What's new
By:
Advanced search…
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!

NZ NRL coverage & rights.

flippikat

flippikat

Bench
Messages
4,466
Why Kiwi fans are ripped off by this year’s Rugby World Cup - Gregor Paul

By Gregor Paul
15 Apr, 2023 06:00 AM

New Zealanders may not fully understand how badly off they are when it comes to live sports broadcasts.

Many parts of the world can turn on the telly and watch quality sport for free: their heroes as large as life in their living rooms without a cent having been spent.

Some of that free-to-air access is protected by anti-siphoning laws, with Governments having intervened at the start of the satellite TV boom to ensure events such as the Olympics remained accessible to everyone.
But there is also a strong belief in the UK, Australia, USA and much of Europe that sport can’t survive if it’s all behind a paywall.

Sell everything to a pay-TV operator and millions of households will never see their heroes, or the big moments that have the power to inspire.
They won’t harbour dreams to play at the highest level, but much worse, they won’t even foster aspirations to participate.
High-profile sport needs to be visible. It needs to be accessible to some extent and not the exclusive preserve of those with the disposable income to afford it.
In the UK, the Six Nations is all on the free-to-air BBC and ITV. The AFL agreement ensures that all marquee matches around public holidays and landmark dates are live on free-to-air.

The NFL has big games on free-to-air and a major reason these competitions continue to grow in popularity is because they are accessible to everyone.

Sports bodies and competitions that have pursued a hybrid model of selling broadcast rights to both subscription and free-to-air channels have been significantly more successful in growing audience, profile and revenue than those who have thrown everything they own behind a paywall.
New Zealand has no anti-siphoning laws and sits as one of the few countries in the world with virtually no high-profile sport on free-to-air.
Every major sports body has prioritised cash over audience and New Zealand, therefore, is the country where fans are ripped off the most — forced to pay to watch all their national teams and told it’s a privilege and not a right to cheer for their own.
This whole issue of being ripped off came up this week when Sky TV announced that it will be broadcasting six live Rugby World Cup games on its free-to-air channel, Prime, and another six on delay.
The masses will be expected to be eternally grateful they will be able to watch six live games for free, but these are going to be shown on Prime only because it’s a condition imposed by World Rugby.
New Zealanders are being offered the bare minimum free-to-air Rugby World Cup content, and just to highlight that this is the thin end of the wedge, all 48 games will be live on ITV in the UK.
Just as all games at last year’s Fifa World Cup were live on BBC and ITV, as was Wimbledon, the Olympics and the Grand National.
The fact the Black Caps and a smattering of other content is now available on TVNZ, is not by design, but by default.
Spark wanted to shut down Spark Sport and offload the liability of its existing obligations, and the quickest and easiest way to do that was to hand everything it owned to TVNZ.
However it came about, though, there is now an opportunity for TVNZ to showcase the value of free-to-air, and to deliver a data set that will prove to sports bodies in New Zealand that they need to rethink their obsession with pay-TV operators.
And no sport needs to be thinking about this harder than rugby, which is facing a participation crisis among teenage boys and in desperate need to find ways to boost audience interest in Super Rugby.
There are multiple factors driving teenage boys away from rugby and it would be naive to argue that sticking a handful of Super Rugby games live on TVNZ or Three would suddenly arrest the decline.
But it would help rugby sell itself as meaningful, credible and aspirational if it were more visible in more homes.
And now the Black Caps have found a new partner in TVNZ, rugby runs the risk of more kids being inclined to play cricket simply because they have had greater exposure to it.
Free-to-air channels have power when it comes to driving participation — see how many people in the UK take to playing tennis when Wimbledon is dominating time slots on the BBC.

The argument against opening professional rugby to free-to-air exposure has always been economic. NZR is sitting on a $100m-a-year deal with Sky, which simply wouldn’t pay that amount if it were sharing content with free-to-air providers.

