Question on Peter V'landys

[Phil McGrawhan]

Seems to me it would have been preferable to not engage with that subject at all. The problem with agreeing with anything 9 put out the other day is that it sets the scene for the negotiations. Especially since our own Gus amplified the proposition.

9 coming in from a position of strength while the NRL looks like joining the table from a position of weakness and vulnerability.

Call it posturing sure....but so far I see it working with Vlandy. He now has a ready made excuse (to take a substandard offer) of not only the prevailing pandemic disaster but the NRL does not even deserve the already agreed upon contract sums because of its own financially folly.

Would have been better to say nothing and get real busy sourcing an alternative broadcast option to at least create a little bit of that famed competitive tension and also in case this negotiation with 9 goes south.

Not anymore .
Fox ain't budging & 7 is now interested .
So 9s perceived advantage is weakened .
PVL seems to have done some advantageous manovering behind the scenes .

 

[Cactus]

Not anymore .
Fox ain't budging & 7 is now interested .
So 9s perceived advantage is weakened .
PVL seems to have done some advantageous manovering behind the scenes .

Thats a good development. We now need a leak to go public about Channel 10s hat in ring.

Mentions Greenburg as mates with Warburton 7 so maybe it was TG rather than PVL that did some backgrounding on this.

 

[Storm80]

Not anymore .
Fox ain't budging & 7 is now interested .
So 9s perceived advantage is weakened .
PVL seems to have done some advantageous manovering behind the scenes .

Nine are in a strong position and they know it.

NRL are the ones that broke the terms of the original TV rights contract by not continuing to provide a product.

The argument that the pandemic was unforeseeable and triggers an force majeure clause is pretty weak. Pandemics happen quite regularly and companies usually have Business Continuity Plans for just such an occasion.

So if NRL can’t prove an Act of God, then they’ve breach contractual terms and both channel 9 and Foxtel would be within their rights to sue for the lost revenue (advertising money) the are missing out over the remainder of the length of the contract, or at least until the NRL returns.

And even if Nine concedes the original tv rights contract is void due to an Act of God, they are still in a strong position. Because the value of NRL in a post corona world is much less than in was in 2019.

If a rival TV channel tries to obtain the rights Nine will make sure they get financially rewarded in the deal one way or another.

At the end of the day if Nine don’t get what they want, they could just go to the courts to test the validity of the Act of God argument and sue the NRL breach of contract and seek damages for lost revenue, which I assume would be substantial.

I think there is a reason V’landys publicly apologised to Nine and then spoke so highly of them after the meeting the other day. And that reason is not because Nine is in a position of weakness.

 

[Cactus]

Nine are in a strong position and they know it.

NRL are the ones that broke the terms of the original TV rights contract by not continuing to provide a product.

The argument that the pandemic was unforeseeable and triggers an force majeure clause is pretty weak. Pandemics happen quite regularly and companies usually have Business Continuity Plans for just such an occasion.

So if NRL can’t prove an Act of God, then they’ve breach contractual terms and both channel 9 and Foxtel would be within their rights to sue for the lost revenue (advertising money) the are missing out over the remainder of the length of the contract, or at least until the NRL returns.

What you say there all depends upon the actual clause in the contract. If it mentions anything about pandemic then the NRL has not breached the contract at all. The fact that 9 has come out publicly stating it doesn’t want the 2020 season to go ahead is most likely a breach in itself.

So its all a bit of an unknown unless we know what the contract stipulates.

And even if Nine concedes the original tv rights contract is void due to an Act of God, they are still in a strong position. Because the value of NRL in a post corona world is much less than in was in 2019.

If a rival TV channel tries to obtain the rights Nine will make sure they get financially rewarded in the deal one way or another.

Not if it can be shown 9 is in breach.

At the end of the day if Nine don’t get what they want, they could just go to the courts to test the validity of the Act of God argument and sue the NRL breach of contract and seek damages for lost revenue, which I assume would be substantial.

Again, that depends upon what is in the contract. Any clause about act of god etc will be fairly easy for both parties to understand and seek legal confirmation about. 9 cant just say “no broadcast = seek damages”

 

[Perth Red]

Yep, this is exactly the type of scenario a clause like that is developed for. The fact the NRL can point to the fact they are doing everything in their power to fulfill the contract despite the situation, whilst NIne seems to be acting the opposite, would also weigh heavy in their favour you'd have to think.

