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

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,587
That is it for both codes

Most sports in the world use a 50/50 split. So whatever the clubs/players get, double that. There is the cash figure.
They are claiming 170 million extra money
Normally you would say 20 million would be contra

we assume half goes to players then that’s 75 million pa

so unless the afl salary cap goes up by 4 million per club (hahahhahaa) we know gill the dill is up to his old tricks
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,587
Last edited:

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,587
You want to know why it is never been paid what it is worth? Because we simply don’t have the same intelligence or guts as fumbleball management and we are completely owned by News Limited (maybe not owned in the traditional sense but pretty much caving in at every opportunity)

If V’Landys or anybody of his ilk is still running the game, we’ll get the same deal as before with maybe a 5% increase to shut us up.

In order for anything like the above scenario to occur, we would need a whole new commission (without a league background) and somebody who is not going to cave into News Limited or the clubs. Essentially somebody with a proven background in international sports management that when the pressure is weighed upon them (and it will because News Limited don’t want to pay more), they can go and point to their background to push things through.
Super league is the only reason

gill isn’t fit to tie vlandys shoelaces
 

Jamberoo

Juniors
Messages
1,431
The network only outlay what they can recoup. Its not V'landys fault that league only has 1/3 of the advertisement opportunities that the AFL have. V’landys was vastly superior to Gil during the Covid period(no loans), made good profits, as opposed to losses for the other mob, and our ratings are now better than there’s even at a home and away club level.
How was PVL superior? Getting the game going a week earlier? Wow! As per Roy’s article he gave the networks a bigger discount during COVID than the AFL.
 

Iamback

Referee
Messages
20,283

Storm80

Juniors
Messages
212
Roy is either too kind or (more likely) embarrassed to explicitly state V'landys cocked up
The headline don’t really match up with his article, which clearly highlights the flaws in NRL re-negation strategy during COVID.

His article calls out each codes “rubbery” figures when it comes to cash and contra. However, Masters still concedes the AFL will receive between $100m to $170m extra in cash annually than NRL.

So by negotiating a 7 year deal 3 years out from current deal expiring - AFL have guarenteed for the 2025, 2026 and 2027 period they will have at least $300m and at most $510m more than NRL.

That’s just the 2025-2027 period. Doesn’t include the extra money AFL got thru the COVID years or 2023-24.

So basically, the AFL from 2020 to 2027 will have walked away with at least $500m more in media rights than NRL in the same time period.

Haha that’s a disgrace anyway you spin it. Be nice if NRL released its commercial in confidence figures so a real calculation could be made.

And for those saying “yeah but, in our next deal for 2028 and beyond - NRL gonna smash it and make up the difference”. Huge problem in that is:

1. Current NRL cash deal is $370m - AFL is $550m. So you gonna have to bump it up by $180m a year just to match AFL from 2028. Easier said than done.

2. AFL made at least $500m more from 2020-27. So for the next 2028-2032 deal you gonna have to increase it by $180m plus another $100m a year to break even with the losses from COVID era. A $280m yearly increase - or 48% - over the next 2028-3032 deal. Good luck with that PVL.

3. AFL gets to renegotiate as soon as the 2028-32 NRL deal is done to counter any gains NRL has made for its next deal and beyond.

4. Ask yourself why AFL made it a longer deal of 7 years? What strategy does that serve? Id say it serves a number of purposes, but one key goal is it paints NRL into a corner that they’ll never make up the $500m plus they missed out on during 2020-2027 - at least not from media rights.

Seriously, AFL have destroyed it in the COVID era. When thinking of the NRL during the COVID era I’m just drawn to the timeless phrase “Empty vessel always makes the most noise”.

Imagine having the Gaul to joke at Gil and Victoria etc in a press conference to announce the GF will be held in the same place we all knew it would, yet again after failing to convince government to fund new stadiums then a month later finding out AFL will make at least half a billion more from 2020-27 period than your own Code.

Its clown show.

Imagine half a billion more to grow your game at grass roots etc during COVID and the rebuild from it. NRL could fund its own stadium redevelopments with that money.

You can’t spin this as a positive for NRL. They are 40 years behind the AFL as far as good governance and expansion is concerned. And being at least half a billion dollars poorer over the 2020-27 period ain’t gonna help it.

