Jeff Probyn: Why didn’t BT deal with the other leagues as well?

As the European row still rumbles along with a myriad of possible outcomes, it's time to reflect on what started it. The sudden announcement that BT were joining the market place and had negotiated a deal with Premier Rugby Ltd (PRL) to show all games (including European) really threw the cat among the pigeons.
Now it may just be a coincidence that PRL had lodged notice to quit shortly before that deal was announced in 2012 but somehow the cynic in me just doesn't believe it.
There was a rumour that PRL's representative attended the ERC meeting that discussed the renewal of the TV contract with BSkyB and had agreed it in principle. That explains why, despite the announcement of the BT deal, ERC went ahead with signing the Sky contract.
It may be that PRL were playing the field in an effort to see which offer was more financially rewarding, or it could be that as they didn't have all their alternative competition partners sorted, they were playing for time.
Whatever the reasons, you can understand why PRL would choose to be a little reserved about what information they wanted in the public domain as negotiations with fellow member clubs were at what they thought was a crucial stage.
The question that keeps echoing in my mind is, why would BT launch a new
business and make a deal to buy a product that at the time and still today doesn't exist and why would they choose to deal solely with PRL?
If the rumours are correct that BT are now in talks with the Welsh regions and Irish provinces about sponsorship, it shows that talks with those countries could have taken place at the same time as the PRL talks.
That said, it would seem logical to me that if BT seriously wanted to show European rugby they would have approached the body in control of the European game (ERC at the time) and made them an offer.
It's not as if BT didn't want to approach ERC  in fear of a bidding war with Sky, because, as BT have shown recently when outbidding Sky with a £900 million bid for UEFA Champions League, they are
prepared to put money on the table for the things they want.
The BT figures that have been produced for public consumption have varied from around £20 millon to £30 million a year depending on the split between Premiership games and Europe and the number of years the contract was to run.
If we take the lower figure, the bid made to PRL at around £20 million a year for four years, seems to be more than the share that was on offer from the Sky deal which, if split three ways with France and the Rabo 12, would have been slightly less than £15 million each.
But there was no telling what would have actually been offered to other nations should they have joined the BT bandwagon – just a speculative suggestion that the same would be on offer to all.
I am surprised that neither PRL nor BT have said categorically what level of funds would have been available to each of the other nations and it seems that BT have deliberately stoked the fires of conflict by buying any European competition, as long as it is not the Heineken Cup.
BT's actions make it appear that they are seeking conflict between the Unions, clubs, regions and provinces and the only reason I can think of for that, is that it will give them an element of control within the sport that will enable them to tailor any future competitions to their requirements.
That and the fact that by splitting the sports they can, in the future, buy the broadcasting rights at knock-down prices and may well achieve what Sky attempted when they tried to differ the amounts paid to each Union dependant on subscribers.
As the newest and biggest player in the demand TV market, BT have the funds to outbid anyone and buy anything they want, but it appears as far as fledgling professional rugby is concerned, buying what is on offer is not enough, only ownership of the sport will do.
One of the proffered scenarios is bringing the Welsh regions into the Premiership as a possible replacement for Europe for a year or two.
I have to ask why the English clubs would want to play more games against the Welsh regions.
They face each other every season in the LV Anglo-Welsh Cup, so unless the intention is to abandon that competition and replace it with weekly matches against the Premiership, it would appear to duplicate what we already have.
It has been said that any new competition could rekindle the ‘good old days' when English and Welsh club games mirrored the international rivalry although I doubt it because that hasn't happened in the LV. Despite the promises, the Premiership won't solve the problems of the Welsh regions, the lack of finance and lack of fans can't be cured by a short-term fix for a year or so.
Welsh rugby is parochial, it always has been and always will be and the formation of regions hasn't changed that. Ospreys are still Swansea, Dragons still Newport, Blues still Cardiff and Scarlets still Llanelli and although they may have attracted slightly bigger crowds because of the big name stars, most fans will still go to their local village clubs.
Also the Premiership teams are stronger than the Welsh regions and so would help to improve Welsh players without the same benefit for the English players.
If I were the RFU, I would do all I could to delay any further cross-border competition – at least until after the World Cup.