 

[Storm80]

What you say there all depends upon the actual clause in the contract. If it mentions anything about pandemic then the NRL has not breached the contract at all. The fact that 9 has come out publicly stating it doesn’t want the 2020 season to go ahead is most likely a breach in itself.

So its all a bit of an unknown unless we know what the contract stipulates.


Not if it can be shown 9 is in breach.


Again, that depends upon what is in the contract. Any clause about act of god etc will be fairly easy for both parties to understand and seek legal confirmation about. 9 cant just say “no broadcast = seek damages”

I guarantee the contract says nothing specifically about pandemics in the ”Act of God” clause. If it did, the NRL would be saying Nine is in breach of the contract if they refused to broadcast games when the season restarts. The NRL would also make the “Act of God” clause public just like they did with the letter from the Police Commissioner which they claimed gave permission to restart on 28 May 2020. The fact they don’t publish or at least clarify what’s in the “Act of God” clause suggests to me they are in a weak position and would need to rely on case law and litigation to prove the breach of contract was due to an “Act of God”.

The reason the NRL called this pandemic an “Act of God” was because they decided not to fulfil their contractual obligations to provide games every weekend for 25 weeks plus finals etc.

Claiming “Act of God” allows the NRL to void any contracts they may have. This potentially includes:

- stadium and concession deals
- media rights
- property and rent
- players wages
- and any other random contracts with service providers and contractors they may have

Once you claim “Act of God” it voids the contract as though it never existed in the first place. Therefore, Nine is under no obligation to meet any conditions of the 2018-2022 TV rights deal because it was voided by the NRL when they suspended the season on 24 March 2020.

The NRL can’t have it both ways and they know it. You can’t claim that you cant fulfil your contractual obligations because of an “Act of God” and then try to hold the other party to the original contract.

The 2018-2022 contract was voided by the NRL on 24 March 2020. Therefore, there is no TV rights contract at the moment.

Nine and Foxtel are literally re-negotiating a new contract. And like any sane company - Nine are are now reevaluating the worth of NRL in the post corona world. Nine are beholden to share holders and are looking to cut costs just like the NRL did and just like every company is doing.

For anyone to suggest Nine should honour the financial terms of the 2018-2022 media contract is ludicrous - when that contract was voided by the NRL on 24 March 2020.

All this postering and finger pointing in the media at the moment is purely designed to sell papers and get NRL fans wound up and blaming the government and media companies for NRL not coming back on 28 May 2020.

The fact of the matter is there is no TV rights deal in place with Nine or any free to air broadcasters at the moment if the NRL’s claim the pandemic is an “Act of God” is correct.

If the “Act of God” claim is incorrect (which only a court can decide) then Nine holds all the cards and power in negotiations. If there is no “Act of God” then its a simple breach of contract by the NRL and Nine will be able to seek legal remedies:

- damages for loss of advertising revenue because NRL can’t deliver its product; and
- injunctions against NRL and rival TV companies to stop rival free to air networks broadcasting the game under a new deal until the end of the the original 2018-2022 contract.

So Nine are in an extremely strong position. I would say they actually have the NRL over a barrel. Which is why they blasted the league publicly last week. They are setting up to put themselves in the most powerful legal position if negotiations with NRL go poorly, they don’t get what they want and this ends up in the Courts.

Which is why V’Landys strategically apologised to Nine and is bending over backwards to give them what they want, or at the very least better value for money.

Basically, the NRL can’t even entertain negotiations with any other free to air networks without Nines blessing And approval, because Nine could challenge the “Act of God” claim in court. This could all get very messy for the NRL if they go rogue and try to undermine Nine and negotiate a new deal with a rival free to air network.

 

[Spot On]

Nine are in a strong position and they know it.

NRL are the ones that broke the terms of the original TV rights contract by not continuing to provide a product.

The argument that the pandemic was unforeseeable and triggers an force majeure clause is pretty weak. Pandemics happen quite regularly and companies usually have Business Continuity Plans for just such an occasion.

So if NRL can’t prove an Act of God, then they’ve breach contractual terms and both channel 9 and Foxtel would be within their rights to sue for the lost revenue (advertising money) the are missing out over the remainder of the length of the contract, or at least until the NRL returns.

And even if Nine concedes the original tv rights contract is void due to an Act of God, they are still in a strong position. Because the value of NRL in a post corona world is much less than in was in 2019.

If a rival TV channel tries to obtain the rights Nine will make sure they get financially rewarded in the deal one way or another.

At the end of the day if Nine don’t get what they want, they could just go to the courts to test the validity of the Act of God argument and sue the NRL breach of contract and seek damages for lost revenue, which I assume would be substantial.

