2023-2028 next tv deal discussion

[LeagueXIII]

TBF to News Ltd they havent played this out in the media. Ch9 has done so. I havent seen any comment at all from Fox directly re the TV deal.

No they haven't, you'd have to wonder why.

However the end result has been great for them. Not being cynical of course.

 

[Perth Red]

Vlandys justifying accepting less money despite a contract being in place.
So we've cut them some slack and taken a revenue hit because both companies dont want to pay as much as they agreed to. And we got what for this act of generosity?

Would ch9 really have refused to pay the three years of the contract and fought it out in court? Hmmm.
Looks like Vlandys getting advice from Murdoch certainly worked for them. 7 years on less money, good deal if you can get it.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sp...s/news-story/b44fbf0c6f8fe0e5d3a1826808a9d534

 

[Phil McGrawhan]

What don't you understand .
It's mind boggling how dumb you are .

 

[Perth Red]

What don't you understand .
It's mind boggling how dumb you are .

I understand well enough, we just got screwed.

 

[Foreign Legion]

I'm so confused was a good deal or bad deal for the NRL?

 

[Perth Red]

I'm so confused was a good deal or bad deal for the NRL?

Subjective
Some think it was a good deal because we ran the risk of Ch9 not paying anything (yeh right lol) and we got a 5 year extension off Fox (a bird in the hand etc)
Others bad deal as we have accepted less money for the last two years of the contract than was agreed and we have given Fox long term rights for less money than last time without any sort of competitive tender process

 

[Phil McGrawhan]

Subjective
Some think it was a good deal because we ran the risk of Ch9 not paying anything (yeh right lol) and we got a 5 year extension off Fox (a bird in the hand etc)
Others bad deal as we have accepted less money for the last two years of the contract than was agreed and we have given Fox long term rights for less money than last time without any sort of competitive tender process

See if you can answer these questions
How long would the NRL been able to fund a court battle with 9 over the contract?
even if a decision was made within a month it would be appealed by whichever side lost....hence more $$$$ ..more lost time
If if went to court would the game be restarting this week?
Lol don't think so
So where does the money come from to Keep the game alive at NRL level if bogged down in court ?

You seem to live in some mythical reality where the NRL has endless Cash reserves to fight against media companies
You seem to think that there were other media companies lining up to get the rights
There weren't .
So you do a deal with the ones you have
Who are also bleeding $$$$$.

What can't you understand ..this situation has changed everything ..for all sports so you make the best of it the best way you can .
You seem to think the NRl has the superior position in this .
They don't

 

[taipan]

I understand well enough, we just got screwed.

Judging by your broadcast expectations, you think there is no pandemic in existence .And the economy is just rolling along smoothly.
Advertising revenue for the month of April on TV is down 30% for TV.
Wait til your fave code AFL has to accept a lesser deal from their broadcasters.Wait til they start chopping head office staff.
Everyone is hurting financially ,yet you continue to live in this wonderland of utopia continues to exist.

"We got screwed ",then fill us in with the details of the actuals ,advise us then how better offers could be secured and what teh figures should be, and tell us how these TV stations are financing their huge debts and covering annual losses.

 

[LeagueXIII]

well if that is the case fulfil the next three years start negotiations on an extension next year when all has settled, not when everyone is panicking about the pandemic.

Unless agendas were at play.

Never waste a crisis, big business sure didn't.

 

[Foreign Legion]

... we could be worse, we could be union.

 

[colly]

Subjective
Some think it was a good deal because we ran the risk of Ch9 not paying anything (yeh right lol) and we got a 5 year extension off Fox (a bird in the hand etc)
Others bad deal as we have accepted less money for the last two years of the contract than was agreed and we have given Fox long term rights for less money than last time without any sort of competitive tender process

Well it is disappointing that we had to except less for the TV contract.

Some random points.

First the NRL contract with Nine is a five year contract stipulating a total amount and on yearly basis with some variations ie pay back loans ect. So when the NRL was cancelled due to corona virus it would be called a breach of contract by the NRL. Many times a negotiated new contract can come to pass or failing that court action or some part of partial contract obligation while awaiting court action.