So by 2032 with at least an extra $500m in media right, AFL will have secured state art facilities:

- MCG new shane warne stand
- Marvel upgrade
- Geelong and country Vic upgrade for commonwealth games
- Perth and Adelaide ovals sorted
- SCG will no doubt get a new stand
- Gabba complete rebuild for olympics
- Tasmania a new stadium
- plus ovals and community ground popping up all over the place for AFLW etc

NRL can’t even manage to upgrade Liechardt Oval ffs… It’s not even fair, someone stop the fight. Gil and his merry men have just ripped PVL’s heart out thru his throat and feasted on it. No wonder Gil says sweet FA about PVL in public. He’s too busy laughing about him behind closed doors
 
Messages
15,406
The following article was published by Crikey (source: https://www.crikey.com.au/2022/09/07/afl-rights-deal-seven-foxtel-fans-lose/) -

AFL fans lose out — broadcaster rights deal just another win for executives and players

Adam Schwab ADAM SCHWAB COLUMNIST
AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan standing in front of the AFL logo and behind microphones a
AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan (Image: AAP/James Ross)

Once again those who just love the game, just want to be able to watch it free and as it happens, have been left on the sideline.

Another “record” AFL broadcast rights deal was confirmed yesterday with outgoing AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan confirming that Seven and Foxtel will spend $642 million annually over seven years.

The previous two deals had generated $3.5 billion over eight years.

Cue widespread praise and adulation from a complicit media that inevitably fail to show the barest understanding of the true implications of ever-inflating broadcast deals.

There certainly are winners from the deal, and McLachlan has once again shown to be a supremely talented negotiator — he has had probably the most successful tenure as head of Australia’s richest sporting code (his calming presence was a significant improvement on the reign of his somewhat tarnished predecessor Andrew Demetriou).

The deal will ensure that AFL bosses continue to be some of the highest paid executives in the country — in 2019, the AFL’s 12-person executive team shared $10.6 million, which will certainly materially increase now. AFL players and club bosses will also earn far more (the “soft cap” that clubs can spend will increase) and the AFL will continue to invest in excellent programs such as Auskick and AFLW, especially in growth markets such as NSW and Queensland.

The key step-change in AFL rights came way back in 2002 — the year when the entire rights were removed from free-to-air TV and shared between Nine, Ten and Foxtel for the first time. The AFL’s annual take leapt in 2002 from $40 million to $100 million. This was straight out of the Murdoch playbook that was executed so brilliantly in the US and UK (British Sky Broadcasting was a struggling satellite provider until winning its shock Premier League rights in 1992).
image001-1.png
AFL BROADCAST RIGHTS EVOLUTION (IMAGE: THE AGE)

Although the AFL’s broadcast revenue has grown significantly in raw terms since then, the 2002 deal stands out as a watershed moment. The losers from all this largesse have been AFL supporters.
The dirty secret of sport (apparently obvious to all except actual sports writers) is that broadcast deals are simply a way of laundering more cash from fans. Subscription TV services (whether cable or broadcaster video on demand) are simply the mechanism to achieve that.

Before 2002, AFL fans could watch every game their team played essentially for free, albeit with an indirect cost borne by consumers when they buy the advertised products. While not as bad as Premier League, which shows almost no games for free, the AFL essentially forces genuine supporters to purchase a Foxtel or Kayo subscription. While the cheaper Kayo has reduced that supporter tax significantly in recent years (a supporter can pay for six months of Kayo for about $160 compared with about $350 for six months of Fox Sport), the tax remains.
The AFL chose to ignore Ten/Paramount’s $6 billion (10-year) pitch, which would have broadcast games free to air every Saturday night in the flailing Queensland and NSW markets. Under the Seven/Foxtel deal, NSW and Queensland fans will also be forced to watch games on a 120-minute delay, a strange way for the AFL to prioritise a so-called growth market.

Viewers in South Australia and Western Australia will be forced to watch 12 games annually on a two-hour delay (up from three now). Also as part of the deal, Thursday night games — hated by those wanting to attend games but loved by TV audiences — will continue to grow to 15 annually.

In one sense, the steep inflation in rights from the AFL is a potential hedge as inflation starts cutting into household discretionary spending (or it’s exceedingly foolish). All sporting organisations have been beneficiaries of the multi-decade everything bubble — if consumers decide to start cutting their discretionary spend, they may well opt to invest in a Kayo subscription rather than attend more expensive AFL matches.

