Next TV rights deal

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

i have came around to the rookie draft in the past few weeks. Although i do think each club should have right to have the first offer to a certain amount of players in their district or assigned districts outside/before the draft. Thats a good way of maintaining district identity but i would limit it to say 3 per year

Definitely think junior development should go into the hands of ARLC sooner rather than later.

I think the fear of the Draft is massively overstated...

Plenty of club legends began with other clubs, fans just love players if they at least appear to put in effort for the team. Hell, JT debuted for the Bulldogs, but he'll probably go down as NQLDs greatest ever.

And there is a positive people dont think about: with centralised development, kids wont need to level their local area until the try for firstgrade. We might get some actual local products instead of kids that were just recruited at 15.

 

[Von Neumann]

You can't compare smith and gallop, to do so is folly. As you will know I am far from being a gallop fan but he was just a puppet at the whim of his news ltd master and an ineffective arl. Smith has independence, funds and free reign to develop the game to its next level. So far, in many areas, he and the arlc are short on expectation. It is only three years and I'm sure they had plenty internally to sort out. On key kpi's they still have a long way to go IMO.

Is the nrl comp better now than 2 years ago?
Are refs better?
Is Jnr RL better?
Is grass roots stronger?
Are more people watching on TV and going to games?
Does RL have a broader national appeal?
Are NRL clubs strong on and off the field?
Is the international game stronger?
Are corporates falling over themselves to sponsor clubs and the code?

These are the key areas for me and there is still a long way to go in most of them. $'s for me are not the measurement, they are just the resource we need to achieve the above. We can have all the money in the bank we want but if we still arent meeting the above then it is a fail.

You are entitled to your view. But I see it the other way around. In the sense that I dont think the games enduring popularity can be knocked around very much - and anything anyone claims has done so is speaking selfishly or preferentially, eg the no fighting/shoulder charge issue; if you look at it then in many respects the game has never been more popular/widely spoken about/wide-spread/more watched than it is now.

So I think the sport already has that. What it needs, to my mind, is the money to help facilitate the growth and initiatives and improvements to stadia, clubs/clubs management.

In some senses the money is not the thing I - or anyone (unless its their job, and who doesn't enjoy growing money really?) I wake up to on my brain each day, but the money nonetheless occupies a significant importance in my mind.

It occupies that importance because I think of big ticket items like stadia and infrastructure of clubs, best practice, improved training facilities, improved game-day corporate service, wider, more involved marketing campaigns and club innitiatives - it all takes money to get the ball rolling.

So in many senses, with more money, the value of any plan you implement can jump from (an example only: ) a 5 to an 8 in terms of effectiveness. In other words, I think the sport has been paying for lower quality things and even if its a chicken and egg argument, I think if you want to cause an effect out there you have to lead - and you have to lead with your best [looking, expensive] foot.

The money is important. Beyond measure. Ask the last 20 years about the money, my friend, and the shrivelled investments. It should also help get us expansion teams. The other goals on your check list (which impressed me anyway) are worthy and will fall easier. Exhibit A: the recent Titans situation and St George. And Wests. In each case, something better came of it. The Titans as a club are in a far better/accepted/financial position now and are receiving worthy attentions from those who wish to support the club.

 

[Von Neumann]

I think the fear of the Draft is massively overstated...

Plenty of club legends began with other clubs, fans just love players if they at least appear to put in effort for the team. Hell, JT debuted for the Bulldogs, but he'll probably go down as NQLDs greatest ever.

And there is a positive people dont think about: with centralised development, kids wont need to level their local area until the try for firstgrade. We might get some actual local products instead of kids that were just recruited at 15.

This. The draft-fear is the propaganda mouth-piece of fearful clubs.

I dont see it - sure, there may be a incy wincy little bit of pain of adjustment - but its not like players just disappear off the face of the earth.

 

[TheRam]

You are entitled to your view. But I see it the other way around. In the sense that I dont think the games enduring popularity can be knocked around very much - and anything anyone claims has done so is speaking selfishly or preferentially, eg the no fighting/shoulder charge issue; if you look at it then in many respects the game has never been more popular/widely spoken about/wide-spread/more watched than it is now.

So I think the sport already has that. What it needs, to my mind, is the money to help facilitate the growth and initiatives and improvements to stadia, clubs/clubs management.

In some senses the money is not the thing I - or anyone (unless its their job, and who doesn't enjoy growing money really?) I wake up to on my brain each day, but the money nonetheless occupies a significant importance in my mind.

