What's new
By:
Advanced search…
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

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,370
westerntiger said:
the anti-RL stench in government goes right up to the top. Don't see why WA and SA need their games 'protected' when similar protections don't exist for Qld league viewers (granted Broncos are on Thursday/Friday Night all the time)
Click to expand...
Its an example of the political standing of both sports. AFL is seen as "Australia's" game and to be protected, NRL is seen as Sydneys game and who cares. When was the last time you heard V'landys talk about the game in any area other than Sydney?
 
westerntiger

westerntiger

Juniors
Messages
1,964
Perth Red said:
Its an example of the political standing of both sports. AFL is seen as "Australia's" game and to be protected, NRL is seen as Sydneys game and who cares. When was the last time you heard V'landys talk about the game in any area other than Sydney?
Click to expand...
this communication minister is from Blacktown and she's doing the AFL's bidding. Disgrace.

As for PVL, he's not the best ambassador for the game and a bit of a thug but still better than Greenberg et al
 
C

colly

Juniors
Messages
1,063
westerntiger said:
this communication minister is from Blacktown and she's doing the AFL's bidding. Disgrace.

As for PVL, he's not the best ambassador for the game and a bit of a thug but still better than Greenberg et al
Click to expand...
Seven is at the top of the bid, say $160m cash with $20m contra. Which 'experts' said the AFL deal will be overflowing with contra, as in smoke and mirrors. Anyway the cash part is very important ,Seven has carefully crafted the top amount they are willing to pay. If the have to give way conditions to foxtel, they stated that they will pay LESS. This cover from the Government means the AFL will likely get less money than they originally thought. Why because Foxtel is by far the 'buyer' with the deepest pockets. So if the terms remain unchanged then Foxtel won't increases their bid. Since the broadcast contract is only for broadcasters their is no Telstra waiting in the wings for 2025- onwards ready to hand over $100m for basically nothing. We will see about their $946m 'publicly released' 2024-25 contract where Seven pays a whopping $190m a year. With this in mind why they went from paying $140m a year of cash (original contract) to $117m a year ( NOW) corona contract , to $190m a year next year- 23-24 contract
I suppose Seven paying s $190m a year for 2023-24 however what would be their bid now for the 2025-contract, $200m? And if they are bidding $200m they won't give up ANY conditions and make Seven-Plus a internet mini Kayo- which again means no large increase from the biggest payer Foxtel.

This AFL being the national sport, spare me, they should put Perth Red on No Fly List for the east coast. Notice what States are on the 'east coast of Australia' heard of Pacific Ocean look at a map only NSW and QLD and we want to keep that way.

Westerntiger most of this post is not directed at you but our favorite- well you know who...
 
Last edited:
Perth Red

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,370
colly said:
Seven is at the top of the bid, say $160m cash with $20m contra. Which 'experts' said the AFL deal will be overflowing with contra, as in smoke and mirrors. Anyway the cash part is very important ,Seven has carefully crafted the top amount they are willing to pay. If the have to give way conditions to foxtel, they stated that they will pay LESS. This cover from the Government means the AFL will likely get less money than they originally thought. Why because Foxtel is by far the 'buyer' with the deepest pockets. So if the terms remain unchanged then Foxtel won't increases their bid. Since the broadcast contract is only for broadcasters their is no Telstra waiting in the wings for 2025- onwards ready to hand over $100m for basically nothing. We will see about their $946m 'publicly released' 2024-25 contract where Seven pays a whopping $190m a year. With this in mind why they went from paying $140m a year of cash (original contract) to $117m a year ( NOW) corona contract , to $190m a year next year- 24-25 contract
I suppose Seven paying s $190m a year for 2024-25 however what would be their bid now for the 2025-contract, $200m? And if they are bidding $200m they won't give up ANY conditions and make Seven-Plus a internet mini Kayo- which again means no large increase from the biggest payer Foxtel.

This AFL being the national sport, spare me, they should put Perth Red on No Fly List for the east coast. Notice what States are on the 'east coast of Australia' , NSW and QLD only, and we want to keep that way.

Westerntiger most of this post is not directed at you but our favorite- well you know who.
Click to expand...
blah blah , guess guess.
Tick tock, time will tell if they get more than the NRL's $345-350mill cash it got from its Australian Tv partners.
 
westerntiger

westerntiger

Juniors
Messages
1,964
The NRL needs a huge restructuring of the draw imo. The current arrangement is unfair and ridiculous. This year the Tigers played the Rabbitohs twice in one month. Last year, we played the Bulldogs twice in a month at the end of the season. We need to have every team playing each other twice. Sounds ridiculous but is doable. Could keep the season at 26-27 weeks in length, but have eight mid-week rounds with four games played at the same time on Tuesday and Wednesday nights. One game for each night on Nine, the other three on Fox. Would be good for TV with a lot more games. Coaches can rotate players giving more lower grade players a chance in first grade.

