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
65,407
Agreed under with a 4th game. That 4th game was later onsold

Therefore 3 games simucast with Exclusive SOO and GF wasn't worth $925m. Ch9 are basically what they did before Fox won't pay any less therefore it is a win for NRL
Yes I know all that, bUt it doesn't change the fact Nine agreed to pay $925mill. As long as Fox is covering the $325mill gap by directly paying the NRL for Saturday night and simucast in this next deal then its all good. But as Vlandys refuses to be transparent we wont know know for sure will we.
 
Messages
3,224
Yes I know all that, bUt it doesn't change the fact Nine agreed to pay $925mill. As long as Fox is covering the $325mill gap by directly paying the NRL for Saturday night and simucast in this next deal then its all good. But as Vlandys refuses to be transparent we wont know know for sure will we.
id prefer we keep our figures confidential rather then post utter BS figures like the afl 😎
 
Last edited:

tri_colours

Juniors
Messages
1,812
haha no! The actual value to the NRL was $175million cash a year. That is how much Nine was paying them pre covid. It would require Fox to be paying the NRL directly $55mill more to cover simucast and Saturday night game for it to be same value! Lets say the last deal was for $1.8billion. Nine paid NRL $925mill and Fox paid $875mill. For the deal to be equal it would require Nine to pay $600mill and Fox $1.2billion this deal. Somewhere tied up in it as well is Telstra but its hard to fathom how much they paid NRL in last deal and for what as the games sponsorship is also tied up into it.

If reports of a $2billion deal are true then that would require Fox to be paying $1.4billion! If V'landys has got them to stump up that much at a time they are hemorrhaging viewers to cheaper streaming options then bloody good job I say!

1.6m from NZ
 

tri_colours

Juniors
Messages
1,812
Whyb

mythical? Last deal Ch9 agreed to pay nrl $925mill, the rumour is this one nrl will be happy with $600mill. Ergo $325mill difference. If fox have covered the gap all sweet, if not well…………
Marks was constantly bitching about C9 making payments of about 100m to the NRL

If Smiths contract had any validity in 2018 would'nt they be paying almost twice that to the NRL?
 
Messages
12,404
Whyb

mythical? Last deal Ch9 agreed to pay nrl $925mill, the rumour is this one nrl will be happy with $600mill. Ergo $325mill difference. If fox have covered the gap all sweet, if not well…………
Didn't the $925 million deal give Ch9 the exclusive broadcast rights to four of the eight games each round?

Ch9's new deals sees them simulcast 3 games per round with Foxtel. Ratings dropped for Ch9 when people who have a Foxtel/Kayo subscription were able to watch them live and ad-free on Fox League.
 

Last Week

Bench
Messages
3,642
Didn't the $925 million deal give Ch9 the exclusive broadcast rights to four of the eight games each round?

Ch9's new deals sees them simulcast 3 games per round with Foxtel. Ratings dropped for Ch9 when people who have a Foxtel/Kayo subscription were able to watch them live and ad-free on Fox League.

Don't bother with him. He's not happy unless he's whining.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,407
Didn't the $925 million deal give Ch9 the exclusive broadcast rights to four of the eight games each round?

Ch9's new deals sees them simulcast 3 games per round with Foxtel. Ratings dropped for Ch9 when people who have a Foxtel/Kayo subscription were able to watch them live and ad-free on Fox League.
Yes they did and and nine paid an extra $325mill for it based on what the alleged value they want to pay this time ($575-600mill). Have fox covered the same value given they have now bought direct from nrl those two parts (simucast and Saturday night) in this deal?
 

Chief_Chujo

First Grade
Messages
7,419

TV reality: The uneasy relationship between the NRL and Nine as broadcast deal looms​

If the wood-panelled walls of the Directors Room at Royal Randwick — or the two veteran TAB operators sitting in the corner — could talk, what would they say? What morsels could they deliver us?

A lot of indecipherable gibber, I’d suggest.

Sure, the room has hosted prime ministers and members of the royal family. Captains of industry. The big end of town. Probably a Hemsworth.
But when the shiraz is sliding down quicker than Nature Strip getting to the line in The Everest, it doesn’t matter who you are or who you know, because the details become sketchy by about race five.

Racing NSW chief executive and ARL Commission chairman Peter V’landys often fills the room with media types. Everyone down to the News Corp janitor usually gets a start.
On Everest Day, however, editors and reporters rubbed shoulders with their bosses with a rollcall of media heavyweights in attendance: News Corp executive chairman Michael Miller, Foxtel boss Patrick Delany, Seven West Media CEO James Warburton and Nine Entertainment Co chief executive Mike Sneesby.
Among them was V’landys, zipping between tables like The Flash, according to those present. The man can work a room.

