Did Gallop sell us short?

[Green Machine]

I thought SBS had already said they wouldn't televise AFL as it doesn't fit in with their charter.

Also, they get better ratings in Sydney by showing The Iron Chef.

I would not discount anything out from PBL. I would not believe a charter would stop anything from going to air on SBS or the ABC for that matter. SBS and the ABC in the end report to the Minister for Communications. I’m sure John Howard would have cleared all blockages for this year’s Ashes Series to appear on SBS to make sure cricket fans could access the games and to help a couple of old media mogul mates out of an embarrassing position. I would like to know what the offer was from PBL to SBS to show AFL games into NSW & QLD. I wonder if PBL was going to provide the feed for free, plus a bit of cash in their offer to SBS. I would hate to think a public broadcaster like SBS would actually pay to screen “Live” AFL games into NSW and QLD and run 5th in the ratings. For 8 AFL games, Channel 9 could deliver only two games on Saturday and Sunday afternoon “Live” into NSW and QLD. The AFL draw allows for:

1 Friday Night Game 7.40pm

2 Saturday Afternoon Games 2.10pm

2 Saturday Night Games at 7.10pm

3 Sunday Games at 1.10pm – 2.10pm (1 or 2) – 4.40pm (or 1)

If the AFL are going to deliver better coverage to NSW and QLD (as they have stated), that would mean Foxsports would have to deliver more than 4 games into NSW and QLD, if SBS is not in the equation. If more than 4 games in NSW and QLD go to PayTV, is that better TV coverage or less coverage. The best possible scenario for Channel 9 in NSW and QLD would be to do two “Live” afternoon games (one each on Saturday and Sunday) and show an evening match at 9.30pm on a Saturday Night. I could not see Channel 9 taking a bucketing in advertising revenue on a Saturday night between 7.30pm and 9.30pm. If Channel 9 went with 3 games in NSW and QLD, that would leave 5 games for PayTV or maybe games for another network, like say SBS. The AFL would not divulge the details of Channel 9’s coverage at their media conference. PBL have screwed Rugby League too many times for me to believe anything they would say,

 

[jed]

But The Ashes were held in a foreign country and was deemed to be of national interest and therefore able to be televised under their charter. The main roadblock to SBS showing the cricket was always the cost to purchase the telecast rights.

They originally came out and said that broadcasting sport for the masses was not a part of their charter, that they were set up to cater for niche markets. However the cost was always an issue for them.

 

[El Diablo]

They originally came out and said that broadcasting sport for the masses was not a part of their charter, that they were set up to cater for niche markets. However the cost was always an issue for them.

but SBS are unable to do what 9 wants and only show it into two states. I think that is part of the no reason.

 

[Quigs]

but SBS are unable to do what 9 wants and only show it into two states. I think that is part of the no reason.

SBS - they still got the spunkiest sports commentator of them all

aarrh Stephenie..........

She can call what ever she likes, she will always have my undivided attention

Cheers
Quigs

 

[Alex28]

I think what is being forgotten in the AFL market v NRL market is that NSW and QLD have NRL, Union and AFL all competing for the market, where as VIC, SA, WA and TAS really only have AFL (I'll wait to be convinced that Union will have any great stronghold in WA with the Force starting this year). Those markets are AFL obsessed - NSW and QLD residents simply do not show as much passion for any sport that Victorians do (for an example, take a look at the Herald Sun during AFL season and look at the 30-odd pages of coverage AFL gets on a weekday).

AFL is a nationwide sport and $760 Million for 5 years is probably a fair price for it given it will add 2 ratings points a week (thats overall - not just for the timeslot that it is shown in). For Seven and Nine - it is the difference between finishing first and second in the ratings. That mantle alone is worth millions in revenue.

Whether Nine can actually show 4 games of AFL and 3 games of NRL a week is irrelevent in the end - Seven and Ten will get the rights in the end (if only to screw over KP one last time).

But as for the value of AFL over League - it's chalk and cheese. AFL rates in every state - yes, even in NSW and QLD (particularly with strong Sawns and Lions teams). NRL rates in NSW and QLD. Completely different markets, completely different values...

 

[Alex28]

1 Friday Night Game 7.40pm

2 Saturday Afternoon Games 2.10pm

2 Saturday Night Games at 7.10pm

3 Sunday Games at 1.10pm – 2.10pm (1 or 2) – 4.40pm (or 1)

Channel Nine can show footy in the following way in NSW and QLD:

Friday night:
7:30 - Rugby League Game 1
9:15 - Rugby League Game 2
11:00 - AFL Game 1

Saturday:
Afternoon - AFL Game 2
Night - AFL Game 3

Sunday:
Midday - AFL Game 4
4pm - NRL Game 3

It can be done - I can't see any other way that Nine could do it given they are committing to 3 NRL games and 4 AFL games every week. Finals series would be interesting tho - How would they show each game live?

