Discussion in 'NRL Media Watch' started by Perth Red, Nov 27, 2019.
For all things next tv deal related
Wonder if Optus will try and bid
They took over EPL on the streaming service that failed during Soccer WC
could they afford it? Big difference between $30mill a year and $300mill that nrl would cost
Take the FTA component off Nine and make KO time exactly as advertised, not 15 minutes later.
Not sure what you're trying to say here. Optus had EPL before the FIFA WC, and it worked very well. They just didn't plan well for the rush of new people coming onboard as the WC started, sending their servers/bandwidth to the doghouse. Their coverage of EPL is flawless.
The big difference with NRL would be that they would have to spend a whole lot of money on producing broadcasts, which is very different to rebroadcasting coverage taken from the UK as they do with the EPL.
Optus Sport is more like Netflix than it is Fox Sports.
Odd question. They are the second biggest telco in the country, with revenues of $9 billion. They are also owned by Singtel, a Singaporean company with revenues close to $20 billion a year. Of course they could afford it.
It's not a question of affordability. The question is whether it wants to outlay that much money on sport, and then having to commit even more resources to broadcasting the league using its own operations rather than just rebroadcasting. Spending the amount of money necessary to secure NRL may be seen as a bridge too far management and shareholders. That's why they went for EPL. Much smaller outlay, but with a dedicated enough following to try and grow subscriber base in a desirable demographic.
Trying to wrest away NRL is a different kettle of fish, especially as Fox will fight tooth and nail to keep it all. This would all be positive for the value of the rights. I'm interested to see if the NRL has any desire to make different packages available.
As we've seen in the UK with BT, if a telco wants to jump into the sports ring, it can easily go toe to toe with the competition. BT did this by taking a package of games, with the rest going to Sky Sports. Could we see a similar thing here with multiple rights holders that require paying subscriptions? Who knows.
Small detail, but Optus pay more than $50m for a year EPL. For the sake of NRL, which makes more than $300m a year in the current deal, I would hope that the next figure is closer to $500m, not $300m.
I guess if nrl is serious about its own production it would then be much more open to selling to a number of streaming services in the future. Could see fta, a telco and a streaming service like Netflix all buying rights.
my afford comment was more in regards to ROI, is streaming in 2023 going to return enough subscriptions to justify the massive cost of either of the two main sports?
That’s where fragmentation comes into play.
BT would never have bought all the packages because it’s too big a gamble. You have to test the waters first and then see if it makes sense building on what you have. After getting one package of EPL, BT then blew Sky out of the water in Champ League rights, so they clearly see a future in sports broadcasting.
So the ball is in NRL’s court. Do they open up different packages for bidding, giving exclusivity to different platforms?
If they do, Optus would definitely consider it I reckon as the ROI you mention carries less risk.
If NRL sticks with one or two major partners, then there’s no chance.
There are risks to both approaches, as broadcasters like having exclusivity as well as large inventory of games. And some are prepared to pay more for that exclusivity.
What could be an idea to try in my opinion is to add 2 teams, open up an extra game and timeslot, and have that as a package of its own to allow bidding by anyone.
Hard to say what happens, but EPL has shown that splitting up packages (I think they have 5 different ones) and asking companies to submit private bids for those packages has worked for them. It might be a bit radical in Australia, but it is one way to get smaller streaming broadcasters interested.
Otherwise it is hard to see how anyone breaks Fox’s + whichever FTA partner they go with strangehold on rights.
I hope fox keeps winning everything as it makes it easier for fans to watch anything they want. Fragmentation of subscription services sucks for fans.
Dont understand V'landys comments today about just adding one team for a 17 team comp. I dont see how that would add any value to the tv rights?
Makes no sense
i guess what he is saying is there is more value in a single additional brisbane team than to dilute further for a 9th game, with a franchise likely going to perth. looks like they want to consolidate brisbane before exploring other areas.
conservative option. could give time for exploration of Origin, Tests and Magic weekend to Perth and Adelaide. maybe that is the strategy for those towns long term...magic weekends and origins? before perhaps inclusion later down the track?
personally, if they went brisbane and wellington to keep it east coast/tasman it has travel advantages. and begins to breakdown union a little more and tap that market for players / depth. perth is a solid option but by the looks of things the bar is being set high now.
