- This topic has 40 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
"At The Races enjoyed a record year in 2011 and is on track to surpass those achievements in 2012. As a shareholder in the company, as well as a media rights licensor, Ascot is a major beneficiary of this success and, factoring in the company’s growth plans going forward, looked set to reap significant further financial returns longer term.
"No material impact on ATR’s profitability is expected as a result of this decision as the company’s revenue lines continue to grow and diversify. Ascot’s rights accounted for 4 per cent of total ATR revenues in 2011."
Ascot is a shareholder in At The Races but takes it’s rights elsewhere… hmmm bizarre, having their cake in both companies and taking a share out of both channels.
What I find irritating about ATR is the way they broadcast two or three races at once, so all you see is a postage stamp sized image on the screen. Is this the same on RUK?
What I find irritating about ATR is the way they broadcast two or three races at once, so all you see is a postage stamp sized image on the screen. Is this the same on RUK?
Sometimes yes
What I find irritating about ATR is the way they broadcast two or three races at once, so all you see is a postage stamp sized image on the screen. Is this the same on RUK?
Sometimes yes
At The Races and Racing UK can’t really win.
If races clash, they have either got to use the split-screen technique and try to cut back as soon as possible to a single race — or ignore one or two races that may be being run at the same time.
Then there would be criticism of them for ignoring some races or, equally likely, for choosing the wrong one to concentrate on (sometimes a subjective judgement).
Sometimes At The Races does show later the closing stages of races that could not be covered live because of a clash.
Clashing races are a fact of life, not least because unforeseen delays can torpedo the best attempts at scheduling, and ATR and RUK can only do their best to try to keep as many people as possible happy (or to upset as few as possible).
Now Ascot has defected ATR is very much left with the lower quality UK racing. At least there is less for them to squeeze into their pathetic Racing Review programme. We are in the middle of the NH season, but ATR decide to show all the AW flat action from Wolverhampton followed by only the closing stages from Doncaster and Lingfield.
I don’t think having all UK racing on one channel would be a good idea. There would be far too many clashes with split screens all over the place.
Racing UK do a pretty good job and the subscription hasn’t increased for years so I think it’s good value for money. You know what you’re getting for your money and it is optional unlike the TV licence fee.
The full race replays after live racing are exactly what some of us who have been at work all day want. Remember a few years ago when they used to broadcast US racing in the evening on their Racing World channel. Very few subscribers tuned in, so it was eventually closed down.
....and you've got to look a long way back for anything else.
Racing UK do a pretty good job and the subscription hasn’t increased for years so I think it’s good value for money. You know what you’re getting for your money and it is optional unlike the TV licence fee.
Really? Endless repeats with no actual programme structure whatsoever. I don’t think they advertise this. Racing is the only sport with an audience mug enough to pay £20/month for a stand alone channel. Is there a recession out there?
Yes really, their website quite clearly gives you the TV schedule.
We are fortunate to have two channels devoted to horse racing, rather than having to share coverage with other sports.
Although the days of Grandstand and World of Sport are missed there were long weeks of no televised racing between Saturday afternoons in the winter months.
The only mugs are those that spend all day in betting shops or on online casinos, gambling on anything that moves. I bet they lose a hell of a lot more than £20 a month.
....and you've got to look a long way back for anything else.
Racing is the only sport with an audience mug enough to pay £20/month for a stand alone channel.
Well, it isn’t as Sky Sports testifies.
The reason I subscribe is because I love watching racing. £20 per month is the offer, which I’m obviously happy to take up. Ergo, I’m spending money on a hobby of mine. Don’t see how that makes me a mug.
Mike
RUK for £20 a month with live action most days compares well with Boxnation for £10 a month with a live card once a week or so
Racing is the only sport with an audience mug enough to pay £20/month for a stand alone channel.
The reason I subscribe is because I love watching racing. £20 per month is the offer, which I’m obviously happy to take up. Ergo, I’m spending money on a hobby of mine. Don’t see how that makes me a mug.
Absolutely right. £20 a month for a hobby is absolutely nothing.
When you think how much some people spend on destructive and life-threatening things like cigarettes, you could easily be spending £20 in a few days, judging by the price of cigarettes.
For £20 a month, you are getting dozens of races, the build-up to them and the aftermath, and other features.
I don’t have Racing UK because, through work and other commitments, I don’t have enough available time to watch it, even if I recorded it.
But I don’t begrudge a penny of the £23 a month Sky subscription I have, even though I watch only a fraction of the channels and programmes available, including hardly ever At The Races these days.
If Mike enjoys watching lots of racing as a hobby and as entertainment, £20 a month is an absolute bargain, especially if you get maximum value by watching enough of the coverage to justify it.
When you think of the cost of going to the cinema and buying DVDs, I honestly don’t know how anyone can moan about £20 a month.
Charging for RUK is short sighted and a typical case of vision free accountants running the game
Racing needs an audience and new followers. Its a fading sport in terms of those that are actually drawn into it
if it was free to air, its classy coverage would be available to all and more would be hooked, whether passing browsers or those that tend to bet elsewhere these days
Hard to disagree about the sport not being available to its main audience but you now have to pay to watch all the big sporting events: football, cricket etc. Free to air coverage such as At The Races needs to have adverts to pay for itself, but that it itself alienates its viewers. I think we kid ourselves how popular and important our little sport is.
Free to air coverage such as At The Races needs to have adverts to pay for itself, but that it itself alienates its viewers. I think we kid ourselves how popular and important our little sport is.
On a pedantic point I would argue At The Races is not "free to air" as you need either a Sky or Cable subscription to watch it.
I don’t have access to ATR because I refuse to give any money to Murdoch and therefore do not have Sky and the cable option where I live is rubbish.
if it was free to air, its classy coverage would be available to all
Except of course, if it
was
free to air, the ‘classy coverage’ would consist largely of adverts asking you if you would like an easy-to-undertand payday loan or wondering if you had tripped over your own feet recently.
Mike
Let’s not forget ATR pictures are deliberately, not unavoidably time delayed for substantial financial gain for some. That could be classed as corruption by some.
Regarding clivexx’s point about RUK being free to air that was originally the plan if memory serves, when it started up with sponsorship I think from Betfair.
This was turned down by the BHA.if it was free to air, its classy coverage would be available to all
Except of course, if it
was
free to air, the ‘classy coverage’ would consist largely of adverts asking you if you would like an easy-to-undertand payday loan or wondering if you had tripped over your own feet recently.
Mike
Marginal but I think I would have slight preference for those adverts over the Coral stooge spouting the same fact about a million times.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.