That argument is broadly true, but it fails to put any future value on audience growth and ignores the evidence that hybrid contracts in other countries have worked symbiotically, with the free-to-air component driving more people to the pay TV operator.
Super Rugby, having disillusioned so many fans by its constant format changes, lopsided fixtures and nonsensical playoff structure, doesn’t appear to have a sustainable future if the content remains exclusively on Sky.
Super Rugby needs some kind of help in winning back fans and engaging new ones, and screams out as a competition that would benefit from a free-to-air partnership.
A few big local games — Blues v Crusaders and Hurricanes v Chiefs — being broadcast live on TVNZ or Three shouldn’t be seen as a nice-to-have by NZR, but a must-have.
And for different reasons, NZR needs to be thinking about getting the All Blacks out from under Sky’s clutches.
Rugby calls itself the national game and the All Blacks are set up as the people’s team and yet, excluding World Cups, when was the last time a test match was live on a free-to-air channel?
Having spent 27 years behind a paywall, the All Blacks have become the team of the affluent.
It’s wrong that Kiwis always have to pay to see the All Blacks and almost immoral that parents and families of the players, after investing years of time and money in their kid, then have to fork out for a Sky subscription on top of everything else to see their child play in the black jersey.
New Zealanders get a terrible deal when it comes to sport.
 
Perth Red

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,957
We saw in uk how bad it was for rl when SL went behind a paywall. Sure it delivered the cash to go fulltime but it also hid away a sport already struggling with a profile and exposure problem.
nrl not being on fta in nz I suspect has had the same damaging outcome. We’ve seen similar outcomes in the non Rl states with the game being buried on secondary channels.
ideally a balance between the cash of ptv/streaming along with bigger exposure of what fta main channel coverage gives you is what any sport needs to thrive.

Having said that professional sport is a commodity and it is a bit weird that we feel we have a right to freely consume it.
 
flippikat

flippikat

Bench
Messages
4,466
Perth Red said:
We saw in uk how bad it was for rl when SL went behind a paywall. Sure it delivered the cash to go fulltime but it also hid away a sport already struggling with a profile and exposure problem.
nrl not being on fta in nz I suspect has had the same damaging outcome. We’ve seen similar outcomes in the non Rl states with the game being buried on secondary channels.
ideally a balance between the cash of ptv/streaming along with bigger exposure of what fta main channel coverage gives you is what any sport needs to thrive.

Having said that professional sport is a commodity and it is a bit weird that we feel we have a right to freely consume it.
Click to expand...

Good points there, and I think the "right to freely consume it" comes out of the TV aspect - historically, TVcontent is funded by advertising or license fees (for places with that system) - and sport was largely considered "just another branch of TV content" - and that worked fine, in those days before professionalism took off to the heights it's at now.

The challenge in the modern era is finding the right mix between universal exposure (FTA tv) and viewer-pays.

The article makes a good point that NZ Rugby Union has gone too far into a paywall, and it's suffering for that... maybe that opens an opportunity for Rugby League to open up more FTA coverage here in NZ and become more of a "peoples' game" than Union?
 
Diesel

Diesel

Referee
Messages
20,376
Rugby in nz is hurting because of how much of it is behind pay tv. Plenty of kids are into American sports over rugby.
 
W

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
23,007
flippikat said:
Why Kiwi fans are ripped off by this year’s Rugby World Cup - Gregor Paul

By Gregor Paul
15 Apr, 2023 06:00 AM

New Zealanders may not fully understand how badly off they are when it comes to live sports broadcasts.

Many parts of the world can turn on the telly and watch quality sport for free: their heroes as large as life in their living rooms without a cent having been spent.

Some of that free-to-air access is protected by anti-siphoning laws, with Governments having intervened at the start of the satellite TV boom to ensure events such as the Olympics remained accessible to everyone.
But there is also a strong belief in the UK, Australia, USA and much of Europe that sport can’t survive if it’s all behind a paywall.

Sell everything to a pay-TV operator and millions of households will never see their heroes, or the big moments that have the power to inspire.
They won’t harbour dreams to play at the highest level, but much worse, they won’t even foster aspirations to participate.
High-profile sport needs to be visible. It needs to be accessible to some extent and not the exclusive preserve of those with the disposable income to afford it.
In the UK, the Six Nations is all on the free-to-air BBC and ITV. The AFL agreement ensures that all marquee matches around public holidays and landmark dates are live on free-to-air.

