Probably 80-120k are purely RL subscribers yes. All my family and several of my friends and neighbours get sky for RL and they would all cancel.
If someone like BT sport signed up super league they would get a huge boost in subscribers, my subscription would go where ever the super went end of.

Of course this may be a plot from sky to get super league to breakaway and go to a closed shop 14 team franchise with London and Toulouse added.

Because some of the hundreds of thousands of Americans, Canadians and French citizens who live in the UK would be more likely to watch.

Plus the average soft core general sports viewer in the UK would find the more internationally oriented competition more significant than the M62 + Catalans only competition.

The figures you quoted are way off the mark. Try about 20-30k. As sky have said in the past, the majority of viewers are actually in the south of England who no doubt don’t have sky for purely rugby league purposes

Sky need to save a couple of million so that they can add another billion or so to their next offer for football. Sky must know that Superleague is both cheap
and popular and good value but it seems that they can fill the hours with any old crap and it still does not matter.
Personally I would happily see Sky go belly up. Usually I buy day passes on NOW TV if there is a match that I cannot get to and sometimes I will buy the odd week. Last summer because of a run of away games I decided to get a month long pass but I failed to read the small print so I did not realise that buying a month pass enrols you onto a rolling contract so beware. They had about £100 before I could cancel. That is the last of my money they will ever have.

Even if that is the case 30k x around £60 a month with sky sports package plus bolt movies and other, would be a loss if around 25 -30 million a year if Sky loose these subscribers due to dropping RL.

I'm still trying to fathom why anyone actually "pays" for SKY/FOX/BT or any of the other stations.

No it’s not. Is about £10m because sky sports is around £30 a month not £60.

They could earn that from showing more rugby union

The NRL has teams in the three largest Australian TV markets of the five that matter. Super League doesn't have teams located in any of the largest British TV markets that matter.

Richard Lewis, who brought Catalans into Super League, threatened to resign if London was dropped from Super League under licensing. After Lewis left the RFL, his dumb successors dropped licensing in favour of promotion and relegation -- a system which prevents the RFL from deciding which teams are part of Super League. The result has been a sport that no longer has a team located in the biggest TV market in the country.

Little wonder that Sky wants to reduce it payment to Super League.

Well I suppose we will see next year if the viewing figures go up with Toronto in SL. Bearing in mind what a small % of the millions in the Uk watch RL think it is a stretch to think uk Canadians and Americans will watch in numbers. Any evidence of this with Catalan. There away support would suggest not.

I know that it would never happen but, if Leigh were playing in a French league, how many away games would you mange to watch ?
It's totally unrealistic for Catalan (and Toronto) fans to attend more than say, one away fixture.
As far as watching on TV, I wonder what effect the number of people watching on "bootleg" channels has on the Sky deal.
I only know of 1 person that pays Sky to watch RL on Sky sports. Of course, the advertisers still get to "sell" their products to the people that dont pay for a Sky subscription but, if their revenue is dependent on people actually paying for Sky + Rugby League, we are screwed for the next deal and do these people count in the figures.
And to reply to the "faux" Frenchman, would London being in Super League make any difference whatsoever to the numbers of people in London watching RL ?
They have 1000-1500 home fans and most of them are "displaced" Northerners or Aussies, it's just more fake news.

London Broncos averaged 2,000 fans at home games in 2019 and delivered £0.00 in value to Sky Sports. Toronto will average 9,000 and deliver the same monetary value to SKY......

You are both very confused.

The issue is not the number of rugby league fans who attend the London Broncos games at the London stadium -- often after having to travel for over an hour, or maybe two, on the train or tube system to do so. It is instead an issue of [ithe number of people sitting at home on their lounges[/i who will choose to watch the game on the television. That is where having a London team in the Super League makes a difference.