I don't really see 1 extra club adding any value, the real value is in the extra content, as AFL showed. If anything adding one club brings in byes and we all know how much people hated that pre Titans admission. I very much doubt the WA Govt will be throwing more money at NRL after his statement.
Ex nine man, Gyngell said previously 9 would be prepared to pay an extra $100m for a 2nd Brisbane team. How accurate that was I don't know. Based on recent expansion in non heartland cities, Perth don't offer a lot And would come with a 10 million cost each year.
Neither G. Coast, Suns or the Lions are money spinners for the AFL. The Swans would be but they've been around for almost 40 years.
no, another brisbane team will add to the bottom line in tv, gate and sponsorships. the broncos are saturated and there is an undercurrent of brisbane people who would support an alternative. a game each week at suncorp drawing on average 30k is locking brisbane down and also offsetting the broncos when they have a bad year.
i think perth are hard done by though. there is definitely room for a team there and with the force gone it is almost incumbent upon the NRL to put some kind of winter alternative there, similar to adelaide. the AFL don't have to spend any extra money there developing the game giving them free reign. meanwhile, stats from jason lassey of @footyindustry on twitter suggests the AFL has put $166m over seven years into both GWS and the Suns (not including 2019).
i think that is what the NRL is trying to avoid. and certainly you would think it is not bearing the fruit they'd hoped and the ROI is dreadful. but maybe they can sustain it as they aren't being challenged on any fronts? who knows. the NRL needs a strong Storm-like blueprint to go into Perth, and I think Adelaide too, but there is no one or no consortium standing up and demanding to be heard. certainly not like the voices from Tasmania that want an AFL team etc who have a govt behind them.
Id be interested to know how having a second Brisbane team would generate any extra revenue for TV? Surely it would just be the same people that currently watch NRL in Brisbane continuing to watch? Or do they think there is a 200k people not currently watching NRL as they dont like any of the 16 teams that will now watch as they like the new Brisbane team?
Having the extra content is the money generator for AFL, it really didnt matter what two clubs were added. They used it as an opportunity to invest in increasing the footprint of their game, part of their long term strategy that has been at play for over 20 years. In reality the ninth game has paid for their expansion and then some. In the same way a ninth game generated by Perth and Brisbane2 would give the NRL more content to sell and increase the TV deal.
Those backers have been so jaded by lack of any commitment to expansion over the last ten years they have stopped advocating for it. Better things to do with their time than waste it on an NRL with no vision.
We have had three multi millionaires publicly say they would be willing to back a Perth NRL club. I bet the NRL has never even picked up the phone to any of them.
I think it’s a bit of a stretch to say Optus would take on NRL rights. Let’s face it, Optus Sport don’t really do anything but retransmit someone else’s production i.e. EPL and FIFA events. Also they only have a vested interest in soccer because Allen Lew is a mad fan. It will be interesting to see if they continue their venture post his reign as CEO
Four quarters maybe??
I like that perhaps the leaks are drying up under V'landys
I really do hope that V’landys is using this as a negotiation tactic. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to realize that not only will adding a 17th team not add extra content, but will also stuff up the current bye periods around SOO. But if nine and fox are willing to pay $100-$150 mil more for no extra content that’s their issue. The nrl can then go to market and offer a Perth team and 9th game to anyone else that wants it or do it in house?
I know this seems highly unlikely with V’landys current mood but we can only hope.
look I get what your saying but as the afl and WA Perth reds will attest too, money isn’t the only answer. Support from the government, broadcast & media partners (seven media seems to have Perth locked down), stadium, airfares and CoE facilities are all needed too and some would say are worth more than money.
Yes but that is why the NRL have been looking at bring broadcast production "in House". Whilst it would reduce costs for people like Channel 9 and Fox Sports, it would encourage bids from organisations like Optus as it would just be broadcasting an already premade service just like they do with the EPL.
Separate names with a comma.