What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The TV rights thread part II

Providing the price is right which is your preferred FTA broadcast option?

  • All games on Seven

    Votes: 11 4.2%
  • All games on Nine

    Votes: 17 6.5%
  • All games on Ten

    Votes: 59 22.6%
  • Seven/Nine split

    Votes: 10 3.8%
  • Seven/Ten split

    Votes: 109 41.8%
  • Nine/Ten split

    Votes: 55 21.1%

  • Total voters
    261
Status
Not open for further replies.

Canucks

Juniors
Messages
168
Well it's kind of a bullsh*t excuse when ratings continue to increase on fox and they continue to increase ad revenue. That plus what happens if they lose league? It's easy to say they have no subscriptions to gain but how many do they have to lose?

If fox won't pay us as much as the AFL (in reality we deserve a lot more) than we have to take the rights away from them to make them wake up. When subscriptions plummett in NSW and QLD then we'll see how much we're worth.


If we dumped fox and were 100% on FTA, what kind of sponsorship revenue would that generate? Sharks, Raiders, Panthers etc are watched by 300k on fox, when Dragons Dogs Broncos etc watched by 1.1 million on a friday....

If every game averaged 800k nationally live you would have to think the sponsorship dollars would gravitate to the NRL....
 

LESStar58

Referee
Messages
25,496
Quote: While Nine has conceded it must pay more to retain the free-to-air rights following interest from Channel Seven and Channel Ten, Fox Sports is seeking to lower expectations of a combined free-to-air and pay TV billion-dollar deal.
Fox Sports' new boss, Patrick Delany, and media rights negotiator Ian Frykberg have been visiting NRL clubs and while the feedback has been positive on Fox's need to develop a closer relationship, the clubs don't like the money talk.
Foxtel paid $658 million over five years for AFL in order to lift subscription rates in the southern and western states.
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


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...rights-push-20120316-1vaiy.html#ixzz1pJrtsU44

Choke on my balls, Fox!

I would genuinely be interested to see wether or not the AFL deal will actually increase the subscriptions in the AFL states. Why the f**k would you, as an AFL fan, subscribe to Fox when you can get every game (well at least the blockbusters) for free on Seven?
 
Messages
15,612
Just the usual crap when negotiations are beginning.
We wont pay more.
We cant afford to pay more ,
Blah blah blah.

They are not going to come out & say Yeh we are going to give RL whatever they ask for.

They know they are stuffed without RL ,so they will cough upthe $$$$.
Its just they will whine,scream,moan ,bitch whle they do it.
 

Cletus

First Grade
Messages
7,171
Choke on my balls, Fox!

I would genuinely be interested to see wether or not the AFL deal will actually increase the subscriptions in the AFL states. Why the f**k would you, as an AFL fan, subscribe to Fox when you can get every game (well at least the blockbusters) for free on Seven?

Exactly, Seven still get to choose the first 4 games and they'll always pick the most popular teams. And they have teh Adelaide, Perth, Sydney and brisbane home teams shown every week. So why do you need Fox? I'd love to see a one year deal with another provider just to show Fox how much they need league.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,515
'SUPER Sunday'' could become a reality in rugby league's next broadcasting contract, with four games across three time zones in two countries over a six-hour period.
The success of last Sunday night's Storm versus Rabbitohs match on pay TV, together with the possible introduction of a Perth team during the life of the forthcoming TV rights deal, could result in wall-to-wall football on the traditional day of rest.
Free-to-air TV hates the idea of Sunday night games, given it is traditionally a big ratings night for the networks - particularly for incumbent rights holder Channel Nine with its flagship show, 60 Minutes.


