GAA doing a deal with SkySports

[deiseach]

Well well well. One year's numbers during a World Cup.

Let's see how we're doing at the tail end of the 3-year deal and how much of an audience has been built up.

What audience would represent success?

[AZOffaly]

Well well well. One year's numbers during a World Cup.

Let's see how we're doing at the tail end of the 3-year deal and how much of an audience has been built up.

What audience would represent success?

7 billion

[brokencrossbar1]

Well well well. One year's numbers during a World Cup.

Let's see how we're doing at the tail end of the 3-year deal and how much of an audience has been built up.

What audience would represent success?

7 billion

Bare minimum!!!

[deiseach]

[Zulu]

Absolutely and I'd never want the GAA to manipulate the facts but you've repeatedly tried to paint the GAA abroad as something it's not. Did you post this information simply as a point of interest?

There is something in the media about the GAA, there is a thread here about the deal with Sky, with many things in it, it seems reasonable to post such things on Gaaboard. Do you want me to delete the post?

Of course not, but if the point you're trying to make is that the deal has failed to meet it's stated objectives then you are not proving anything at all? The NFL will play 3 regular season games in Britain next year, do you think they could have done that when the sport was first shown on British TV? The sky deal makes it easier for non-Irish viewers in Britain to see the games, what impact that will have on clubs over here or the general level of interest in the games will take quite a few years to establish.

[deiseach]

Analysing the figures for Sky Sports' live coverage of 22 Championship games last year, Rouse states: "Ultimately, the average viewership of Sky's GAA coverage of all the people watching television at any given time in Britain, amounted to .25%."

I'd say Sky would get better viewing figures putting on re-runs of the 2005 Ashes. There are going to have to be a lot more bums on couches for Sky to renew the deal.

[JoG2]

Analysing the figures for Sky Sports' live coverage of 22 Championship games last year, Rouse states: "Ultimately, the average viewership of Sky's GAA coverage of all the people watching television at any given time in Britain, amounted to .25%."

I'd say Sky would get better viewing figures putting on re-runs of the 2005 Ashes. There are going to have to be a lot more bums on couches for Sky to renew the deal.

Would that quarter of 1% include the folk in the black north?

How would that quarter of 1% compare number wise to the number in Ireland who missed out these matches due to Sky? (ie total viewership up or down?)

[Eamonnca1]

Well well well. One year's numbers during a World Cup.

Let's see how we're doing at the tail end of the 3-year deal and how much of an audience has been built up.

What audience would represent success?

As a GAA man I'm not so much interested in audience size, I'd be more interested in how much interest it generates in the game in terms of recruitment of new players. If the increase is measurable and bigger than it was without TV coverage then I'd consider that a success. I know the TV channels are only interested in audience size though, but you'd need to ask them what they would consider a success.

[Croí na hÉireann]

So the lads have disallowed Clare's SKY motion for Congress (from 2017, all championship games to be free to air). This with all the manipulated facts is fast turning me off the deal.

[orangeman]

So the lads have disallowed Clare's SKY motion for Congress (from 2017, all championship games to be free to air). This with all the manipulated facts is fast turning me off the deal.

Some shock there.

[stringbean]

I've no issue with sky's involvement - they offer a better product than rte, they do this strange thing were they actually analyse the game at hand rather than listen to Spillane et al spout same thing they've been talking about for a decade.

Last year we found ourselves watching the all Ireland semis and final on sky.

[JoG2]

Paul Rouse:

"One of the GAA's stated reasons for entering the deal was to provide coverage for the emigrant community. GAA General Secretary Paraic Duffy stated at the time that 11 million households in Britain had Sky Sports. In fact the figure was actually four million. And another fact is that the emigrant community already had access to GAA games. Premier Sports, part of the Setanta Sports group, provided 100 games a year, not just championship games but all the games shown on TG4, Setanta, TV3 and RTE, for a subscription fee of £10 a month.

Premier's commitment to the GAA also extended to sponsoring Warwickshire GAA. But under the Sky deal they were prevented from showing 20 live games exclusive to that broadcaster, which meant GAA fans in Britain had to pay an extra subscription. Because of the Sky deal the GAAGO service is only available on a reduced basis to the largest emigrant community of all, the one in Britain.