Make no mistake, the new AFL rights deal is another big win for executives and players who will share in billions of dollars of windfall gains, and another loss for ordinary AFL fans who have long stopped being relevant stakeholders in the game they fund.
 
Messages
14,822
It's a shitload of money, that's for sure.
It is possible that from 2028 to 2031 (4 years), the NRL gets the opportunity to make up the ground, perhaps even draw level for those years.
For decades we've heard delusional fans say we will get our fair share "next time". The formation of the ARLC was meant to be the great equaliser to bring us on par with AwFuL in 2012. Since then the divide has gotten worse.

News Ltd has controlled us for a quarter of a century. They don't need a 50% stake in the game to control our destiny. There is no independence. We're dependent upon them and they know it

The broadcasters don't value our game. If they did they would pay us a lot more than they do. At this stage we would be better off taking a hit and producing our own content so that News Ltd no longer makes a killing off us. It'll cost us money for the first few years, but in the long run it will force Ch9 and Foxtel to give us a fair offer as they'll know we have the option and balls to tell them to piss off. It'll also bring the other streaming companies into play.
 

Vee

First Grade
Messages
5,596
It sucks seeing the NRL get dicked like this but watching the regulars squirm and seeing how utterly stupid all their posts look over the past few months and years does bring a smile to my face. Baseline panther and his ilk looking real f**king dumb right now lol.
wb, Colly, Iamback et al
 
Last edited:

The_Wookie

Bench
Messages
3,243
They are claiming 170 million extra money
Normally you would say 20 million would be contra

we assume half goes to players then that’s 75 million pa

so unless the afl salary cap goes up by 4 million per club (hahahhahaa) we know gill the dill is up to his old tricks

half doesnt go to the players. Never has. Players get 28% of total AFL revenue. Not just tv rights, but this includes funding for the AFLPA and player welfare programs too
 
Messages
14,822
Dumb article by whoever wrote it. He said viewers could watch all games their team played for free before 2002. Bullshit. Ch7 screened a few games on FTA and screened the rest on Optus Vision through their PTV network C7 Sport. People had to pay money to access C7 Sport. Brisbane Lions games were broadcast on delay around midnight in Brisbane. There's no way all Victorian teams were broadcast each week on Ch7.
 

Idris 84

Juniors
Messages
61
They are claiming 170 million extra money
Normally you would say 20 million would be contra

we assume half goes to players then that’s 75 million pa

so unless the afl salary cap goes up by 4 million per club (hahahhahaa) we know gill the dill is up to his old tricks

Gill the dill? Known as the best sports negotiator in Australia and the best negotiator Richard Goyder (chairman of Qantas and the AFL and previous head of wesfarmers) has ever seen in the business world. You can see why they wanted him to stick around to negotiate these rights.

I hope Vlandy's slept well last night, a cheap dig from Peter across the fence should have us back feeling like we are even again tomorrow. Well it will at least keep all the halfwits on here feeling warm and fuzzy.
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
35,607
Dumb article by whoever wrote it. He said viewers could watch all games their team played for free before 2002. Bullshit. Ch7 screened a few games on FTA and screened the rest on Optus Vision through their PTV network C7 Sport. People had to pay money to access C7 Sport. Brisbane Lions games were broadcast on delay around midnight in Brisbane. There's no way all Victorian teams were broadcast each week on Ch7.

The AFL got an incredible deal and it clearly is more then the current NRL deal.

But not having a FTA game on Sat night for a chunk of the season, and more Thu games is a big change to what Melbourne fans are used to and will cause some negative press when it commences in 2025.

For mine its worth it given the extra $$$ secured, but I'm not sure all AFL fans who are used to free games on TV on a Sat night will think so, not to mention the impact on pubs and clubs etc.
 

Colk

First Grade
Messages
6,750
Super league is the only reason

gill isn’t fit to tie vlandys shoelaces

I’ve seen some hot takes in my time but this might be the hottest.

So the bloke and the commission who presided over a deal that is 50% higher than their competitor despite having similar viewing figures isn’t fit to tie the shoelaces of a bloke who could barely get a 5% increase on the previous deal; despite setting up a new side and giving in to every one of the broadcasters demands? Rightio then

Also how long is Super League going to be an excuse for some people? It ended over 20 years ago. The Super League war isn’t the reason for V’Landys giving away our digital rights for a song, talking to nobody but Nine/Foxtel or for getting practically nothing for extra content. That’s on him and the commission - nobody else.
 