When the 'breach' occurs' it allows all parts of a contract to faithfully renegotiated. Nine could accept less this year and pay/return to the original contract amount for the final years. However they don't have to take this route. The contract is not five separate year contracts for the years of operation. Nine is well with-in it's rights to re-negotiated the contract including the out years 2021-2022. I would say this is thee normal course of events. ( I think the next football season ( 2021) starts in less than 10 months, what if crowds are still not back/and or some teams have to go into isolation due to catching corona virus.)

Court action and appeals can last years and this one with millions to be contested will go one for years if their is a dispute.

Chanel nine threatened to rip up contract ( however it was US/NRL that caused the first breach by not presenting our product and in a way that would be popular/Tv ratings. This course of action terminating the contract, Nine would be logical as they don't make any money on it (130 million) because they don't have exclusive games and that 400,000 extra views would make the advertising profitable.

Channel 10 are a basket case. Their CEO doesn't read the papers otherwise he would call League Central willing to take on Nines obligations- Ch 10 are third raters always. Have they ever won yearly rating award. No.?

So Nine says lets book 130 million dollar cost saving because the adverting market is shit this year- ie rip the contract- Court case coming but their legal advice is solid they can win somewhat..

So we NRL have to go to SBS, are No. ABC, well no again. Ch 10 would be our only chance. How much are they going to pay knowing nobody else will put in a commercial offer. So Ch 10 will low ball us 30/40 million for the lot maybe lower as they (Ch 10) nobody else can bid- because the only other party has the AFL and we are fighting Nine in court. See what happened to Rugby Union with no free to air and how they over estimated their position AND should have negotiated instead of betting the house on red!
CERTAINTY comes at a price.


So the NRL is in shit position and can't dictate to Nine. I haven't given any thought to the Foxtel angle and will wait to see the revised dollar amounts.

 

[Cactus]

So when the NRL was cancelled due to corona virus it would be called a breach of contract by the NRL.

That is just not correct at all.

 

[Perth Red]

Not privy to how it was worded but a contract of this magnitude SHOULD have had a force majeure clause. This USUALLY is written in a way that allows either party to suspend the contract during periods of extreme circumstance beyond their control until the event has passed and normal business can resume. If the tv contract did not have this then someone has seriously fcked up! ch9 could have demanded the contract be ripped up Under a doctrine of frustration but given the nature of what has caused the nrl to be unable to meet the contract temporarily it would be a long shot for them, not to mention they lose their golden goose forever and good luck to them without a major sport.

We can play hypotheticals forever but the fact is we have just a lost a significant amount in revenue, possibly for no good reason other than some fear about what might happen. For a fearless leader Vlandys doesn’t look that brave to me on this one. only hope now is we got something worthwhile in return but there has been zero rumour that nrl has won anything in all this.

 

[Phil McGrawhan]

Fear of what might happen .
Jesus h
Are you on another planet .
Shit is happenening ..now
What don't you get that there is a pandemic affecting sport ...near every sport on Earth .
Affecting the media companies .

I could explain it to A 5 yr old & they would understand it better than you do .

 

[colly]

Not privy to how it was worded but a contract of this magnitude SHOULD have had a force majeure clause. This USUALLY is written in a way that allows either party to suspend the contract during periods of extreme circumstance beyond their control until the event has passed and normal business can resume. If the tv contract did not have this then someone has seriously fcked up! ch9 could have demanded the contract be ripped up Under a doctrine of frustration but given the nature of what has caused the nrl to be unable to meet the contract temporarily it would be a long shot for them, not to mention they lose their golden goose forever and good luck to them without a major sport.

We can play hypotheticals forever but the fact is we have just a lost a significant amount in revenue, possibly for no good reason other than some fear about what might happen. For a fearless leader Vlandys doesn’t look that brave to me on this one. only hope now is we got something worthwhile in return but there has been zero rumour that nrl has won anything in all this.

Sports legal opinion I found. -It seems the burden is upon the NRL when force majeure occurs, so Nine are in the stronger position.

