der Berliner 3,744 Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 (edited) Maybe someone has the time to dig up the percentages of the prize money allocated to each league & team in the actual TV deal? You would assume that it is done similarly to European Prize money, i.e. a set figure (plus bonuses according to points won). A set figure for all teams in one league would probably the best thing to have, so all teams get a share. Rangers games obviously attract more audience than Raith vs QotS. Thus, with a set figure you would get a "fair" SPFL deal for all teams, not least since TV station pick the games they want, i.e. outwith the influence of the teams and SPFL. And then there should be reasonable bonus payments for viewing figures on top of that. Edited October 30, 2015 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger_syntax 4,320 Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Maybe someone has the time to dig up the percentages of the prize money allocated to each league & team in the actual TV deal? You would assume that it is done similarly to European Prize money, i.e. a set figure (plus bonuses according to points won). A set figure for all teams in one league would probably the best thing to have, so all teams get a share. Rangers games obviously attract more audience than Raith vs QotS. Thus, with a set figure you would get a "fair" SPFL deal for all teams, not least since TV station pick the games they want, i.e. outwith the influence of the teams and SPFL. And then there should be reasonable bonus payments for viewing figures on top of that. That would be a pretty bad idea. Prize money should be in proportion to sporting merit. After scanning the numbers it looks like that is the case here. Assembling data like this should probably not make you reflect on how the prize money has been distributed. Instead think about how badly Rangers have been run, and managed, over the years. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearman 9 Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 That would be a pretty bad idea. Prize money should be in proportion to sporting merit. After scanning the numbers it looks like that is the case here. Assembling data like this should probably not make you reflect on how the prize money has been distributed. Instead think about how badly Rangers have been run, and managed, over the years. ...and Scottish Football itself has escaped such criticism, it's a dead duck bringing in how bad Rangers have been run without looking at the whole picture. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger_syntax 4,320 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 ...and Scottish Football itself has escaped such criticism, it's a dead duck bringing in how bad Rangers have been run without looking at the whole picture. Could have had an extra £100k for winning our league last year. Any place in the top league would guarantee, at least, twice as much prize money. Did Scottish football do that to us? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 There used to be tv appearance money on top of the prize money. I think they scrapped that due to us getting a lot of it. They also changed it so second place gets much less probably in antipation of us being back in one season, weakened and with points penalties. Celtic look after themselves shaft us, and the rest just follow like sheep due to sweetie money bribes along with lack of ambition and expectation. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.