The T.V Rights Thread Part III

[Goddy]

The other thread was locked so continuing the discourse.

I have a pretty frank and straightforward slant on all this; I think the ARLC should bend Fox over a barrel and ram it home that the NRL is not going to be put second to the AFL. If they want to retain the rights to League that badly, they can extend an olive branch to the ARLC and promise a dedicated League channel to level the playing field. A pretty simple request, I would think.

If Fox are obligated to tell the NRL that is not possible because of some small print deal with the AFL, they can f**k off quiet frankly. If I had my way, all Australian Sport would be F2A as a rule, but as long as the networks can't afford to buy the rights AND televise in HD, then Fox is a necessary evil.

However, while Fox are having their cake and eating it as well with their advertisements, which has been a disgrace for almost 10 years, then the ARLC is fully entitled to make them grovel.

 

[bobmar28]

NRL has to be on Foxsports 1 so it is always on the big screen at the club.

 

[rednblack]

To say that "On top of all that, you would need a free to air broadcaster that would be willing to hugely expand it's broadcast infrastructure, enough to produce 8 games a week, then lose most of that infrastructure a year later" is not entirely accurate.

For the most part, the broadcasters don't actually own any of it. At any OB, the trucks, equipment and staff are largely provided by specialist companies such as Global, Gearhouse Broadcast, and Cutting Edge. These facilities are contracted by the networks on a case-by-case basis. Most of the gear and personel will go from one broadcaster to another each week. For instance, a cameraman might shoot NRL for nine in Brisbane on Friday night, then do an A-league game in Gosford on Saturday, then a MNF game on the Monday, perhaps even with some AFL or Super Rugby thrown in on the Sunday.

If any FTA network buys all NRL games, they will obviously have to cover the cost of this hire and production, but they won't actually buy anything. If ten gets it all, they'll just use the trucks, equipment and personel that fox or nine WOULD have used if they were covering those games.

 

[BDR]

All broadcasters should also give regular blowies to league fans and officials

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...er-austar-merger/story-fna1k39o-1226303283565

If the ACCC delivers a positive response later this month on the Austar merger, one of the next weighty items occupying Mr Freudenstein's in-tray is negotiations over a new broadcasting rights deal for the NRL. Rugby League Commission chief executive David Gallop has been vocal in drumming up hopes of a $1bn-plus deal to match rival code the AFL's $1.25bn agreement with broadcasters.

Fox Sports and Nine paid $500 million for the current NRL rights and expect to win the 2013-17 rights.

In the rugby league cities of Sydney and Brisbane, Foxtel has the right to broadcast five of eight regular season NRL matches. However, Seven chief executive David Leckie has indicated that he would like to acquire at least one NRL game, and Network Ten has also expressed interest in snaring some rights.

Mr Freudenstein suggested Foxtel would push hard in its negotiations with the NRL.

"A lot of the value in any rights deal now will be driven by the subscription television sector.

"So we just need to make sure in any rights negotiation what we get is a fair share of the rights if they want us to pay them a fair share of the money."

 

[Heritage XIII]

Another plus for NRL rights was this in media section of The Australian:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...ngs-crash-at-ten/story-fna045gd-1226303271582

Plus Ten are moving to sell assets:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...rtising-business/story-fn91v9q3-1226303670080

Clearing the decks anyone?

 

[docbrown]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...er-austar-merger/story-fna1k39o-1226303283565

The plan to boost to 50% in NSW & QLD is simple - all NRL games live and ad free on Foxtel.

I know it, they know it, everybody knows it.

Everything else is just bluff.

They know they need the 50% before the NBN becomes mainstream so they can do the internet crossover in 10-15 years times, otherwise their marketshare will just keep getting eroded.

That's all the NRL needs to reminded them and exactly what LEK knows.

Another plus for NRL rights was this in media section of The Australian:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/broadcast/warburton-faces-ratings-crash-at-ten/story-fna045gd-1226303271582

Plus Ten are moving to sell assets:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/companies/ten-network-starts-review-of-eye-corp-outdoor-advertising-business/story-fn91v9q3-1226303670080

Clearing the decks anyone?

They have been for some time.

 

[juro]

Hopefully we will have a new contract by the time this thread reaches 3000...

 

[Canucks]

The plan to boost to 50% in NSW & QLD is simple - all NRL games live and ad free on Foxtel.

I know it, they know it, everybody knows it.

Everything else is just bluff.

They know they need the 50% before the NBN becomes mainstream so they can do the internet crossover in 10-15 years times, otherwise their marketshare will just keep getting eroded.

