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!

OT: Foxtel FoxSports / Kayo /Ch9 + NRL TV Rights

Twizzle

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
152,467
Thats melbourne news which is totally AFL centric. So of course they just worry about AFL.

NRL will be just as rooted. Betting is a massive revemue stream. If it gets shredded the NRL and broadcasters are gonna need to find alternatives.
If Fox isnt a strong bidser in tv rights do they drop? The more bidders the higher the price.

Its gonna be as big an issue for NRL as AFL.

Nah, betting props up the AFL much more than NRL


The investigation reveals four ways proceeds of gambling pour into the coffers of Australia’s most popular football competition. Most are well known. The TV stations that pay for AFL broadcast rights, worth about $400 million a year, are partly funded by the huge advertising spending by betting companies. The pervasive on-ground advertising is worth up to $3 million to the AFL. A sponsorship with Sportsbet rakes in up to $8 million.

One less known but lucrative revenue stream is the cut the AFL gets from every gaming company. In the early 2000s, Andrew Demetriou, who headed the AFL then, called the bookmakers together to demand a cut. McClure says the “integrity agreement” resulted in the AFL receiving 10¢ for every dollar made by corporate bookmakers (Sportsbet, Ladbrokes, Neds and others) on the game. This has turned into a huge windfall. Two senior wagering sources have told The Age it could make the AFL up to $40 million this year. At a time when the pandemic has put the AFL under enormous financial pressure, the tens of millions in proceeds from gambling will be a critical revenue stream. And it is only going to grow.
While that may be good for the AFL’s bottom line, the flipside is the rise in problem gambling that comes with it, and the reputational damage the AFL suffers from being so closely associated with the business. Experts are increasingly raising alarm bells over what most who are impacted know all too well: many who gamble are addicts and gambling irresponsibly has a drastic impact on not just the punter, but family, friends and workplaces.


 
Messages
11,247
Because... 49 years changes lots of things.

But you don't really need it explained - it's just another one of your attempted trolls against people on the forum.
 

Twizzle

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
152,467
If no merkin was hurt or offended by John Cleese making fun of Nazis on Fawlty Towers why would they now?

well first of all, you don't know that no one was offended by John Cleese 49 years ago and secondly, you cannot possibly be serious about comparing a Foxtel CEO to a comedian, or maybe you can but I doubt anyone else would

I just saw a Jim Jeffries concert and I doubt anyone could be as offensive as him, particularly when discussing LGBTQI+, but you wouldn't hear the prime minister repeat anything a comedian says
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
76,524
At least he apologised to the people most impacted by his actions, his Foxtel team members. Did he miss anyone else?

IMG_1981.jpeg
 

Poupou Escobar

Post Whore
Messages
89,751
well first of all, you don't know that no one was offended by John Cleese 49 years ago
Actually I’m sure someone was. There’s always someone offended by everything. The difference was he wasn’t required to apologise for it.
and secondly, you cannot possibly be serious about comparing a Foxtel CEO to a comedian, or maybe you can but I doubt anyone else would
Everyone is a comedian when they’ve had enough to drink.
I just saw a Jim Jeffries concert and I doubt anyone could be as offensive as him, particularly when discussing LGBTQI+, but you wouldn't hear the prime minister repeat anything a comedian says
It’s a fair point. But is the CEO of an entertainment company anything like a PM? I’d argue he is closer to a comedian than an elected official.
 
Top