However, Fox Sports' Storm versus Rabbitohs match was pay TV's most watched program on Sunday, drawing 279,500 viewers.
A super Sunday would be dependent on adding two additional teams - including Perth - and creating a ninth game.
It would mean a game in New Zealand shown at noon on the Australian eastern seaboard and starting at 2pm in Auckland or Wellington; a 2pm game hosted by a NSW club or Melbourne; a 4pm match, as is the custom with Nine's Sunday coverage, finishing with a 6pm game from Perth where the local kick-off time would be 4pm. All four games would be live and back-to-back.
Like many inventions, the unique Sunday night game between the Storm and Rabbitohs came about by accident. When the round one draw was prepared, the game was scheduled for 5.30pm last Saturday. However, A-League team Melbourne Heart, which shares AAMI Stadium with the Storm, had already booked the ground.
The Heart were prepared to change their game to Friday night, provided Football Federation Australia agreed. After initially showing no objection to the change, FFA refused permission.
The Storm believe this followed pressure from Fox Sports, which holds the pay TV rights to the A-League and NRL.
Fox Sports and the NRL were then adamant the game be played on Monday night, following the recent Eels versus Warriors match.
However, the Storm objected to a double-header with a midnight finish in the dressing room. A 7pm Sunday night slot was negotiated.
The Storm understood a Fox Sports official declared: ''We tell the clubs when they play, not the other way round.'' But now Sunday night football is on the agenda in the new TV broadcast rights deal and it will be the ARL Commission telling Fox Sports when they televise games.
Should Perth enter the competition, it is almost certain another Queensland team would be added to create a ninth game.
Nine is believed to be supporting the introduction of a second Brisbane team in order to create more flexibility with programming opportunities in the fiercely parochial rugby league city.
Ratings for Nine's Sunday game have been soft because, with only three NRL clubs in Queensland, the network is often forced to show a game involving Sydney clubs.
Nine and Fox Sports are preparing their proposals to the ARL Commission for the renewal of their broadcast deals.
While Nine has conceded it must pay more to retain the free-to-air rights following interest from Channel Seven and Channel Ten, Fox Sports is seeking to lower expectations of a combined free-to-air and pay TV billion-dollar deal.
Fox Sports' new boss, Patrick Delany, and media rights negotiator Ian Frykberg have been visiting NRL clubs and while the feedback has been positive on Fox's need to develop a closer relationship, the clubs don't like the money talk.
Foxtel paid $658 million over five years for AFL in order to lift subscription rates in the southern and western states.
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?''


"Super Sunday" F2A double headers have been on the cards for quite some time with a QLD team taking up one of the 4 slots similar to Friday nights. It came out of one of the first LEK meetings god knows how long ago.

I have doubted that Channels 7 or 9 would take up a Sunday night game as well but of course the theory is that 10 could run it from 5:30-7:30pm in a slot that traditionally underperforms for them breaking up the 7/9 6pm news stranglehold, even if it was on a digital channel. Or of course it could remain the domain of subscription TV.

As for this -

The Storm understood a Fox Sports official declared: ''We tell the clubs when they play, not the other way round.'
Not for long bitches. :lol:

Well it's kind of a bullsh*t excuse when ratings continue to increase on fox and they continue to increase ad revenue. That plus what happens if they lose league? It's easy to say they have no subscriptions to gain but how many do they have to lose?

If fox won't pay us as much as the AFL (in reality we deserve a lot more) than we have to take the rights away from them to make them wake up. When subscriptions plummett in NSW and QLD then we'll see how much we're worth.

It is but of course its in their best interests to talk down reports of large broadcast rights deals and pretend there is no competition.

The problem for them though is that every single game up for grabs - from the NYC, through to NRL, to rep matches - has a F2A bidder that wants it.

If we dumped fox and were 100% on FTA, what kind of sponsorship revenue would that generate? Sharks, Raiders, Panthers etc are watched by 300k on fox, when Dragons Dogs Broncos etc watched by 1.1 million on a friday....

Indeed.

Sponsorship. Advertising revenue. Audience interest.

All goes up because the game has a greater reach.

Up until now the questions have been-
* Are there enough F2A networks who want to take up every game?
* What impact will broadcasting every game have on crowds?

We know the answer to the first one is yes.

