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.

oikee

Juniors
Messages
1,973
You have to have some seriously good content to sell if your going to break 2 billion.

We will have expansion, 2 new teams. Maybe 4 over the 5 years.
The Nines.
All-stars,
World Club Series,
Origin as stand alone hopefully.
Anxac games and Test.

Some more items that we could be working on, "island of origin" for kiwis. A nines 3 weekend series in 3 major cities each year.

Now you can see the importance of adding extra events.
I still think we will either have to expand the squads, or cut the NRL season back to 19 or 20 rounds so we can stop for the 3 weekend Origin series. Throw in the Island of Origin and maybe a Tonga Samoa Fiji PNG games.

We need to reach that 2 billion, then we own the airwaves.
 

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
Im just reading up on some of the old TV deals and apparently, in 1990, the ARL almost bought into C10 along side Gerry Harvey and some other bloke...

It brings up the question: is there any value in the ARLC accepting shares/board seats/etc. in in 9 or 10 as part of the next tv deal or is FTA too archaic a medium to be worth anything?? thoughts?
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
35,796
Im just reading up on some of the old TV deals and apparently, in 1990, the ARL almost bought into C10 along side Gerry Harvey and some other bloke...

It brings up the question: is there any value in the ARLC accepting shares/board seats/etc. in in 9 or 10 as part of the next tv deal or is FTA too archaic a medium to be worth anything?? thoughts?

Is it considered a good investment is really the question? People who know far more then me would be able to speculate.

But considering that 9 has traditionally been the highest rating TV channel, and it went broke recently, I'd speculate no.
 

insert.pause

First Grade
Messages
6,469
Im just reading up on some of the old TV deals and apparently, in 1990, the ARL almost bought into C10 along side Gerry Harvey and some other bloke...

It brings up the question: is there any value in the ARLC accepting shares/board seats/etc. in in 9 or 10 as part of the next tv deal or is FTA too archaic a medium to be worth anything?? thoughts?

It would present an unwelcome conflict for future broadcast negotiations as it would effectively lock the NRL into one broadcast partner or lose share value by selling the rights to a rival network.
 

eelandia

Juniors
Messages
854
Is it considered a good investment is really the question? People who know far more then me would be able to speculate.

But considering that 9 has traditionally been the highest rating TV channel, and it went broke recently, I'd speculate no.

A vast majority still watch FTA over any other form, even Internet. PayTV still too exclusive as well. I can't even get my Smart TV to access the internet without buffering and with an inferior NBN FTTN rather than FTTP being rolled out, the future vision of multiple devices streaming content in your average household is a long way off.

A Deloitte report last week highlighted the death of traditional TV is premature, in Australia anyway. As it stands, maybe such a partnership (with an FTA network) may not be as bad as it seems.

****
 

CC_Roosters

First Grade
Messages
5,221
A vast majority still watch FTA over any other form, even Internet. PayTV still too exclusive as well. I can't even get my Smart TV to access the internet without buffering and with an inferior NBN FTTN rather than FTTP being rolled out, the future vision of multiple devices streaming content in your average household is a long way off.

A Deloitte report last week highlighted the death of traditional TV is premature, in Australia anyway. As it stands, maybe such a partnership (with an FTA network) may not be as bad as it seems.

****

I subscribe to nhl gamecenter and cannot watch the highest quality on supposed telstra adsl2+ and when downloading a game on steam a few weeks ago it took 3 and a half days at an average of 800kb/s whem the advertised peak average is 8mb/s!!!!. internet speed in this country is garbage and i will not be using any online streaming services like netflix while it is so. How the australian government has made blundered with this is beyond mw when it is so critical to the future infastructure.

Tv will rule here into the short and medium term as the internet is going nowhere
 

Timbo

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
20,281
I wonder if the massive ratings the Big Bash League has been getting will effect how much money networks have to throw around for the football rights. When Ten paid $100 million for five years it was seen as a risk but they're getting seven figures almost every night if the commentary is to be believed. You'd have to imagine that if it keeps growing at this rate that all three networks will have a red hot crack at it in three years.
 
Messages
3,138
I wonder if the massive ratings the Big Bash League has been getting will effect how much money networks have to throw around for the football rights. When Ten paid $100 million for five years it was seen as a risk but they're getting seven figures almost every night if the commentary is to be believed. You'd have to imagine that if it keeps growing at this rate that all three networks will have a red hot crack at it in three years.