It occupies that importance because I think of big ticket items like stadia and infrastructure of clubs, best practice, improved training facilities, improved game-day corporate service, wider, more involved marketing campaigns and club innitiatives - it all takes money to get the ball rolling.

So in many senses, with more money, the value of any plan you implement can jump from (an example only: ) a 5 to an 8 in terms of effectiveness. In other words, I think the sport has been paying for lower quality things and even if its a chicken and egg argument, I think if you want to cause an effect out there you have to lead - and you have to lead with your best [looking, expensive] foot.

The money is important. Beyond measure. Ask the last 20 years about the money, my friend, and the shrivelled investments. It should also help get us expansion teams. The other goals on your check list (which impressed me anyway) are worthy and will fall easier. Exhibit A: the recent Titans situation and St George. And Wests. In each case, something better came of it. The Titans as a club are in a far better/accepted/financial position now and are receiving worthy attentions from those who wish to support the club.

Did you even understand PR's and my posts??? Read more carefully next time.

 

[Von Neumann]

Did you even understand PR's and my posts??? Read more carefully next time.

you could start by stating your position more clearly and concisely. Am interested. Because it sounds like some (cough) have a problem with all the talk of 'makin` money'

Seems if some (cough) are not talking football down at NRL HQ, its just not good enough.

So, er.... now, I dont think the weight of knowing exactly what you mean is upon me.

Go ahead, YOU explain.

Your majesty.
lmfao

 

[El Diablo]

http://mumbrella.com.au/ten-to-bid-...it-suffered-from-lack-of-winter-sports-290628

Ten to bid for AFL and NRL rights admitting it ‘suffered’ from lack of winter sports

Ten has signalled its intention to enter the bidding war for the NRL and AFL rights after admitting it has suffered from not having a major winter sport in its schedule.

While the network had seen its ratings dive in recent years after losing the AFL rights to rival Seven, Ten chief executive Hamish McLennan warned it will only proceed with negotiations if the price is right.

“We have always said we will not blow our brains out,” he said.

Speaking at the release of its half results which showed losses spiralled to $264m on the back of a write down of its TV licence, McLennan said Ten has proved to be “flexible and creative” in its approach to live sport negotiations, an approach it will adopt with the AFL and NRL.

He highlighted the winter Olympics in Sochi, F1 motor racing and V8 Supercars where it has been creative. Rights for the motorsports are shared with pay-TV’s Fox Sports, seeing only certain races covered in full on the free-to-air channel.

McLennan also pointed out Ten’s success with the Big Bash cricket where, despite widespread scepticism, it turned the tournament “into a really fantastic competition that is making money and delivering sensational results”.

“The negotiations with the AFL and NRL don’t have to be absolute. It doesn’t necessarily mean that we have to trade for everything,” he said when asked whether it would bid for the rights.

“If you look at Sochi as an example of premium live sport, we secured that at a very competitive price and we made money off the back of it and drove a really good share.

“My point is that we are very flexible and creative in how we deal with those rights and you have to look at them on a stand alone basis.”

Industry speculation has suggested the NRL in particular could be looking to split its rights packages, breaking off events like State of Origin and international matches to encourage more competition from networks.

McLennan added: “Every negotiation is different and we have been creative in how we have handled them. I don’t want to tip my hand at this point about how we are going to approach either the NRL and AFL negotiations, but it’s fair to say we have suffered from not having a major winter sport.

“We like the NRL and we like the AFL and we are going to see what we can do over the next few months to get a bit of it.

“It could be that we get nothing as it might get too expensive for us, but we have a plan for winters sports and a plan without and we are keeping our options open.

“We have always said we will not blow our brains out and we will deal with the brief as it lands and see if there is an opportunity for Ten.”

Meanwhile, McLennan told an analyst and media briefing that Ten was outperforming its free to air rivals in capturing the pivotal 25 to 54 demographic. They are the biggest spenders in most product categories and an attractive market for advertisers, he said.

He said Ten’s ratings performance – “the best for several years” – was being recognised by the market, as was its program schedule.

“I have been very encouraged by the dialogue we have had with our advertisers and media buyers around our schedule and the integratible nature of the new programs we are launching,” he said.

“It is a tough, competitive market but there seems to be a greater willingness to trade with Ten than 12 months ago.

“How that manifests itself over the next three to four months we are are yet to see, but I am encouraged by the nature of the conversations we are having with key advertisers and media buyers.”

McLennan said there was an “absolute focus” on yield and called on the industry to show “integrity” in its pricing.

“You can only really do that [build yield] through ratings momentum and you have to do it consistently,” he said.

“The price lever we can then start to pull when we build momentum and as shows build then you get positive trajectory.

