News Ltd and Control

[Perth Red]

We can do that when we know the financials of the code.
And you have just helped my point.no new CEO should have ties with any club.
And players will not be getting the huge deals they did in the past, because everyone in not only the NRL will have to take financial haircuts.
After the new TV deals are set in stone, head office has its cost cutting exercise completed.
The reason the AFL haven't spent the money in the heartland states, is because of their huge membership ,domination of their sport in each state .
The AFL still have at least 7-8 clubs that need financial support from the AFL dues to losses, and in fact a few AFL clubs in Vic also get poker machine profit assistance,

The areas I suggested for cuts are not revenue making exercises:refs/bunkers/some H/O areas.

The cuts your suggesting are worth what? about 2% of NRL expenditure? If your going to cut then know why your going to cut. What are you going to do with the cost savings that puts you in a better position?

Presuming of course your revenue hasnt taken a massive hit, in which case you have to to cut the cloth to fit the suit and a lot of activity will be reduced accordingly.
Be very interesting to see if Vlandys/the new CEO has the balls to suggest cutting the NRL club grant and salary cap. Never happened before!

 

[Perth Red]

Exactly, are the AFL doing the same?

They are but the tone is very different!

Seeking some certainty amid the COVID-19 crisis that has wiped out football indefinitely, the AFL, the Seven Network and Fox Sports are exploring a new marginally reduced contract that would run until 2024.
The AFL chief has received strong public support from News Corporation and Seven West, which has praised the competition
By stark comparison Nine's chief executive Hugh Marks is attempting to significantly renegotiate down the network's NRL deal over the longer term and has attacked the code for "mismanagement over many years"

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-seven-working-to-extend-broadcast-deal-20200409-p54ip3.html

 

[Perth Red]

I can actually understand clubs asking for a bigger cut. The fact is the NRL/broadcasters forces them to play in unappealing timeslots - Thurs night, Friday 6pm, Sunday 6pm. They have every right to ask for more money.

hang on they got a bigger cut, in fact they got a massive cut compared to previous contracts! Most clubs are getting around $13.2mil a year from NRL. I actually dont mind it being set at 40% of revenue, grants up or down as revenue changes. But stop the bleating about how the NRL spends the other 60% and get your own sht in order !

 

[franklin2323]

They are but the tone is very different!

Seeking some certainty amid the COVID-19 crisis that has wiped out football indefinitely, the AFL, the Seven Network and Fox Sports are exploring a new marginally reduced contract that would run until 2024.
The AFL chief has received strong public support from News Corporation and Seven West, which has praised the competition
By stark comparison Nine's chief executive Hugh Marks is attempting to significantly renegotiate down the network's NRL deal over the longer term and has attacked the code for "mismanagement over many years"

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-seven-working-to-extend-broadcast-deal-20200409-p54ip3.html

No figures in either article so can’t compare but FTA seems to be the issue

 

[Perth Red]

I still say take it the market in mid 2021. If Nine are skint and can only afford 2 FTA games, fine. Lets see if Ch10 want the whole lot or want to buy one game and Origin and share with Ch9. Fox have no option. Without NRL Foxtel and Kayo are dead in the water. Its only a case of how much for Fox. Before then we should invest in a serious business case around NRL producing and selling its own content. If Fox cant match that business case outcome then bye bye, lets go it alone. Fox knowing that is an option for NRl would be enough to scare them into a decent deal.

 

[Perth Red]

No figures in either article so can’t compare but FTA seems to be the issue

Yeh as I said above Fox have no choice, FTA can survive without NRl or AFL but its not good business sense for them to do so if they dont have to. Seeing what happened to Ch10 after they lost AFL will have them both scared. For FTA they dont know what advertising will look like in 12 months so are trying to reduce their risk exposure, Fox are pretty safe in what subscriptions will look like. Kayo is doing well but isnt the high price point of foxtel so that will be a case of numbers over price.

 

[LeagueXIII]

When you don't put money into retirement funds, you have to ask why. Vlandys is an accountant ,he stated there needs to be cuts. Legitmate points .No media narrative.

Disagree...if you read the SMH stated the retirement fund doesn't need the money until 2022.

You believe Greenberg has mismanaged money, because the media get 1 plus 1 and come up with 5. They are attacking him leaving out facts to create a narrative that he is useless, which is completely untrue. This is about the broadcast deal that's it and he wasn't on the side of nine and news ltd so they wanted him punted.

Guess what they punted him and now they are getting what they want.

