What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Next TV rights deal

Status
Not open for further replies.

applesauce

Bench
Messages
3,573
AFL deal per year
FTA $150mill ($140mill cash)
Fox $217mill (? contra value)
Telstra $50mill

It is likey they will end up with 4.5 games a round on FTA (not sure how they get the .5 of game?)

Going to take some significant increases in Telstra and Sky and of course Fox or someone else stumping up big to get near $2bill. Time for Dave to earn his big bikkies!

Every second week FTA will have 4 games (5 games if CH10 get one from News). 3.5 (4.5) is the average over a season FTA will have.
 

nrlnrl

First Grade
Messages
6,853

Nerd

Bench
Messages
2,826
Hopefully.

Has it? Lions getting 20k crowds, pick up a Qland paper and it's got plenty of afl stories in it, and whilst I am always suspect of player stats they are hardly ignored as a sport. Two clubs, only one less than the nrl.

If NRL was as strong as all this in WA we'd be ecstatic!

http://www.foxsportspulse.com/assoc...D=108278&&news_task=DETAIL&articleID=32581998

Yes the Lions have failed big time. They have made a financial loss for i think it's 7 years straight and their crowd average this year is around 19K and is lower than previous years. Their ratings on FTA are woeful and that's with games broadcast on saturday night with no competition. When the NRL has a saturday night game on FTA expect these figures to drop even more if thats possible.
 

typicalfan

Coach
Messages
15,430
Lol the AFL have got a good payday but at what cost? They have just made a deal with the devil. AFL would be wise to tread carefully as we all know Roops is a man to hold a grudge.

He basically owns the AFL based on the deal. We saw how that worked out for the NRL. It is still recovering.
 

bobmar28

Bench
Messages
4,304
The NRL has screwed itself because of the deal with channel 9. That kills the potential income from Fox. 9 did a much better job of negotiating with the NRL than 7 does with AFL, and so the AFL could go to Fox with much more than the NRL can.

The key issue is Fox gets every AFL game simulcast. It will not get every NRL game simulcast so it is not going to pay an equivalent figure. You're comparing apples and oranges.

Besides the extreme hardcore fan do you think mainstream fans really care at all about how many zeroes are in the bank account of NRL HQ? They will not lose "hundreds of thousands of subscribers". The NRL will get about 750 million from Fox and it will accept.

If NRL is to be on Netflix, where do I sign up?
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842

Thanks for posting.

Paul 'The Hack' Kent said:
The NRL's TV rights deal will be closer to $1.5 billion.

Here's the run of News Corp stories so far:

Talks have completely stalled
NRL are negotiating with 9, 10, Foxtel & Telstra for a guaranteed $1.7 billion deal to be signed imminently
We had no idea the NRL would reject our shitty offer and sign with 9 so we were beaten to the story by other sources
We're pissed off they didn't let us ram our arrogant shitty offer up their arse
Murdoch & News won't talk to the NRL, Murdoch hates David Smith right now
Murdoch just met with David Smith
Murdoch just gave millions of free money to AFL because he's grumpy
The NRL never talked with 10, Foxtel & Telstra

News' method is to assume people only remember the stories on the day they're printed. They don't expect people to be smart enough to view them in context with one another. Their contradictions and hypocrisy is obvious.

If you think Kent is having a whinge now, does anyone seriously believe these hacks would suddenly let up if the NRL had signed $1.7 billion then the AFL signed $2.5 billion?

It'd be the same shit different shape.

So f**k them. And f**k anyone stupid enough to fall for their bullshit. :lol:
 
Last edited:

cleary89

Coach
Messages
16,462
If Tesltra is paying 300m for afl for 6 you'd assume we get 250m for 5. NZ we currently get 100m, will increase but for arguments sake we keep it at 100m.

Kent thinks we will get 1.5b total, so 925+250+100= 1.275b. Kent thinks fox will pay 225m all up? Lolz.
 

Edwahu

Bench
Messages
3,697
Like I said before, NEWS CORP own the AFL rights, not Foxtel or FoxSports. Murdoch is looking bigger picture than just pay TV.

True, News has a much tougher fight online than in print and are trying to push subscriptions. I guess we will see a heap of bundles across Pay, Streaming and Online Print.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
Meanwhile here's what you get when you take code war/media war crap out of it and focus on the tech itself:

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/hometech/telstra-tv-will-be-a-dud-20150817-gj14ie.html

Telstra TV: why no built-in tuner dooms streaming device in 'battle for HMDI 1'
Date
August 19, 2015 - 8:50AM
Andrew Colley

When Telstra moved to phase out its T-Box it made a cardinal error which will leave its upcoming replacement Telstra TV device struggling not to be left to rot in cupboards and landfill.
That's not to say that the devices won't make their way into households – potentially hundreds of thousands will be included free in bundling deals.
However, whether customers will use them is another question. It's not the quality of the Roku 2 device that Telstra has chosen that's the problem – Roku has a good reputation for its slick and intuitive interface.