Last edited:

Colk

First Grade
Messages
6,750
The headline don’t really match up with his article, which clearly highlights the flaws in NRL re-negation strategy during COVID.

His article calls out each codes “rubbery” figures when it comes to cash and contra. However, Masters still concedes the AFL will receive between $100m to $170m extra in cash annually than NRL.

So by negotiating a 7 year deal 3 years out from current deal expiring - AFL have guarenteed for the 2025, 2026 and 2027 period they will have at least $300m and at most $510m more than NRL.

That’s just the 2025-2027 period. Doesn’t include the extra money AFL got thru the COVID years or 2023-24.

So basically, the AFL from 2020 to 2027 will have walked away with at least $500m more in media rights than NRL in the same time period.

Haha that’s a disgrace anyway you spin it. Be nice if NRL released its commercial in confidence figures so a real calculation could be made.

And for those saying “yeah but, in our next deal for 2028 and beyond - NRL gonna smash it and make up the difference”. Huge problem in that is:

1. Current NRL cash deal is $370m - AFL is $550m. So you gonna have to bump it up by $180m a year just to match AFL from 2028. Easier said than done.

2. AFL made at least $500m more from 2020-27. So for the next 2028-2032 deal you gonna have to increase it by $180m plus another $100m a year to break even with the losses from COVID era. A $280m yearly increase - or 48% - over the next 2028-3032 deal. Good luck with that PVL.

3. AFL gets to renegotiate as soon as the 2028-32 NRL deal is done to counter any gains NRL has made for its next deal and beyond.

4. Ask yourself why AFL made it a longer deal of 7 years? What strategy does that serve? Id say it serves a number of purposes, but one key goal is it paints NRL into a corner that they’ll never make up the $500m plus they missed out on during 2020-2027 - at least not from media rights.

Seriously, AFL have destroyed it in the COVID era. When thinking of the NRL during the COVID era I’m just drawn to the timeless phrase “Empty vessel always makes the most noise”.

Imagine having the Gaul to joke at Gil and Victoria etc in a press conference to announce the GF will be held in the same place we all knew it would, yet again after failing to convince government to fund new stadiums then a month later finding out AFL will make at least half a billion more from 2020-27 period than your own Code.

Its clown show.

Imagine half a billion more to grow your game at grass roots etc during COVID and the rebuild from it. NRL could fund its own stadium redevelopments with that money.

You can’t spin this as a positive for NRL. They are 40 years behind the AFL as far as good governance and expansion is concerned. And being at least half a billion dollars poorer over the 2020-27 period ain’t gonna help it.

So by 2032 with at least an extra $500m in media right, AFL will have secured state art facilities:

- MCG new shane warne stand
- Marvel upgrade
- Geelong and country Vic upgrade for commonwealth games
- Perth and Adelaide ovals sorted
- SCG will no doubt get a new stand
- Gabba complete rebuild for olympics
- Tasmania a new stadium
- plus ovals and community ground popping up all over the place for AFLW etc

NRL can’t even manage to upgrade Liechardt Oval ffs… It’s not even fair, someone stop the fight. Gil and his merry men have just ripped PVL’s heart out thru his throat and feasted on it. No wonder Gil says sweet FA about PVL in public. He’s too busy laughing about him behind closed doors

This times a thousand.
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,587
half doesnt go to the players. Never has. Players get 28% of total AFL revenue. Not just tv rights, but this includes funding for the AFLPA and player welfare programs too
Ok let’s see if the afl salary cap goes up 2.5 million which is around 30 percent

I mean sure foxtel just apparently doubled what they pay afl
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,587
I’ve seen some hot takes in my time but this might be the hottest.

So the bloke and the commission who presided over a deal that is 50% higher than their competitor despite having similar attendance figures isn’t fit to tie the shoelaces of a bloke who could barely get a 5% increase on the previous deal; despite setting up a new side and giving in to every one of the broadcasters demands? Rightio then

Also how long is Super League going to be an excuse for some people? It ended over 20 years ago. The Super League war isn’t the reason for V’Landys giving away our digital rights for a song, talking to nobody but Nine/Foxtel or for getting practically nothing for extra content. That’s on him and the commission - nobody else.
If you really believe gill figures I truly am shocked

do you really believe foxtel went from 230 million to 470 million pa ?
 

Latest posts

Top