Hop off to the BARB site and show me that more people tune into London Broncos games than do say, Wakefield games...there's a good chap.
Otherwise, stop spouting bull.
Choice is yours

No you hop off to the BARB site and provide me with the data. You are a pensioner with plenty of time on his hands. I have more important things to do.

Which is why Premier Sports went to the wall when they dropped RL.

Oh. Wait. That didn't happen.

I'd say that the number of Sky subs that genuinely rely on RL is worryingly small. Around 250,000 watched the first Wigan v Leeds game of the season (the highest rated match of the first four rounds of 2019). To suggest that almost half of those subscriptions rely "purely" on RL is a massive leap to make.

Quote ="rollin thunder"Even if that is the case 30k x around £60 a month with sky sports package plus bolt movies and other, would be a loss if around 25 -30 million a year if Sky loose these subscribers due to dropping RL.'" You've just answered your own question. The last TV deal was £182m over five years. (https://www.totalrl.com/ins-outs-super- ... w-tv-deal/). That's £36m pounds a year. Even by your maths, dropping RL is worth between £5m and £11m to Sky's bottom line.

Quote ="rollin thunder"Even if that is the case 30k x around £60 a month with sky sports package plus bolt movies and other, would be a loss if around 25 -30 million a year if Sky loose these subscribers due to dropping RL.'" You've just answered your own question. The last TV deal was £182m over five years. (https://www.totalrl.com/ins-outs-super- ... w-tv-deal/). That's £36m pounds a year. Even by your maths, dropping RL is worth between £5m and £11m to Sky's bottom line.

The main point was French, Canadian and Americans living in uk with access to Sky Tv, the suggestion being they are likely to watch a team from their country. My point was there would be a small percentage give the interest in their countries in RL. More likely you would get that same RL Uk fans watching the new teams initially out of novelty.

Think the bigger question is What SL and RL will look like with a big drop on funding?

A key point that is brushed aside by Jean's terrible self serving reply that people from France and NA living here will buy dishes in their hundreds!! No offence Jean!!

McManus was very clear SKY must have a high English content and that is nine English clubs minimum. Last year SL tried to bring in a 10 club SL, and a 10 club SL has been argued since they abandoned licensing. Shane Richardson said last week SL should be 10 clubs, and as SKY say they are dropping the money there is every chance we will go to 10 clubs so that maximises the share per club of a guaranteed much lower deal.

Do the math everyone, if the SKY contract needs 9 English clubs to sell adequate subscriptions there is no room for the expansion dream is there?. That's exactly why Mr. Perez put the capture of a NATV TV deal high on his agenda. Mr. McDermott admitted there is no such deal nor any prospect of one. The expansion dreamworld we have been in since 2006 is set to end 2021. Wake up ladies and gents!!

Really ??

Just how many of these mythical creatures are there and just how many of those base their decision on whether to subscribe to RL on Sky based on the inclusion of a London side.
Should I point out that London were only back in SL for 1 season and remembering that most of the potential viewers in London dont know who London Broncos are, it makes zero difference.
The whole myth about expansion clubs being of greater importance to Sky was blown out of the water at the last re vamp of the league structure, when it was decided that the inclusion of Toronto and Toulouse wasn't even worth considering, which would suggest that despite all of the froth and hype form certain advocates of expansion, we stuck with the same 12 clubs, albeit with a return to promotion and relegation.

It seems like Mr Elstone will indeed have to work very hard to gain any kind of improved deal and the words from Brian Carney may give an insight as to what Sky are thinking here - very worrying times for the game and it's to be hoped that we have a plan B.

Bang on - Les Catalans are already on SKY - how many ex-pats buy subs here? 10? As for Canadians interested in rugby league enough to buy subs here how many? two or three?.

You can straight away predict SL 2021, Caddick, Pearson, Hudgell, Fulton, Davey, Moran, McManus, Lenigan, Carter and Beaumont. The wild card is Wood at Bradford.

A long shot though is TWP, Barcelona, Belgrade, Perpignan. Ottawa, Toulouse, New York, Boston. Rome and Vancouver. The wild card is Perth (WA)....