I think there is a reason V’landys publicly apologised to Nine and then spoke so highly of them after the meeting the other day. And that reason is not because Nine is in a position of weakness.

...but, but Vlandys made Marks go all the way to RNSW for the meeting the other day...

Lol.

The post of this thread mate. Well said.

For the good of the NRL, we all hope they have the word 'pandemic' in the contract. But as it stands, and for the reasons you have outlined, one would think they don't.

 

[Spot On]

I guarantee the contract says nothing specifically about pandemics in the ”Act of God” clause. If it did, the NRL would be saying Nine is in breach of the contract if they refused to broadcast games when the season restarts. The NRL would also make the “Act of God” clause public just like they did with the letter from the Police Commissioner which they claimed gave permission to restart on 28 May 2020. The fact they don’t publish or at least clarify what’s in the “Act of God” clause suggests to me they are in a weak position and would need to rely on case law and litigation to prove the breach of contract was due to an “Act of God”.

The reason the NRL called this pandemic an “Act of God” was because they decided not to fulfil their contractual obligations to provide games every weekend for 25 weeks plus finals etc.

Claiming “Act of God” allows the NRL to void any contracts they may have. This potentially includes:

- stadium and concession deals
- media rights
- property and rent
- players wages
- and any other random contracts with service providers and contractors they may have

Once you claim “Act of God” it voids the contract as though it never existed in the first place. Therefore, Nine is under no obligation to meet any conditions of the 2018-2022 TV rights deal because it was voided by the NRL when they suspended the season on 24 March 2020.

The NRL can’t have it both ways and they know it. You can’t claim that you cant fulfil your contractual obligations because of an “Act of God” and then try to hold the other party to the original contract.

The 2018-2022 contract was voided by the NRL on 24 March 2020. Therefore, there is no TV rights contract at the moment.

Nine and Foxtel are literally re-negotiating a new contract. And like any sane company - Nine are are now reevaluating the worth of NRL in the post corona world. Nine are beholden to share holders and are looking to cut costs just like the NRL did and just like every company is doing.

For anyone to suggest Nine should honour the financial terms of the 2018-2022 media contract is ludicrous - when that contract was voided by the NRL on 24 March 2020.

All this postering and finger pointing in the media at the moment is purely designed to sell papers and get NRL fans wound up and blaming the government and media companies for NRL not coming back on 28 May 2020.

The fact of the matter is there is no TV rights deal in place with Nine or any free to air broadcasters at the moment if the NRL’s claim the pandemic is an “Act of God” is correct.

If the “Act of God” claim is incorrect (which only a court can decide) then Nine holds all the cards and power in negotiations. If there is no “Act of God” then its a simple breach of contract by the NRL and Nine will be able to seek legal remedies:

- damages for loss of advertising revenue because NRL can’t deliver its product; and
- injunctions against NRL and rival TV companies to stop rival free to air networks broadcasting the game under a new deal until the end of the the original 2018-2022 contract.

So Nine are in an extremely strong position. I would say they actually have the NRL over a barrel. Which is why they blasted the league publicly last week. They are setting up to put themselves in the most powerful legal position if negotiations with NRL go poorly, they don’t get what they want and this ends up in the Courts.

Which is why V’Landys strategically apologised to Nine and is bending over backwards to give them what they want, or at the very least better value for money.

Basically, the NRL can’t even entertain negotiations with any other free to air networks without Nines blessing And approval, because Nine could challenge the “Act of God” claim in court. This could all get very messy for the NRL if they go rogue and try to undermine Nine and negotiate a new deal with a rival free to air network.

As far as has been reported, the All-England Tennis Club (Wimbledon) is the only organisation that had 'pandemic' in the Act of God clause re the Wimbledon Tournament with their insurer.

https://www.actionnetwork.com/news/why-did-wimbledon-get-canceled-not-postponed-force-majeure

 

[unforgiven]

I guarantee the contract says nothing specifically about pandemics in the ”Act of God” clause. If it did, the NRL would be saying Nine is in breach of the contract if they refused to broadcast games when the season restarts. The NRL would also make the “Act of God” clause public just like they did with the letter from the Police Commissioner which they claimed gave permission to restart on 28 May 2020. The fact they don’t publish or at least clarify what’s in the “Act of God” clause suggests to me they are in a weak position and would need to rely on case law and litigation to prove the breach of contract was due to an “Act of God”.

