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!

RL independence day arrives - NRL Independent Commission announced for November 1

Status
Not open for further replies.

BunniesMan

Immortal
Messages
33,738
The ARL gave News everything it wanted to go - a financial package ensuring the continued viability of the Melbourne Storm, the dissolution of the ARL and a five-year extension of its first and last rights option on the broadcasting contract to 2027.
First and last rights make a powerful weapon. When a company is as big as News, the power to trump the last bidder frightens everyone from the negotiating room.
AFL celebrated the day Channel Seven's first and last rights option over its broadcasting rights expired. News parent News Corp is a thousand times more powerful than Seven.
Furthermore, league's first and last rights options are a mess. The agreements with Channel Nine, Fox Sports, Sky New Zealand and News are inter-locked and not understood.
Insofar as broadcasting rights are a code's principal source of revenue, News has gained control of the game until 2027. It can pitch the revenue at a level which controls the code's spending for the next three decades.
And there lies the problem. Some things will improve with the IC but News STILL has too much power with the extension of the first and last rights. They basically control how much money comes into the game for the next 17 years.
 

Quidgybo

Bench
Messages
3,054
And there lies the problem. Some things will improve with the IC but News STILL has too much power with the extension of the first and last rights. They basically control how much money comes into the game for the next 17 years.
The same way first and last rights allowed Seven to keep the price for AFL down? All first and last rights means is that it's your decision if you lose the rights. It certainly doesn't mean you won't have to match the biggest offer in the market to keep them. And as the AFL lesson shows it doesn't mean you won't be pushed to exorbitant levels if one of your competitors decides to really have a go. This is just a load of FUD on Roy's part.

Leigh.
 

BunniesMan

Immortal
Messages
33,738
The same way first and last rights allowed Seven to keep the price for AFL down? All first and last rights means is that it's your decision if you lose the rights. It certainly doesn't mean you won't have to match the biggest offer in the market to keep them. And as the AFL lesson shows it doesn't mean you won't be pushed to exorbitant levels if one of your competitors decides to really have a go. This is just a load of FUD on Roy's part.

Leigh.
Read the article. AFL celebrated when 7 lost first and last rights. It's not good for a sport, and we will be celebrating in 2027. If having first and last rights meant so little why would News ltd even want them extended? News have spent years profiting off our sport and by giving us the least amount possible, and they'll keep doing it. First and last rights are the last thing you want in what is basically an auction.
 
Messages
14,139
Yeah I believe News over Roy Masters any day. I mean they are just doing the right thing by the game and Roy has a conflict of interest...
 

Quidgybo

Bench
Messages
3,054
I believe Roy when what Roy says makes sense and rings true. On this occasion, in my opinion, he does not. It's a sentimentalist piece playing on fear of the future amongst the older brigade at a time of change. That's common enough in many walks of life, but it ain't a big news story.

Leigh.
 

BunniesMan

Immortal
Messages
33,738
I believe Roy when what Roy says makes sense and rings true. On this occasion, in my opinion, he does not. It's a sentimentalist piece playing on fear of the future amongst the older brigade at a time of change. That's common enough in many walks of life, but it ain't a big news story.

Leigh.
You're naive if you think News ltd's influence in our game ends today and that from now on they'll stop unfairly taking advantage of us for their own gain.
 

Quidgybo

Bench
Messages
3,054
You're naive if you think News ltd's influence in our game ends today and that from now on they'll stop unfairly taking advantage of us for their own gain.
The great thing is you can always count on News to do one thing - whatever is right for News. It tends to be a characteristic of a big corporation. That's fine, where doing what is right for themselves does us no harm, I've got no problem with it. Where doing what is right for themselves incidentally benefits us, even better.

In my opinion first and last rights is one of those things. It means something for News, I don't believe it really affects the value for us, and we get the leverage to expel News from our boardroom immediately. Sure, I'd take my cake and eat it too if I could, but I'm OK with this. It's not the end of the world as Roy paints, it's a new beginning.

Leigh
 
Last edited:

Parra

Referee
Messages
24,900
If News wanted out they could always just walk away.

As it is they have managed to exert control longer than the 1997 agreement allowed for. So they get to break a deal, yet extend the benefits. That is what happens when you appoint your own lawyer as CEO of the entity you then negotiate with.