“As an overall statement for the industry, we are the only major media that delivers a mass audience and I think as a general rule there has to be greater price integrity in how we all trade.

“I think [Nine CEO] David Gyngell and [Seven CEO] Tim Worner would probably agree with that.”

Steve Jones

 

[insert.pause]

Creative is code for a small slice of both codes.

 

[Cletus]

Creative is code for a small slice of both codes.

If he is comparing it to the "creativity" they used for F1 then he means Foxtel showing some weekends exclusively and no FTA coverage. It's a real worry that Murdoch has influence over Ten and even though I'm sure Fox & Ten could do a very competitive bid in money terms I think it would be very dangerous for the NRL to accept a deal with them.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

IF...and it's a big IF...the ARLC take ALL junior development and competitions away from the 16-20 NRL clubs, and run them themselves in conjunction with the NSWRL, QRL and affiliated states, and funnel all junior and lower grade teams in to the NRL via a draft, then the clubs won't have much say in it at all. And those that throw up a fuss don't get players, lose their licence and f**k off to oblivion.

I can eventually see a time when the ARLC runs:
* all junior development.
* all non-NRL competitions.
* players draft.
* merchandising.
* match day entertainment.
* advertising.
* website presences.
* ticketing.
* memberships.
* sponsorship.
* tv, radio, web broadcasts.
* licensing.

All monies are collected and divided amongst the NRL clubs and junior/grassroot & lower level comps.

And with their allocation of funds - which covers their entire cap - the 16-20 NRL clubs go about their primary role - which is putting a team on the park to provide sport/entertainment and managing their roster and have to worry about nothing else.

 

[BuffaloRules]

Creative is code for a small slice of both codes.

I think they would've perfect for Monday night RL...

How much would that be worth - $50-$60mil yer year?

Live FTA around all Capital cities thanks...

 

[Perth Red]

re clubs getting more money, the last significant increase was mostly taken up by the salary cap increase. Clubs still struggle on either pokie club hand outs, nrl hand outs or support of directors. Most clubs require around $2-3million a year more to be fully sustainable without these other sources and to be able to ride out rough times and invest in infrastructure. If the game gets another $50-100mill a year revenue increase grants need to go up by $1million for everyone then another $1mill each on the table for directed spending. Some sort of grant equalisation to achieve nrl Goals should also be on the table ie partial re.ocation to Gosford, Wellington or Adelaide, playing games in the bush/other cities, centralised stadium usage etc.

 

[Perth Red]

Wouldn't surprise me to see ch10 going for nrl nines, rlwc/internationals and SOO, live simulcast with fox sports. I doubt they have the money or desire to go for the nrl regular season.

 

[Starkers]

i can't see a channel securing a package like the nines, origin or international without a weekly round fixture. ten might have experience with things like V8's and F1 but they can cross promote that stuff. and i really doubt they would live simulcast origins.

 

[LeagueXIII]

Back in the early 90's

Ten had the club games including a pre season comp
Nine had origin
Seven did the tests
ABC did Saturday game

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

IF...and it's a big IF...the ARLC take ALL junior development and competitions away from the 16-20 NRL clubs, and run them themselves in conjunction with the NSWRL, QRL and affiliated states, and funnel all junior and lower grade teams in to the NRL via a draft, then the clubs won't have much say in it at all. And those that throw up a fuss don't get players, lose their licence and f**k off to oblivion.

I can eventually see a time when the ARLC runs:
* all junior development.
* all non-NRL competitions.
* players draft.
* merchandising.
* match day entertainment.
* advertising.
* website presences.
* ticketing.
* memberships.
* sponsorship.
* tv, radio, web broadcasts.
* licensing.

All monies are collected and divided amongst the NRL clubs and junior/grassroot & lower level comps.

And with their allocation of funds - which covers their entire cap - the 16-20 NRL clubs go about their primary role - which is putting a team on the park to provide sport/entertainment and managing their roster and have to worry about nothing else.

The clubs should focus on their teams AND fan involvement....

The average fan will always love their club above the League, which inclines me to say that ticket sales shouldnt be evenly distributed. The ARLC should definitely centralise the sale and take a commission off the top, but clubs that invest in supporter deserve to be rewarded.

A home and away gate split could be a good idea; the NFL give the visiting team 40% to encourage them to bring fans.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

The clubs should focus on their teams AND fan involvement....

The average fan will always love their club above the League, which inclines me to say that ticket sales shouldnt be evenly distributed. The ARLC should definitely centralise the sale and take a commission off the top, but clubs that invest in supporter deserve to be rewarded.