 

[LeagueXIII]

I still say take it the market in mid 2021. If Nine are skint and can only afford 2 FTA games, fine. Lets see if Ch10 want the whole lot or want to buy one game and Origin and share with Ch9. Fox have no option. Without NRL Foxtel and Kayo are dead in the water. Its only a case of how much for Fox. Before then we should invest in a serious business case around NRL producing and selling its own content. If Fox cant match that business case outcome then bye bye, lets go it alone. Fox knowing that is an option for NRl would be enough to scare them into a decent deal.

Not forgetting down the track Amazon are looming large.

 

[LeagueXIII]

They are but the tone is very different!

Seeking some certainty amid the COVID-19 crisis that has wiped out football indefinitely, the AFL, the Seven Network and Fox Sports are exploring a new marginally reduced contract that would run until 2024.
The AFL chief has received strong public support from News Corporation and Seven West, which has praised the competition
By stark comparison Nine's chief executive Hugh Marks is attempting to significantly renegotiate down the network's NRL deal over the longer term and has attacked the code for "mismanagement over many years"

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-seven-working-to-extend-broadcast-deal-20200409-p54ip3.html

Good they are taking a cut too. Caro article she will always make RL look worse then the AFL. She's a zealot. I recall she even said Dave Smith didn't handle the drug scandal as well as the AFL

 

[Perth Red]

Disagree...if you read the SMH stated the retirement fund doesn't need the money until 2022.

You believe Greenberg has mismanaged money, because the media get 1 plus 1 and come up with 5. They are attacking him leaving out facts to create a narrative that he is useless, which is completely untrue. This is about the broadcast deal that's it and he wasn't on the side of nine and news ltd so they wanted him punted.

Guess what they punted him and now they are getting what they want.

The retirement fund thing was just another smoke screen , another shtty leak by people in the game trying undermine nrlhq and just another bullet for the media to fire off as "proof" Greenberg wasnt managing the finances. A sht as he was at other parts of the business the finances most definitely werent a problem! Raised revenue significantly and last two years had significant surplus despite increased spending. If the money wasn't there in 2022 then yes he should have been sacked instantly.

 

[Phil McGrawhan]

They are but the tone is very different!

Seeking some certainty amid the COVID-19 crisis that has wiped out football indefinitely, the AFL, the Seven Network and Fox Sports are exploring a new marginally reduced contract that would run until 2024.
The AFL chief has received strong public support from News Corporation and Seven West, which has praised the competition
By stark comparison Nine's chief executive Hugh Marks is attempting to significantly renegotiate down the network's NRL deal over the longer term and has attacked the code for "mismanagement over many years"

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-seven-working-to-extend-broadcast-deal-20200409-p54ip3.html

Lol correct me if I'm wrong & excuse me for interrupting your afl worship .
Isn't the age Fairfax media
The very same owned by 9
Lol lol lol
Anything degenerating RL gives you a woody .

 

[typicalfan]

The AFL might not happen this year while the NRL plays in just over a months time and it's players get paid. I just hope we get significant return for being the only show in town. It's the kind of free swing that the AFL or any code would dream of.

 

[taipan]

The cuts your suggesting are worth what? about 2% of NRL expenditure? If your going to cut then know why your going to cut. What are you going to do with the cost savings that puts you in a better position?

Presuming of course your revenue hasnt taken a massive hit, in which case you have to to cut the cloth to fit the suit and a lot of activity will be reduced accordingly.
Be very interesting to see if Vlandys/the new CEO has the balls to suggest cutting the NRL club grant and salary cap. Never happened before!

I suggested a couple from random for a start,I'm not going through a great list.If V'Landys and even Greenberg have admitted cuts can be made, then they may have a clue.
If you drop 500K from each club's grants that's $8m.The clubs also have to answer for wastage.
Your'e the one who continually complains about the NRL accounts not being transparent and money being wasted.Specifics and detail by the NRL instead of lumping would assist.

The revenue will take a hit ,the current deal will because of the worldwide crap going on.In terms of the FTA and Pay TV stations running at losses, it simply can't continue ad infinitum.The likes of the Amazons etc may be a. way of bringing some back.

 

[taipan]

They are but the tone is very different!

Seeking some certainty amid the COVID-19 crisis that has wiped out football indefinitely, the AFL, the Seven Network and Fox Sports are exploring a new marginally reduced contract that would run until 2024.
The AFL chief has received strong public support from News Corporation and Seven West, which has praised the competition
By stark comparison Nine's chief executive Hugh Marks is attempting to significantly renegotiate down the network's NRL deal over the longer term and has attacked the code for "mismanagement over many years"

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-seven-working-to-extend-broadcast-deal-20200409-p54ip3.html

The AFL has always received strong support from News Corp (Insert Murdoch).They like to bag the NRL
and praise the AFL on a regular basis, even though News Ltd rely on the NRL for their print sales and Pay Tv subs.
Ch7 head honchos have been in the past and even to a degree now been AFL supporters.The guy who is the major shareholder is from WA.
And if you have been paying attention ch9 historically for at least the past 20 years, done little promoting rugby league (the supposed home of the game).
Thus is it any wonder News and Seven do the AFL bootlicking, such is their media relationship and domination in the Southern states.You live in an AFL dominated state.
Even the ABX+C like the Offsiders is another example of media bootlicking.


