Next TV deal discussion 2028 -

[Iamback]

You have a very selective memory!
I said if there wasnt competitive tension and more than one bidder we would struggle to get over $500mill.
And I stand by that.

You also said the current deal wasn't $400m cash...

Contra being as an expense shows that to be false

 

[Wb1234]

You have a very selective memory!
I said if there wasnt competitive tension and more than one bidder we would struggle to get over $500mill.
And I stand by that.

Yes you did say 500 million thanks for admitting it

and 3 new teams and you are saying they are worth zero lol

so why are we adding Perth if their biggest fan says they are worth nothing

 

[Perth Red]

You also said the current deal wasn't $400m cash...

Contra being as an expense shows that to be false

eh? contra has been shown as an expense rather than a revenue in the concise financials since 2020. Im guessing due to some change in accountancy rules at that time.

 

[Perth Red]

Yes you did say 500 million thanks for admitting it

and 3 new teams and you are saying they are worth zero lol

so why are we adding Perth if their biggest fan says they are worth nothing

sigh, ok whatever. No competitve bidding = no $500mill+, regardless of how many teams we add.

 

[Wb1234]

sigh, ok whatever. No competitve bidding = no $500mill+, regardless of how many teams we add.

So why are we adding Perth if they are worth nothing

 

[Perth Red]

So why are we adding Perth if they are worth nothing

because they are, especially in partnership with NS. Maybe with a more national reach Fox will get more sponsors for nrl than afl rather than less?

 

[Wb1234]

You have a very selective memory!
I said if there wasnt competitive tension and more than one bidder we would struggle to get over $500mill.
And I stand by that.

If this next tv deal isnt north of $550million all up then questions need to be asked.

Lol

 

[Iamback]

eh? contra has been shown as an expense rather than a revenue in the concise financials since 2020. Im guessing due to some change in accountancy rules at that time.

Yet in AFL... it counted as revenue

 

[The_Wookie]

It is that simple. The total value and the Money Australian TV pay won't be the same thing.

You'd think part of the Homework for PNG would be gauging interest for TV rights

PNG has two tv broadcasters. EMTV is the only commercial broadcaster - owned by Telekom since 2015 - and they generated 6 million in revenue in 2014. The only other TV broadcaster is the state owned NBC so maybe they'll pony up. Either way I wouldnt expect big dollars.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

So because The NRL is by far the most watched sport on STV, you then bring crowds into it.
It’s the standard AFL fan ploy to shift onto something that They are winning.
This is a TV deal discussion.

Yep and when you add crowds plus TV ratings you see that NRL has the bigger audience. Our game is King in NSW and QLD (55-60% of the population) and has a decent niche in Melbourne

 

[Perth Red]

Yet in AFL... it counted as revenue

Until 2020 it was in nrl as well. They obviously decided to change it for whatever reason after 2019.

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

PNG has two tv broadcasters. EMTV is the only commercial broadcaster - owned by Telekom since 2015 - and they generated 6 million in revenue in 2014. The only other TV broadcaster is the state owned NBC so maybe they'll pony up. Either way I wouldnt expect big dollars.

China Central Television could buy the PNG rights.

Or ABC, funded by Albo.

 

[Wb1234]

China Central Television could buy the PNG rights.

Or ABC, funded by Albo.

ABC can’t Aussie rights are owned by the current rights holders

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

ABC can’t Aussie rights are owned by the current rights holders

Who owns what is immaterial in a national emergency.

 

[The_Wookie]

Who owns what is immaterial in a national emergency.

NRL broadcast rights are hardly going to qualify as a national emergency

 

[Iamback]

PNG has two tv broadcasters. EMTV is the only commercial broadcaster - owned by Telekom since 2015 - and they generated 6 million in revenue in 2014. The only other TV broadcaster is the state owned NBC so maybe they'll pony up. Either way I wouldnt expect big dollars.

The aim would be Amazon or someone. That would be a way off.

Assuming the 20 teams comes off in the time frame of the next TV deal, Then NRL need to find a minimum of $100m a season - this is not counting the NRLW expansion

Extra games mean Magic Round and so on would cost more to host but generally TV is going to stump up.

Add to that this talk of reducing the season length. Which reduces the marquee games...

Having 3 teams based outside of Australia is great for sponsors etc but becomes an issue with expecting Fox or Stan to put it a huge slab of extra money

 

[Iamback]

Until 2020 it was in nrl as well. They obviously decided to change it for whatever reason after 2019.

It is simple. You can't pay bills with contra it is no place being on as income

 

[Perth Red]

It is simple. You can't pay bills with contra it is no place being on as income

Its in kind revenue. It saves you spending on things you might normally spend on. Its clear given AFL, and NRl up till 3 years ago, where counting it as revenue, and now NRL is counting it as expense that for accounting purposes it can be shown as either. Which is weird I agree. Maybe NRL is showing it in both? ie its sitting in the licensing line as revenue, and being shown as expense in effect making it a $0 on the books? Only reason i can think you'd show it as an expense as its not actually something you are paying out. Any accountants on here who could explain it?

 

[Iamback]

Its in kind revenue. It saves you spending on things you might normally spend on. Its clear given AFL, and NRl up till 3 years ago, where counting it as revenue, and now NRL is counting it as expense that for accounting purposes it can be shown as either.

But you players who are in a profit share arrangement
Clubs and the state bodies that are all stake holders and get presented this data several times a year.
It was likely causing confusion so it got simpified

2020 was the covid year. We had the players and NRL dispute over the 'wrong' figures as a starting point

 

[Perth Red]

But you players who are in a profit share arrangement
Clubs and the state bodies that are all stake holders and get presented this data several times a year.
It was likely causing confusion so it got simpified

2020 was the covid year. We had the players and NRL dispute over the 'wrong' figures as a starting point

That would make sense, makes the revenue look less so their share is less? It isn't an expense though so is a bit of a fiddle unless its also being counted as revenue in the licensing pot so in effect is $0 on the bottom line.