The NFL has big games on free-to-air and a major reason these competitions continue to grow in popularity is because they are accessible to everyone.

Sports bodies and competitions that have pursued a hybrid model of selling broadcast rights to both subscription and free-to-air channels have been significantly more successful in growing audience, profile and revenue than those who have thrown everything they own behind a paywall.
New Zealand has no anti-siphoning laws and sits as one of the few countries in the world with virtually no high-profile sport on free-to-air.
Every major sports body has prioritised cash over audience and New Zealand, therefore, is the country where fans are ripped off the most — forced to pay to watch all their national teams and told it’s a privilege and not a right to cheer for their own.
This whole issue of being ripped off came up this week when Sky TV announced that it will be broadcasting six live Rugby World Cup games on its free-to-air channel, Prime, and another six on delay.
The masses will be expected to be eternally grateful they will be able to watch six live games for free, but these are going to be shown on Prime only because it’s a condition imposed by World Rugby.
New Zealanders are being offered the bare minimum free-to-air Rugby World Cup content, and just to highlight that this is the thin end of the wedge, all 48 games will be live on ITV in the UK.
Just as all games at last year’s Fifa World Cup were live on BBC and ITV, as was Wimbledon, the Olympics and the Grand National.
The fact the Black Caps and a smattering of other content is now available on TVNZ, is not by design, but by default.
Spark wanted to shut down Spark Sport and offload the liability of its existing obligations, and the quickest and easiest way to do that was to hand everything it owned to TVNZ.
However it came about, though, there is now an opportunity for TVNZ to showcase the value of free-to-air, and to deliver a data set that will prove to sports bodies in New Zealand that they need to rethink their obsession with pay-TV operators.
And no sport needs to be thinking about this harder than rugby, which is facing a participation crisis among teenage boys and in desperate need to find ways to boost audience interest in Super Rugby.
There are multiple factors driving teenage boys away from rugby and it would be naive to argue that sticking a handful of Super Rugby games live on TVNZ or Three would suddenly arrest the decline.
But it would help rugby sell itself as meaningful, credible and aspirational if it were more visible in more homes.
And now the Black Caps have found a new partner in TVNZ, rugby runs the risk of more kids being inclined to play cricket simply because they have had greater exposure to it.
Free-to-air channels have power when it comes to driving participation — see how many people in the UK take to playing tennis when Wimbledon is dominating time slots on the BBC.

The argument against opening professional rugby to free-to-air exposure has always been economic. NZR is sitting on a $100m-a-year deal with Sky, which simply wouldn’t pay that amount if it were sharing content with free-to-air providers.

That argument is broadly true, but it fails to put any future value on audience growth and ignores the evidence that hybrid contracts in other countries have worked symbiotically, with the free-to-air component driving more people to the pay TV operator.
Super Rugby, having disillusioned so many fans by its constant format changes, lopsided fixtures and nonsensical playoff structure, doesn’t appear to have a sustainable future if the content remains exclusively on Sky.
Super Rugby needs some kind of help in winning back fans and engaging new ones, and screams out as a competition that would benefit from a free-to-air partnership.
A few big local games — Blues v Crusaders and Hurricanes v Chiefs — being broadcast live on TVNZ or Three shouldn’t be seen as a nice-to-have by NZR, but a must-have.
And for different reasons, NZR needs to be thinking about getting the All Blacks out from under Sky’s clutches.
Rugby calls itself the national game and the All Blacks are set up as the people’s team and yet, excluding World Cups, when was the last time a test match was live on a free-to-air channel?
Having spent 27 years behind a paywall, the All Blacks have become the team of the affluent.
It’s wrong that Kiwis always have to pay to see the All Blacks and almost immoral that parents and families of the players, after investing years of time and money in their kid, then have to fork out for a Sky subscription on top of everything else to see their child play in the black jersey.
New Zealanders get a terrible deal when it comes to sport.
Click to expand...
Gronk references afl but does his best not to mention nrl

nrl is getting decent fta coverage in nz this year
 
W

Wb1234

Referee
Messages
23,007
flippikat said:
Good points there, and I think the "right to freely consume it" comes out of the TV aspect - historically, TVcontent is funded by advertising or license fees (for places with that system) - and sport was largely considered "just another branch of TV content" - and that worked fine, in those days before professionalism took off to the heights it's at now.

