Next TV rights deal

[Perth Red]

Still not great value, if I can watch 50% of games live for free across 4 days am I really that fussed to pay Fox costs for the other 50%? I am as die hard as you get, watch pretty much every game every week on GEM and Fox and all the Fox NRL shows but tbh I will cancel my subscription in 2017 if 4 out of 8 games are live and free. Simulcast and the majority of games on Fox and Ill keep it.

They will need to stump up in the region of:
$100mill (last deal payment)
+ $25million Nine loss if simulcast
+ $30million to cover expansion to get the ninth game

at least to have a package enticing to subscribers. if Fox feel it is worth it will be interesting to see

 

[docbrown]

A Pacific nations Test featuring NRL players will rate better than most think.

It will rate, just not as highly as a Kangaroos or regular NRL match.

I'm not sure if there was word on City vs Country given the Anzac Test has been moved. It could either be scrapped - or if they play it safe ratings wise - they may go

Friday - City vs Country
Saturday Night & Sunday Afternoon - Internationals (except for Australia)
Sunday Night - Origin

That's the least risk option.

I wonder if Fox heard about the deal at the same time as everyone else.

People at Fox are going to lose their jobs over this.

Graeme Samuel has his fingerprints all over it.

Aye.

They only get to simulcast it on their digital platforms (Jumpin or Stan) as part of the deal but that is not the digital mobile rights (currently DigitalPass).

So the NRL can sell it (to Telstra, Optus, iiNet etc) or keep it in house.

The non-exclusive rights mean the 4 Channel 9 games can also be simulcast to another subscription streaming service. So in effect the NRL can sell the same content twice & don't have to do anything.

Also to: Bgoodorgoodatit --- it could be a week, it could be 2 years before the rest of the packages are completed.

 

[Johnny88]

Wouldn't be surprised to see Fox go low or not bid at all. Sounds crazy I know but reality is with 50% of games live FTA games a week, no exclusive Saturday and no Monday night the amount of people who will subscribe primarily for NRL is going to be extremely low. They are going to haemorrhage subscribers end of 2017 and not much they can do to stop it regardless of how much they pay. Only hope for them is simulcast and a ninth game so they have some relevance to the NRL fan. No one is going to pay what Fox charges to watch 50% of NRL games on same days as they can be watching games on FTA imo.

If Fox got all games live and in HD ad free on a 24hr League channel I would keep Foxtel plus there is talk that they would have there own graphics and commentators for the ch9 games so that would be good.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Wouldn't be surprised to see Fox go low or not bid at all. Sounds crazy I know but reality is with 50% of games live FTA games a week, no exclusive Saturday and no Monday night the amount of people who will subscribe primarily for NRL is going to be extremely low. They are going to haemorrhage subscribers end of 2017 and not much they can do to stop it regardless of how much they pay. Only hope for them is simulcast and a ninth game so they have some relevance to the NRL fan. No one is going to pay what Fox charges to watch 50% of NRL games on same days as they can be watching games on FTA imo.

You are being illogical. Why? Have a look at what Foxtel does with the AFL. What they could wind up with for the NRL (i.e. simulcasting all 8 games, with only 4 exclusive games) would be pretty much the same as what they have for the AFL. If they dropped NRL altogether, they would lose even more subscribers than they currently do.

Rupert Murdoch himself reportedly said many moons ago "content is king" and without the NRL what would drive subscriptions in NSW and Qld? Not much.

 

[Canard]

Still not great value, if I can watch 50% of games live for free across 4 days am I really that fussed to pay Fox costs for the other 50%? I am as die hard as you get, watch pretty much every game every week on GEM and Fox and all the Fox NRL shows but tbh I will cancel my subscription in 2017 if 4 out of 8 games are live and free. Simulcast and the majority of games on Fox and Ill keep it.

They will need to stump up in the region of:
$100mill (last deal payment)
+ $25million Nine loss if simulcast
+ $30million to cover expansion to get the ninth game

at least to have a package enticing to subscribers. if Fox feel it is worth it will be interesting to see

But as a NRL fan your somewhat of an "anomaly" in that you don't have a team.

