Newscorp And Rugby League

[Ice_Storm]

How could the top line be a good thing for the NRL? Like how does freezing out certain bidders make sure you get the best deal? Gallop would of been crucified on here for that. You could argue that AFL has benefited from it.

If the NRL has some kind of plan to entice a huge pay TV deal, I can't see how it will work. I always have had the impression Murdoch/Fox isn't interested in ratings. It wants ownership. Control. $$$.

Maybe it's backfired on the AFL too when they discover how much influence they will want/have in running their game.


So either the NRL's plan to force Fox to pay big will work, or they are leaving the controlling influence of Fox finally. Maybe that's why Murchoch seemed a little pissy in that conference. He knows Foxs time is up with the NRL.

Here's hoping.

 

[BulldogsBulldogsYepYepYep]

There should be a secret hidden clause in the Foxtel deal that old Rupie bear has to off himself. ASAP.

K(u)ent was literally fondling Murdoch's balls with his comments on 360 last night.

 

[babyg]

I'm pretty confident Smith and Grant will play this well

Surely now is the time for Fairfax to make a play at crushing Fox and its newspapers. Don't Fairfax part own Stan. And if they provide a decent alternative to the tele and courier mail, then that political influence to pump Afl will backfire on News

 

[docbrown]

Well what's also interesting is the decision Channel 10 is faced with.

You've got 9 rejecting paying $30 million directly to the AFL for the Saturday afternoon slot that Fox has the rights to on-sell. It's easy to understand why -- Saturday afternoon is a wasteland. 9 didn't think it the loss justified the gains, it's as simple as that. Not that this rules 9 out completely, they could go for it at a marked down price or horse trade an NRL by come to terms with both 7 & Foxtel (9 can't onsell NRL to Foxtel so 9 would have to get Foxtel, 7 & AFL agreeing to shift their slots) potentially for cash. The latter is complicated so highly unlikely, the mark down though could happen. So for the Saturday afternoon AFL slot you'd have to think 9 are slim odds.

The slot is 3:20pm -- clearly for a 6pm news lead in.

So then you have 10 -- the Foxtel decision pending. If 9 can't justify the current price, 10 is unlikely to either. Plus the slot doesn't suit their news so either Fox Sports have to go earlier or 10 have to put their news up against 9 & 10 which is undesirable.

Remember - the overall net benefit to News Corp is by benefiting Foxtel over 10. The stake in 10 is sizable but still quite small compared to the stake in Foxtel. So they will first and foremost try and do what serves Foxtel the best.

Pushing the game earlier is certainly possible -- they were going to be competing AFL on Fox & AFL on F2A from 3pm onward anyway. The question is price -- it might be likely that News would have to reduce that price & also schedule higher quality matches in that slot as it would be 10's only match. So immediately it's costing News on 3 points.

But hold your horses.

You also have 9 looking to on-sell a Saturday Night or Sunday Afternoon match to 10 & 7. For 7 having both AFL & NRL together on either night at the same time slot would give them a leg up. The issue is cost and net benefit as a loss leader. Also if it were to go 10 & 7, an agreement could be made re: simulcast rights to drop the F2A ad component -- immediately making that match more attractive to Fox. The NRL would still control the scheduling for any such match so both are sweeteners they can use in their negotiations with News/Foxtel.

Can 10 afford the NRL match? Well the two slots offered are better than the AFL's slot. They may have to again use their Foxtel connection to subsidize it. But at the end of the day, if Foxtel can take back one of the F2A streams, one of the F2A simulcasting ads and guarantee better scheduling for the 10 game, it's an attractive offer. By having a game on 10 you have a number of options (assuming Foxtel gets the rights:

If 10 buys AFL but won't play earlier & Foxtel won't help:
Sat 3:00pm AFL on 10
Sat 3:00pm NRL on Foxtel
Sat 5:30pm NRL on Foxtel
Sat 6:00pm News on 10
Sat 7:00pm NRL Pre-Game on 10
Sat 8:00pm NRL on 10 Simulcast on Foxtel ad-free

If 10 buys AFL but 10 & Foxtel use their influence to air AFL earlier:
Sat 2:00pm AFL on 10
Sat 3:30pm NRL on Foxtel
Sat 5:00pm News on 10
Sat 6:00pm NRL on 10 Simulcast on Foxtel ad-free
Sat 8:00pm NRL on Foxtel - Foxtel get it's Saturday Night NRL slot back
(or those 2 late NRL games flip broadcasters)