All the ARL has to do was wait. News had to walk away - now they have no obligations but they also have what they want.

It stinks.
 

Fonzie

Juniors
Messages
40
In my opinion first and last rights is one of those things. It means something for News, I don't believe it really affects the value for us, and we get the leverage to expel News from our boardroom immediately. Sure, I'd take my cake and eat it too if I could, but I'm OK with this. It's not the end of the world as Roy paints, it's a new beginning.

Quidgy, the way first and last rights affects the value is that the holder doesn't need to enter the competitive process for the rights - it just sits back, lets the competitive process happen, and then decides whether it wants to trump the top bid by a small increment. Where you have a market with very little competition to start with, the removal of one of the few competitors can have a big impact. It can also deter people from bidding at all if they think that they will end up being trumped, further undermining the process. [I am making some assumptions about how the first and last rights clause is drafted here, but I'm guessing that News had the better lawyers when it was drafted!]

First and last rights doesnt stop you getting a good deal, but it makes it much harder.
 
Messages
14,139
I believe Roy when what Roy says makes sense and rings true. On this occasion, in my opinion, he does not. It's a sentimentalist piece playing on fear of the future amongst the older brigade at a time of change. That's common enough in many walks of life, but it ain't a big news story.

Leigh.
So you believe him when he says what you want him to say but not when he doesn't. Genius. Roy is about the only one in the press who has the knowledge, the interest in the game and the freedom to say what he thinks. He seems to be the only one who is questioning why News is doing what it is doing. And we all know it won't be the best thing for RL. It will be the best thing for News.
 
Messages
14,139
If News wanted out they could always just walk away.

As it is they have managed to exert control longer than the 1997 agreement allowed for. So they get to break a deal, yet extend the benefits. That is what happens when you appoint your own lawyer as CEO of the entity you then negotiate with.

All the ARL has to do was wait. News had to walk away - now they have no obligations but they also have what they want.

It stinks.
Pretty much. This is News' chance to ensure they keep what they want, which is the Pay TV rights to the NRL, for even longer than they already had it for AND get rid of the ARL which is one body that might actually have the will and power to fight the News agenda. The alternative is that they get out of the game in seven years and leave it to the ARL and the clubs. This way they don't get out because they still get last dibs on the TV rights AND they destroy the ARL in the process.
 

BunniesMan

Immortal
Messages
33,738
I just hope we don't get to a position a few years down the line where we think the better option would have been just to wait it out until News would have had to leave the game completely and unconditionally.
 

Fonzie

Juniors
Messages
40
I just hope we don't get to a position a few years down the line where we think the better option would have been just to wait it out until News would have had to leave the game completely and unconditionally.

I guess the next tv deal will give us an early and good indication of where we are at. If it isn't fair relative to the afl deal then I will nearly give up. The federal government should not have let a media company cutie our game over like this - the game is a public good and the public have come second for too long.
 

andrew057

First Grade
Messages
7,485
Furthermore, league's first and last rights options are a mess. The agreements with Channel Nine, Fox Sports, Sky New Zealand and News are inter-locked and not understood.

Insofar as broadcasting rights are a code's principal source of revenue, News has gained control of the game until 2027. It can pitch the revenue at a level which controls the code's spending for the next three decades.

I agree with Quidgbybo. This seems like nothing more than fear mongering.

Extending the first and last rights deal by 5 years is a SMALL price to pay to get NEWS out of the game imo.
 

BunniesMan

Immortal
Messages
33,738
I agree with Quidgbybo. This seems like nothing more than fear mongering.

Extending the first and last rights deal by 5 years is a SMALL price to pay to get NEWS out of the game imo.
Considering they would have had to leave the game completely and unconditionally anyway maybe it's not a small price. Add on top of that the fact that they will be involved in choosing some of the members of the IC. Maybe it would have been easier to wait them out.
 

chefman21

Juniors
Messages
1,220
I've said for a very long time (since it was proposed) that people are putting far too much faith in this whole project. There are a fair few signs for me that are a concern to me. The difficulties of the QRL, the line divided between NSWRL and QRL and some of the clubs, some of the names mentioned for the commissioners, the influence of News just to name a few... Some people think the IC is going to do this, this and this. It may just be that everything gets buried under agendas and politics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top