A home and away gate split could be a good idea; the NFL give the visiting team 40% to encourage them to bring fans.

Can't argue with that.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.couriermail.com.au/busin...329091476?nk=a213cae97b53751d7dd140f4fc686b59

Network says without urgent cash injection it could no longer be viable in the industry

Jeff Whalley
The Courier-Mail
April 30, 2015 8:44PM

TEN Network warns it could need an emergency cash injection within a year or it may no longer be a viable business.

The group yesterday declared it was pushing the limits of its $200 million debt facility.

If advertising revenue fell short of expectations, or the group lost market share, it would have to seek a new debt or turn to shareholders for more funding, it said.

“As a result of these matters, there is a material uncertainty that may cast significant doubt on the group’s ability to continue as a going concern,” Ten management said in a statement.

The group might therefore “be unable to realise its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business”.

Ten chief Hamish McLennan (pictured) said the advertising market was “short” in terms of forward bookings and the outlook was hard to predict. But he argued 2015 was the “beginning of the sustained turnaround” for Ten. “You can’t get revenue up until ratings are up and we’ve got that.”

He said the broadcaster had enjoyed its best season launch since 2012.

“We were the only free-to-air network to grow revenue over summer ... our schedule is tightening up.”

He pointed to Big Bash League cricket and series, including Family Feud and Shark Tank, as underpinning this.

The Great Australian Spelling Bee and The Bachelorette were among series that would bolster Ten’s schedule later in the year, he said.

Ten would continue to push for AFL and NRL rights despite the group’s headwinds, he said, repeating that he would take the same “flexible and creative” approach as Ten had used to secure cricket.

Mr McLennan said it was “too early” to say what proposals it would put to the major football codes.

He was speaking as Ten posted a $264 million net loss for the six months to February after taking a $251 million writedown on the value of its television licence.

This compared with an $8 million loss for the same period a year ago.

The results follow market speculation that pay TV group Foxtel, which is half owned by The Courier-Mail publisher News Corp, is close to taking a major stake in Ten.

The network acknowledged on Monday it and Foxtel had held discussions, but Mr McLennan declined to comment further yesterday.

Ten shares closed flat at 20.5¢.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/busines...332106075?nk=0e4ce68fa1f3118a6a6bc5ac90b680c4

Television networks jostle in fight for rare air

Terry McCrann
Sunday Herald Sun
May 03, 2015 12:00AM

THE free-to-air television industry has reached the most critical point in its 60-year life. Each of the three networks and the industry overall face a series of fundamental existential decisions.

They would have faced them a decade ago but for the decision of the Howard government to give them extra digital channels while preserving their monopoly access to prime (and not-so prime) sport programming and maintaining the ban on new entrants.

This maintained their lock on the eyeballs of Australians and the $4 billion or so of advertising revenue that went with them.

The digital channels have worked to add — more accurately, keep — eyeballs and ad-dollars on cheap programming.

A decade ago that left subscription-TV group Foxtel — half owned by the parent company of this newspaper — as the networks’ only competitor. But that is now breaking down with the arrival of the various “streaming” operations like Netflix, and with the national broadband network looming ahead.

While the networks have moved to form partnerships with these new players, they are ultimately sleeping with the enemy. It might give them a share of the services plundering their viewers, but their viewers would still be plundered.

For as the executive chairman and CEO of the Ten Network, Hamish McLennan, said during the week at the release of the network’s results, right now FTA-TV was still the only game in town for 24/7 mass eyeballs.

“No medium can match FTA-TV’s ability to reach large audiences every day and night of the week,” McLennan said.

But for how much longer, unchallenged, is the critical question?

To some extent each network is the master of its own destiny — if it gets the eyeballs with an MKR or premium sports, the ad-dollars will still come.

But programming costs are going up and the amount of ad-dollars in aggregate is going sideways. This has been obscured to some extent by the very weak performance of Ten.

For pretty much the 20 years through to the GFC the ad revenue share split roughly 40-30plus-30minus between the three with the ratings winner — usually Nine — getting a much bigger share.

But in recent years it’s been more like a 40-40-20 split, with Ten running a very poor third. Although McLennan said on Thursday Ten had got up to 21.8 per cent in March.

That’s barely survivable for Ten, hence it’s move to raise fresh funding by selling a 14.9 per cent stake in itself to Foxtel.

Details of the deal were expected to surface last week but didn’t.

The key programming decision for all the networks is the AFL broadcast rights for the five years starting in 2017. Then a year later come the NRL rights. Whoever gets the rights has to “dance with FTA-TV’s old devil Foxtel”.