I'm puzzled you believe (as a realist) they will stay at 12? I don't see that Elstone has any sort of a hand to play at all?? The penny has dropped with me that Carney's the SKY anchorman for RL so that's probably relevant to the validity of his comments, but there has been a more rounded explanation that SKY were up against newbies BT last time and they flexed their financial muscles. Now BT and SKY are more in harmony and BT are happy to let SKY take the game. I trust that SKY won't shoot themselves in the foot by giving us so little that the quality drops?

How about £2.5M a club for 10 clubs for 5 years = £125M?? We talk about 2021 is it the case the season coming up 2020 is the last season under this deal do you know?

Quote ="Donnyman"I'm puzzled you believe (as a realist) they will stay at 12? I don't see that Elstone has any sort of a hand to play at all?? The penny has dropped with me that Carney's the SKY anchorman for RL so that's probably relevant to the validity of his comments, but there has been a more rounded explanation that SKY were up against newbies BT last time and they flexed their financial muscles. Now BT and SKY are more in harmony and BT are happy to let SKY take the game. I trust that SKY won't shoot themselves in the foot by giving us so little that the quality drops? We talk about 2021 is it the case the season coming up 2020 is the last season under this deal do you know?'" The current deal is until the end of the 2021: https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... rship-deal

Quote ="Donnyman"I'm puzzled you believe (as a realist) they will stay at 12? I don't see that Elstone has any sort of a hand to play at all?? The penny has dropped with me that Carney's the SKY anchorman for RL so that's probably relevant to the validity of his comments, but there has been a more rounded explanation that SKY were up against newbies BT last time and they flexed their financial muscles. Now BT and SKY are more in harmony and BT are happy to let SKY take the game. I trust that SKY won't shoot themselves in the foot by giving us so little that the quality drops? We talk about 2021 is it the case the season coming up 2020 is the last season under this deal do you know?'" The current deal is until the end of the 2021: https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... rship-deal

Quote ="wrencat1873"The current deal is until the end of the 2021: https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... rship-deal'" Thank you for very kindly letting me know that, sadly we may have to suffer constant blueprints for European, Transatlantic and World leagues for two years to come yet.

Quote ="wrencat1873"The current deal is until the end of the 2021: https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... rship-deal'" Thank you for very kindly letting me know that, sadly we may have to suffer constant blueprints for European, Transatlantic and World leagues for two years to come yet.

Nah, discussions will be ongoing and hopefully, there are other broadcasting companies that may be interested and if we are really lucky, now that we have an international look to SL, be willing to throw even more at RL, after all it is "the greatest game"

Quote ="wrencat1873"The current deal is until the end of the 2021: https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... rship-deal'" The Sky sponsorship referred to in that article is not the TV deal, which has always been ending in 2021, but the joint 'Gamble Responsible' campaign with BF. [iAs part of the new sponsorship, Super League and Betfred will continue to support the ‘Gamble Responsible’ campaign, which is currently promoted at Super League games. The partnership will continue to see over £25,000 donated to local charities as part of the Betfred Super League Man of Match initiative, where at each televised match, the player donates to a charity of their own choice. [/i https://www.rugby-league.com/article/54 ... aking-deal

Quote ="wrencat1873"The current deal is until the end of the 2021: https://www.skysports.com/rugby-league/ ... rship-deal'" The Sky sponsorship referred to in that article is not the TV deal, which has always been ending in 2021, but the joint 'Gamble Responsible' campaign with BF. [iAs part of the new sponsorship, Super League and Betfred will continue to support the ‘Gamble Responsible’ campaign, which is currently promoted at Super League games. The partnership will continue to see over £25,000 donated to local charities as part of the Betfred Super League Man of Match initiative, where at each televised match, the player donates to a charity of their own choice. [/i https://www.rugby-league.com/article/54 ... aking-deal