The answer to the second one is dependent on what measures the NRL brings in. Let's face it - some clubs are underperforming crowdwise and we don't want to do anything to damage that further.

That said the NRL can write in a blackout clause - that any games that have not achieved a minimum crowd guarantee will be blacked out on F2A in that local area. Each club would have a minimum expected attendance rating based on traditional numbers.

That way the onus shifts onto the free to air network to help promote game attendance for next to nothing so they too can get what they want. ;-)

That in conjunction with ticket subsidies will ensure that crowds aren't affected. Believe me, the ARLC aren't going to let 10 and 7 get what they want without addressing this issue.
 
Last edited:
Messages
15,612
"Super Sunday" F2A double headers have been on the cards for quite some time with a QLD team taking up one of the 4 slots similar to Friday nights. It came out of one of the first LEK meetings god knows how long ago.

I have doubted that Channels 7 or 9 would take up a Sunday night game as well but of course the theory is that 10 could run it from 5:30-7:30pm in a slot that traditionally underperforms for them breaking up the 7/9 6pm news stranglehold, even if it was on a digital channel. Or of course it could remain the domain of subscription TV.

As for this -

Not for long bitches. :lol:



It is but of course its in their best interests to talk down reports of large broadcast rights deals and pretend there is no competition.

The problem for them though is that every single game up for grabs - from the NYC, through to NRL, to rep matches - has a F2A bidder that wants it.



Indeed.

Sponsorship. Advertising revenue. Audience interest.

All goes up because the game has a greater reach.

Up until now the questions have been-
* Are there enough F2A networks who want to take up every game?
* What impact will broadcasting every game have on crowds?

We know the answer to the first one is yes.

The answer to the second one is dependent on what measures the NRL brings in. Let's face it - some clubs are underperforming crowdwise and we don't want to do anything to damage that further.

That said the NRL can write in a blackout clause - that any games that have not achieved a minimum crowd guarantee will be blacked out on F2A in that local area. Each club would have a minimum expected attendance rating based on traditional numbers.

That way the onus shifts onto the free to air network to help promote game attendance for next to nothing so they too can get what they want. ;-)

That in conjunction with ticket subsidies will ensure that crowds aren't affected. Believe me, the ARLC aren't going to let 10 and 7 get what they want without addressing this issue.
Sounds good ,but what would Stormcaps family have to say ?
 

Billythekid

First Grade
Messages
6,570
Personally i'm of the opinion that having more games on FTA wouldn't affect crowds much at all. If anything i can see the increased exposure having a positive influence on crowds.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,515
Personally i'm of the opinion that having more games on FTA wouldn't affect crowds much at all. If anything i can see the increased exposure having a positive influence on crowds.

There is a case for this which is pretty much a positive feedback loop.

Check this out if you want to have your mind blown -

Adoption_SFD_ANI.gif
 

gallagher

Juniors
Messages
1,800
Yep, arseholes. They have no idea how many people up in NSW/QLD who flick Fox if there is no RL to watch. God i hope them and Nein lose the rights.
Dont discount non RL states either. Myself and my league mates all have fox but only a few of my alf friends have fox.They dont need it. And despite Foxfooty none of them are considering getting it either.

But if Fox lose NRL then they lose a heap of subscribers in Perth.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,515
For a moment, at risk of starting code war, let's talk about saturation and word of mouth when comparing the two codes in terms of previous levels of coverage.