The challenge in the modern era is finding the right mix between universal exposure (FTA tv) and viewer-pays.

The article makes a good point that NZ Rugby Union has gone too far into a paywall, and it's suffering for that... maybe that opens an opportunity for Rugby League to open up more FTA coverage here in NZ and become more of a "peoples' game" than Union?
Click to expand...
His argument is bs

union isn’t struggling in nz because it’s behind a pay wall

union has saturation coverage in nz

it’s struggling because super rugby is a dieing format with the sa sides

watching their sides beat up the dregs of Australia rugby players isn’t very exciting
 
Perth Red

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,957
flippikat

flippikat

Bench
Messages
4,466
Perth Red said:
Sounds like a great platform to show, and grow, the nz national premiership comp if we could get someone to produce it at a reasonable cost.
Click to expand...
TVNZ+ has a LOT of great non-sports content - currently I'm making my way through all of The Office (US version) with my wife and son who hadn't watched it before, but have become fans - all for free on TVNZ+

If they can wrangle a deal for FTA rights, it'd give the game huge exposure here.

Currently it's very much an inconsistent mish-mash of FTA coverage here.. sometimes on Prime (Sky owned FTA channel), sometimes on Three & a mix of live and delayed, at all sorts of times in the weekend.

We need reliable, consistent FTA timeslots here.
 
Perth Red

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
65,957
flippikat said:
TVNZ+ has a LOT of great non-sports content - currently I'm making my way through all of The Office (US version) with my wife and son who hadn't watched it before, but have become fans - all for free on TVNZ+

If they can wrangle a deal for FTA rights, it'd give the game huge exposure here.

Currently it's very much an inconsistent mish-mash of FTA coverage here.. sometimes on Prime (Sky owned FTA channel), sometimes on Three & a mix of live and delayed, at all sorts of times in the weekend.

We need reliable, consistent FTA timeslots here.
Click to expand...
It could be a lever if Sky NZ offer NRL less next time. Pay up or we will have a game a week on TVNZ.
 
flippikat

flippikat

Bench
Messages
4,466
Perth Red said:
It could be a lever if Sky NZ offer NRL less next time. Pay up or we will have a game a week on TVNZ.
Click to expand...
I like your thinking - and I hope the NRL are open to more of a FTA profile over here - after all, it's a key part of what raised the game's profile in NZ to begin with - the old "Aussie League on 2" days of the early 1990s, just as Sky were getting started & hadn't yet got a vice-like hold on rights.
 
Matua

Matua

Bench
Messages
4,586
flippikat said:
I like your thinking - and I hope the NRL are open to more of a FTA profile over here - after all, it's a key part of what raised the game's profile in NZ to begin with - the old "Aussie League on 2" days of the early 1990s, just as Sky were getting started & hadn't yet got a vice-like hold on rights.
Click to expand...
I had completely forgotten TVNZ had the league before Sky because of how the league "saved" Sky in the early 90s.

They must have only had the rights for a year or two before Sky grabbed them.
 
flippikat

flippikat

Bench
Messages
4,466
Matua said:
I had completely forgotten TVNZ had the league before Sky because of how the league "saved" Sky in the early 90s.

They must have only had the rights for a year or two before Sky grabbed them.
Click to expand...

This may be a bit of a digression, but stick with me here...

Keep in mind, up until 1998 Sky was a UHF service - so it's coverage depended on them being on your local transmission tower... and expansion only gathered pace in the mid 1990s.

[From Wikipedia]

The company was founded by Craig Heatley, Terry Jarvis, Trevor Farmer and Alan Gibbs in 1987 as Sky Media Limited. It was formed to investigate beaming sports programming into nightclubs and pubs using high performance 4-metre satellite dishes by Jarvis and an engineering associate Brian Green, but was redirected into pay television following successful bidding in early 1990 for four groups of UHF frequencies in the Auckland, Hamilton and Tauranga regions.