The reason the NRL called this pandemic an “Act of God” was because they decided not to fulfil their contractual obligations to provide games every weekend for 25 weeks plus finals etc.

Claiming “Act of God” allows the NRL to void any contracts they may have. This potentially includes:

- stadium and concession deals
- media rights
- property and rent
- players wages
- and any other random contracts with service providers and contractors they may have

Once you claim “Act of God” it voids the contract as though it never existed in the first place. Therefore, Nine is under no obligation to meet any conditions of the 2018-2022 TV rights deal because it was voided by the NRL when they suspended the season on 24 March 2020.

The NRL can’t have it both ways and they know it. You can’t claim that you cant fulfil your contractual obligations because of an “Act of God” and then try to hold the other party to the original contract.

The 2018-2022 contract was voided by the NRL on 24 March 2020. Therefore, there is no TV rights contract at the moment.

Nine and Foxtel are literally re-negotiating a new contract. And like any sane company - Nine are are now reevaluating the worth of NRL in the post corona world. Nine are beholden to share holders and are looking to cut costs just like the NRL did and just like every company is doing.

For anyone to suggest Nine should honour the financial terms of the 2018-2022 media contract is ludicrous - when that contract was voided by the NRL on 24 March 2020.

All this postering and finger pointing in the media at the moment is purely designed to sell papers and get NRL fans wound up and blaming the government and media companies for NRL not coming back on 28 May 2020.

The fact of the matter is there is no TV rights deal in place with Nine or any free to air broadcasters at the moment if the NRL’s claim the pandemic is an “Act of God” is correct.

If the “Act of God” claim is incorrect (which only a court can decide) then Nine holds all the cards and power in negotiations. If there is no “Act of God” then its a simple breach of contract by the NRL and Nine will be able to seek legal remedies:

- damages for loss of advertising revenue because NRL can’t deliver its product; and
- injunctions against NRL and rival TV companies to stop rival free to air networks broadcasting the game under a new deal until the end of the the original 2018-2022 contract.

So Nine are in an extremely strong position. I would say they actually have the NRL over a barrel. Which is why they blasted the league publicly last week. They are setting up to put themselves in the most powerful legal position if negotiations with NRL go poorly, they don’t get what they want and this ends up in the Courts.

Which is why V’Landys strategically apologised to Nine and is bending over backwards to give them what they want, or at the very least better value for money.

Basically, the NRL can’t even entertain negotiations with any other free to air networks without Nines blessing And approval, because Nine could challenge the “Act of God” claim in court. This could all get very messy for the NRL if they go rogue and try to undermine Nine and negotiate a new deal with a rival free to air network.

A force majeure event doesn't usually void the contract, contractual obligations are usually put on hold for the duration of the force majeure event.

 

[Cactus]

I guarantee the contract says nothing specifically about pandemics in the ”Act of God” clause.

Really ?
a) What makes you say that ?
b) What direct knowledge of the contract do you have ?
c) Do you know if there is an Act of God clause or a Force Majeure clause in the contract ?
d) Do you think The Government implementing measures in regard to the Pandemic (sush as no gatherings of people) is an Act of God or a Force Majeure event ?
e) If so tell us all about Force Majeure and how that might apply in this instance ?

Claiming “Act of God” allows the NRL to void any contracts they may have. This potentially includes:

- stadium and concession deals
- media rights
- property and rent
- players wages
- and any other random contracts with service providers and contractors they may have

Once you claim “Act of God” it voids the contract as though it never existed in the first place.

Therefore, Nine is under no obligation to meet any conditions of the 2018-2022 TV rights deal because it was voided by the NRL when they suspended the season on 24 March 2020.

The NRL can’t have it both ways and they know it. You can’t claim that you cant fulfil your contractual obligations because of an “Act of God” and then try to hold the other party to the original contract.

The 2018-2022 contract was voided by the NRL on 24 March 2020. Therefore, there is no TV rights contract at the moment.

Nine and Foxtel are literally re-negotiating a new contract. And like any sane company - Nine are are now reevaluating the worth of NRL in the post corona world. Nine are beholden to share holders and are looking to cut costs just like the NRL did and just like every company is doing.

For anyone to suggest Nine should honour the financial terms of the 2018-2022 media contract is ludicrous - when that contract was voided by the NRL on 24 March 2020.

All this postering and finger pointing in the media at the moment is purely designed to sell papers and get NRL fans wound up and blaming the government and media companies for NRL not coming back on 28 May 2020.

