7 and 10 wins AFL rights, Does it affect your club?

[ibeme]

Would be naive to think that the AFL having over 40mill a year more in cash to spend isn't in some way going to allow their sport to be promoted, developed etc better than the NRL.

A lot of that 40mill will be swallowed up by increased player salaries. Player managers aren't going to stand by and allow the AFL to bring in more cash without sharing it with the players.

 

[taipan]

A lot of that 40mill will be swallowed up by increased player salaries. Player managers aren't going to stand by and allow the AFL to bring in more cash without sharing it with the players.

apparently the players are already lining up for an increased share of the action,

 

[Twizzle]

yeh, the players union rep has already been on radio today, saying this now justifies an increase of the average wage of $180K for a sport with such a short playing span

 

[legend]

Then League players and the union will be lining up for thier slice of the NRL pie which has the potential to cause a few problems and a strike as a worst case scenario.

 

[Misty Bee]

Is AFL slowly damaging itself by staking it's claim on having huge audiences for each match? Not only will it bleed long term with the population shift from the southern capitals to NSW/Queensland regions, but does it out-greed itself by tryiong to get the most out of every deal?

I mean, $700 million is a huge sum. To get that amount, they are now selliong their product (and have been for a few years) to rival networks, with the potential to split their audience with games coinciding. Even having a C10 game following a C7 game would invite an audience leak in comparison to consecutive games on the same network.

Then their is the Footy Channel. Having a channel specifically for your sport is a major boon - your product gets 24/7/365 air time. How can Fox justify maintaining that with only 3 fresh games per week? Who would get subscription for 3 lousy games per week?

Pay TV is a greater revenue source per viewer. That's why Foxtel/News loves the NRL - and ultimately why the code went to war. The NRL is a MAJOR earner for Foxtel.

AFL get their free to air live games in less watched timeslots on Saturday, strengthening themselves in a media which is in decline, in a region that is in decline, with potential to compete with itself by sharing their product with rival networks.

Meanwhile, the NRL get less money, but guarantee their income stream, and the value of their product the next time around. Already the AFL drools over NRL ratings on pay TV, and the subscriptions that come with it. So the NRL maintain their comfort zone - FNF, Footy show, and 3 League shows on Sunday, plus the income and promotion of Super Saturday.

League, in the regions, is again the huge winner. In my region, TV is our total footy access. My kids can get into the game because of it.

AFL, by ignoring the regions, and hinging it's existence on being the biggest, has made itself too big for the regions. And it's the regions, esp in League territories, which have the biggest population growths.

League wins again.

 

[_Johnsy]

Is it too much to as to have all the SOO, GF and fri night & sunday games at the same hour as NSW and QLD ???

 

[Misty Bee]

When Queensland itself gets on the same hour as NSW, maybe.

 

[Green Machine]

You will find Young, Temora, Cootamundra and surrounding areas get Wagga's WIN feed - so they in fact get the AFL on WIN when Wagga does. You can show all those towns (many in fact get NBN which is completely different to WIN), but the Southern NSW area is big and takes a fair chunk out of rural television ratings.

Alex,
I’ll take you on what you have said that the AFL has been on occasions screened before the NRL on a Friday Night in Wagga. Take the towns Young, Cootamundra and Temora.

Now, stack them up against the rest of Southern NSW with Dubbo, Parkes, Orange, Bathurst, Lithgow, Forbes, Wellington, Cowra, Mudgee, Batemans Bay, Ulladulla, Moruya, Bega, Queanbeyan, Canberra, Cooma, Nowra, Wollongong, Shellharbour, Albion Park, Dapto, Southern Highlands and Goulbourn, which is lot bigger chunk

Not to mention Blue Mountains and the Sydney metro area

Plus, not mentioning the largest regional population in NSW north of Sydney serviced by NBN including Central Coast, Newcastle, Coal Fields, Lake Macquarie, Nelson Bay, Forster, Taree, Port Macquarie, Kempsey, Coffs Harbour, Casino, Grafton, Lismore, Ballina, Murwillumbah, Tweed Heads, Singleton, Muswellbrook, Scone, Tamworth, Armidale, Gunnedah, Moree, Inverell and Glen Innes,

 

[El Diablo]

NBN are also on the Gold Coast but so are channel 9.

 

[Green Machine]

NBN are also on the Gold Coast but so are channel 9.

Not to mention the state of Queensland

 

[ozzie]

won't effect me at all. I don't watch Nine's coverage except for the replay on Austar. Therefore I don't have to watch tight shorts rules.

The only annoying part of rugby league v Swans both at home is the crowd in the SCG area. But now I get aorund that by buying my tickets at the Easts Club on match day after parking in the club area - have a beer or two then catch the bus to the game - straight to the gate - no hassles and step out of the ground and throw my keys to the my son and have a few more in the club.