Because force majeure clauses are the product of commercial agreement, the scope and effect of a force majeure clause is determined on a case-by-case basis, by reference to the wording of the clause and the relevant facts. That said, there is a range of jurisprudence on force majeure clauses that is relevant and important (particularly in the context of a pandemic situation), including:

• The party that relies upon the force majeure event generally has the burden of proof of the event itself[9]. Similarly, these clauses will be subject to the contra proferentem rule and, as such, the force majeure clause will be construed strictly. In the event of ambiguity, it will interpreted against the interests of the party that relies upon it.[10]

https://corrs.com.au/insights/legal...ak-on-contracts-force-majeure-and-frustration

So Nine don't have to call force majeure, it is the NRL who has too. They haven't supplied product.

A seller of generic goods is not usually relieved, even by a force majeure clause, from a duty to appropriate such goods simply because a particular source of supply becomes unavailable or there is a shortage of materials, especially if it can be overcome at a cost[12];

Nine can point to the breach of contract (ie no games/not in appropriate dates/time ) to terminate the contract entirely without consequence OR renegotiate the contract. Nine is in the box seat on this situation. We can only negotiate from a position of weakness. Come to think of this Foxtel would hold the same legal cards as Nine. Our only saving (legal/ contractual)grace is the NEED of Foxtel for our product/game. Still again the contract can be nogiated- and the counterpoint Foxtel to NRL is if you don't sell to us, who pays 190 million pa. At this stage, Zero.

 

[taipan]

well if that is the case fulfil the next three years start negotiations on an extension next year when all has settled, not when everyone is panicking about the pandemic.

Unless agendas were at play.

Never waste a crisis, big business sure didn't.

The Federal Govt has stated the economy will be in a very weakened state for the next 5 years.This when the pandemic has done see ya later.

Already advertising revenue for Tv stations is continuing to take a big hit, and they are living ATM on huge debts.Current NRL sponsorship will also take hits when contracts fall due.Business now are falling over ,or being reduced in numbers, not coming back.Tourism in Queensland is taking a massive hit, with quite a few businesses never to return.Banks have large numbers of doubtful debts and growing.Unemployment is going to remain at high levels.

So you are quite comfortable to wait for the next 3 years under the above circumstances, whilst Tv stations are in even deeper crap and expect to get a deal that equates to what has (in the case of Foxtel )negotiated now.Who knows what 9 will do, as they continue to suck up to AFL.ch7 and 10 I thought they would be stronger ,they also have debt and limitations.

By doing this ,you are somehow able to tell your admin staff ,the clubs and players, oh we know our revenue will be X dollars to 2022 whilst the economy is crap, but whilst it continues to be crap ,well we can all sit around and whistle dixie, but we cannot provide revenue certainty from 2023.

The NRL is big business and we as fans are stakeholders.I don't want any club cut, though there will be cuts in H/O staff, and if their agenda is to survive and be around with the same clubs and expanded ones also for the next 50-100 years, and as their agenda is to underpin their security with long term contracts then IMO go for it.

Waiting for something(in less than 3 years) that almost certainly won't eventuate in times of this UNPRECEDENTED global disaster, is just plain economic folly.

People whether employees /football players want a degree of security not for the short term.

 

[taipan]

Not privy to how it was worded but a contract of this magnitude SHOULD have had a force majeure clause. This USUALLY is written in a way that allows either party to suspend the contract during periods of extreme circumstance beyond their control until the event has passed and normal business can resume. If the tv contract did not have this then someone has seriously fcked up! ch9 could have demanded the contract be ripped up Under a doctrine of frustration but given the nature of what has caused the nrl to be unable to meet the contract temporarily it would be a long shot for them, not to mention they lose their golden goose forever and good luck to them without a major sport.

We can play hypotheticals forever but the fact is we have just a lost a significant amount in revenue, possibly for no good reason other than some fear about what might happen. For a fearless leader Vlandys doesn’t look that brave to me on this one. only hope now is we got something worthwhile in return but there has been zero rumour that nrl has won anything in all this.

I understand now,I have a distant memory of you inferring the current pandemic and its financial implications was no worse than the 2008 GFC.It is not a hypothetical, the 5m who contracted it and the 300k plus have died is not hypothetical, that is the health impact ,which then has hugely impacted the economies of every country on this rock.

