2023-2028 next tv deal discussion

[Perth Red]

Just thinking in the 'catching up' terms though. Say the extra game is +30 mill, on top of what has already been given as +20 mill for the dolphins. For the next contract that is something like + 30 NRL. However, the AFL are going to bring in Tasmania (Just looking that's slated as 2027) when our new deal will be about to start, so that's + 20 for their additional 12 games too.

So effectively, wouldn't we only be gaining + 10 mill on the competition anyway (+30 - 20)?

That might be why New Zealand may be preferred, because you could get the extra 30 mill from fox, then extra millions from sky as well, if it's their own local team.

Regardless, I think after the embarrassment recently, Vlandy's will wanna maximise dollars. What extra he wants to sell off to achieve this we'd hope would strike the right balance between dollars and what's good for the fans.

Given the size of their deal Id be very surprised if it doesnt already have in it for the 19th club. They are going through the motions but with that much money I'd be amazed if Tassie arent already in under the table.

As for us, the only way the gap is closing in any meaningful way is to go to open market for 2028- and hope there's a bidding war like AFL experienced. Interestingly I very much doubt Fox has got the money left to be in a bidding war after what they are going to be splashing out on AFL, so if there is one Id fully expect a rival to win it. One of the reasons Fox will be going hard for an extension until 2031 I suspect.
Might net us $30mill or so extra but still leaves us $150mill behind AFL!

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Given the size of their deal Id be very surprised if it doesnt already have in it for the 19th club. They are going through the motions but with that much money I'd be amazed if Tassie arent already in under the table.

As for us, the only way the gap is closing in any meaningful way is to go to open market for 2028- and hope there's a bidding war like AFL experienced. Interestingly I very much doubt Fox has got the money left to be in a bidding war after what they are going to be splashing out on AFL, so if there is one Id fully expect a rival to win it. One of the reasons Fox will be going hard for an extension until 2031 I suspect.
Might net us $30mill or so extra but still leaves us $150mill behind AFL!

At this stage we're better off accepting our position and should try to get a rival to give us more than Foxtel are giving us now, or at least match what we're currently getting. We should tell Ch9/Stan that they need to give us no less than $500m per annum for all games and screen them across FTA and Stan, since that's what they offered the other mob. We know they have this money so there's no excuse since they showed their hand. If they don't cough up then go with Ch10/Paramount+. We really need to get away from Foxtel for everything News Ltd has done to hold our game back and make Ch9 have no choice but to go all in or get lost.

 

[Wb1234]

At this stage we're better off accepting our position and should try to get a rival to give us more than Foxtel are giving us now, or at least match what we're currently getting. We should tell Ch9/Stan that they need to give us no less than $500m per annum for all games and screen them across FTA and Stan, since that's what they offered the other mob. We know they have this money so there's no excuse since they showed their hand. If they don't cough up then go with Ch10/Paramount+. We really need to get away from Foxtel for everything News Ltd has done to hold our game back and make Ch9 have no choice but to go all in or get lost.

 

[Wb1234]

At this stage we're better off accepting our position and should try to get a rival to give us more than Foxtel are giving us now, or at least match what we're currently getting. We should tell Ch9/Stan that they need to give us no less than $500m per annum for all games and screen them across FTA and Stan, since that's what they offered the other mob. We know they have this money so there's no excuse since they showed their hand. If they don't cough up then go with Ch10/Paramount+. We really need to get away from Foxtel for everything News Ltd has done to hold our game back and make Ch9 have no choice but to go all in or get lost.

Great post

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Perfect example if they can't stream Stan Sports now then what will change in a few years?

As for EPL, They likely have a chromecast or something. It works for one TV but you can't do it on multiple TV's

You can stream EPL perfectly through Fetch.

 

[docbrown]

They still couldn't sell the ninth game slot separately to someone else until the next contract though. The current contract has been sold with the 12 games a 17th side brought. If they sold the ninth game to someone else Fox then loses those 12 games and Ch9 the 4 games they are getting from the 17th club entering. Ninth game will only be sold to the existing partners OR in 2028 in a new contract period.

