How Much Do You Think The New Deal Is Worth???

For those who think the CFL did NOT get an increase, please explain this...

Western teams care very little for the Argos or the teams out East - nothing has happened in the last 20 years to make me think otherwise. So, why would the Western Teams agree to a TSN extension if there wasn't something in it for them? Especially, given the fact that all 4 Western teams are flush with cash. That, more than anything else, makes me think there was an increase - even if it was a small one. It makes sense.

If WE know TSN needs the CFL, and BCE buying the Argos proves this, they certainly know. Without an increase, my guess, Winnipeg, Calgary, Edmonton and Saskatchewan would all be happy to wait until 2018 to see what the new market prices bring in.

Anyway, we'll know in the coming months as the details leak out.

Well I guess we should be nice, I'm sure Bob McCown and his buddies who are in line with him are not having a good day after knowing of the CFL - TSN deal. :wink:

First, this is good news so I don't understand why such a negative spin.

Second, no one is getting "worked up" :roll: . We are happy that everything is coming up positive for the CFL. There are different threads for different topics. Feel free to visit a "training camp" thread.

Third, everything BCE/TSN has done in the last month proves how much they need the CFL. No company buys a money losing organization like the Argos without a BIG incentive. BCE's incentive was that they have very little summer content and will be crushed without the CFL in the summer months.

Last, rating and attendance have ebb and flow. Both the CFL and BCE/TSN know this. They also know content is king. My guess, as I have said, there was an increase.

Aye Earl,

I understand Rogers and McClown putting a negative spin on the CFL but why do OUR fans?

We have had nothing but good news for years and still so many of our own wax rhapsodic about how bad things are. If TFC/MLS had as many positives as we do, they would be singing from the stands. We get all these positives, yet many of our posters see nothing but bad news. Makes no sense.

Does it really matter how much the television deal is worth? Or are CFL fans suddenly equating quality to how much money the league is worth, pays its players? when it should really be the on field product that counts.

Personally I would prefer my league not to be like the NHL and pull a Rogers.

Kevin, maybe some CFL fans have very high expectations compared with some other leagues. And that's not a bad thing. :wink:

NOT my words, so stop shooting the messenger!!
Essentially, negotiating this extension at this point rather than closer to 2018 provides the CFL with some long-term stability and security. It also [b]could[/b] be a useful hedge [b]against declining ratings or a potential advertising bubble[/b]. The league will be under less immediate pressure to draw big numbers of viewers now, and if there's some major crash in the value of TV sports rights, the CFL won't be hurt by it until at least 2022. Moreover, this gives TSN yet more incentive (and they already had plenty) to work to promote the CFL and make it a pillar of their own long-term strategy. However, locking into a long-term deal now rather than near the contract's expiry, and doing so without any apparent negotiations with other broadcasters, [b]may limit the financial upside for the CFL[/b]. In particular, if the game continues to grow and the values of sports rights continue to rise the way they have over the last decade, the decision to extend this deal now [b]may look like a bargain for TSN[/b].
[url=https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/cfl-55-yard-line/cfl-extends-tv-radio-digital-contract-with-tsn-rds-through-2021--a-good-move-231945456.html]https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/cfl-5 ... 45456.html[/url]
I think this article with the bolded puts this in a nutshell IMO.

It's away too early to tell if this extension is a good thing for the league or not. 7 years is a long time and the market can swing either way.

On another board I was reading about the San Jose Sharks local deal and how it was locked in for a such a long period (up in 2024 I believe). It pays about 7 million per year and afterwards local rights fees skyrocketed where teams like Dallas, LA & Anaheim now get about 20 mil per year putting SJ at a major disadvantage.

So at the least it shows Bell values the CFL brand to the point they don't want any competitors in. Overall, the news is neutral.

I know and my comments we’re NOT directed at any one poster. Just in general.

It just, the League is on a (positive) roll. Why can’t people/posters/fans enjoy it and not put a negative spin on the small stuff?