Now I understand Perth is a long way from Canberra, but it appears from your imaginative expectations on what the NRL should have done on TV deals, that city may as well be a landing spot on Pluto.

Because ignoring the realities of what is going on in this country and beyond ,is living in Disneyland.

Did you expect not to lose a significant amount of revenue , based on what is happening in this world, or do you live in the next world?
Did you expect Luigi the Unbelieveable to deliver the same Tv deal as before?

Would it be within the realms of chance, to actually await the outcome of the TV deal, the 2020 NRL accounts, the 2020 NRL season on the field to evaluate the decisions that were made, and whether V'Landys is a hero or the Joker from batman.
Also end 2022 you can look at the economy and formulate an opinion ,whether the NRL, did the right thing.

If V'Landys had sat back and waited to negotiate, you'd still whinge, of course if it had been Dave Smith doing the same whilst he had been here 6 months, you would have lauded his foresight.

Greenberg was perpetually bagged by you, then when he got the flick he did no wrong.

 

[Cactus]

Sports legal opinion I found. -It seems the burden is upon the NRL when force majeure occurs, so Nine are in the stronger position.

Because force majeure clauses are the product of commercial agreement, the scope and effect of a force majeure clause is determined on a case-by-case basis, by reference to the wording of the clause and the relevant facts. That said, there is a range of jurisprudence on force majeure clauses that is relevant and important (particularly in the context of a pandemic situation), including:

• The party that relies upon the force majeure event generally has the burden of proof of the event itself[9]. Similarly, these clauses will be subject to the contra proferentem rule and, as such, the force majeure clause will be construed strictly. In the event of ambiguity, it will interpreted against the interests of the party that relies upon it.[10]

https://corrs.com.au/insights/legal...ak-on-contracts-force-majeure-and-frustration

So Nine don't have to call force majeure, it is the NRL who has too. They haven't supplied product.

A seller of generic goods is not usually relieved, even by a force majeure clause, from a duty to appropriate such goods simply because a particular source of supply becomes unavailable or there is a shortage of materials, especially if it can be overcome at a cost[12];

Nine can point to the breach of contract (ie no games/not in appropriate dates/time ) to terminate the contract entirely without consequence OR renegotiate the contract. Nine is in the box seat on this situation. We can only negotiate from a position of weakness. Come to think of this Foxtel would hold the same legal cards as Nine. Our only saving (legal/ contractual)grace is the NEED of Foxtel for our product/game. Still again the contract can be nogiated- and the counterpoint Foxtel to NRL is if you don't sell to us, who pays 190 million pa. At this stage, Zero.

A quantum leap to conclusion based upon a cut and paste job from a legal google search.

So I will make some points to help bring back some sense to this and take issue with the repeated notion on this forum that 9 & or Fox are in a position of power over the NRL in the broadcast renegotiation. That is just straight up BS.

The facts are that we don't know what the specific clauses in the contract are. It has been stated in the papers that a force majeure clause does exist. It may have a specific pandemic clause or it may not. We dont know. Even if it does not mention pandemic specifically the NRL can easily rely on an Act of Government for relief and then Frustration for relief then the failure of 9/Fox to supply a breach notice to the NRL and then ultimately the NRL could reply on the fact that 9 was in breach of contract itself.

People keep wrongly thinking the NRL was in breach however the only party to the contract that stated they were unwilling to comply (in the media no less) with the contract was Channel bloody 9

The real issue here is that neither party wanted to take this through the court system and found a way through negotiation to find a path forward.

By the way, the legal opinion you have put there is a generic one and would appear to be more applicable to the supply of generic goods and services rather than a sports broadcast contract. It offers this "A seller of generic goods is not usually relieved". Well that hardly applies to the NRL not being able to supply irreplaceable 1st class footballers as a direct result of Government prevention caused by a pandemic.

 

[Perth Red]

I understand now,I have a distant memory of you inferring the current pandemic and its financial implications was no worse than the 2008 GFC.It is not a hypothetical, the 5m who contracted it and the 300k plus have died is not hypothetical, that is the health impact ,which then has hugely impacted the economies of every country on this rock.