They're literally extending the next season over 27 weeks to incorporate the extra 12 games and the extra byes from a 17th side. To suggest that the NRL can't modify the schedule to suit their own best interests doesn't make any sense. With 18 teams all they'd have to do is to keep the 27 weeks but play 25 rounds (12 home, 12 away and magic round). There's an extra 9 games plus the extra 12 from the 18th team. Change to a Top 9 finals system you can add an extra finals game. Now there's a whole 22 games - pretty much one extra game per round for a full season - that a broadcaster has to pay for, in additional to the benefit of a new timeslot and new team market. I know you're pessimistic about the NRL management as am I but it's not some impossible thing to do.

 

[Diesel]

They're literally extending the next season over 27 weeks to incorporate the extra 12 games and the extra byes from a 17th side. To suggest that the NRL can't modify the schedule to suit their own best interests doesn't make any sense. With 18 teams all they'd have to do is to keep the 27 weeks but play 25 rounds (12 home, 12 away and magic round). There's an extra 9 games plus the extra 12 from the 18th team. Change to a Top 9 finals system you can add an extra finals game. Now there's a whole 22 games - pretty much one extra game per round for a full season - that a broadcaster has to pay for, in additional to the benefit of a new timeslot and new team market. I know you're pessimistic about the NRL management as am I but it's not some impossible thing to do.

Or a 10 team final.

Week 1; teams 1 & 2 have the week off while 3-8 play week one of the finals & two eliminated teams eliminated from 7 v 10 and 8 v 9

week 2 winner of 3 v 6 plays team 1 and and 4 v 5 play team 2
week 2 is week 1 of the top 8

 

[Perth Red]

They're literally extending the next season over 27 weeks to incorporate the extra 12 games and the extra byes from a 17th side. To suggest that the NRL can't modify the schedule to suit their own best interests doesn't make any sense. With 18 teams all they'd have to do is to keep the 27 weeks but play 25 rounds (12 home, 12 away and magic round). There's an extra 9 games plus the extra 12 from the 18th team. Change to a Top 9 finals system you can add an extra finals game. Now there's a whole 22 games - pretty much one extra game per round for a full season - that a broadcaster has to pay for, in additional to the benefit of a new timeslot and new team market. I know you're pessimistic about the NRL management as am I but it's not some impossible thing to do.

You keep missing the point, they’ve already sold those 12 games in this contract. They can’t add another round and sell it to someone else as half those games are already sold. Sure they can bring in another club and add the extra round sooner but they’d have to sell it to the incumbents, going out to tender with it is not an option.

 

[docbrown]

They still couldn't sell the ninth game slot separately to someone else until the next contract though. The current contract has been sold with the 12 games a 17th side brought. If they sold the ninth game to someone else Fox then loses those 12 games and Ch9 the 4 games they are getting from the 17th club entering. Ninth game will only be sold to the existing partners OR in 2028 in a new contract period.

Yes they can. The non-compete clause is only valid against existing weekly slots like Friday nights etc. Anything else is a restriction of trade. I've told you that multiple times. The NRL could have done whatever they wanted to with those 12 extra games from the 17th team depending on how they scheduled them. They could have paid for independent production and streamed them themselves on their website or onsold them to another streamer. They sold them to the existing rights partners simply to maximise the money they could get for them because few rival parties would be interested in only a 12 game package at random times of the year. It's not because 9/Foxtel have some first and last rights clause. That clause no longer exists any more (it did like a decade ago though). Any new games that are created are the NRL's to do as they please and I've told you precisely how the NRL can create a package of 22 games (that don't include the 12 already sold) with a unique weekly timeslot by extending the competition by only 1 round when the 18th team is introduced. That's something rival networks and streamers would take seriously to eat into 9/Foxtel halo and build flow on programming.

The only non-compete clause the 9 or Foxtel can activate is when it clashes with their existing broadcast schedule and Monday/Sunday nights do not do that. Hell, if the NRL wanted to, they could plan to bring in a 9th game in 2025/2026/2027 then sell the rights to that game as part of a package for selling the rights beyond 2027.