The fact of the matter is there is no TV rights deal in place with Nine or any free to air broadcasters at the moment if the NRL’s claim the pandemic is an “Act of God” is correct.

If the “Act of God” claim is incorrect (which only a court can decide) then Nine holds all the cards and power in negotiations. If there is no “Act of God” then its a simple breach of contract by the NRL and Nine will be able to seek legal remedies:

- damages for loss of advertising revenue because NRL can’t deliver its product; and
- injunctions against NRL and rival TV companies to stop rival free to air networks broadcasting the game under a new deal until the end of the the original 2018-2022 contract.

So Nine are in an extremely strong position. I would say they actually have the NRL over a barrel. Which is why they blasted the league publicly last week. They are setting up to put themselves in the most powerful legal position if negotiations with NRL go poorly, they don’t get what they want and this ends up in the Courts.

Which is why V’Landys strategically apologised to Nine and is bending over backwards to give them what they want, or at the very least better value for money.

Basically, the NRL can’t even entertain negotiations with any other free to air networks without Nines blessing And approval, because Nine could challenge the “Act of God” claim in court. This could all get very messy for the NRL if they go rogue and try to undermine Nine and negotiate a new deal with a rival free to air network.

That is just all wrong. And by that I mean 100% total rubbish wrong.

 

[Cactus]

I guarantee the contract says nothing specifically about pandemics in the ”Act of God” clause

The post of this thread mate. Well said.

For the good of the NRL, we all hope they have the word 'pandemic' in the contract. But as it stands, and for the reasons you have outlined, one would think they don't.

PHEW ! Its OK everyone. All is going to be alright.

Thank god..........Storm80 can guarantee exactly what the contract says and there is NO pandemic/act of god clauses. And Hugh...I mean Spot agrees.

What a relief.

 

[unforgiven]

Do you know if there is an Act of God clause or a Force Majeure clause in the contract ?
d) Do you think The Government implementing measures in regard to the Pandemic (sush as no gatherings of people) is an Act of God or a Force Majeure event ?

There is a Force Majeure in the contract, it was reported in the paper over the weekend. The government implementing measures would possible fall outside a Force Majeure because that is human intervention, saying that the NRL stopped playing because of the risk to players not because of government restrictions so that would probably be a mute point. There is also the possibility that human involvement in the start of the virus could put the pandemic outside an act of god clause.

If a pandemic is included in the list then it would be automatically a Force Majeure event, if it is argued under an act of god I would think it would still be found to be a Force Majeure event. Other terms of the contract would be important as well as to whether either of both parties have a right to terminate the rest of the contract due to a Force Majeure event!

 

[Cactus]

There is a Force Majeure in the contract, it was reported in the paper over the weekend. The government implementing measures would possible fall outside a Force Majeure because that is human intervention, saying that the NRL stopped playing because of the risk to players not because of government restrictions so that would probably be a mute point. There is also the possibility that human involvement in the start of the virus could put the pandemic outside an act of god clause.

If a pandemic is included in the list then it would be automatically a Force Majeure event, if it is argued under an act of god I would think it would still be found to be a Force Majeure event. Other terms of the contract would be important as well as to whether either of both parties have a right to terminate the rest of the contract due to a Force Majeure event!

Yes. It depends upon what the definition of the Force Majeure event is and whether the definition includes terminology such as 'infectious disease', 'epidemic', 'pandemic' or similar.

The effect of this pandemic could lead to the occurrence of other events usually included in a force majeure definition such as 'government action', 'national emergency' or 'labour shortages'.

And as you say, a common consequences of activating a force majeure clause does not necessarily void a contract. It can include suspension of contractual obligations, excuse from liability for non-performance or delay, termination of contract, extensions of time, renegotiation of certain terms or certain contract remediation or governance measures. Any relief is often also only available for the duration of the force majeure event.

And then additionally there would be termination provisions that would have some effect.

 

[Storm80]

...but, but Vlandys made Marks go all the way to RNSW for the meeting the other day...

Lol.

The post of this thread mate. Well said.

For the good of the NRL, we all hope they have the word 'pandemic' in the contract. But as it stands, and for the reasons you have outlined, one would think they don't.

Yeah exactly. I want life back to normal ASAP. I want sport on tv ASAP.

I’m just sick of reading the paper every day and seeing another misleading article and quote about the re start of the NRL. My god if V’landys opens an envelope, there’s a press release about it.

Just quit the public blame game. Stop blaming Nine and the Government and the players.

