This is where most of your licence money went http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-22651126 honestly they are complete muppets who run the BBC they really dont give a dam about licence payers.