 

[Phil McGrawhan]

Yes they can. The non-compete clause is only valid against existing weekly slots like Friday nights etc. Anything else is a restriction of trade. I've told you that multiple times. The NRL could have done whatever they wanted to with those 12 extra games from the 17th team depending on how they scheduled them. They could have paid for independent production and streamed them themselves on their website or onsold them to another streamer. They sold them to the existing rights partners simply to maximise the money they could get for them because few rival parties would be interested in only a 12 game package at random times of the year. It's not because 9/Foxtel have some first and last rights clause. That clause no longer exists any more (it did like a decade ago though). Any new games that are created are the NRL's to do as they please and I've told you precisely how the NRL can create a package of 22 games (that don't include the 12 already sold) with a unique weekly timeslot by extending the competition by only 1 round when the 18th team is introduced. That's something rival networks and streamers would take seriously to eat into 9/Foxtel halo and build flow on programming.

The only non-compete clause the 9 or Foxtel can activate is when it clashes with their existing broadcast schedule and Monday/Sunday nights do not do that. Hell, if the NRL wanted to, they could plan to bring in a 9th game in 2025/2026/2027 then sell the rights to that game as part of a package for selling the rights beyond 2027.

You can tell him a million times
he won't take any notice .His PVL obsession overrules everything.

 

[Steel Saints]

Yes they can. The non-compete clause is only valid against existing weekly slots like Friday nights etc. Anything else is a restriction of trade. I've told you that multiple times. The NRL could have done whatever they wanted to with those 12 extra games from the 17th team depending on how they scheduled them. They could have paid for independent production and streamed them themselves on their website or onsold them to another streamer. They sold them to the existing rights partners simply to maximise the money they could get for them because few rival parties would be interested in only a 12 game package at random times of the year. It's not because 9/Foxtel have some first and last rights clause. That clause no longer exists any more (it did like a decade ago though). Any new games that are created are the NRL's to do as they please and I've told you precisely how the NRL can create a package of 22 games (that don't include the 12 already sold) with a unique weekly timeslot by extending the competition by only 1 round when the 18th team is introduced. That's something rival networks and streamers would take seriously to eat into 9/Foxtel halo and build flow on programming.

The only non-compete clause the 9 or Foxtel can activate is when it clashes with their existing broadcast schedule and Monday/Sunday nights do not do that. Hell, if the NRL wanted to, they could plan to bring in a 9th game in 2025/2026/2027 then sell the rights to that game as part of a package for selling the rights beyond 2027.

Interesting thoughts and ideas. An extra team and round. If Fox and Nine weren't interested or got outbid, then you would hope that a network gets the rights to that 22 game package you referred to, rather than another streaming provider. You don't want to give fans another bill to pay.

Have a look at football:
Optus-EPL and La Liga
Stan- Champions League
Paramount- A League.

Fragmentation at it's worst. Too many providers to pay, and the A League is left isolated.

 

[Perth Red]

You cant sell something you’ve already sold! They’ve sold those 12 games until 2027. ergo you can’t sell a ninth game to someone else that includes those 12 games Until 2028!

 

[The_Wookie]

You cant sell something you’ve already sold! They’ve sold those 12 games until 2027. ergo you can’t sell a ninth game to someone else that includes those 12 games Until 2028!

Its not going to be 9 games every week as with 17 teams someone is going to have a bye. They may have sold the Dolphins home games with the current deal but each new team adds another 12 home games to the schedule. Any 18th team would have another 12 games to add to the season that may or may not be able to be leveraged for a better deal or for a separate deal - an 18th team would enable that 9th game to be every week.

 

[Iamback]

At this stage we're better off accepting our position and should try to get a rival to give us more than Foxtel are giving us now, or at least match what we're currently getting. We should tell Ch9/Stan that they need to give us no less than $500m per annum for all games and screen them across FTA and Stan, since that's what they offered the other mob. We know they have this money so there's no excuse since they showed their hand. If they don't cough up then go with Ch10/Paramount+. We really need to get away from Foxtel for everything News Ltd has done to hold our game back and make Ch9 have no choice but to go all in or get lost.

Yet people won't watch ch9. Now this is better?

 

[Nerd]

Its not going to be 9 games every week as with 17 teams someone is going to have a bye. They may have sold the Dolphins home games with the current deal but each new team adds another 12 home games to the schedule. Any 18th team would have another 12 games to add to the season that may or may not be able to be leveraged for a better deal or for a separate deal - an 18th team would enable that 9th game to be every week.

I agree. An 18th team gives the NRL some leverage with Fox and Nine. Here's hoping they have the gumption to do it and a new player can not only add money to the existing rights deal but start some early tension for the next deal.