 

[Green Machine]

http://smh.com.au/news/business/seven-ten-win-780m-battle-for-afl/2006/01/05/1136387573051.html

Seven, Ten win $780m battle for AFL

By Lisa Murray
January 6, 2006

AUSTRALIA'S richest sports rights contract has been awarded to networks Seven and Ten after they agreed yesterday to match Nine's hefty $780 million bid to televise AFL games from 2007 to 2011.

As a sign of good faith in the new partnership, Seven also dropped Ten from the $1.1 billion lawsuit over the demise of its pay TV arm, C7.

The AFL was dropped from the action last month.

Both Seven and Ten were claiming victory yesterday, as the AFL rights typically deliver about 2 percentage points in ratings every year, but some industry analysts warn there are more battles ahead.

Seven and Ten must now sit down with Foxtel to negotiate how much it will pay to broadcast up to four of the eight AFL games each week. As Foxtel was part of Nine's losing AFL bid, is part owned by Nine parent Publishing & Broadcasting Ltd and is also one of the defendants in the high-profile C7 case, the negotiations are likely to be tense.

Nine's acting chief executive, Sam Chisholm, who was said to be bitterly disappointed about losing the AFL from next year, also sits on the Foxtel board.

A source close to Foxtel said Seven and Ten had taken a "big gamble" in signing up for the rights without holding discussions with the pay TV operator first.

Analysts expect Foxtel to pay less to Seven and Ten for its games than the $60 million it is believed to have offered Nine.

Ten's head of sport, David White, said there was no urgency to start negotiations with Foxtel.

Foxtel is in a strong negotiating position because Seven and Ten need to offload some games on Friday and Saturday nights to ensure a good ratings schedule, especially in Sydney and Brisbane.

However, the AFL games are also important to Foxtel as they secure its market position in Melbourne, Perth and Adelaide and support its 24-hour football channel.

"We have held no discussions with Seven and Ten about any aspect of their bid," a Foxtel spokeswoman said.

The broadcast deal will see AFL stay with Ten next year, after being a significant part of its schedule over the past four years.

It will also put AFL back on Seven, which showed the sport for more than four decades before losing the rights in 2002.

"We are pleased to be back in football," Seven's executive chairman, Kerry Stokes, said in a statement yesterday.

Fund managers said that while Seven and Ten had paid a full price, the AFL rights were important for ratings performance and sentiment toward their stocks.

"It's a big price that has been paid for sporting rights but you have to remember that TV has moved away from movies to live events and concept TV," 452 Capital's Peter Morgan said.

"It's a five-year deal and it's important to their schedule."

Goldman Sachs JBWere analysts believe the AFL deal is a loss maker to the tune of $20 million a year, without taking into account the indirect benefit for ratings.

Citigroup analysts said the rights were becoming a poisoned chalice. Seven fell 8c yesterday to $8.35, Ten 2c to $3.13 and PBL 4c to $16.70.

Ten's Mr White dismissed analysts' concerns about the cost of the rights. "We're not very good at losing money and we think this in the best interests of Ten so we're doing whatever we can to add value to the company," he said.

Of the $780 million bid, $85 million covers on-air advertising and cross-promotion. The rest is cash.

 

[Alex28]

There is no denying they have paid a premium for the rights. I agree that it wont lift their ratings in NSW and QLD (depending on how the Sawns and Lions are going from 2007 on but even then...). But there are AFL fans in NSW and QLD and the sport absolutely dominates the other states - thats where they are going to get their ratings from.

I'm home now so I'll take a look for the article where it refers to what the AFL does to national ratings. All I know is it was based on the ratings rise Nine had when they got the AFL rights, and that Seven can command a premium for advertising rates if they can say they are the Number 1 station nationally (estimated at $10 Million per annum per point of increase).

Please note I am not stating that they can be Number 1 in NSW and QLD with the AFL rights. I have never said that.

 

[Raider_69]

good for my club

this will give us a better chance to get better coverage in the outta states, which will be good for the game and the benifits of whats good for the game will fliter down to being good for mine and 14 (15 come 2007) other clubs

 

[Razor]

What I want to know is why the NRL don't sell the "final right to bid" themselves - what a great revenue source!

Yes they do. Channel 9 own the first and last bidding rights.

 

[Razor]

Seven and Ten must now sit down with Foxtel to negotiate how much it will pay to broadcast up to four of the eight AFL games each week. As Foxtel was part of Nine's losing AFL bid, is part owned by Nine parent Publishing & Broadcasting Ltd and is also one of the defendants in the high-profile C7 case, the negotiations are likely to be tense.

Nine's acting chief executive, Sam Chisholm, who was said to be bitterly disappointed about losing the AFL from next year, also sits on the Foxtel board.