That's all the NRL needs to reminded them and exactly what LEK knows.


They have been for some time.

Seven paid $400m+ for 4 Non exclusive AFL games, Surely 8 exclusive NRL games going to FTA would be worth alot....

Is a billion possible without subscription TV?

 

[Goddy]

Seven paid $400m+ for 4 Non exclusive AFL games, Surely 8 exclusive NRL games going to FTA would be worth alot....

Is a billion possible without subscription TV?

It would be possible, but it would also be the first ever 3 way split in the history of television in Australia.

 

[The Tank]

IMO a three way split would be the best option of all as long as we get the $$$ required.

 

[docbrown]

Seven paid $400m+ for 4 Non exclusive AFL games, Surely 8 exclusive NRL games going to FTA would be worth alot....

Is a billion possible without subscription TV?

Trick is - what are you showing that the other networks don't have?

If everybody has it, well then it comes down to the luck of the draw and preferred timeslots - this is what you see in USA with NFL.

If there's a minimum amount of games on F2A, say 3-4, then there's a bit of exclusivity about it.

But if you own all the games on just one network, then you are THE rugby league broadcaster (as 9 claims when it suits them but doesn't respect) and you retain the vast majority of the rugby league viewing audience and halo.

 

[Pigskin]

quick question if I may ... requiring a very general answer

would it be fair to assume that 16 (or 18 even) NRL clubs recieving a massive increase in salary cap all at once, would rape pillage and plunder talent from super rugby ?

especially considering the ARU is apparantly not exactly flush with funds these days

I'm sure the ARU would keep some chosen top liners ... but to what extent ?

Oink !

 

[Perth Red]

The Storm Sunday night game drew a good audience. Article here suggesting the introduction of a perth team gives a wide range of time options for a Super Sunday scenario

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...ld-card-in-tv-rights-push-20120316-1vaiy.html

 

[juro]

quick question if I may ... requiring a very general answer

would it be fair to assume that 16 (or 18 even) NRL clubs recieving a massive increase in salary cap all at once, would rape pillage and plunder talent from super rugby ?

especially considering the ARU is apparantly not exactly flush with funds these days

I'm sure the ARU would keep some chosen top liners ... but to what extent ?

Oink !

It would certainly be a shift in the balance between the two codes. We sometimes take from them. They sometimes take from us. It would also lead to a bit more movement of players from Super League than is currently the case.

 

[RLNY]

I would say that a potential new tv deal will result in less movement from the NRL to the ESL, rugby union, and the AFL.

 

[magpie_man]

would it be fair to assume that 16 (or 18 even) NRL clubs recieving a massive increase in salary cap all at once, would rape pillage and plunder talent from super rugby ? !

Doubt it. Most union players, particularly forwards, are unsuitable for league.
What we are more likely to see is a berrick Barnes or kurtley Beale (sportsmen with rugby league experience) being enticed back and/or never leaving in the first place.

 

[ElectricEelMan]

The Storm Sunday night game drew a good audience. Article here suggesting the introduction of a perth team gives a wide range of time options for a Super Sunday scenario

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...ld-card-in-tv-rights-push-20120316-1vaiy.html

Fox Sports' rationale for not increasing significantly its $220 million over five years for almost the same number of NRL games is that Foxtel subscriptions in NSW and Queensland are already in line with their AFL expectations.
In other words, why pay more for what you already have?
However, one NRL club boss said: ''Fox Sports should ask the question the other way around … How many subscriptions will they lose if they don't have NRL?''

I always thought Fox Sports reasoning justifying the disparity between what they pay the AFL and NRL, considering the NRL is their most important program, to be warped. What if they don't pony up with an adequate amount in the next NRL deal ... and use that excuse? What if they lose the rights to the NRL? Well, they will lose massive amount of subscriptions in NSW and QLD and the NRL can turn around at the next TV deal and just say 'Pay up. You need more subscriptions in NSW and QLD. Give us $2b!'

I am quite sure they know this. I am quite sure the NRL knows this. I have a feeling they will pay accordingly.

​

 

[Perth Red]

It's who will blink first! Will the NRL risk taking a short term (big) hit for long term gain or will Fox know they can offer unders and it will be accepted. I get the feeling if Fox thought we would have the balls to dump them then they would not dare risk it. I am not convinced we are financially strong enough yet to call their bluff.

 

[undertaker]

Doubt it. Most union players, particularly forwards, are unsuitable for league.

Also, even though the salary cap will substantially increase, it still won't be enough to match offers from European Rugby. They have far more money up their sleeves than nearly all NRL clubs