 

[jed]

Channel Nine can show footy in the following way in NSW and QLD:

Friday night:
7:30 - Rugby League Game 1
9:15 - Rugby League Game 2
11:00 - AFL Game 1

Saturday:
Afternoon - AFL Game 2
Night - AFL Game 3

Sunday:
Midday - AFL Game 4
4pm - NRL Game 3

It can be done - I can't see any other way that Nine could do it given they are committing to 3 NRL games and 4 AFL games every week. Finals series would be interesting tho - How would they show each game live?

Theoretically the above schedule could be done, however for them to make any money, they would need to sell a lot of advertising. Showing the 7:30 game live would only allow about 10-12 minutes of advertising, rather than the 20+ that they currently run. Likewise, the 9:15 delayed game would have a similar amount of advertising. If 9 were to broadcast 3 games, they'd be looking to run upwards of 55-60 minutes to cover their costs.

 

[Green Machine]

Channel Nine can show footy in the following way in NSW and QLD:

Friday night:
7:30 - Rugby League Game 1
9:15 - Rugby League Game 2
11:00 - AFL Game 1

Alex, firstly, they will not be showing the footy that of an interest 50% of Australia’s population in NSW & QLD. Putting AFL on a 11.00pm is no improvement on what the AFL have now. The AFL have stated that they want an improvement with coverage in NSW and QLD. They do screen AFL on Foxtel at 9.30pm in NSW and Queensland on a Friday Night. Maybe they could get an earlier start on Foxtel.

Saturday:
Afternoon - AFL Game 2

Agree

Night - AFL Game 3

There is no way that Channel 9 in NSW or QLD would be committed to running 5th in the ratings on a Saturday Night between 7.30pm-9.30pm. That could not afford to lose that much advertising revenue to 50% of the population of this country that lives in NSW and QLD. Channel 7 and Channel 10 have tried in the past in making Saturday Night AFL a regular feature in NSW and QLD. For the Swans to run 5th behind the Iron Chef on a Saturday Night is not a great response to AFL in NSW on a Saturday evening, not to mention other AFL games not involving the Swans that rate worse.

Sunday:
Midday - AFL Game 4
4pm - NRL Game 3

Agree

It can be done - I can't see any other way that Nine could do it given they are committing to 3 NRL games and 4 AFL games every week. Finals series would be interesting tho - How would they show each game live?

I would think that PBL’s proposal would have been for 5 FTA games and 3 PayTV games in the Southern States. I think the AFL will get a backlash from the traditional supporters in the Southern States if they are suddenly told they their FTA diet is reduced from 5 to 4 games by taking PBL’s offer of 4FTA and 4PayTV games. The bottom line is AFL is ratings lemon in prime time night time TV in NSW and QLD. The NRL Final Series will clash more with the AFL with NRL Finals being moved to Friday and Saturday Nights

 

[Alex28]

I think you will find that they have committed to showing 2 games of NRL on Friday night as part of the new agreement (I could be wrong tho), so if they are to show 4 games of AFL as part of the new agreement, I don't know where else they can play those games on TV.

Either way, I would be surprised if 7 & 10 don't up the offer given they paid $20 Million for the right of last bid on the AFL rights, so we wont have too many dramas with NRL and AFL clashes...

 

[El Diablo]

I think you will find that they have committed to showing 2 games of NRL on Friday night as part of the new agreement (I could be wrong tho), so if they are to show 4 games of AFL as part of the new agreement, I don't know where else they can play those games on TV.

Either way, I would be surprised if 7 & 10 don't up the offer given they paid $20 Million for the right of last bid on the AFL rights, so we wont have too many dramas with NRL and AFL clashes...

the funny thing is because the AFL have gone for the cash 7 have decide to change the way they show AFL should the rights go to them :lol:

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,17688403%255E11088,00.html

Cash is the key to AFL rights
Damian Barrett
30dec05

PROMISES to promote football in the black spots of the northern states will not be part of the Channels 7-10 counter bid for AFL broadcasting rights.

In a strategy that dramatically reshapes the AFL TV landscape, Seven and Ten have taken the view they need only match finances, not coverage, of the Channel 9 bid conditionally accepted by the AFL.


In its offer approved by the AFL Commission last Friday, Nine, in partnership with Foxtel and News Limited, publisher of the Herald Sun, pledged $780 million for the 2007-11 football rights.

Nine was allowed to sub-license four matches a week to pay-TV.

Seven and Ten have decided the rights were made purely a matter of money because of the AFL's decision to go with Nine.

They had been convinced their deal was superior in terms of free-to-air coverage in the black spots.