If the only way to guarantee that you could watch your club every week is to have Foxtel/Stan/Netflix than I see that appealing to many people.

What I could see happening is people deciding whether they subscribe once the yearly schedule is resolved.

 

[docbrown]

Re Fox lowballing --

Maybe, it's their choice really. If I recall, they used to have these metrics called SRI - subscriber retention indicators. Basically if package X wasn't available we'd lose Y. And they were updated regularly, like every week because that's how often it changes based on the offerings, financial situations etc. The idea is to keep SRI high obviously. They'd know exactly what the drop would be without the NRL component.

But there's also another metric - again I think it was SMI - subscriber migration indicator. Now that's the important one because that's the one that measures viewers lost to competitors, it was similar to the migration ones used in F2A. So whereas SRI is say like velocity and in an instantaneous moment you can see what the subscriber loss would be, SMI is like acceleration/differential-- so you might be able to take the initial hit but the overall drain over time to the competitor to the point where the overall impact makes the business unsustainable.

They would never risk that though, hence why they do numbers 10 years in advance today.

The way I see it, NRL is just playing its cards close to its chest and they've been smart so far. People might overreact but they're usually the same people who find out their predictions of doom and gloom end up wrong.

 

[Canard]

You are being illogical. Why? Have a look at what Foxtel does with the AFL. What they could wind up with for the NRL (i.e. simulcasting all 8 games, with only 4 exclusive games) would be pretty much the same as what they have for the AFL. If they dropped NRL altogether, they would lose even more subscribers than they currently do.

Rupert Murdoch himself reportedly said many moons ago "content is king" and without the NRL what would drive subscriptions in NSW and Qld? Not much.

Im playing the strawman arguement here, but I think PR is angling that FOX need a 9th game to justify any spend.

Imagine the subscriber numbers in QLD and NSW without NRL? It would be the death of them.

 

[Haffa]

Im playing the strawman arguement here, but I think PR is angling that FOX need a 9th game to justify any spend.

Of course he is and he's wrong.

If Foxtel simulcast all games live and in HD, the retention rates to cover the costs and the amount of people signing up to packages would outstrip the numbers the VFL got a few years ago. After losing the AFL rights a few years ago Fox took a hit, there is now way they'd risk that with RL.

 

[taipan]

Rugby league underpinned Pay TV from day one,thanks to the subscriber base in two of the three most populous states in Australia.
Currently their churning rate has dropped to lower levels than usual.
I'm sure the powers that be in Fox would be fully aware ,if they lose the NRL.not only will the churning rate accelerate,so will their drop in profitability.
9 is OK with simulcasting but of course will pay less (best $150m over the 5 years).That slack would be more than made up by Fox getting simulcasting on 8 games.that would retain subscribers,retain advertisers and cash flow.

The NRL have IMO snookered Fox in a corner.9 and the NRL just have to adopt a wait and see approach,because Fox eventually will have to make a calculated move which could mean for them long term survival.

People will retain their Fox subs,if they are assured of 8 games live,no ads during play.So I don't agree with Perth Red.If the 8 games are live,my subs will remain .The problem with FTA is the invasion of advertising in live games.

It's now in Fox's court and Rupert M.will be seething he has no control of the NRL's gonads like he had before.His grip has loosened somewhat.

 

[Billythekid]

Still not great value, if I can watch 50% of games live for free across 4 days am I really that fussed to pay Fox costs for the other 50%? I am as die hard as you get, watch pretty much every game every week on GEM and Fox and all the Fox NRL shows but tbh I will cancel my subscription in 2017 if 4 out of 8 games are live and free. Simulcast and the majority of games on Fox and Ill keep it.

They will need to stump up in the region of:
$100mill (last deal payment)
+ $25million Nine loss if simulcast
+ $30million to cover expansion to get the ninth game

at least to have a package enticing to subscribers. if Fox feel it is worth it will be interesting to see

I disagree with your assessment for 2 main reasons. Firstly I think you're underplaying just how big simulcast for all games is for fox. You only have to see what they have got out of the AFL to see this. I think subscribers would be quite happy to get all games on fox in HD. People with fox would be getting much more vault for money.