Are you kidding me?
During the early 90's when the league was on the brink of extinction, maybe then only TSN paid more then it was worth in an effort to keep the league afloat.
After that every contract singed by TSN was under market value when the previous commissioners going back to Tom Wright, Marc Cohon and now Jefferey has not properly negotiated by creating a bidding war involving real or possibly real other networks.
Whether there would be a bidding war on not, the mere perception would have driven up the value.
Why would he sign an extension now unless like I said it is for some major cabbage possibly twice the current value?
The other factor, again no mention so likely it does not include the playoffs or GC on the main CTV network.
These major gaffes are scandalous to me.

Good post.

I agree the CFL sells itself short.

I don't know about dollar and cents
I just got me common sense
don't you tell me I am dense
just because I sit on the fence

Whats the deal worth, I don't know
How much does it matter to the average joe
Some of you may be in the know
most of us just say go team go

the part that bugs me most is that there is probably not even a clause to broadcast the Grey Cup or Playoffs on CTV as a simulcast. which would bring in loads of viewers to the greatest month of the year.

The simple fact is the CFL wants its games on TSN. It doesn't matter if it's for $15M, $45M or $55M the league is happy as long as the games are on TSN. They've never negotiated with any other network since they exclusively signed-on with TSN, despite claims other networks would bid higher (CBC, Global, RSN, etc.) The CFL wants to dance with the gurl they brung...and Bell/TSN seems like an amiable partner (sponsored by Shaw). :thup:

I always said I would be happy if each team made $1 forever and ever amen. Hopefully the extension is another step in that direction because I think we're close.

But they already have loads of potential viewers on TSN and RDS.
9.2 million subscribers on TSN which translates to around 24 MILLION viewers PLUS 2.5 million subscribers to RDS which translates to 6 MILLION veiwers = TOTAL OF 30 MILLION potential viewers.

Out of 30 MILLION potential viewers 3.8 MILLION were atual viewers who watched the Grey Cup. So if 26 MILLION potential viewers on TSN/RDS did NOT watch the Grey Cup then why would having it on CTV add actual viewers????
Seems to me the answer is to get more of the TSN/RDS subscribers to watch the Grey Cup......... :roll:

The fact that cTV is on Chanel 7 and TSN is on channel 153 also plays into viewership however. I honestly believe that Bell and Shaw have some kind of working agreement and in two years when the CBC tells Rogers that they are tired of being pimped out for HNIC that Rogers will be truly screwed because Global stations won't take HNIC either. Basicly, Rogers will be stuck paying 5.2 billion and have no over the air access..

Were the Grey Cup game on CTV - it would get more viewers - full stop. Nobody knows how many more exactly - but it would get more.

That NFL games on CTV get substantially more than the NFL games on TSN is one clue. But just common sense tells you it would capture more casual viewers were the game on CTV. 20% of Canadian homes don't have satellite or cable so they don't get TSN. How many of those sitting home on a Sunday evening might turn on the TV and watch at least part of the Grey Cup game? Some for sure.

Plus as Bungle pointed out even for those who have cable - TSN is at a much higher place on the dial. I've got Fibe TV so my over the air HD channels like CTV, Global City etc start at 1200. TSN is 1400. When I flip on the TV I invariably flip the Program Guide to start at 1200 and start scrolling up. If I come across a program or movie I like I often stop right there and start watching that program without checking to see what's up on the sports channels. And I'm a big sports fan! I can't tell you how often I've watched something on one of those channels and then realize later that I completely forgot about a game on that night that I meant to watch.

You would get all kinds of viewers who would turn on their TV's not knowing what they were planning on watching - stumble across the Grey Cup on CTV and start to watch it.

It does cost the Grey Cup I think a significant number of viewers by only being on TSN. That might be a couple of hundred thousand, 500,000 maybe even more - but it is likely a significant number IMO.

What are you talking about homie? You have an aging demographic that needs to be replaced. The product we are selling is football, not tsn subscriptions, so you have to put it across as many platforms and make it reach as many viewers as possible. We want football by Canadian rules to be showcased, not tsn broadcasts. That's why I'm not down with only tsn showing the games, because now it is to the point where you have to buy a secondary product to watch the primary. It's like a forced add on with the original product you wanted. Not very business savvy. I don't have cable, so how am I supposed to watch the games I'm not attending with my (Argonauts) season tickets?

This post came off a tad angry, which I am not. Just to clarify dude. Cheers

No it didn't. You're fine.