2023-2028 next tv deal discussion

[Wb1234]

Ok I disagree with that assertion but let’s compare the TV deals then under your presumptions. Our TV deal is what $370m cash (including radio) and about $30 odd million contra. So the difference is only $130m cash then in your estimations - is that a heap better for you? Have we still not undersold our rights in this comparison?

Nrl current tv deal 400 million cash
Afl current tv deal approx 415 million cash

revised afl tv deal 470 million cash (max 500 million )

revised nrl deal ???

 

[Colk]

Nrl current tv deal 400 million cash
Afl current tv deal approx 415 million cash

revised afl tv deal 470 million cash (max 500 million )

revised nrl deal ???

So you’re now suggesting the current NRL deal is 100% cash are you?

Also there are no reports of the AFL deal being $470m cash. You’re continually revising it down. Next you’ll say the cash amount is miraculously even.

 

[Wb1234]

So you’re suggesting the current deal is 100% cash are you?

Also there are no reports of the AFL deal being $470m cash. None whatsoever.

Those are the cash figures reported

I think there’s another 15 or 20 million contra on top max

if you don’t think right now the two deals are very similar then I don’t know what your thought processes are

 

[Colk]

Those are the cash figures reported

I think there’s another 15 or 20 million contra on top max

if you don’t think right now the two deals are very similar then I don’t know what your thought processes are

No it hasn’t. If it has and I have every article about this, then forward me the actual articles which clearly state this is the case.

The NRL deal reported was “over” $400m. There is no mention of the cash vs contra split nor even a final amount. Suffice to say there would be some contra amount and also suffice to say that if the deal was closer to five than four they would say close to five.

There are also multiple reports after it was announced that the cash part of fumbleball’s deal is at least $550m cash. If it was $470m cash (and it isn’t) that would suggest that the Telstra portion plus contra would be $173m?

 

[The_Wookie]

Nrl current tv deal 400 million cash
Afl current tv deal approx 415 million cash

revised afl tv deal 470 million cash (max 500 million )

revised nrl deal ???

The NRLs deal is "more than 400m" pa. Theres no detail regarding contra or not in the total for that announcement.

However, Nine confirmed in the NRL announcement that its share of the deal includes contra, ad its been reported that the NZ deal contains a lot of contra. As usual Fox not mentioned.

The AFLs current deal (originally to 2022) is about 400m cash from 418m total before COVID discounts. (In 2019 it was 397m, down to 352m in 2020 and 366m in actual broadcast revenue last year, probably coming in about close to 380m this year). The AFL has a revised deal for 2023-2024 that increased the total beyond the 2018 -2019 arrangement from 418m to 476m pa (inc contra), which probably means its cash is - without Telstra - for 2023-2024 about 420m pa. From 2025, its 550m pa without Telstra included (and 571m with).

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Aren't Ch9 are paying $115 cash and $15m contra per annum between 23-28?

Contra in 21 from all broadcasters was around $25m. My guess is it'll be somewhere between that and $35m per annum between 23-28.

Arguing with @Wb1234 and @Iamback is futile. They're just trolling.

 

[docbrown]

The following post will probably piss everyone off but here goes. The AFL got more for a variety of reasons. You have to consider that they have 18 teams in Australia playing 9 games a week with 27 hours of weekly game content. The NRL has 15 teams in Australia playing 8 games a week with 16 hours of weekly game content. That's just reality. There are also other factors that are both cons and pros for both leagues -- like metro market reach - the NRL doesn't have teams in Perth or Adelaide. Or season length which favours the NRL. There are game overlaps that affect AFL moreso and even marquee events like State of Origin attract their own value. Competitive tension also affects things - not every wannabe broadcaster has the funds to buy AFL and NRL matches. All of those differences affect things like ad rates and subscriber numbers and therefore the final amounts. But both leagues are now in their own strata when it comes to sports rights in this country.

The point is - there's no simple formula for calculating what the rights should be. So anyone on here acting otherwise should be taken with a grain of salt. You're commenting on complex negotiations but with the power of hindsight but it doesn't make you an expert. I don't care if you're an AFL fan trolling a Rugby League site whose only qualification is running a website that steals ratings data from elsewhere or an NRL fan blindly loyal to current management who can't handle criticism or an NRL fan who shits on management at every turn because of some other petty grievance. You aren't in the room during these negotiations and there really is nothing to talk about now until the NRL makes firm expansion plans. It's fine to speculate about the future but if your plan is to bitching and moan and troll about what's done and can't be undone for the next few years, I have to say I feel sorry that you don't have much else going on in your lives.