Initially operating only in the Auckland region, Sky contracted Broadcast Communications (now Kordia) to provide the broadcast service and transmission.

Later, funding allowed Sky to extend its coverage throughout most of New Zealand: In 1991, the company expanded to Rotorua, Wellington and Christchurch. Then in 1994, the company expanded to Hawke's Bay, Manawatu, Southland and Otago, followed by the Wairarapa, Taupo, and Wanganui regions in 1995. Its final UHF expansion, in 1996, was to Taranaki, Whangarei, and eastern Bay of Plenty Region.

Following the launch of the digital satellite service in 1998, Sky began reducing services on the UHF platform.

Sky switched off its analogue UHF TV service on 11 March 2010 at midnight.

[End quote]

Sure, I quoted Wikipedia.. but it roughly matches with what I remember from the 1990s.. I grew up on the Kapiti Coast (Just north of Wellington - and just at the fringes of Wellington's main transmission tower Mt Kaukau) and remember Sky expanding to our region in that mid-'90s push by Sky.

They got the rights to the NSWRL competition (as it was) somewhere in that expansion - and I seem to recall it was a wee bit before Rugby Union went pro at the end of 1995.

I suspect around 1994-5 was the earliest they had the critical mass of subscriptions AND reasonable reach across NZ to make a good run at sports rights.
 
Matua

Matua

Bench
Messages
4,586
flippikat said:
This may be a bit of a digression, but stick with me here...

Keep in mind, up until 1998 Sky was a UHF service - so it's coverage depended on them being on your local transmission tower... and expansion only gathered pace in the mid 1990s.

[From Wikipedia]

The company was founded by Craig Heatley, Terry Jarvis, Trevor Farmer and Alan Gibbs in 1987 as Sky Media Limited. It was formed to investigate beaming sports programming into nightclubs and pubs using high performance 4-metre satellite dishes by Jarvis and an engineering associate Brian Green, but was redirected into pay television following successful bidding in early 1990 for four groups of UHF frequencies in the Auckland, Hamilton and Tauranga regions.

Initially operating only in the Auckland region, Sky contracted Broadcast Communications (now Kordia) to provide the broadcast service and transmission.

Later, funding allowed Sky to extend its coverage throughout most of New Zealand: In 1991, the company expanded to Rotorua, Wellington and Christchurch. Then in 1994, the company expanded to Hawke's Bay, Manawatu, Southland and Otago, followed by the Wairarapa, Taupo, and Wanganui regions in 1995. Its final UHF expansion, in 1996, was to Taranaki, Whangarei, and eastern Bay of Plenty Region.

Following the launch of the digital satellite service in 1998, Sky began reducing services on the UHF platform.

Sky switched off its analogue UHF TV service on 11 March 2010 at midnight.

[End quote]

Sure, I quoted Wikipedia.. but it roughly matches with what I remember from the 1990s.. I grew up on the Kapiti Coast (Just north of Wellington - and just at the fringes of Wellington's main transmission tower Mt Kaukau) and remember Sky expanding to our region in that mid-'90s push by Sky.

They got the rights to the NSWRL competition (as it was) somewhere in that expansion - and I seem to recall it was a wee bit before Rugby Union went pro at the end of 1995.

I suspect around 1994-5 was the earliest they had the critical mass of subscriptions AND reasonable reach across NZ to make a good run at sports rights.
Click to expand...
Weird, my memory is fuzzy, I thought we had Sky in HB before I went away to Uni in 1994. I guess I can remember watching it during the holiday breaks.
 
flippikat

flippikat

Bench
Messages
4,466
Matua said:
Weird, my memory is fuzzy, I thought we had Sky in HB before I went away to Uni in 1994. I guess I can remember watching it during the holiday breaks.
Click to expand...
Yeah, as I said it's quoted from Wikipedia which can be a bit "off" with details.. but generally captures the rush to expand Sky had in the early-mid 1990s.

The key thing is that Sky had a UHF network together by around 1996 where they could bid for big sports - luckily just coinciding with rugby union going pro in 1995 (and needing to find a solid broadcast revenue stream to fund that!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top