If 9 keeps the Saturday NRL rights but sells 10 Sunday afternoon:
Sat 2:00pm/3:00pm AFL on 10 (doesn't really affect the scenario)
Sat 3:00pm NRL on Foxtel
Sat 5:30pm NRL on Foxtel
Sat 6:00pm News on 9
Sat 7:00pm NRL Pre-Game on 9
Sat 8:00pm NRL on 9 Simulcast on Foxtel
Sun 1:00pm NRL on Foxtel
Sun 2:30pm NRL Pre-Game on 10
Sun 3:00pm NRL on 10 Simulcast on Foxtel ad-free
Sun 5:00pm News on 10
Sun 5:15pm NRL on Foxtel
Sun 7:15pm NRL on Foxtel - Foxtel get exclusive Sunday twilight & night matches
(effectively with 10 simulcasting Foxtel's Super Saturday becomes Super Sunday)

If 10 don't buy AFL and/or NRL rights, then they're kind of relegating themselves to the scraps. It's intriguing all around. 10's desire to secure its future may play a part in putting pressure on Foxtel to accelerate the NRL negotiations. Time will tell.

 

[pHyR3]

I am not sure why you are all surprised by this, not Rupert?s comments but the way things have panned out. It is a carbon copy of what happened last time and the time before that. For 5 years I have heard how channel 10/7 are hugely interested in NRL (especially origin) and how a split FTA model will annihilate any AFL deal, yet the same old happens, Channel 9 retains the rights with no bidding war taking place. Either the other broadcasters aren?t interested as we are told they are or the NRL like pandering to channel 9.

For 5 years I have heard our the NRL is the lifeblood of Foxtel and that the NRL leaving will be doomsday for them and how we should hold off and bleed them dry, yet the same thing keeps happening and it will happen this time. Foxtel will retain the PTV rights without the NRL so much as looking at anyone else.

you clearly dont understand what the first and last rights clause meant.

this time around 9 offered the best deal, 10 is being bought by fox and 7 wanted AFL. what do you suggest the NRL should have done?

 

[DC_fan]

Companies like Netflix and Google are already snapping at the heels of Foxtel and they have pretty deep pockets. It would only take someone with a bit of nouse in one of those organisations to realise that taking league away from Fox would put a massive dent in that organisation and potentially, it could be the new jewel in the crown of one of these streaming services in Australia.

It is my understanding that no where in the world does Netflix cover sport. So why would they start here?

If they were to cover sport I could see it doing the EPL or one of the American sports, where their is a huge market

I mean, I've had Fox for about 15 years now... Only ever got it in the first place to watch the Footy and if league went elsewhere, I'd drop Fox like a hot rock. I know that thousands of subscribers in NSW and QLD are just like me.

To make a statement like this you obviously must know a lot of people. Your friends list on Facebook must go on forever.

 

[Mogsheen Jadwat]

It is my understanding that no where in the world does Netflix cover sport. So why would they start here?

If they were to cover sport I could see it doing the EPL or one of the American sports, where their is a huge market



To make a statement like this you obviously must know a lot of people. Your friends list on Facebook must go on forever.

agreed with you on both points, made a similar post in the tv deal thread in the other subforum.

 

[reanimate]

It is my understanding that no where in the world does Netflix cover sport. So why would they start here?

It'd be an excellent test bed for them, we have a small wealthy population, with which they could test the impact they could have on a traditional pay TV network by taking away one of their big draw cards- live sport.

 

[redvscotty]

So you wouldnt think they'd test out streaming on a smaller scale before going into the EPL or NFL or something?

 

[Mogsheen Jadwat]

but why would they do it? they're already making a killing doing what they're doing currently. why would they move into sport? it makes no sense for them to outlay a bunch of money on a minority sport in one country. they'd be better off purchasing the rights to seinfeld or whatever, that's probably going to be more of a money spinner than the NRL.

 

[reanimate]

but why would they do it? they're already making a killing doing what they're doing currently. why would they move into sport? it makes no sense for them to outlay a bunch of money on a minority sport in one country. they'd be better off purchasing the rights to seinfeld or whatever, that's probably going to be more of a money spinner than the NRL.

Nothing would make them more money here in the long run than killing off Foxtel.

 

[Mogsheen Jadwat]

but they're already killing foxtel? why not just keep going along the path they're on? why would they want to put money into sport if they're already succeeding in doing what they're doing?

they might go into docos next and try and kill off discovery/history channel on foxtel? maybe entertainment television? dedicated movie channels? why would they go into sport when their bread and butter still has so much more scope for profit?