But hey guys, go back to measuring your dicks if it makes you happy. Just don't pretend that you're John Holmes though.

 

[Iamback]

The following post will probably piss everyone off but here goes. The AFL got more for a variety of reasons. You have to consider that they have 18 teams in Australia playing 9 games a week with 27 hours of weekly game content. The NRL has 15 teams in Australia playing 8 games a week with 16 hours of weekly game content. That's just reality. There are also other factors that are both cons and pros for both leagues -- like metro market reach - the NRL doesn't have teams in Perth or Adelaide. Or season length which favours the NRL. There are game overlaps that affect AFL moreso and even marquee events like State of Origin attract their own value. Competitive tension also affects things - not every wannabe broadcaster has the funds to buy AFL and NRL matches. All of those differences affect things like ad rates and subscriber numbers and therefore the final amounts. But both leagues are now in their own strata when it comes to sports rights in this country.

The point is - there's no simple formula for calculating what the rights should be. So anyone on here acting otherwise should be taken with a grain of salt. You're commenting on complex negotiations but with the power of hindsight but it doesn't make you an expert. I don't care if you're an AFL fan trolling a Rugby League site whose only qualification is running a website that steals ratings data from elsewhere or an NRL fan blindly loyal to current management who can't handle criticism or an NRL fan who shits on management at every turn because of some other petty grievance. You aren't in the room during these negotiations and there really is nothing to talk about now until the NRL makes firm expansion plans. It's fine to speculate about the future but if your plan is to bitching and moan and troll about what's done and can't be undone for the next few years, I have to say I feel sorry that you don't have much else going on in your lives.

But hey guys, go back to measuring your dicks if it makes you happy. Just don't pretend that you're John Holmes though.

I have said all along AFL should get more, Which they have.
My issue is people saying the NRL got a shit deal without knowing exact figures.

 

[Iamback]

No it hasn’t. If it has and I have every article about this, then forward me the actual articles which clearly state this is the case.

The NRL deal reported was “over” $400m. There is no mention of the cash vs contra split nor even a final amount. Suffice to say there would be some contra amount and also suffice to say that if the deal was closer to five than four they would say close to five.

There are also multiple reports after it was announced that the cash part of fumbleball’s deal is at least $550m cash. If it was $470m cash (and it isn’t) that would suggest that the Telstra portion plus contra would be $173m?

There was one where PVL himself said the deal is over $400m cash, Given it was offically 'over' $400m. Adding contra still falls in that category

As for the $550m cash that isn't logical

Ch7 is about $170m that would include contra. That leaves Fox playing $400m cash. No way they have that money on top of the other sports they pay for

 

[Wb1234]

There was one where PVL himself said the deal is over $400m cash, Given it was offically 'over' $400m. Adding contra still falls in that category

As for the $550m cash that isn't logical

Ch7 is about $170m that would include contra. That leaves Fox playing $400m cash. No way they have that money on top of the other sports they pay for

Nailed it

 

[Starkers]

Im not saying its likely, I am sayhing its possible. And it would certainly affect the deal as it would not currently be included.

lol. as the kids say

Is this an area where the NRL may stream direct from their website? Would definitely create some leverage there...

 

[Starkers]

I'd hazard a guess that losing half your subscription base isn't going to help, and wouldn't be in there plans.

You just reminded me, I need to cancel my Kayo until next season starts

There would be significant overlap between NRL and AFL fans to Cricket. So kayo keeps them over summer and all year round if they can hold those 3 key sports.

Outside that, union and soccer are niche sports in Australia.

 

[Colk]

There was one where PVL himself said the deal is over $400m cash, Given it was offically 'over' $400m. Adding contra still falls in that category

As for the $550m cash that isn't logical

Ch7 is about $170m that would include contra. That leaves Fox playing $400m cash. No way they have that money on top of the other sports they pay for

What do you mean it isn’t logical in this context?

I think the word you are trying to use is believable, anyway, there are multiple media reports to suggest it is $550 million, ergo, it is more likely to be $550 m cash then it isn’t.