Now I understand Perth is a long way from Canberra, but it appears from your imaginative expectations on what the NRL should have done on TV deals, that city may as well be a landing spot on Pluto.

Because ignoring the realities of what is going on in this country and beyond ,is living in Disneyland.

Did you expect not to lose a significant amount of revenue , based on what is happening in this world, or do you live in the next world?
Did you expect Luigi the Unbelieveable to deliver the same Tv deal as before?

Would it be within the realms of chance, to actually await the outcome of the TV deal, the 2020 NRL accounts, the 2020 NRL season on the field to evaluate the decisions that were made, and whether V'Landys is a hero or the Joker from batman.
Also end 2022 you can look at the economy and formulate an opinion ,whether the NRL, did the right thing.

If V'Landys had sat back and waited to negotiate, you'd still whinge, of course if it had been Dave Smith doing the same whilst he had been here 6 months, you would have lauded his foresight.

Greenberg was perpetually bagged by you, then when he got the flick he did no wrong.

that’s a lot of speculation and usual cheap shot bs from you lol. Maybe the country will be in the crapper end of next year, or maybe it won’t. End of day the tv companies had a contract, they have only missed a few weeks of content. Giving them what is sounding like a great deal for them at expense of what should be guaranteed nrl revenue Is a hell of a nice thing to do by Vlandys. If, as you claim, tv is going to be so badly effected, why have fox pushed so hard for a major extension? Seems to me they are quiet confident in the next 7 years?

 

[taipan]

that’s a lot of speculation and usual cheap shot bs from you lol. Maybe the country will be in the crapper end of next year, or maybe it won’t. End of day the tv companies had a contract, they have only missed a few weeks of content. Giving them what is sounding like a great deal for them at expense of what should be guaranteed nrl revenue Is a hell of a nice thing to do by Vlandys. If, as you claim, tv is going to be so badly effected, why have fox pushed so hard for a major extension? Seems to me they are quiet confident in the next 7 years?

When there is a pandemic that has happened, the economy is in deep you know what,that is not a hypothetical.
We have a huge debt that is not a hypothetical.We have high unemployment and businesses shutting down cutting back ,that is not a hypothetical.
Governments, economists, business people, the World bank etc have all stated the economies are going to take 5-10 years to get back to normality, do you ignore the view of that mob, or suggest it's only speculation?

So when an NRL guy with a Chartered Accounting background, who has experience in negotiating deals with Govt and TV in the past for racing, is able to get the game up and running despite much laughter ,and has had under the current circumstances and ongoing Australian economic problems negotiated an expected lower broadcast deal, you have bagged him for doing so.Without knowing the actual deal ,the actual financial situation of the broadcasters, that force majeure is unknown.

In all honesty to expect the current deal to remain in place, under the economic effects of a world wide pandemic, when the broadcast organisations are in huge debt, and the NRL is running out of money ,and was getting $13m per weekend, to ignore these facts expect some ridicule, just as you ridicule those involved in the TV dealing.
The" few weeks of content missed "have cost the NRL tens of millions of dollars.That"ain't" chickenfeed.

But if you don't know the actual deal for Fox and you don't know the revenue security for the NRL, how can you form an opinion as to it being to the advantage of only one party?

Foxtel is churning subscribers big time, they have a huge debt and Murdoch has had to throw in large sums to stop the bleeding.Foxtel has paid the bulk of broadcasting revenue and still does.They need long term NRL commitment for ad revenue and subscriptions.The NRL needs their major revenue provider to be in existence tlong termite give them(NRL) long term revenue security.Murdoch love or loath him, always pays his bills.I wouldn't trust 9 ,as it could end up like decades ago, when they went down the tube.
If there wass a time to bitch about any NRL TV deal, it's when Gallop boasted about getting Australia's biggest $500m over 6 years, then the AFL threw down a full house of TV cards $780m over 5 years.

I'll form opinions about V'Landys end of 2020 and end of 2022(to see the new FTA deal).You choose the cart before the horse, so be it.

We as a code have had more positive,and a fair swag of negative publicity since I can remember by media this year.Guess what we'd have killed for that on the past.Even overseas media is getting in on the act.
With some of the numpties running NRL in the past, you had to organise a search party to get any positivity.