A source close to Foxtel said Seven and Ten had taken a "big gamble" in signing up for the rights without holding discussions with the pay TV operator first.

Analysts expect Foxtel to pay less to Seven and Ten for its games than the $60 million it is believed to have offered Nine.

But they don't have to sell the rights to those 3 games to anyone. Seven/Ten own the rights to all 8 matches, same as Nine did. There's no requirement that they have to on-sell matches to pay TV, or show matches in prime time. Initially Seven/Ten had live Friday & Saturday night as part of their bid, but the AFL rejected that. Seven/Ten simply matched Nines offer. Nine had no guarentee of live coverage in QLD or NSW. It was expected that they would, but it wasn't part of the condition of the contract.

So Fox Footy will cease to exist I say.

 

[Green Machine]

But they don't have to sell the rights to those 3 games to anyone. Seven/Ten own the rights to all 8 matches, same as Nine did. There's no requirement that they have to on-sell matches to pay TV, or show matches in prime time. Initially Seven/Ten had live Friday & Saturday night as part of their bid, but the AFL rejected that. Seven/Ten simply matched Nines offer. Nine had no guarentee of live coverage in QLD or NSW. It was expected that they would, but it wasn't part of the condition of the contract.

So Fox Footy will cease to exist I say.

Sorry Razor,

Are you talking to me or to the Lisa Murray article I posted?

Fox Footy Channel will cease to exist if Channel 7 can’t cut a deal with Foxsports owners PBL and News Ltd and probably the half owner of Foxtel, Telstra. This from Roy Masters in regards to three extra matches that Fox Footy Channel currently screen:

If Foxtel refuses to take any AFL matches, Seven and Ten could be forced to cannibalise each other on Saturday nights. Both networks would be forced to telecast matches against each other, drawing viewers away from each network.

Forget NSW and Queensland, but what does that mean for revenue from Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth TV markets. In Adelaide if say the Crows are playing a game on Channel 7 and over on 10, they are showing the Swans/Lions against a Melbourne side, what would be the ratings difference. This from Roy Masters on Channel 7’s relationship with the AFL:

The AFL has not disguised its anger at Seven over the C7 court case, or enmity with Ten over switching broadcasting camps, making it obvious they hoped the Nine/Foxtel bid would succeed.

This from Roy Masters in regards to 7 & 10’s Pay TV proposal

Under the initial Seven/Ten proposal, Foxtel would screen three of the eight weekly matches.

However, there has been no communication between Seven/Ten and Foxtel, which is 25 per cent owned by the Packer family's PBL.

Nor are Seven/Ten aware of the amount of money Foxtel committed to Nine for it to cover four matches a week.

I’m sure Telstra, the half owner of Foxtel would not want to upset the AFL with all the other deals they have including internet and 3G. I’m sure something will be worked out to keep three games on Foxtel, but maybe not at the rate that 7 & 10 hoped for. This from Roy on Kerry Stokes and his drive to be the number network without the help of Fox Footy Channel:

A further complication is televising the Friday night match of the round in the northern states.

Under the Nine/Foxtel offer, Foxtel would show the match live in NSW and Queensland.

If Foxtel was not a partner, Seven would be forced to televise the match live to NSW and Queensland, in competition with Nine's back-to-back NRL games.

And finally, what Channel 7 and 10 got:

Furthermore, they will have cost their rival networks a fortune.

"Seven once had all the AFL and now they may have half," an executive said.

"Ten had the finals and now they have half the finals. "Both have paid an awful lot of money for half of what they once had."

 

[Southern Rooster]

i seriously don't think the coverage will change for the better in victoria

but i really hope it does

IF Kerry was still around and in charge it wouldn't have but maybe with Jamie there it might be a bit different. Channel 10 did the right thing and lost ratings by putting the Swans porime time in Sydney will be interesting to see if 9 does the same in Vic, WA, SA etc with the league.

 

[El Diablo]

AFL idiots seem to think Foxtel need their queer game. Fox Footy is one of the worst rating channels on Pay and 7/10 are the one's that will have to get on their hands and knees, not the other way around.

Foxtel also somehow managed to survive for years with no androtop ball. I hope Fox tell them to shove the stupid game up their clacker.

 

[Alex28]

IF Kerry was still around and in charge it wouldn't have but maybe with Jamie there it might be a bit different. Channel 10 did the right thing and lost ratings by putting the Swans porime time in Sydney will be interesting to see if 9 does the same in Vic, WA, SA etc with the league.

The sad truth is that a repeat movie rates better than NRL in AFL states, just like it rates better than AFL in NSW and QLD. The ratings battle between 9 and 7 will be that close and that valuable to the leading network that they will not take a punt for the sake of the game. They will make sound business decisions that will be the best for the network.

It's a shame though agreed...