The buzz started early, long before the shiraz kicked in, about the NRL and Nine (publisher of this masthead) being on the cusp of a new free-to-air broadcast deal.

The Herald and The Age reported the news on Sunday evening, and on Monday morning all three major Sydney newspapers ran stories, albeit with different figures, sparking speculation a deal could be just days away.

Not so fast, said well-placed sources at both the NRL and Nine when contacted by this column: no deal was imminent, and if it was forthcoming, it wouldn’t be this week.
The reason is the considerable gap between what the NRL wants Nine to pay (believed to be $120 million per year) and what Nine is prepared to pay (about $100 million to $105 million per year).
NRL powerbrokers were also cranky about reports that Seven had turned its back on negotiations, insisting discussions were “ongoing”.

Just how serious Seven, which has the rights to AFL and cricket, and Ten, which is looking to turbo-charge its new streaming service Paramount+, has been about rugby league remains unclear.
But if you push aside the subterfuge and posturing, it’s obvious the NRL wants to do a deal with Nine — and Nine, which has held the rights since 1992, wants to do a deal with the NRL.
Which is interesting, because the relationship between the pair has been strained in the last 18 months.
It started last year when the competition was stopped during the first COVID-19 lockdown and Sneesby’s predecessor, Hugh Marks, squeezed the NRL for millions, writing down the value of the broadcast rights for 2020 to 2022.
Some at the NRL believe Marks unfairly leveraged a global pandemic to protect Nine’s bottom line. Others, especially those in Club Land, believe the NRL caved in too easily.

In January, there was more tension. The NRL complained about Nine promoting its rugby union coverage on Stan Sport during ad breaks of the Australian Open.
Nine insists the $2 million worth of advertising was paid by Stan to Nine, its parent company. The NRL considers them one and the same.
A common theme throughout current negotiations has been about Nine “promoting” the sport, not running it down. I’ve seen that movie before.
For years, former NRL chief executive David Gallop called former Nine boss David Gyngell first thing on Monday morning to complain about something Phil Gould had said in commentary.
Gould and V’landys fell out earlier this year following the calamity of the head-high crackdown during Magic Round, although there’s been a truce. Maybe. They both keep their cards close to their chests.

The clubs regularly complain about both Nine and Fox Sports’ coverage, claiming neither “talk up the game”.
It’s a tricky dance for broadcasters as they cover the sport but also run a critical eye over it. Former players sitting on panels usually call it as they see it, although there are often agendas and your usual healthy dose of rugby league hate.
There’s an unhealthy obsession with rules and refereeing, but the discerning fan would call “bullshit” at the very whiff of someone sugar-coating serious issues that require debate.
The NRL also wants Nine to create a midweek magazine show, perhaps like NRL 360 on Fox Sports, but shown in primetime instead of the 10.30pm time slot 100% Footy has on Mondays.
Perhaps this shows the disconnect between what the NRL wants and what Nine can deliver. A program of that nature might work on subscription TV but a program with such a narrow audience on free-to-air, which needs to be all things to all people, would be a ratings black hole.

For all the talk of “promoting the game”, and “growing the game”, and being genuine “partners”, those familiar with the current negotiations are adamant the deal will be determined by what it’s always determined by.
Money.
The NRL traded away some of its bargaining power last year when it extended the Foxtel deal out to 2027. The amount remains undisclosed, with V’landys citing “commercial in confidence”.

Last week, the NRL handed Foxtel more exclusive Broncos matches on the condition it pays a further $100m in broadcast rights to fund a 17th team.

The move infuriated Nine. Whether they are winning or losing, the Broncos are the safest ratings bet alongside the powerhouse Sydney clubs.

Foxtel and Kayo live and die by subscriptions. With three matches per week, and none of them exclusive outside the grand final and State of Origin, Nine is driven by ratings.
Its window for blockbuster matches is narrowed by the NRL draw for the whole season being locked in months before it starts.
All parties concerned are convinced they’ll find common ground soon enough, whenever that may be.

The relationship might be strained, but it’s not combative. Long gone are the days when the late Nine owner Kerry Packer, with feet perched on the boardroom table, tore up contracts in front of rugby league powerbrokers and told them to do their best elsewhere.
These days, NRL chief executives and chairs live and die by the size of their broadcast deal. V’landys is different, not least because of the way he and chief executive Andrew Abdo have navigated the last two years.
But we’ll no doubt know if the deal is a lucrative one if he decides to tell us how much it’s worth.