The NRL needs to quietly and professionally get the new tv deals done, do whatever they need to do to comply with health and government regulations and get players on board for the re start.

And if it starts in May or July so be it. If it starts in 2021 so be it.

But don’t try and spin this whole thing every day so you’ve got someone else to blame if the game doesn’t restart on 28 May.

If the NRL just did their job professionally, quietly and effectively I’d have no complaints.

It’s a shit situation, but it’s made worse by them playing it out in public and trying to make out we are foolish enough to buy the spin.

 

[Storm80]

As far as has been reported, the All-England Tennis Club (Wimbledon) is the only organisation that had 'pandemic' in the Act of God clause re the Wimbledon Tournament with their insurer.

https://www.actionnetwork.com/news/why-did-wimbledon-get-canceled-not-postponed-force-majeure

Great article. Thanks for sharing.

Perhaps Nine has pandemic insurance - which is another reason they’d be keen for the whole season to be cancelled, aside from saving $130m.

 

[Cactus]

Yeah exactly. I want life back to normal ASAP. I want sport on tv ASAP.

I’m just sick of reading the paper every day and seeing another misleading article and quote about the re start of the NRL. My god if V’landys opens an envelope, there’s a press release about it.

Just quit the public blame game. Stop blaming Nine and the Government and the players.

The NRL needs to quietly and professionally get the new tv deals done, do whatever they need to do to comply with health and government regulations and get players on board for the re start.

And if it starts in May or July so be it. If it starts in 2021 so be it.

But don’t try and spin this whole thing every day so you’ve got someone else to blame if the game doesn’t restart on 28 May.

If the NRL just did their job professionally, quietly and effectively I’d have no complaints.

It’s a shit situation, but it’s made worse by them playing it out in public and trying to make out we are foolish enough to buy the spin.

Who wrote the newspaper stories playing the blame game and place all of this front & centre in the mainstream media ? The NRL or 9 ?

 

[unforgiven]

Yes. It depends upon what the definition of the Force Majeure event is and whether the definition includes terminology such as 'infectious disease', 'epidemic', 'pandemic' or similar.

The effect of this pandemic could lead to the occurrence of other events usually included in a force majeure definition such as 'government action', 'national emergency' or 'labour shortages'.

And as you say, a common consequences of activating a force majeure clause does not necessarily void a contract. It can include suspension of contractual obligations, excuse from liability for non-performance or delay, termination of contract, extensions of time, renegotiation of certain terms or certain contract remediation or governance measures. Any relief is often also only available for the duration of the force majeure event.

And then additionally there would be termination provisions that would have some effect.

Exactly, Force Majeure clause vary greatly!

 

[unforgiven]

Yeah exactly. I want life back to normal ASAP. I want sport on tv ASAP.

I’m just sick of reading the paper every day and seeing another misleading article and quote about the re start of the NRL. My god if V’landys opens an envelope, there’s a press release about it.

Just quit the public blame game. Stop blaming Nine and the Government and the players.

The NRL needs to quietly and professionally get the new tv deals done, do whatever they need to do to comply with health and government regulations and get players on board for the re start.

And if it starts in May or July so be it. If it starts in 2021 so be it.

But don’t try and spin this whole thing every day so you’ve got someone else to blame if the game doesn’t restart on 28 May.

If the NRL just did their job professionally, quietly and effectively I’d have no complaints.

It’s a shit situation, but it’s made worse by them playing it out in public and trying to make out we are foolish enough to buy the spin.

Who said the TV deals need to be renegotiated?

 

[Perth Red]

There is a Force Majeure in the contract, it was reported in the paper over the weekend. The government implementing measures would possible fall outside a Force Majeure because that is human intervention, saying that the NRL stopped playing because of the risk to players not because of government restrictions so that would probably be a mute point. There is also the possibility that human involvement in the start of the virus could put the pandemic outside an act of god clause.

If a pandemic is included in the list then it would be automatically a Force Majeure event, if it is argued under an act of god I would think it would still be found to be a Force Majeure event. Other terms of the contract would be important as well as to whether either of both parties have a right to terminate the rest of the contract due to a Force Majeure event!

my understanding is a force majeure is where there are circumstances outside the contract holders control that stop them being able to fulfil the contract. So govts closing borders, govts banning crowds for example would be very much covered if it led to the contract not being able to be fulfilled,

of course the devil will be in the detail and depend exactly on what the clause says and no doubt lawyers will argue for months so as to earn a decent crust out of it!

 

[Dave's mate]

None of you know shit so please stop pretending you do