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!

2023-2028 next tv deal discussion

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
53,830
yeah theres that too
so it was never 473 anyway as telstra are not a TV provider
the small increase can only be based on 423 mill PA to be accurate
make you’re mind up, not long ago there was argument on here telstra aren’t paying anything and no way it’s $473mill, now it’s $473 and telstra are paying $50mill, but shouldn’t be counted Lol.

I do agree the majority of the deal with telstra is for sponsorship and digital platform rights, they still do have some online streaming rights, though. Still $423mill from Australian tv v $370mill the nrl will get from Australian tv in 23/24 is still a massive gap in the way the codes are being valued in this country. when you factor in cash value the gap is likely going to be even bigger.
 
Messages
3,224
make you’re mind up, not long ago there was argument on here telstra aren’t paying anything and no way it’s $473mill, now it’s $473 and telstra are paying $50mill, but shouldn’t be counted Lol.

I do agree the majority of the deal with telstra is for sponsorship and digital platform rights, they still do have some online streaming rights, though. Still $423mill from Australian tv v $370mill the nrl will get from Australian tv in 23/24 is still a massive gap in the way the codes are being valued in this country. when you factor in cash value the gap is likely going to be even bigger.
its 423 mill V 403 mill
for TV in total
for our 8 games a week V their 9
 

The_Wookie

Juniors
Messages
1,747
Well the BROADCAST MEDIA $473 is PROVED wrong by the case that Telstra most likely pays $50 to the AFL for the extension ( for commercially what) but that Telstra $50 million should not be counted in the broadcaster media contract, because Telstra isn't a broadcaster. So th AFL just change the definition of broadcast contract to include Telstra, so the $473 figure.... is.......$50m less because it is NOT PART OF THE BROADCAST MEDIA AGREEMENT>
Finally the reporter's statement of $946/$473m, "publicly released " sounds like skepticism or pushing off blame if the $473 turns out to be incorrect which technically is ( see above) The dick measuring contest was about broadcast media contracts , lets see what they get.

Its not PROVEN anything. This is an assumption made here based on your BELIEF that this is the case. There is literally NO literature that supports any of this.

Never mind that it has been included in *checks notes* the media rights agreements for more than a decade.
 

colly

Juniors
Messages
911
make you’re mind up, not long ago there was argument on here telstra aren’t paying anything and no way it’s $473mill, now it’s $473 and telstra are paying $50mill, but shouldn’t be counted Lol.

I do agree the majority of the deal with telstra is for sponsorship and digital platform rights, they still do have some online streaming rights, though. Still $423mill from Australian tv v $370mill the nrl will get from Australian tv in 23/24 is still a massive gap in the way the codes are being valued in this country. when you factor in cash value the gap is likely going to be even bigger.
What are going on about excluding Sky NZ broadcast money. It's NOT the NRL fault nobody internationally interested to pay $$$ to AFL. So in the NRL broadcast agreements it's over $400 million for the NRL not your ridiculous $360m
 

colly

Juniors
Messages
911
Its not PROVEN anything. This is an assumption made here based on your BELIEF that this is the case. There is literally NO literature that supports any of this.

Never mind that it has been included in *checks notes* the media rights agreements for more than a decade.
No your wrong, it was correct to put Telstra in when they streamed live broadcasts of the AFL. They don't do that anymore, that's why Telstra should not be counted in the broadcast media contracts.
 

The_Wookie

Juniors
Messages
1,747
No your wrong, it was correct to put Telstra in when they streamed live broadcasts of the AFL. They don't do that anymore, that's why Telstra should not be counted in the broadcast media contracts.

You should let the people who do the media rights contracting that they are also wrong to have included Telstra so they can spare your feelings
 

The_Wookie

Juniors
Messages
1,747
the NRL doesn't include their telstra monies in their... TV ...rights deal
they're not in the business of misleading everyone

Thats because their deal with Telstra is primarily a naming rights premiership season sponsorship. Telstra not included in the media rights announcement either.

And just because you buy whatever is being spun out of NRLHQ like its holy writ doesnt mean they arent capable of misleading everyone...and who would know in any case - broadcast revenue is completely opaque these days
 
Last edited:

colly

Juniors
Messages
911
You should let the people who do the media rights contracting that they are also wrong to have included Telstra so they can spare your feelings
Heard anything about Telstra executives in the 'now' broadcast mediia negotiations. We have heard sources say this about Foxtel, ie want super Saturday and Seven saying they want streaming rights, but nothing about what Telstra (if any) are going to pay.
 

The_Wookie

Juniors
Messages
1,747
Heard anything about Telstra executives in the 'now' broadcast mediia negotiations. We have heard sources say this about Foxtel, ie want super Saturday and Seven saying they want streaming rights, but nothing about what Telstra (if any) are going to pay.