Live sport is the future of commercial TV.
In fact the only thing I watch on commercial TV now is sport.

Those networks who see this will thrive
Those networks who don't might wither and die.

During the past few years it has been Ch10 who have had the vision (BigBash) while Ch9 have made some very questionable decisions.

Why for the love of me Ch9 don't want the Auckland Nines is a massive mystery. It would be a ratings bonanza for them (Maybe they couldnt get them as Foxsports had the rights ... I don't know) anyway not wanting the BigBash was a weird one too.
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
pretty sure the 9's had to go to Fox even though they didn't exist in the last rights deal

don't think they had to pay for them either
 

Tigers1986

Juniors
Messages
1,368
Nine didn't want the nines because it was an all-day event which would anger the non-sport types. Fox offered it live and ad-free which was jumped at.
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
Nine didn't want the nines because it was an all-day event which would anger the non-sport types. Fox offered it live and ad-free which was jumped at.

wrong http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...832057506?nk=f3ae95d8f8c58f5b3df59dd8549696e3

Fox Sports chief executive Patrick Delany was unaware of Ten?s possible interest last night, but maintained that his network held exclusive rights to cover the remaining four years of the current deal.

?I don?t want to go into too much detail, but we have the exclusive rights,? Delany said.

Although the ARLC did not green light the Nines until almost a year after the TV deal was announced, Delany confirmed the concept was catered for in his contract.
 

insert.pause

First Grade
Messages
6,469
The AFL grand final is in danger of losing its coveted place as Australia's highest rating game of the year unless it moves into a new twilight time slot, according to Eddie McGuire.

The Collingwood president's warning came as club and broadcast bosses threw their overwhelming support behind a later start to football's biggest occasion.

And the AFL's grand final broadcaster, the Seven Network, has not only reinforced its push for a twilight or night play-off as part of the next media agreement, but also called for an extended half-time break to maximise a new focus on the mid-game entertainment.

With broadcast rights negotiations soon to resume, AFL chief Gillon McLachlan will return to work on Monday following his US trip strongly considering a twilight grand final that would prove a lucrative new part of the next TV deal, something the AFL has previously resisted against the trend in other sports and football codes.

Advertisement
Channel Seven chief Tim Worner told Fairfax Media: "We shouldn't focus the thinking on the bounce time in isolation. Making sure we take into account player welfare, we should definitely be looking at every possible way we can to extend half-time.

"There is so much more we can do in that part of the telecast. And I don't mean Meatloaf. When we've suggested a slightly longer half-time break, it was like we were going to invite the collapse of modern society."

Describing new boss McLachlan as "a progressive thinker who is prepared to challenge convention", Worner said of mooted changes to the AFL grand final: "Let's hope the greatest game gets the sort of build-up and presentation it deserves on its most important day.

"There is no way you are not going to get a much better result. Not just a great deal, more tension and a much bigger audience, but a far better looking spectacle minus the shadows and the seagulls."

McLachlan returns from the US this weekend following a series of post Super Bowl meetings with American sporting chiefs. While the AFL CEO has in the past declared himself a traditionalist who preferred a day grand final, McLachlan has never ruled out a shift to a later start time, unlike his predecessor Andrew Demetriou.

McLachlan became more convinced after last week's audience and ratings spectacular that compelling half-time entertainment could only be achieved in darkness. While mindful the AFL does not become carried away by a once-in-a-lifetime Super Bowl event, Fairfax Media understands the AFL boss is now strongly considering a later start time.

The current AFL broadcast agreement with Seven dictates a traditional grand final start time for 2015 and 2016. However, the league has already shifted this year's final game to October to make way for World Cup cricket commitments and the grand final start time could be changed should both parties agree.

McGuire said he had been pushing for the change at club presidents' meetings for the past five years.

"From a TV point of view the AFL grand final is in grave danger of not being the highest rating game of the year," he said. "All the big soccer games are played at night, the final of The Voice could outrate us eventually because we don't play in prime time.