Fox and Nein would have to put their hands deep into their pockets for the extra games as we all know now they have the cash. That or allow a competitor to start eating away at the cash cow that is the NRL rights. Lets not forget that Fox without the NRL would have serious problems with profitability and having the funds to finance their AFL deal.

 

[JD-Roo]

Interesting thoughts and ideas. An extra team and round. If Fox and Nine weren't interested or got outbid, then you would hope that a network gets the rights to that 22 game package you referred to, rather than another streaming provider. You don't want to give fans another bill to pay.

Have a look at football:
Optus-EPL and La Liga
Stan- Champions League
Paramount- A League.

Fragmentation at it's worst. Too many providers to pay, and the A League is left isolated.

For what it's worth, this was on The Age website today. So streaming might not get the free run it's been having so far.......

Sports TV rights review to put streaming services under microscope

 

[gUt]

If you prefer not to give Rupert clicks:

Streaming platforms may be restricted from broadcasting some live sports, pending review

Digital streaming services may have access to certain live sports restricted to ensure Australians can continue to watch major events on free-to-air television.

The change is being considered amid a review of the government's anti-siphoning scheme, which stops subscription services such as Foxtel from acquiring media rights to certain sports unless a free-to-air broadcaster has already acquired them.

At the moment, the scheme does not stop streaming services such as Kayo, Optus Sports or Amazon Prime from acquiring exclusive rights to the same, high-profile sporting events.

The federal government is seeking industry feedback on how the anti-siphoning scheme could be improved, given rapid changes around digital media and how people watch live sport.

"Every Australian deserves the chance to enjoy live and free coverage of events of national significance, regardless of where they live or what they earn," Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said.

"Subscription-based services make a valuable contribution to Australia's media market and consumer choice, but not everyone can afford to pay for sport."
The current anti-siphoning list includes the Olympic Games, Commonwealth Games, AFL, rugby league, rugby union, soccer, tennis, netball, motor sports, horse racing and cricket.

This review will also consider whether the list of sports should also be changed or expanded.

A consultation paper released by the government on Monday warns there is a "risk that new players in the sports distribution market will obtain exclusive media rights to events on the anti-siphoning list".

Media consumption changing quickly​

The paper notes that most online sports coverage has generally been "complementary" to traditional television broadcasting in Australia.

However, it also warns that media consumption patterns are changing quickly and that live sport on streaming services is increasingly common overseas.

In Germany, streaming services accounted for one quarter of the overall spend on sports TV rights.

And, in Italy, the share is expected to reach 53 per cent this year.

"The impact of online coverage of sporting events — in terms of interest and participation in sport — is difficult to ascertain, given the relative recency of the trend and the lack of publicly available research and data," the report said.

"However, this is expected to evolve over the coming years as sporting codes look to capitalise on the opportunities presented by online streaming services."

Consultation on changes to the scheme will be open until December 6.

"The televising of key sports competitions helps to create shared experiences, foster a collective Australian identity and contributes to grassroots community-based sports participation," Ms Rowland said.

"This consultation is an opportunity for Australians, industry, sports clubs, and other interested groups to have their say about the future of sport on TV in Australia."

The free broadcast of major sporting events has seen a significant increase in the uptake of a sport at a grassroots level.

According to the consultation paper, Tennis Australia reported a 343 per cent increase in the sport after the Australian Open was broadcast this year.

Free broadcasting of the AFLW has also been credited with increasing participation figures from 194,966 in 2014, to more than 600,000 last year.

 

[gUt]

Free broadcasting of the AFLW has also been credited with increasing participation figures from 194,966 in 2014, to more than 600,000 last year.

 

[Perth Red]

Its not going to be 9 games every week as with 17 teams someone is going to have a bye. They may have sold the Dolphins home games with the current deal but each new team adds another 12 home games to the schedule. Any 18th team would have another 12 games to add to the season that may or may not be able to be leveraged for a better deal or for a separate deal - an 18th team would enable that 9th game to be every week.

yes I know that but they've sold 12 of the 24 new games a ninth game brings already lol. That will prevent them selling the ninth game to anyone other than the incumbents. 2028 would be the earliest they could sell the ninth game to someone else.

 

[Perth Red]

If you prefer not to give Rupert clicks:

Streaming platforms may be restricted from broadcasting some live sports, pending review

I'd rather pay and watch decent coverage!