Nothing from Telstra at this time. That said, we havent really heard anything from Telstra in the past either. They tend to just be there at the signing. i mean if they are gettng the rights to replays and highlights and the AFL network, they actually dont care what the broadcast and streaming guys are doing.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
53,830
its 423 mill V 403 mill
for TV in total
for our 8 games a week V their 9
It is, kind of, but it still begs the question why Australian tv values afl at $53mill a year more than nrl. cant Be due to 18 afl australian clubs v 16 nrl Australian clubs as I keep hearing that 4 of the afls aren’t worth anything. is one extra game worth $53mill? And if yes then why the frick haven’t we brought one in by now?


What are going on about excluding Sky NZ broadcast money. It's NOT the NRL fault nobody internationally interested to pay $$$ to AFL. So in the NRL broadcast agreements it's over $400 million for the NRL not your ridiculous $360m
Value to Australian tv, keep up! If we were as valuable to Australian tv as afl then the skynz deal would be pushing us way ahead of them. Instead we are going to sit $53mill behind in Australian value and $21mill (if you want to take all the afl telstra deal out) overall for two years, and very possible even more for a further three. When you factor in cash value it is likely to be even greater, potentially an extra $10-15mill on top of that. We are on track to have the biggest cash gap since the arlc took over.
 
Last edited:

colly

Juniors
Messages
911
It is, kind of, but it still begs the question why Australian tv values afl at $53mill a year more than nrl. cant Be due to 18 afl australian clubs v 16 nrl Australian clubs as I keep hearing that 4 of the afls aren’t worth anything. is one extra game worth $53mill? And if yes then why the frick haven’t we brought one in by now?



Value to Australian tv, keep up! If we were as valuable to Australian tv as afl then the skynz deal would be pushing us way ahead of them. Instead we are going to sit $53mill behind in Australian value and $21mill (if you want to take all the afl telstra deal out) overall for two years, and very possible even more for a further three. When you factor in cash value it is likely to be even greater, potentially an extra $10-15mill on top of that. We are on track to have the biggest cash gap since the arlc took over.
Yout the only one making thiis distintion, wonder why. Sky NZ is part of this broadcast agreement. Adjust your figures.
 

The Penguin #6.

Juniors
Messages
485
It is, kind of, but it still begs the question why Australian tv values afl at $53mill a year more than nrl. cant Be due to 18 afl australian clubs v 16 nrl Australian clubs as I keep hearing that 4 of the afls aren’t worth anything. is one extra game worth $53mill? And if yes then why the frick haven’t we brought one in by now?
Despite the NRL averaging 70 000 + more viewers per game than fumbleball the difference in value between the two Tv deals obviously comes down to the greater spread ; dominant in three capital cities ( Melb. Perth, Adel. you could throw in Hobart ) and small but solid figures in QLD and NSW.
The other factor is of course the people watching the respective sports. Both have their lower socio-economic demographic fanbase, but I`d say fumbleball`s fan base definitely reaches more consistently in to higher income brackets.
These things aren`t set in stone, apparently the 15k crowds that Toronto Wolfpack got at their home games cut across all socio-economic groups - no preconceived notions in Toronto who goes to a League match.
There are things League could do to address this and the reaction to the pride jersey furore shows they are trying but certainly a lot of the media coverage of the game still idolises the thugs i.e. Tallis, Geyer and Roach and the nufty good blokes i.e. Johns, Smith, Vautin.
Value to Australian tv, keep up! If we were as valuable to Australian tv as afl then the skynz deal would be pushing us way ahead of them. Instead we are going to sit $53mill behind in Australian value and $21mill (if you want to take all the afl telstra deal out) overall for two years, and very possible even more for a further three. When you factor in cash value it is likely to be even greater, potentially an extra $10-15mill on top of that. We are on track to have the biggest cash gap since the arlc took over.
The ARLC should squirm if this looks like going the way it is.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
53,830
Yout the only one making thiis distintion, wonder why. Sky NZ is part of this broadcast agreement. Adjust your figures.
Because I’m the only one who wants to compare apples and apples, and ask the question “why does Australian tv value nrl significantly less Than afl?”
Including Skynz masks the reality for the game here in australia And what it needs to do to close the gap. Skynz should see us hammering afl for media revenue, if Australian tv was equal.
 
Messages
15,315
Mate your arguing something you have zero idea if true or not. You’re going to know in a week or two, let’s just wait and see Then you can say told you so or you can slink away looking a tool.
Lol x 1000000000
you have taken every bit of afl speculation as gospel.
because it suits your anti PVL agenda
& makes you feel warm & fuzzy over your beloved afl .
 
Top