NRL 2017 TV RATINGS!

[Billythekid]

Not true, see my posts. NRL gets $400 million yearly cash only
AFL gets $ 383 million yearly cash only

That's kinda misleading as the deals aren't made in cash only.

 

[El Diablo]

i have nfi why Smith & Co were in such a rush to do the TV deal seeing we'd got rid of first and last rights options in the previous deal and could have had a bidding war at an appropriate time

 

[Billythekid]

i have nfi why Smith & Co were in such a rush to do the TV deal seeing we'd got rid of first and last rights options in the previous deal and could have had a bidding war at an appropriate time

I don't think we will ever know the answer to that really. In the end we got the best deal we've ever had so I don't want to complain too much. Hopefully next time we do things better. It's going to be interesting how expansions will play out in all of this.

 

[Perth Red]

Not true, see my posts. NRL gets $400 million yearly cash only
AFL gets $ 383 million yearly cash only

NRL hasn't announced its contra amount of the deal. Makes me very suspicious of what this amount may be as this is the first and only time they haven't!

 

[insert.pause]

NRL hasn't announced its contra amount of the deal. Makes me very suspicious of what this amount may be as this is the first and only time they haven't!

they didn't even announce the nz deal. Too many hands in the pot, with club funding & rlpa.

 

[El Diablo]

NRL hasn't announced its contra amount of the deal.

and i bet you're on the phone to them every day about it

 

[taipan]

NRL hasn't announced its contra amount of the deal. Makes me very suspicious of what this amount may be as this is the first and only time they haven't!

Judging by the lack of News promotion for the NRL ditto by channel 9,I'd suggest contra would be small by comparison to the fumble brigade.

 

[El Diablo]

Judging by the lack of News promotion for the NRL ditto by channel 9,I'd suggest contra would be small by comparison to the fumble brigade.

the deal doesn't formally start until next year

 

[Captain Apollo]

you don't reckon how quickly the AFL deal came together had anything to do with Murdoch getting retribution against Dave Smith for cutting newscorp out of the Nine deal and announcing it on the day Murdoch landed in Australia?

Smith made the negotiations unnecessarily adversarial and handed the AFL about $200m in the process.

If Grant weren't such a weak chairman looking to save his own skin by rushing through a deal it would have been very interesting to see what newscorps end game was. If it weren't for the Friday arvo game I would say the NRL did a reasonable deal, despite everything.

By their very nature, negotiations are adversarial, and News assumed they didn't have to pony up much and that they could just have the TV rights. Smith did what was right by the game by calling News and showing that they are not the only game in town. News like to dictate and hate it when anyone stands up to them. If you doubt what I'm saying, have a read of what they have done in other countries and how they cry like a child when they don't get their way. Just look at the comments in the News Ltd press when the AFL TV deal was announced and how News Ltd "preferred AFL anyway"

If anyone deserves any stick, it is Grant as you rightly point out. He rushed into getting it done with Foxtel after Smith had set it up to get better terms from then. Grant undercut the hard work after the AFL deal came out. It would cost Foxtel far more in lost subscriptions in not having any NRL TV rights compared to AFL.

 

[insert.pause]

By their very nature, negotiations are adversarial, and News assumed they didn't have to pony up much and that they could just have the TV rights. Smith did what was right by the game by calling News and showing that they are not the only game in town. News like to dictate and hate it when anyone stands up to them. If you doubt what I'm saying, have a read of what they have done in other countries and how they cry like a child when they don't get their way. Just look at the comments in the News Ltd press when the AFL TV deal was announced and how News Ltd "preferred AFL anyway"

If anyone deserves any stick, it is Grant as you rightly point out. He rushed into getting it done with Foxtel after Smith had set it up to get better terms from then. Grant undercut the hard work after the AFL deal came out. It would cost Foxtel far more in lost subscriptions in not having any NRL TV rights compared to AFL.

Smith, perhaps naively, made the negotiations particularly adversarial when it may not have been needed, despite how good it felt to give the old turd the finger.

 

[The_Wookie]

you don't reckon how quickly the AFL deal came together had anything to do with Murdoch getting retribution against Dave Smith for cutting newscorp out of the Nine deal and announcing it on the day Murdoch landed in Australia?

It probably helped things along.

Smith made the negotiations unnecessarily adversarial and handed the AFL about $200m in the process

.