It's also not the quality of the content given Telstra's decision to allow Netflix​ onto the device.

The problem is that it won't win the battle to be the default device on living room TVs. Industry insiders refer to it as "the battle for HDMI 1" in referring to the first video input source on modern TVs.
And that's because big T made one flawed decision in selecting the Roku 2: it doesn't have a built-in tuner. It may seem a stretch to argue, but a short(ish) history lesson on Australia's internet TV market bears it out.
Early attempts to establish streaming services in Australia were largely financial disasters that landed in the hands of administrators or, if they were backed by established entertainment brands, were aborted.
Who can forget ReelTime​ Media, which went into voluntary administration in 2008, owing its creditors millions of dollars? Or Macquarie Bank-backed video download service Anytime, which struggled to get more than a few thousand subscribers despite contra deals with iiNet​ and then independent cable operator TransACT?
Arguably the most successful of these early pioneers, Quickflix, which celebrated its foray into digital streaming with an expensive bash at a Sydney nightclub, has constantly struggled to stay solvent in spite of leadership from the likes of former Telstra media chief Justin Milne.
High rates of TV and movie piracy in Australia hurt everyone in the local pay TV business but none more so than cash-strapped homegrown digital streaming services competing for customers with low bandwidth quotas.
Netflix​, which could have given Australia's streaming video business a much needed credibility boost, held off launching here as long as possible – it already had paying Australian customers using VPNs to circumvent its regional controls without having to pay a cent for content rights in the region, so why the rush?
Seven Network-backed Hybrid TV was the first credible internet TV service offered in Australia, and its TiVo​ set-top box was a top-selling appliance in its early days. Seven has since effectively withdrawn all its support for the business in favour of the FreeView​ Plus platform and the TiVo is no longer distributed.
It's not clear why Seven withdrew its marketing support for the TiVo​. Perhaps because iiNet​ and Optus threw their support behind Fetch TV's rival set-top box? But a cynical person might point out that FreeView doesn't allow viewers to skip commercials.
Indeed, the launch of Fetch TV's set-top box and Telstra's T-Box signalled that Australia's internet TV industry had reached a point of maturity where it could challenge Foxtel's dominance in the pay TV market.
Since then smartphones, tablet computers and, to a lesser extent, smart TVs have spread competition for eyeballs to multiple screens and devices. However, set-top boxes have continued to dominate the living room in most Australians households.
Foxtel had about 2.6 million pay TV subscribers as of last August 2014, Telstra has sold 760,000 T-Box units and Fetch TV is rumoured to be closing in on 200,000. (It's hard to know precisely how many iQ subscribers Foxtel has as it included Presto subscribers in total subscriber numbers it reported last week and, in a worrying sign, declined to break them down further.)
The reason
The reason set-top boxes have endured in the living room is pretty clear, according to pay TV industry insiders: most consumers are lazy and don't want to have to plug in a secondary device and constantly switch away from the source they use to get free-to-air to view content.
The secondary device tends to get forgotten and be used only on weekends or holidays rather than being part of the consumer's daily viewing digest. Furthermore, the technically savvy consumers that might have a fondness for such a gadget would likely know that they can already get the services on the Roku 2 via their smart TV interface, their gaming console or by using a smartphone with Google's Chromecast​.
And while we're touching on that topic, if Foxtel and its 50 per cent owner Telstra are hoping that Presto's brand has the credibility to compete with Netflix​ they need to address problems with the Presto app urgently. On both Google Play and iTunes stores the vast majority of ratings give the Presto app one star and the reviews are, to say they least, eye-watering.
"Crash central. Worst app ever. Keeps crashing and [the] odd time it does work streams sound but no picture just black screen," wrote one reviewer.
"NEVER WORKED E.V.E.R!!!!! I have installed and used a lot of apps over the years and this 'app' for presto is certainly different from all the rest, and here's why: It has NEVER EVER NOT ONE SINGLE TIME EVER IN THE WORLD TODAY WORKED!!!!!!!!!," wrote another.
And in that vein they continue, with nary a positive word from any reviewer.
Sources close to the tender process through which Telstra eventually sourced the Roku 2 have told Fairfax Media that the T-Box was discontinued to give Foxtel's iQ box a clearer run at the middle segment of the market.
The idea was to keep the replacement device as cheap as possible – hence no tuner – and then secure the best possible content bundling deals for it to target lower-end consumers.
Optus is rumoured to be launching a similar "puck-like" set-top device with Fetch TV in the coming months and you can be sure it will have a tuner.
Clearly, with a device that's starting from behind, getting the bundling right for Telstra TV could make all the difference as to whether its customers even bother opening the box.
 