Accountants at Seven and Ten have begun financially analysing the marketplace hoping to project their status, five years ahead, based on both having and not having the football rights.

Removing the pledges to broadcast live or near live in the northern states will mean that ratings losses -- and therefore advertising dollar losses -- are not sustained in New South Wales and Queensland.

Seven initially gave consideration to including selling the management rights to Telstra Dome, valued at $150-$200 million, as part of the TV rights negotiations, but the possibility has been scrubbed.

Seven director of corporate development Simon Francis would not comment on the coverage issue last night, but said his network and Ten would remove emotion from any counter bid.

Under contractual rights to bid last, Seven and Ten have until late next week to match Nine's offer.

"Seven is No. 1 in news and public affairs, is surging in prime time and is well placed to continue this momentum," Francis said.

"We are delivering without the AFL and there is no doubt we would be even more competitive with the television rights to the AFL. We will let our heads and not our hearts make the final decision.

"There is no rush to respond to the AFL and we will make the decision that is in the best interests of our shareholders and our viewers, and we are looking forward to the next time we speak to the AFL."

The AFL has regularly stated coverage in NSW and Queensland was as important as cash in the next rights deal.

While the finer details of the coverage available under the Nine bid will not be known until Seven and Ten decide whether to counter, it is known Foxtel's signal is to be used in the northern markets.

In its first bid rejected by the AFL, Ten had planned to provide live national coverage in NSW and Queensland on Saturday nights, and Seven said it would broadcast in those states from 10.30pm on Fridays.

Nine's conditionally successful $780 million bid includes about $80 million of contra.

It was at least $75 million more than Seven and Ten had offered at the first bid stage.

The AFL said last week Seven and Ten had until next Thursday to respond to the Nine offer, but the networks are working to deadline of next Friday. Should a counter bid be made, Seven would take three Grand Finals within the 2007-11 period, leaving two for Ten.

 

[Green Machine]

I think you will find that they have committed to showing 2 games of NRL on Friday night as part of the new agreement (I could be wrong tho), so if they are to show 4 games of AFL as part of the new agreement, I don't know where else they can play those games on TV.

It is common knowledge that Channel 9 will be going with two NRL games on Friday Nights. What I was trying to point out is for the AFL to improve their TV coverage in NSW and QLD, they have to get better TV times with their Friday and Saturday night games. The AFL currently gets excellent coverage on Saturday and Sunday afternoons. Getting AFL to rate after 6.30pm on any night over the weekend is tough for the AFL in NSW and QLD. Evening viewing is where TV stations make most of their advertising revenue. I agree with you, it will be interesting what is PBL’s proposal for AFL coverage on FTA TV in NSW and QLD.

Either way, I would be surprised if 7 & 10 don't up the offer given they paid $20 Million for the right of last bid on the AFL rights, so we wont have too many dramas with NRL and AFL clashes...

Why would Channel’s 7 & 10 pay an extra $20m when all they have to do is match PBL’s offer. It seems from Damien Barrett’s report that the AFL are after as much cash as possible and will sacrifice coverage in NSW & QLD. The other problem is, does Channel 7 need to purchase the AFL rights when they in position to beat Channel 9 without the AFL in the Southern States:

Under contractual rights to bid last, Seven and Ten have until late next week to match Nine's offer.

"Seven is No. 1 in news and public affairs, is surging in prime time and is well placed to continue this momentum," Francis said.

 

[Alex28]

What I meant is, that Channels 7 & 10 paid $10 Million each to get the final bid - they have already invested $20 Million in the bid process. They then have to match PBL's offer to get the rights.

 

[El Diablo]

channel 7 paid the $20 million when 9 and 10 got the rights

10 didn't pay a cent of it

 

[jed]

10 have repaid half of it to 7 now though, they're joint holders of the last-bid rights

 

[El Diablo]

i see

10 shareholders won't be happy if they lose the rights after bailing on 9 and then forking out $10 mill for nothing.

 

[Quigs]

Give it to Stephenie at SBS and I'll even watch Manly play.

Cheers
Quigs

 

[Perth Red]

Whatever the AFL end up with it will be a damn site more cash and better TV coverage than the NRL is getting. BAsed on that then you would have to say the NRL rushed into a deal that cost a bucket load of money and resigned RL to not having decent free to air coverage until 2013!

 

[El Diablo]

and do you think they'll act any different in 2013?

 

[Surandy]

and do you think they'll act any different in 2013?

I had been looking forward to the new deal, until it was announced. Given the NRL/ARL's track record I strongly doubt the 2013 deal will be any better than what we've got now.

 

[Perth Red]

We can but hope that we have an administrator with bigger balls than Gallop and that News Ltd has cut its ties with running the game.

If not then No!