Theres always a reason the AFL gets more and its apparently never because anyone actually wants to pay that much. Notably Packer trying to force Seven to pay more, so he bid high even though he didnt reallly want it, or Murdoch losing his marbles and paying overs and wasting 200 million in the process.

If Grant weren't such a weak chairman looking to save his own skin by rushing through a deal it would have been very interesting to see what newscorps end game was. If it weren't for the Friday arvo game I would say the NRL did a reasonable deal, despite everything.

Its not a bad deal, but i think it could have been better. How the Storm still cant get much local coverage of their games on FTA is a travesty.

 

[The_Wookie]

they didn't even announce the nz deal. Too many hands in the pot, with club funding & rlpa.

(Source: 2016 NRL Annual Report)

Given the announced total was 1.825 billion and the 2016 Annual Report says that with the Sky deal completed the total is 1.9 billion, it looks like the NRL got 75-125 million from NZ.. (Depending on whether the Telstra money includes naming rights for the competition)

 

[insert.pause]

It probably helped things along.

.

Theres always a reason the AFL gets more and its apparently never because anyone actually wants to pay that much. Notably Packer trying to force Seven to pay more, so he bid high even though he didnt reallly want it, or Murdoch losing his marbles and paying overs and wasting 200 million in the process.



Its not a bad deal, but i think it could have been better. How the Storm still cant get much local coverage of their games on FTA is a travesty.

Murdoch wanted to make a statement, there was nothing subtle about it.

 

[insert.pause]

(Source: 2016 NRL Annual Report)

Given the announced total was 1.825 billion and the 2016 Annual Report says that with the Sky deal completed the total is 1.9 billion, it looks like the NRL got 75-125 million from NZ.. (Depending on whether the Telstra money includes naming rights for the competition)

There was no announcement, no press release, nothing. They announced it in previous deals.

 

[The_Wookie]

There was no announcement, no press release, nothing. They announced it in previous deals.

yeah. It was barely announced last time, no amount was released, just a note to say it had been done really.

 

[Perth Red]

Must have been less and I reckon the contra is significant. It's not like the nrl,to be shy to front the media when they have something positive to report so I think we can be safe neither are particularly good news.

How come Telstra get such a sweet deal on nrl? $200mill inc $50mill worth of naming rights over $250mill and no naming rights for afl seems a massive difference

 

[Perth Red]

Smith, perhaps naively, made the negotiations particularly adversarial when it may not have been needed, despite how good it felt to give the old turd the finger.

Smith got a great deal from nine. 4 fta games and a massive $ increase. this peed off fox, smith should have been allowed to see it through, if he couldn't bend fox over and give them the shafting they deserved then he should have been sacked, not mid negotiations. Hell if fox dug in I'd have looked at fast tracking an nrl digital,service for the other 4 games and cut fox off at the knees. They'd be crawling to the nrl in a couple of years when their subscriptions withered away.

They should have gone to fox with an offer of a ninth game and simucast, which is the biggie this deal for them, for the amount they paid. Telstra needed pulling into line as well. We got sold for around $200mill unders which would have paid for the ninth game expansion and grass roots increased funding. Homhum such is the lot of RL. You could never accuse us of outstanding strategy and leadership.

 

[insert.pause]

Must have been less and I reckon the contra is significant. It's not like the nrl,to be shy to front the media when they have something positive to report so I think we can be safe neither are particularly good news.

How come Telstra get such a sweet deal on nrl? $200mill inc $50mill worth of naming rights over $250mill and no naming rights for afl seems a massive difference

The NRL will own its online properties outright, with all its ad revenue. No Telstra branding or advertising. The AFL website is a JV with Telstra.

 

[HHH]

I think what made Murdoch panic was optus stealing the EPL from fox sports,
When this happened most people agreed Dave Smith had done a wonderful job as their was more then one TV mob after our product , we really had NEWS by the balls.
Then within a few weeks of the EPL deal for some stupid reason we sign a rushed deal with fox for decent money but we lost free to air Saturday nights , got lumped with a 6pm pub game and weekly Thursday night
The commission should hang there head in shame

 

[Perth Red]

The NRL will own its online properties outright, with all its ad revenue. No Telstra branding or advertising. The AFL website is a JV with Telstra.

I'm struggling to see how that is worth $20million a year? Do online adds really generate that sort of income?