Show me where News or even Fairfax have maintained concerted efforts to get rid of AFL CEOs.on a regular basis?You've been brainwashed by the AFL inclined media."Exploring a new marginally reduced contract" LOL.TV companies will try to achieve the best result for them, they are not a charity.
Oh and the AGE a Vic print masthead which supports AFL to the hilt.Nothing to see here.

 

[taipan]

Disagree...if you read the SMH stated the retirement fund doesn't need the money until 2022.

You believe Greenberg has mismanaged money, because the media get 1 plus 1 and come up with 5. They are attacking him leaving out facts to create a narrative that he is useless, which is completely untrue. This is about the broadcast deal that's it and he wasn't on the side of nine and news ltd so they wanted him punted.

Guess what they punted him and now they are getting what they want.

They may not need it til then ,but if the sh*t hits the fan and/or from a good house keeping perspective it should be there and contributed on a regular basis.Sorry but it's not a good look.
The NRL made a commitment to that fund, not having the money there, you consider that OK ,but using it for something else meantime.
Unless you work for the NRL with due respects ,most info comes from media sources .It's a matter of dissecting fact from fiction.

Mate I have had experience first hand ,the editing and exaggeration of print media.The Fairfax media in our local newspaper.I was interviewed for a story about a close well known in the area relo who had passed away.When the story which included excerpts from my interview came out it was edited and in some cases embarrassingly exaggerated .
So please don't think I accept every thing ,media puts out.My regular shots here on this site at Murdoch, Buzz,Kent,FitzSimons ,Weidler et al are proof enough.

The media has been attacking CEOs ever since Gallop got the heave ho.The clubs have been attacking CEOs ever since there have been NRL head office CEOs.

I just cannot fathom where we know the TV deals ,ever since the "brilliant "$500m 6 year Gallop deal and the AFL got $780m over 5 years, why we don't have $150m in the Bank.Understand when it was a partnership with News we could have been screwed. I know we have had clubs go broke, and that eats into funds ,but $70m is the supposed net available figure.

The CEO is where the buck stops in organisations.Whether he is directly involved or because of the underlings, someone has to take responsibility.I've never stated he is useless for a start ,so that's an exaggeration.
Greenberg even admitted cuts needed to be made.He handled the off field incidents pretty well, the women's game grew tremendously, and he made the game inclusive plus others, and digital has grown.

I'm not sure how you know he wasn't on the side of News,(all of them) when Delaney from Foxtel has said SFA about Greenberg or the accounts..And it is the Pay TV mob who were to deal with Greenberg not the Telegraph.It's ch9 and Fairfax that started the sh*t with Marks going off his tree.His company has financial issues and this was a get out for him, by getting a cheaper deal.

 

[Perth Red]

They may not need it til then ,but if the sh*t hits the fan and/or from a good house keeping perspective it should be there and contributed on a regular basis.Sorry but it's not a good look.
The NRL made a commitment to that fund, not having the money there, you consider that OK ,but using it for something else meantime.
Unless you work for the NRL with due respects ,most info comes from media sources .It's a matter of dissecting fact from fiction.

Mate I have had experience first hand ,the editing and exaggeration of print media.The Fairfax media in our local newspaper.I was interviewed for a story about a close well known in the area relo who had passed away.When the story which included excerpts from my interview came out it was edited and in some cases embarrassingly exaggerated .
So please don't think I accept every thing ,media puts out.My regular shots here on this site at Murdoch, Buzz,Kent,FitzSimons ,Weidler et al are proof enough.

The media has been attacking CEOs ever since Gallop got the heave ho.The clubs have been attacking CEOs ever since there have been NRL head office CEOs.

I just cannot fathom where we know the TV deals ,ever since the "brilliant "$500m 6 year Gallop deal and the AFL got $780m over 5 years, why we don't have $150m in the Bank.Understand when it was a partnership with News we could have been screwed. I know we have had clubs go broke, and that eats into funds ,but $70m is the supposed net available figure.

The CEO is where the buck stops in organisations.Whether he is directly involved or because of the underlings, someone has to take responsibility.I've never stated he is useless for a start ,so that's an exaggeration.
Greenberg even admitted cuts needed to be made.He handled the off field incidents pretty well, the women's game grew tremendously, and he made the game inclusive plus others, and digital has grown.