Anyway, laugh away.
 
C

colly

Juniors
Messages
1,063
Perth Red said:
Its an example of the political standing of both sports. AFL is seen as "Australia's" game and to be protected, NRL is seen as Sydneys game and who cares. When was the last time you heard V'landys talk about the game in any area other than Sydney?
Click to expand...
V'landys talk about the game in any area other than Sydney?

Weren't you complaining about Vlandy obsession about adding QLD teams, where a quote from Vlandy said something like this, we ( NRL) want to own QLD, how is that Sydney Centric. Anyway Vlandy talk of Sydney is comparable to the role Sydney plays in the game and were all the big media companies have their HQ.
Over 50% of Australian's reside in NSW and QLD, whereby QLD elevate RL national sport if by going by State of Origin, and old Sydney fans still poke their heads up when the timing right. Like when Ten's of thousands march for the 'bunnies' over the Harbor Bridge.
 
Last edited:
Perth Red

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,370
colly said:
V'landys talk about the game in any area other than Sydney?

Weren't you complaining about Vlandy obsession about adding QLD teams, where a quote from Vlandy said something like this, we ( NRL) want to own QLD, how is that Sydney Centric. Anyway Vlandy talk of Sydney is comparable to the role Sydney plays in the game and were all the big media companies have their HQ.
Over 50% of Australian's reside in NSW and QLD, whereby QLD elevate RL national sport if by going by State of Origin, and old Sydney fans still poke their heads up when the timing right. Like when Ten's of thousands march for the 'bunnies' over the Harbor Bridge.
Click to expand...
Thanks for proving my point, that was 12 months ago and the only time lol
 
Perth Red

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,370
Believe the stereotype, and Australians love sport … and the only thing they love more is watching it free on television.

Indeed, that vision is enshrined in Australian law, which under the so-called anti-siphoning framework prevents sporting events deemed "of national and cultural significance" from being shown on pay-TV before free-to-air stations have had a chance to buy their rights.

It's now safe political territory for both major political parties, though it remains closer to Labor's image as a party for the common people.

Anthony Albanese campaigned on a pledge to keep watching sport free, and new Communications Minister Michelle Rowland yesterday weighed into the multi-billion-dollar negotiations for the rights to broadcast the AFL.

The comments follow reports suggesting the AFL is chasing an even larger deal than its six-year, $2.5 billion arrangement struck in 2015.

And to do so it may wish to appease pay-TV broadcaster Foxtel — or even owners of streaming platforms — in order to extract more money and deliver outgoing CEO Gillon McLachlan a record result.

Some are calling the minister's intervention unprecedented.

David Rowe, Emeritus Professor of Cultural Research at Western Sydney University and perhaps Australia's foremost expert in anti-siphoning law, describes it as "a strategic intervention, a strategic play".

"In some ways you could see this as a political move, because it's a statement to subscription television, which has traditionally been dominated in Australia by the Murdochs in association with Telstra, essentially saying: 'we're the government, we're in charge, we are not going to give up our rights to regulate the market in television in sport. You won't like it, but we don't care'," he said.
While deeply embedded, the habit of Australians devouring nation-defining sport on TV will not be around for long.

Research from Free TV Australia — the organisation representing the interests of commercial TV companies — suggests three quarters of Australians agree that free-to-air television ensures Australians have access to iconic sporting events.

But the Netflix generation has well and truly arrived.

For the first time ever, ACMA reported in June there are more people (58 per cent in a given week in 2020-21) watching online subscription video services than there are watching free-to-air television (54 per cent).
Ms Rowland said the government's upcoming review into the anti-siphoning scheme "will give stakeholders and the public the opportunity to share their views on which events should be on the list, and how the scheme should work".

Changing consumption habits are no doubt undermining the functioning of the scheme, and putting more events on the list may further entrench the influence of commercial networks.

But the anti-siphoning list stands as a legislated statement of the sporting events that matter to Australians.

There's irony then, that such an intervention would arrive just as the new season of the AFLW launches.
The significant bias towards men's sport on the list is impossible to ignore in 2022.

For fans of the AFLW, Ms Rowland's surprise intervention — while perhaps unprecedented — could be seen as a missed opportunity.

RL where it fits in anti syphoning law

5 Rugby league football(1) Each match in the National Rugby League Premiership competition (including the Finals Series).
(2) Each match in the National Rugby League State of Origin Series.
(3) Each international rugby league test match that:
(a) involves the senior Australian representative team; and
(b) is played in Australia or New Zealand.
(4) Each match of the Rugby League World Cup that:
(a) involves the senior Australian representative team; and
(b) is played in Australia, New Zealand or Papua New Guinea.

www.abc.net.au

'Strategic intervention' against Murdoch by minister in chase for AFL rights, but there's one thing missing

The government has issued a stern warning to the AFL and those pursuing the rights to broadcast matches, but the next TV deal is only the start of a tense era in Australian sport.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top