Rosetta

Juniors
Messages
683
If Tesltra is paying 300m for afl for 6 you'd assume we get 250m for 5. NZ we currently get 100m, will increase but for arguments sake we keep it at 100m.

Kent thinks we will get 1.5b total, so 925+250+100= 1.275b. Kent thinks fox will pay 225m all up? Lolz.

From what I've heard the league is done with Telstra due to NRL HQ receiving complaint after complaint about the NRL App. They will get the professionals in to build the web and digital platforms this time. Telstra are losing money on both the AFL and NRL digital rights in the current deal so I must say I was quite surprised to see their $300 million splurge on the AFL, I suspect News Corp has something to do with it.
 
Last edited:

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
67,461
If Tesltra is paying 300m for afl for 6 you'd assume we get 250m for 5. NZ we currently get 100m, will increase but for arguments sake we keep it at 100m.

.

Telstra only paid $90mill last time around ($10mill was effectively naming rights they bundled into it). Would be a big increase to go to 250mill. What impact does the nine digital deal have on the potential Telstra one?
 

Nerd

Bench
Messages
2,826
Looks like Dave Smith is doing something right as he has up set Uncle Rupert no end. Looks like Fox have attempted to lowball the NRL and Dave Smith has knocked them back. They've become so used to getting the NRL for unders that they are now somehow angered that they will now have to pay a fair market value for their number one sport.

Also good luck with throwing money at AFL to promote it in QLD and NSW. The AFL has been doing that for years and so far have the basket cases GWS, Suns and Lions to show for it.
 

bobmar28

Bench
Messages
4,304
Wow that is a faking massive amount of money! Not really that surprised., afl have been manoeuvring this for two decades with proper expansion and major presence in every large capital city in the country. They clearly set out their strategic intent to be seen as "Australia's game" and fox have bought it hook, line and sinker.

After a short bask in the glow of what looked like a good fta deal, Smith and co are now massively under the spotlight to deliver both expansion and money that will allow us to keep pace with afl. If he fails we are going to see some challenges in the years ahead for the game.

With that size war chest you haven't seen anything yet in regards to the push the afl will now make Into nsw and Qland, supported by Foxtel who will be doing everything to convert sports fans into afl fans.

AFL have had teams in NSW and QLD for years and they have been nothing but a dismal failure. Remember most Australians live in NSW and QLD.
 
Messages
14,716
I have read much of the posts since the AFL deal was announced. I decided to hold off commenting until I'd had some time to reflect on it.

Frankly I don't think it is "doom and gloom" at all for the NRL's TV rights at all from pay TV. Based on the breakdown in where subscribers are located, two of the three biggest markets are Sydney and Brisbane, with Melbourne rounding out the third. Foxtel cannot be profitable without rugby league. Why? Well you only have to look and see what sport is their top rating, it is rugby league by far. As such if they had no rugby league, they would lose subscribers. Everyone knows it.

Thing is News Ltd's modus operandi for years has been to seduce where possible, or otherwise bully/intimidate people into giving them what they want at terms favourable to News. They certainly have with rugby league considering since 1995, they have devoted so much of their efforts to belittle the code it is not funny. Yet according to some of you the NRL should be friendly to a "partner" who has spent decades running it down and giving it near constant negative press? :crazy:

To those who have rubbished what the NRL have done, go take a good hard look at yourselves. You sound exactly like Phil Rothfield and Paul Kent. Doubt me? Have a look at what you have posted here and then go read their columns from the last 48 hours. They will sound eerily similar.
 

Ice_Storm

Juniors
Messages
259
Looks like Dave Smith is doing something right as he has up set Uncle Rupert no end. Looks like Fox have attempted to lowball the NRL and Dave Smith has knocked them back. They've become so used to getting the NRL for unders that they are now somehow angered that they will now have to pay a fair market value for their number one sport.

Also good luck with throwing money at AFL to promote it in QLD and NSW. The AFL has been doing that for years and so far have the basket cases GWS, Suns and Lions to show for it.


What if Fox stand their ground and say, sorry, this is our final deal. Except it less then AFL's deal, or go elsewhere?

Where does the NRL go?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top