I'm not sure how you know he wasn't on the side of News,(all of them) when Delaney from Foxtel has said SFA about Greenberg or the accounts..And it is the Pay TV mob who were to deal with Greenberg not the Telegraph.It's ch9 and Fairfax that started the sh*t with Marks going off his tree.His company has financial issues and this was a get out for him, by getting a cheaper deal.

if Greenberg had been able to continue with the first two years of surpluses from this deal the game would have had more than $150mill in the bank by the end of it. The reality is we have only had one full term of a decent deal (2013-2017) which was largely used to sort the game out given it was the first decent tv deal and the game was rebuilding with its independence and after years of neglect by News stooge Gallop, and two years of the second big windfall (2018&19). In those two years the game has done very well financially.

 

[taipan]

if Greenberg had been able to continue with the first two years of surpluses from this deal the game would have had more than $150mill in the bank by the end of it. The reality is we have only had one full term of a decent deal (2013-2017) which was largely used to sort the game out given it was the first decent tv deal and the game was rebuilding with its independence and after years of neglect by News stooge Gallop, and two years of the second big windfall (2018&19). In those two years the game has done very well financially.

Not if there was $45m owed due for repayment 2022.Plus you were continually bagging him for not getting the profits you wanted ,and questioned where are the costs when we are getting X amount for Tv deals.
You kept emphasising our big Tv deals time after time ,and wondering why the NRL didn't have the future fund with decent monies.At the same time praising Smith.You've confused me mate.

 

[Perth Red]

Not if there was $45m owed due for repayment 2022.Plus you were continually bagging him for not getting the profits you wanted ,and questioned where are the costs when we are getting X amount for Tv deals.
You kept emphasising our big Tv deals time after time ,and wondering why the NRL didn't have the future fund with decent monies.At the same time praising Smith.You've confused me mate.

what $45mill?
Yep I was critical of the years 2015-2017 and rightly so, we went not only from a surplus of the first two years of the tv deal, but then spent the savings and ran deficits for the last three years. We also had clubs being bailed out because they were Ely poor at their business, It wasn’t a great period.
The new deal and some returns on investment from events and digital saw it turned around though and no one can say the last two years financial performance hasn’t been encouraging.

 

[taipan]

what $45mill?
Yep I was critical of the years 2015-2017 and rightly so, we went not only from a surplus of the first two years of the tv deal, but then spent the savings and ran deficits for the last three years. We also had clubs being bailed out because they were Ely poor at their business, It wasn’t a great period.
The new deal and some returns on investment from events and digital saw it turned around though and no one can say the last two years financial performance hasn’t been encouraging.

The $45m apparently due in 22 out of the $129m cash that was supposed to be on hand.Plus another approx $15m owing which gets us back to the $70m in the a bank realistically.The figures were mentioned in the Telecrap .If they are wrong then we had $129m ridgy didge in the bank.Well we don't it's $70m and that's why we sought back up finance in the UK>

Then you can't go on about the situation now as being not that bad, suggesting we would have the $150m ,when you know the chances of that happening now, with the Tv stations in a.financial bind and industry and commerce cutting back resulting in lower profits.
You yourself have stated NRL costs have either been vague or lumped in without real transparency, i their annual reports.I gave up at times trying to break them down.

I might go along with your view if ch9 and Foxtel were doing well and we had no COVID-19 to contend with, but we have to be realistic if we make $40m profit pa from now on, good luck.Ch9 tells the stock exchange one minute they will save $125m if the NRL season stops.No agendas here.

I await with interest the TV deal that V'Landys comes up with.I don't trust ch9 one iota, they have white anted the code prior with some of their stories.Just as they are doing now.And as for Buzz,he even skewers his own club to get a story.
To quote the Age as you did (owned by Fairfax) praising the AFL, is like getting Kim Jon Un to criticise totalitarianism.
They are all click merchants, and sensationalists to get sales.

I have stated Greenberg did some admirable things, and I have stated many times that clubs were taken over by the NRL because they were up sh*t street.
I also suggest if Greenberg had to go, some of his advisers need to look at themselves.

 

[Perth Red]

$45mill due to who?
Who was the $15mill owing to?
We sought back up because like every other company the nrl has serious cash flow problems if this goes for more than a couple of months.
Woo what you talking about? no one could have predicted a global pandemic and no one has planned just in case. I said if Greenberg had continued with the way the first two years of financial performances had gone, pandemic aside, then by the end of this tv deal the nrl would have had the cash equity everyone had been screaming out about. Some simpletons seem to think because the nrl signed a $1.8billion tv deal all that money has already been paid and the game should be rolling in cash!

On our mistrust of the media we can agree lol. It is going to be fascinating to see what Vlandys gets, it will make or break his very short tenure!