Also, it is not like Fox haven’t consistently paid more for fumbleball than league, regardless of our higher ratings. If you want to complain about that, complain about our leaders ability or complain to Fox.

In any case, if you are arguing that the TV cash deal is less and the Telstra cash component is more then that just means that we are are being ripped off by Telstra and not by TV. Wow that makes it a whole lot better. Either way we are being ripped off by somebody and that is pretty clear.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

The following post will probably piss everyone off but here goes. The AFL got more for a variety of reasons. You have to consider that they have 18 teams in Australia playing 9 games a week with 27 hours of weekly game content. The NRL has 15 teams in Australia playing 8 games a week with 16 hours of weekly game content. That's just reality. There are also other factors that are both cons and pros for both leagues -- like metro market reach - the NRL doesn't have teams in Perth or Adelaide. Or season length which favours the NRL. There are game overlaps that affect AFL moreso and even marquee events like State of Origin attract their own value. Competitive tension also affects things - not every wannabe broadcaster has the funds to buy AFL and NRL matches. All of those differences affect things like ad rates and subscriber numbers and therefore the final amounts. But both leagues are now in their own strata when it comes to sports rights in this country.

The point is - there's no simple formula for calculating what the rights should be. So anyone on here acting otherwise should be taken with a grain of salt. You're commenting on complex negotiations but with the power of hindsight but it doesn't make you an expert. I don't care if you're an AFL fan trolling a Rugby League site whose only qualification is running a website that steals ratings data from elsewhere or an NRL fan blindly loyal to current management who can't handle criticism or an NRL fan who shits on management at every turn because of some other petty grievance. You aren't in the room during these negotiations and there really is nothing to talk about now until the NRL makes firm expansion plans. It's fine to speculate about the future but if your plan is to bitching and moan and troll about what's done and can't be undone for the next few years, I have to say I feel sorry that you don't have much else going on in your lives.

But hey guys, go back to measuring your dicks if it makes you happy. Just don't pretend that you're John Holmes though.

The big take away is News Ltd and FTA don't value our game as much as fumbleball. Rupert Murdoch told us News Ltd has always prefers fumbleball and views it as the premier game. He also said he would use his print publications in Brisbane and Sydney to grow fumbleball.

That's what concerns me the most.

Not having teams in Adelaide and Perth is down to the influence of the NSWRL, its fans and Sydney media. Brisbane has been under served for 35 years. We're paying the price for it and now is the time for the people responsible for this mess to put their hand up and accept they've stunted our game's growth. They won't though and will continue to come up with all sorts of BS excuses to justify their stance and argue for more of the same. The most frustrating thing is smart people like @Perth Red and @The Great Dane have been warning us for over a decade, yet no one would listen..

 

[Wb1234]

What do you mean it isn’t logical in this context?

I think the word you are trying to use is believable, anyway, there are multiple media reports to suggest it is $550 million, ergo, it is more likely to be $550 m cash then it isn’t.

Also, it is not like Fox haven’t consistently paid more for fumbleball than league, regardless of our higher ratings. If you want to complain about that, complain about our leaders ability or complain to Fox.

In any case, if you are arguing that the TV cash deal is less and the Telstra cash component is more then that just means that we are are being ripped off by Telstra and not by TV. Wow that makes it a whole lot better. Either way we are being ripped off by somebody and that is pretty clear.

Nah the only report which talks solely about the tv deal only says 3.5 billion over five years

indirectly the report which says paramount offered 3 billion as the underbidder backs this up

your literally choosing to ignore these articles as mistakes because you seem to want to believe the afl boss when it’s clear he’s full of bs

you know he’s the same afl boss which you agree is sweeping the recism scandal to the off season when nobody cares so you know he’s dodgy af

 

[The_Wookie]

Nah the only report which talks solely about the tv deal only says 3.5 billion over five years

Which report. Ive not seen anything under 3.85b for TV.

indirectly the report which says paramount offered 3 billion as the underbidder backs this up

not really. the AFL was apparently chasing a 3 billion 6 year contract at the time.

The networks are likely to score a deal well under the AFL’s wished-for $3 billion, six-year contract.

your literally choosing to ignore these articles as mistakes because you seem to want to believe the afl boss when it’s clear he’s full of bs

You know you do exactly the same thing your accusing him of - except here youve literally seized on "the only report" that you think backs your position.