Much more importantly though you're ignoring the perils of not getting the NRL on board. You think people might start leaving fox because nine has one more game. Well imagine what happens if fox have NO NRL. Their subscriber base would shrink up overnight in what are their most important markets. They can't afford not to get the NRL, obviously there is a limit to what they can and should pay but they're in a more precarious position than the NRL.

 

[BuffaloRules]

Is it possible that the other 4 games could go to 7 & 10?

Say for $100 mil a year $500 mil total?

Not as much money as the NRL would have got from Fox,but Imagine all 8 games on FTA...

 

[Captain Apollo]

Is it possible that the other 4 games could go to 7 & 10?

Say for $100 mil a year $500 mil total?

Not as much money as the NRL would have got from Fox,but Imagine all 8 games on FTA...

I'd doubt it. Mainly because 7 will be saving it's money for the AFL, whilst 10 has virtually no money. Foxtel has the money to spend and would be able to outbid 7, and 10.

 

[beave]

I like that we have Fox over a barrell somewhat. They know that if they don't have any NRL they are completley f**ked in NSW and QLD. Regardless of the average house numbers also think of all the clubs and pubs that pay a ridiculous amount per month showing league to the public (i believe it's around $1k a month for pub) that would simly turn it off if they didn't have Rugby League to show. Uncie Rupes is gonna be wild I'll tell ya!!!!!!

 

[Cletus]

One of the best things about locking 9 in is it stops Fox from putting together a joint bid with 10 after becoming a shareholder in them. I'm sure they would have been their preferred FTA partner. It will be interesting to see what happens with the AFL rights, it was a masterstroke getting in there early and striking a deal before the AFL. I'm sure there will be a very unhappy polo player in Melbourne tonight.

 

[Timbo]

I seem to recall asking this question once before and can't remember the answer - would someone like ESPN Australia be in a position to make a play if Fox Sports balks at the price?

 

[Haffa]

I seem to recall asking this question once before and can't remember the answer - would someone like ESPN Australia be in a position to make a play if Fox Sports balks at the price?

Wouldn't make sense for them to go it alone. If they had the backing of Fetch they could but they don't need to attract subscribers the only way they'd get returns is through advertisements. Fox would love it because they'd show the game for free.

 

[LESStar58]

http://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/nr...-of-rugby-league/story-fndv2us0-1227478837858

Please. Anyone but Warren smith!

 

[FlameThrower]

Please. Anyone but Warren smith!

Andrew Voss with about 49% of the vote...

 

[docbrown]

not only will the churning rate accelerate,so will their drop in profitability.

That's the key indicator they'll be looking at.

Is it possible that the other 4 games could go to 7 & 10?

Say for $100 mil a year $500 mil total?

Not as much money as the NRL would have got from Fox,but Imagine all 8 games on FTA...

It depends if there's a F2A exclusivity clause, I'm thinking there might not be one any more (there used to be). 9 might not appreciate the competition after forking out $$$ but hey, what can they do? Also remember like has happened previously, 9 can potentially still on sell one of those 4 games to 10 & 7. That may come into play in getting a final compromise between the NRL, 9 and Fox/10.

One of the best things about locking 9 in is it stops Fox from putting together a joint bid with 10 after becoming a shareholder in them.

That's the key because that almost happened last time before Fox got cold feet because of their existing arrangements.

Make no mistake. This is NRL & 9 combining to screw over Fox & 10.

 

[nrlnrl]

Rupert Murdoch once hijacked rugby league. Now he could end up with nothing.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...th-nothing-20150810-givwqi.html#ixzz3iSU87xZ0
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook


I know its 2018 but I wonder how many people will cancel their foxtel subscription.

Andrew Webster came across as taking delight in this story. Does he normally sit outside & have graphics on his stories ? I don't read all his articles, but from my experience he's normally a bit more reserved than this.