 

Chief_Chujo

First Grade
Messages
7,419
So Fairfax pushed out a bullshit story to try and head off interest from other parties. Why does the game want to tie itself to these merkins again? At least it looks like V'landys is calling these merkins on their shit.
 

tri_colours

Juniors
Messages
1,812
Yes I know all that, bUt it doesn't change the fact Nine agreed to pay $925mill. As long as Fox is covering the $325mill gap by directly paying the NRL for Saturday night and simucast in this next deal then its all good. But as Vlandys refuses to be transparent we wont know know for sure will we.
PR that is a very moot point. The contract Smith signed with Gyngell would have seen Fox having just 4 games and the 4 games in the worst time slots. Meaning Fox would of payed jack and the NRL would have got a lot lower contract.

Fox refused to negotiate until Smith was sacked!
 
Last edited:

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,407
PR that is a very moot point. The contract Smith signed with Gyngell would have seen Fox having just 4 games and the 4 games in the worst time slots. Meaning Fox would of payed jack and the NRL would have got a lot lower contract.

Fox refused to negotiate until Smith was sacked!
well yes and no. It was the biggest FTA deal ever done for sport in this country. It only offered what AFL offered ch7 and for the first time ever it eclipsed their FTA deal. It would have been very interesting if we hadn't blinked! Fox needs NRL to survive, at the same time NRL needed Fox money and there wasn't a lot of competition around back then for Fox. Fox would have got all 8 games either way as it was always Ch9's intent to sell them simucast for their 3 or 4 games and having all games is where the real value is for Fox, not necessarily X number of exclusive ones. I don't think subscriptions would alter much if it was 4 or 5 exclusive games.

Ironically this deal ended up costing Fox less as Ch9 sold them those two pieces of the pie for less than the $325mill difference between this current deal (if media is to be believed). Unless of course Fox felt that they could have got simucast, Saturday night and the rest of the deal for less than they ended up paying Ch9 but then NRL would have lost out massively.

We always come from a point of weakness, Smith sacked and Fox's behest, Greenberg sacked at Ch 9's behest etc.
Reality is Fox get in many ways a far worse deal from AFL yet are happy to pay more than they pay for NRL each time. Go figure.

For NRl the reality is Ch9 paid $925mill last time and if rumours are to be believed will pay a max $600mill this time. I hope that missing chunk of money is being covered by the Fox deal!
 

LeagueXIII

First Grade
Messages
5,965
PR that is a very moot point. The contract Smith signed with Gyngell would have seen Fox having just 4 games and the 4 games in the worst time slots. Meaning Fox would of payed jack and the NRL would have got a lot lower contract.

Fox refused to negotiate until Smith was sacked!
Smith wasnt an idiot would have liked to see where he was planning on taking the game. Bloody annoying that our game will always be under the thumb of News Corp.
 

tri_colours

Juniors
Messages
1,812
Smith wasnt an idiot would have liked to see where he was planning on taking the game. Bloody annoying that our game will always be under the thumb of News Corp.

Wherever it was he took the game it would of been with a lot less money.

I don't think he was an idiot either , but his tact and his negotiating skills sure needed to be worked on!
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,407
Wherever it was he took the game it would of been with a lot less money.

I don't think he was an idiot either , but his tact and his negotiating skills sure needed to be worked on!
Why do you say that? He had already delivered the biggest, by a long long way, FTA deal ever seen. Fox would have had no choice but to pay, they need NRL to survive. Would they have paid more than the $875mill they did if he had negotiated with them first? Who knows. To just keep the NRL moving away from News ltd influence I'd have been happy with a bit less money if it meant less News Ltd control of the game. news had their noses put out because finally someone had come along and not made everything about them. The fact they were so upset at having to pay ch9 for saturday and simucast should tell you what they were hoping to get for their money and negitiating with NRl would have likely been cheaper than paying Ch9.

Anyway all hypotheticals as Smith wasnt given the chance to bring home the bacon, but he will always be credited for getting the best FTA deal in NRL history, and potentially for many years to come.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,407
Smith brought transparency to NRL, Vlandys has well and truly buried it again!

In comparison with the highly spin-doctored and scantily detailed summations of previous years, Monday’s annual NRL presentation was largely satisfying and refreshing.
For the first time in recent memory, there was transparency. There was precision. There was structure. There was a plan.
The sport that’s lurched from the whim of one disaster to the next atrocity like a harmless drunk has not only finished the financial year with $49.6 million in the bank, but also a formula dictating how the surplus will be maximised.

 

Latest posts

Top