 

[Perth Red]

Ni

The deal was done for $402m
Since then The Dolphins have been locked in and added $20m a year to that.

So there is still room in the deal to add stuff that benefits the game.

For me NRLW is the one to go fully professional the spend is $120m, There are options to maximise TV money for that. There wouldn't be if it was lock tight for 5 years

nope, dolphins were announced BEFORE the $402mill deal was announced not after. The alleged $20mill is included in it. The question you should be asking is why did Vlandys sign a deal with fox for $20mill less than 2017 deal in 2020? Then have to make up the loss by adding in dolphins and gifting it to fox for what was effectively the same as they paid for 16 clubs!

 

[Perth Red]

Ok I disagree with that assertion but let’s compare the TV deals then under your presumptions. Our TV deal is what $370m cash (including radio) and about $30 odd million contra. So the difference is only $130m cash then in your estimations - is that a heap better for you? Have we still not undersold our rights in this comparison?

It’s not ots $370mill cash (with around $5mill radio rights) v around $540mill cash (without any radio rights). A whopping $170mill CASH difference a year for 3 years. Quite staggering really!

 

[Perth Red]

So you’re now suggesting the current NRL deal is 100% cash are you?

Also there are no reports of the AFL deal being $470m cash. You’re continually revising it down. Next you’ll say the cash amount is miraculously even.

Stop bothering, he’s a deluded idiot who no matter how many times you show him what the actual deals are is just going to make up bs arguments.

the simple facts are
nrl $402mill cash and contra for 5 years plus digital profit ($15-20mill) inc some radio rights
afl $473mill cash and contra for 2 years then $643mill cas( and contra for 7 years inc digital rights knot including $10mill a year of radio rights

thats all there is to it, we got right royally fcked and Vlandys is the cause of it.

 

[Perth Red]

The following post will probably piss everyone off but here goes. The AFL got more for a variety of reasons. You have to consider that they have 18 teams in Australia playing 9 games a week with 27 hours of weekly game content. The NRL has 15 teams in Australia playing 8 games a week with 16 hours of weekly game content. That's just reality. There are also other factors that are both cons and pros for both leagues -- like metro market reach - the NRL doesn't have teams in Perth or Adelaide. Or season length which favours the NRL. There are game overlaps that affect AFL moreso and even marquee events like State of Origin attract their own value. Competitive tension also affects things - not every wannabe broadcaster has the funds to buy AFL and NRL matches. All of those differences affect things like ad rates and subscriber numbers and therefore the final amounts. But both leagues are now in their own strata when it comes to sports rights in this country.

The point is - there's no simple formula for calculating what the rights should be. So anyone on here acting otherwise should be taken with a grain of salt. You're commenting on complex negotiations but with the power of hindsight but it doesn't make you an expert. I don't care if you're an AFL fan trolling a Rugby League site whose only qualification is running a website that steals ratings data from elsewhere or an NRL fan blindly loyal to current management who can't handle criticism or an NRL fan who shits on management at every turn because of some other petty grievance. You aren't in the room during these negotiations and there really is nothing to talk about now until the NRL makes firm expansion plans. It's fine to speculate about the future but if your plan is to bitching and moan and troll about what's done and can't be undone for the next few years, I have to say I feel sorry that you don't have much else going on in your lives.

But hey guys, go back to measuring your dicks if it makes you happy. Just don't pretend that you're John Holmes though.

Don’t disagree at all and there are some lessons for us to learn in those reasons! But there is a counterbalance to value of nrl in that we have origin that is allegedly worth around $30mill a year and we have much higher subscriber rates for fox.

in reality nine are paying just $95mill a year for the nrl competition when you take out origin and radio rights value. Compare that to the alleged $185mill seven are paying for afl comp. can you honestly say what you’ve pointed out makes afl worth double the nrl to fta?

there is zero reason it would be more valuable to fox who make their money from subscribers and the figures show nrl is far more popular on fox/kayo than afl

if rumours are to be beloved it is $240mill v $400mill. How anyone can say that is justified baffles me?

the pure and simple fact is they ran their negotiations far superior and created competitive tension which drove the price way above market value whilst we gave them away to do the tv companies a favour.