AFL Victoria -
* 4 games a week on F2A
* Usually 2-3 live, rest on short delay
* Most involving Victorian teams, usually 5-7 a week
* Usually the biggest teams to boost appeal
* The main slots - Friday Night, Saturday News Lead In, Saturday Night, Sunday News Lead In - all covered
* 4 games a week on subscription
* Live
* Picking up the rest of the Victorian content

That is market saturation

NRL NSW -
* 3 games a week on F2A
* 1 live, 1 on 1 hr delay, 1 on 2 hr delay
* Most involving NSW teams, usually 4-5 a week
* Games picked by networks but because they're obliged to pick 1 out of 3 games as QLD team game their second choice is not necessarily the 2nd best pick overall - this usually goes to Foxtel on Monday night
* Only two slots covered - Friday Night, Sunday news lead in
* 5 games on subscription - a smaller audience base than F2A
* Live
* Picking up the remaining content

That is not market saturation

AFL in WA/Sa
* Get 1-2 games a week on F2A that cover their local teams, usually live or on slight delay
* Again similar conditions to AFL in Victoria except in WA's case on F2A they suffer the inevitable timezone delay

Close to market saturation

NRL in QLD
* Get 1 game a week on F2A that usually on covers 1 particular team - the Broncos. Cowboys and Titans mostly restricted to subscription
* Similar conditions to NRL in NSW

Again this is not market saturation

AFL in non heartland areas i.e. NSW & QLD
* Get 3 live games a week on F2A
* Have gotten a delayed game or live digital Friday night game
* The local sides usually shown on F2A most weeks
* Subscription access similar to rest of country
* Significant promotion

This is a market that has already reached saturation point. The potential adopters have already had the access to adopt.

NRL in non heartland areas i.e. WA, SA and VIC
* No guaranteed scheduling arrangements and timeslots on F2A
* The local team typically blacked out on F2A
* Minimal to non existent promotion
* Subscription access similar to rest of country

This is a market that is nowhere near developed

Make of all that what you will.
 

andrew057

First Grade
Messages
7,485
I've said it before, but if Fox arent willing to stump up the cash the game deserves, Id be more than happy to see all games on FTA, even if it means a lower pay day.
 

beave

Coach
Messages
15,562
If fox don't get the NRL rights, watch the subscription rates plummet in NSW and QLD deluxe, we'll see which sport gives you $$$$ you merkins.
 

Canucks

Juniors
Messages
168
the NRL already threatned all games on FTA

can't find the article

How does Fox's first and last rights work? They have first and last rights of refusal for any PAY TV games.... but the NRL don't have to put anything on pay tv..... Is that right?

Imagine Super Saturday on TEN/One or another FTA station..... GWS will pulling 8,000 on Seven Mate or 7two, it will be a joke.... I think a large % of the 60,000 tv ratings the swans pull are sports fans with no choice on FTA....

If anything wall to wall NRL on FTA would be a massive blow to the AFL in NSW & QLD...

Fox Sports can фuck off, don't even buzz them in until they slip $600m under the door.... League is better off without them....
 

babyg

Juniors
Messages
1,512
I hope they are offerring a potential deal to optus. If you want to screw fox offer an alternative. Give fans all fta games and then something like a tbox that gives people NRL whenever they like and access to movies, music, shows to cut to reliance on fox for all the other shit.
 

supera

Juniors
Messages
274
hmmm.

how the crowds turn on Foxtel...

but i'll add my voice - why does tonight's parra vs nth qld game say "Fox Sorts HD" in the top right of the screen when it's clearly not HD?


i don't think we'd be at all better off without Fox Sports. but the notion that they should be paying three times what they are now is correct. yes, subscriptions have no doubt gone up in the last few months because of AFL. but without NRL i doubt fox would even still be viable.
 

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,410
If Fox wants to see what a tsunami of a churning rate will be to their subscriptions, lose rugby league.
Even if a bare minimum 20% of rl viewers cancelled just their sports subs (not the total package,which no doubt many would cancel) they would bleed I suggest a min $30m pa.

Throw in the additional loss of advertising revenue,and the mind boggles.
They need to pick up subs on the AFL to help pay for the new deal.They need rugby league to not only pay for the code,but to further top up the AFL deal.
If they lose rugby league,Fox is going to have financial egg on its face.They need a demand product to remain in place.They do not hold a gun at the head of rugby league this time.They may be pointing a hand gun,but rugby league is aiming a Hellfire missile.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top