It is impossible for one network to both pay the $1.5-$2 billion it will cost and sensibly show all nine games across a weekend.

But equally it is critical, if expensive, for Foxtel to get some of the games. This time round it had a majority — five — exclusively and all nine live-to-air.

Equally it is critical for the AFL to have a shared deal. If it could only sell exclusively to a FTA-TV network it would get half the money and have only half the games shown. Next time round the “other” rights — online and mobile — will have added significance dramatically greater than just five years ago.

McLennan made it clear that Ten would be going after the AFL rights — and the NRL ones as well. Seven will clearly defend its AFL rights, Nine its NRL ones. Both those networks have made moves to cash up in recent weeks.

Last week Seven moved to raise around $400 million in new funding from shareholders in a move that also further cements control of the network by Kerry Stokes. Nine got $640 million from the sale of its ticketing and events arm.

The networks are also positioning for some degree of further deregulation. This will either enable them to buy their regional affiliates or merge with other media in their main capital city markets, or indeed both. But it could also see them lose monopoly access to at least some prime sports programming.

Arguably though none of this will stop but only delay the irresistible progressive loss of eyeballs — and so those key ad-dollars — to new media; in the context of a similarly irresistible rise in programming costs.

Now it’s true that every network has faced individual — indeed, multiple — existential threats in the past. That was when “entrepreneurial” owners like Alan Bond (Nine) and Christopher Skase (Seven) loaded them or their parent companies up with debt.

But ownership changed and they sailed on. This time it is already different; tomorrow, it is going to become even more so.

 

[insert.pause]

Ch9 today show sports news led with AFL and didn't even mention RL or the Pacific Test AT ALL!

I would have thought with the ANZAC Test on their own station this afternoon it would have been the perfect opportunity to plug the broadcast...

Home of Rugby league folks!

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.afr.com/business/sport/s...ut-bid-for-nrl-and-afl-rights-20150503-1mx2dt

Seven to try for knockout bid for NRL and AFL rights

by Jared Lynch John Stensholt

Speculation is mounting that Seven West Media will attempt a knockout bid to land AFL and NRL broadcast rights, using its strengthened balance sheet from its large capital raising to target the country's two biggest winter sports.

Seven West, which owns the Seven free-to-air TV network, is in the midst of a $612 million capital raising that sports sources expect frees up Seven to lodge huge bids for AFL and rugby league rights.

It comes as expectations are growing that the NRL will attempt to beat the AFL to the punch and sign a rights deal it hopes will be worth up to $2 billion over five years before the AFL finalises its negotiations for a new contract, which it has told TV networks should be worth about $1.75 billion over five years.

The NRL told TV executives at the end of the week before last that it was in the market for a new deal to begin after its current contract with Nine Entertainment Co, Fox Sports Australia and Telstra, worth about $1.2 billion over five years, expires at the end of 2017.

The move came as a surprise, given the AFL has started negotiations for rights that would start after its five-year, $1.25 billion contract with Seven, Foxtel and Telstra ends after the 2016 grand final.

It is understood the NRL will fast-track negotiations and attempt to seal a deal before the AFL, in the belief that whichever sport signs a contract first will garner more money from a combination of free-to-air and pay-television networks.

Nine executives are adamant the network will not lose its rugby league rights and is in a strong fiscal position after adding $640 million to its balance sheet after the recent sale of its Nine Live business.

Go hard

But it is expected Seven will go hard after the rights to the State of Origin series, usually among the highest-rating shows across television each year and which NRL chief executive Dave Smith is exploring the possibility of selling separately to NRL and Test matches.

"We would expect to see strong bidding tension for the State of Origin series, with both Seven and [Network] Ten potentially interested," Commonwealth Bank analyst Alice Bennett said in a note to clients last week.

Seven is favourite to retain AFL rights, and is paying about $425 million in cash and $50 million in contra over five years of the deal. Telstra is paying $100 million in cash over the five years for the mobile-phone and internet TV rights, while Foxtel is paying an estimated $593 million in cash and $85 million in contra. Seven also owns rights to the Olympic Games, beginning with the Rio de Janeiro Games next year.

Rival Ten is hoping to gain a foothold in either of the new NRL and AFL rights deals. Its position would be strengthened considerably should a mooted deal for Foxtel – which has rights to both sports – to become a 14.9 per cent shareholder in the struggling free-to-air network eventuate.

Sports sources have said they would expect Foxtel to push hard for Ten to be involved in rights for one or both of the two sports, which could result in Ten winning the rights to one or two matches a week and Seven or Nine broadcasting others in conjunction with Foxtel.