As Rouse points out, "Ultimately, when you take away the rhetoric of serving emigrants what you are left with is the provision of a service that was already available but was now fragmented, and now cost at least three times the established price."

[AZOffaly]

I think Paul (I know him a bit, he's a smart guy) is probably right in his figures, but as I said when this happened, I don't see any negative to the games being available on Sky to Irish people in the UK and to foreigners exposed to our games for the first time. I just can't see how that is a bad thing.

Of course I do see that the fact that you have to pay for Sky means that in Ireland there are people who are now not able to view some of the games, and this is a pity, and I would not like to see Sky getting exclusive rights for any more than what they have now.

I would prefer the Clare wording, where all televised games are available on terrestrial, and on Sky in addition if they were interested. However I can see why that would not be ideal from the Sky perspective, but the GAA are saying this is not about TV rights monies per se (and the numbers back that up), so they need to play the maximum exposure angle, and that would be the games on both Sky and Terrestrial TV.

I still think Sky are doing a decent job on the games, I do think it provides an avenue for our games to be recognised amongst a wider audience, and anything that makes RTE perhaps rethink their tired approach is a good thing.

I'd be interested to hear what the likes of Jinxy, Zulu and the like have seen/heard over the water. Especially Zulu who is involved in coaching native kids in our games. Are there any anecdotes of friends watching or whatever?

[BennyHarp]

Paul Rouse:

"One of the GAA's stated reasons for entering the deal was to provide coverage for the emigrant community. GAA General Secretary Paraic Duffy stated at the time that 11 million households in Britain had Sky Sports. In fact the figure was actually four million. And another fact is that the emigrant community already had access to GAA games. Premier Sports, part of the Setanta Sports group, provided 100 games a year, not just championship games but all the games shown on TG4, Setanta, TV3 and RTE, for a subscription fee of £10 a month.

Premier's commitment to the GAA also extended to sponsoring Warwickshire GAA. But under the Sky deal they were prevented from showing 20 live games exclusive to that broadcaster, which meant GAA fans in Britain had to pay an extra subscription. Because of the Sky deal the GAAGO service is only available on a reduced basis to the largest emigrant community of all, the one in Britain.

As Rouse points out, "Ultimately, when you take away the rhetoric of serving emigrants what you are left with is the provision of a service that was already available but was now fragmented, and now cost at least three times the established price."

The above is all true but their must be a few caveats. Firstly, Premier Sports provision was often unreliable in the respect that it often didn't show what it was listed to show, especially when it used to show the Sunday Game about once every 3 weeks. Secondly, you still need the Sky platform to get Premier Sports coverage so saying it just costs £10 a month is not accurate and you would need some form of Sky package. If assuming that people already had Sky to get the Premier coverage then it may also be a relatively reasonable to assume that they may have Sky Sports - remember there is more than just the GAA on offer for the price on Sky Sports, this would have enabled them to access the games for no extra cost. This was the position I was in and many of my mates. Thirdly, there is a lot of questioning the viewing figures for Sky's coverage but I wouldn't mind seeing this as a comparison to that of Premier Sports. Finally, as someone who is heavily involved in coaching and promoting the game in England, I can report that there has be very little change in the number of kids taking up the sport in our region. In Yorkshire the GAA has cricket, Rugby Union, Soccer and especially Rugby League to compete with and it will take more than just 20 matches on Sky to change the mindsets of the parents, who are the ones who will ultimately make the decision as to which game their kids play. On a more personal experience though as a teacher in a sixth form college, where the students obviously are aware that I'm Irish, i have had loads of students coming up to me and asking me to explain the rules, asking if I'd watched the match at the weekend and who I supported etc. As a result we have quite a few Tyrone supporters over here now who appreciate the art of defending in Gaelic Football.  Joking aside though, in my experience, awareness is being created but it will take time before this is reflected in numbers on the pitch.

[sheamy]

In my experience games on tv or otherwise have absolutely no impact on the levels of participation.

We seem to be wedded to the idea (or is that peddled the idea) that audience exposure = increased participation when it's total nonsense imo.

Alot of people watched the superbowl in this country but there's no rush to send kids to play american football.