"We have to hold on to that and we have to jealously guard that and protect it.
And while we're on the entertainment, it's all very well to laugh about it and make Meatloaf jokes but really it's embarrassing. If you're going to put on entertainment during the day you might as well march a pipe band up and down a couple of times and get them off.

"If we are putting millions and millions of dollars into New South Wales and Queensland - and I'm not just talking about academies - it doesn't make sense that we are not showing our proudest day into the two biggest states in prime time.

"These days I watch the NRL grand final because it's played at a time I'm sitting down. Why not make it the best possible spectacle it can be? Economically, for the fans, for families, for the players and as a spectacle it just offers far bigger opportunities. Let's think about fireworks, not confetti."

Various AFL club bosses and officials watching New England overcome Seattle in last week's thrilling NFL Super Bowl included chief executives Greg Swann (Brisbane) and David Matthews (Greater Western Sydney) along with a number of key recruiters including the Gold Coast's Scott Clayton and Collingwood's Matt Rendell. The viewpoint from Rendell was that players would have no issue with a later start.

"When you look at the NFL, it's a national obsession on Super Bowl Sunday," said Matthews. "We're not there yet but putting on your biggest event at a time when significantly more people can watch it would change that.

"For a town like Sydney it's just so exciting when you think what it would do for the audience. And I look at it from the point of view of what is the best start time all year round and we believe it's twilight."

Added Swann: "We've been talking for months about reconnecting the game with supporters and putting on an absolutely great show, and I would have thought this is just another part of that."

Seven boss Worner pointed to the success of the 2012 Hawthorn Adelaide preliminary final at the MCG. "We had a crack at it and it worked an absolute treat.

"We have always held the view the grand final should be played later in the day and not for any financial reasons, either. It is much more about the way the whole day can be organised in terms of the build-up and the aesthetics of the match itself.

"I get that the two sports are completely different in terms of their level of sustained intensity but when you see the Super Bowl you cannot help but wonder just what it could be."

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-to-consider-twilight-grand-final-20150207-138lji.html

Gotta wonder what planet these Victorians live on, the NRL has had 3-4 games each year beat their grand final since at least 2012.
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...222311194?nk=e32bc578c57f1c8515183589c5950f0a

Channel 9 tipped to stay out of bidding war for next AFL TV rights deal

Scott Gullan
Herald Sun
February 17, 2015 10:01AM

THE anticipated three-way stoush in the next AFL TV rights race could already have the speed wobbles.

New AFL boss Gillon McLachlan was hoping the free-to-air TV networks would go at each other and push the price past $1.75 billion.

But a senior TV industry source says it is highly unlikely that Channel 9 will make a realistic bid against Channel 7.

Nine is expected to put all of its energy into retaining the NRL TV rights.

“They won’t bid for the AFL — and if they do it won’t be serious,” the insider said.

“”They have to save their money for the NRL because of it’s importance to Nine’s schedule in NSW and Queensland.

“They can’t afford both — no free-to-air network can afford to do that again.”

Nine and its Pay TV partner Foxtel paid $1.025 billion for a five-year NRL rights deal which finishes at the end of 2017.

The AFL — which pocketed $1.25 billion last time for its rights — will soon start serious discussions about its new deal which is for 2017-21.

The industry source believes a more realistic outcome would see Channel 7 and Channel 10 again join forces with a final price tag of about $1.4 billion.

Last year’s ratings back up the Nine stance with rugby league providing the three most watched shows in 2014 while the AFL Grand Final was relegated to fifth.

The opening two State-of-Origin games filled the top spots with the NRL Grand Final coming in third. Channel Seven’s My Kitchen Rules final even attracted more viewers than the AFL grand final.
 

insert.pause

First Grade
Messages
6,469
Love how they always compare the total of the current AFL broadcast deal including digital rights with the NRL broadcast deal excluding them.
 

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
Love how they always compare the total of the current AFL broadcast deal including digital rights with the NRL broadcast deal excluding them.

There are so many aspects that dont line up between the deals that, as a pissing contest, its not even worth the effort of debating whose is more valued.

Personally, i hope the ARLC begin negotiations around the same time the VFL does. Obviously, running a year later, there isnt the same preasure to sign the contract, but id hate to see 10 or 7 go all in on VFL and exclude themselves from the NRL bid just through fear of getting nothing simply because the ARLC wouldnt indicate interest in leaving 9.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top