 

[reanimate]

but they're already killing foxtel? why not just keep going along the path they're on? why would they want to put money into sport if they're already succeeding in doing what they're doing?

they might go into docos next and try and kill off discovery/history channel on foxtel? maybe entertainment television? dedicated movie channels? why would they go into sport when their bread and butter still has so much more scope for profit?

Sport is all Foxtel really has left, but it's more than keeping them afloat, they're still turning a profit thanks to sport- if Netflix takes sport, that's it for Foxtel, instead of a long running battle with other content, they can go straight for the heart and own the market.

Plus, it would allow them to see the impact that taking sport from a cable company would have in other parts of the world. Netflix spend a stack on producing their own content, filming sport is hardly going to break their budget.

 

[Mogsheen Jadwat]

maybe netflix has no interest in sport? maybe netflix doesn't feel the need to compete with sport because it's already making a killing and slowly becoming the dominant player in tv/movie/doco markets?

you want netflix to take over sport because you don't like foxtel/sport tribalism etc. fine, i get that, but you're not really outlining why netflix needs to put in a bid for sport. they don't. they can continue to monopolize their market and earn billions before they need to even give a second thought to spending hundreds of millions on a sport that only one country and really, one coast of that country, cares about.

 

[docbrown]

Take the whole NRL/AFL sports rights out of the equation.

It's essentially one technology -- subscription cable/satellite TV -- which is based around the concept of forcing consumers into packages with unwanted material vs digital streaming on multi-platform where the user is free to choose their own content by simply logging on. In many cases the price point is cheaper and the quality comparison the same.

The thing is the older tech providers know the migration is occurring. The problem is they're bound to the investment in the old tech so they have to outlay two sets of costs at the same time to prevent consumer migration. As they can't dominate the new market, new players who can offer more flexibility and variety can stake a claim. By the time the migration is completed, the old players may end up losing market share and/or collapsing altogether.

Sport is one of the few things keeping users on old systems. Once that starts migrating, the churn will accelerate. It is inevitable.

 

[Brutus]

Paul Kent = Rupert Murdoch's biggest mouthpiece.

 

[reanimate]

maybe netflix has no interest in sport? maybe netflix doesn't feel the need to compete with sport because it's already making a killing and slowly becoming the dominant player in tv/movie/doco markets?

you want netflix to take over sport because you don't like foxtel/sport tribalism etc. fine, i get that, but you're not really outlining why netflix needs to put in a bid for sport. they don't. they can continue to monopolize their market and earn billions before they need to even give a second thought to spending hundreds of millions on a sport that only one country and really, one coast of that country, cares about.

They've repeatedly said "Never say never" when it comes to them getting into sport, what has always been the biggest turnoff for them is the ludicrous price they'd have to pay to get into US sports, that's why trialling sports broadcasting with the NRL could be an appealing proposition for them. Yes, it would still be an expensive exercise, but the NRL rights would be a drop in the bucket compared to attempting to get into the US market.

 

[betcats]

If the NRL has some kind of plan to entice a huge pay TV deal, I can't see how it will work. I always have had the impression Murdoch/Fox isn't interested in ratings. It wants ownership. Control. $$$.

Maybe it's backfired on the AFL too when they discover how much influence they will want/have in running their game.


So either the NRL's plan to force Fox to pay big will work, or they are leaving the controlling influence of Fox finally. Maybe that's why Murchoch seemed a little pissy in that conference. He knows Foxs time is up with the NRL.

Here's hoping.

Hmm that makes some sense but from what I can tell even if the NRL hits their 1.7b target the increase from the current deal to this new one is still not as big as the increase the AFL has just got from their current deal to their new one. We have to wait and see but that's IF they make their target which means they need to find another 800million or thereabouts.

Now I may not be an expert but if the AFL rights are increasing at a higher rate then the NRL rights it can only mean the NRL is falling further behind the AFL or they have bungled something.

 

[redvscotty]

The Press Gallery just started in the lunch room talking about AFL and the globalisation of the sport moving forward.

I laughed and left.

They aren't that stupid to honestly believe it could take off anywhere? It can't even take off in NSW/QLD.

 

[redvscotty]

but they're already killing foxtel? why not just keep going along the path they're on? why would they want to put money into sport if they're already succeeding in doing what they're doing?

they might go into docos next and try and kill off discovery/history channel on foxtel? maybe entertainment television? dedicated movie channels? why would they go into sport when their bread and butter still has so much more scope for profit?

Wouldn't you take up sport, wipe out Foxtel quickly, then BUY the History/Discovery channels with the profits you made?