Cheltenham Festival
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
and paid for by the bookmakers & exchanges, betting turnover would almost cetainly increase ? (or am I missing something).
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 15
|
By:
You think people who can't afford £5 a week are suddenly going to start punting enough to make a difference to the levy ?
I should also think the chances of the bookies paying for it are about nil. |
|
By:
The five pounds a week is not the issue, it's opening the channel and races to a wider audience, which will almost certainly happen if it's subscription free. New punters will help themselves to a few small bets, nothing major to start, then as familiar horse run the turnover will grow. At present, it's only the hardcore, and that's a leaky bucket - it needs to be topped up.
Football turnover may be comparable, live games on terrestrial v Sky v ESPN. I am no expert, but horseracing looks in a spot of bother, they need to find additional punters from somewhere. |
|
By:
I'd also have thought that the increase in betting turnover would be beneficial to the bookies and the levy so it seems a no brainer but I'm sure they must have done the math and decided it dosen't make commercial sense.
|
|
By:
The money isn't the issue. The channel represents a minority sport, and charges doubles what ESPN does. It's just not value for money. A part time channel with too many replays and little else to offer.
|
|
By:
It depends what you want to watch.
£5 a week to watch the best racing in the UK in my home is a steal for me. ESPN show absolutely nothing I want to watch so tuppence a month would be expensive from my point of view. |
|
By:
I think its fantastic value for money shame about some of the presenters but compaired to atr with countless adverts,poor replay service and equally annoying presenters its brilliant
|
|
By:
when the original ATR collapsed the bookies were in a state of shock as their telephone betting turnover plummeted.
They probably want RUK as a free to air channel, but do you think they could come to a funding arrangement between them? |
|
By:
I think Racing Uk should try and strike a deal to be a part of the ESPN package.
|
|
By:
Been down that path with setanta before
|
|
By:
Setanta weren't a globally renound, multi billion dollar sporting institution. They won't be sinking anytime soon.
|
|
By:
The problem is that the people who will pay out work during the week but sometimes get home early, so that £5 a week is a waste of money.
The people that sit at home all week cannot afford it, the richer older audience who can afford it, buy it. |
|
By:
£5 per week may be good value to watch the best racing in uk when its on, but what about all their blank days. rip off
|
|
By:
So what if there are some blank days ?
Some Saturdays they show 5 meetings and average around 12 meetings a week. |
|
By:
I subscribe to RUK and agree if you are a big racing fan it's worth it. I was disgusted the other day though when I recently got multiroom to find that RUK was an additional £7 a month. I mean really? The conveniance to watch it in a different room £7!? I agree that RUK really does need to be free or get into some kind of deal with ESPN. Racing is paying people huge sums to get a wider audience yet most of the top courses midweek and sundays are not free to view. It's quite a simple solution IMO.
|
|
By:
some bloke from RUK phoned me up and asked if i wanted to puchase i said 20 pound a month was to expensive he said we have the best courses i said you dont have ascot an doncaster ATR for me 20 a month is to expensive i work during the week so no benefit whatsover 5 pound a week sounds good but most people work during the week so in theory you only getting sat and sunday 8 days a month to watch if it free would have it like a shot though
|