The T.V Rights Thread Part III

[TimmyB]

You're being a little bit literal.

There's speculation and there's fancy.

 

[docbrown]

Doc, I've followed your posts keenly for a number of months, as long as I have been following this thread. The news is always pleasingly positive. However I must say, and I don't meant to be rude, I have been stung trusting anonymous posts on the internet before. Well, stung to the extent that they haven't eventuated.

May I humbly ask how you are privy to this information? Apologies if it is something you've covered previously. Again, I don't mean to be rude or provocative.

Well it's in the nature of my work to speculate on things but I always make sure there's a differentiation on here between my own speculation and genuine industry talk, so take from that what you will.

I choose not to reveal my own specific sources but I have connections with most of the players involved.

The problem with saying who will get what before the final result is announced is because if you even get one thing wrong people will leap onto that and use it as a way to exult their own "expertise" as they decry yours. Everything is easy in hindsight and these people will never be privvy to the inner sanctum so they will never truly know the machinations of the bidding process itself and what was won, lost and bargained.

 

[Raiders_Premiers]

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...p-12b-from-tv-rights-deal-20120412-1wwnz.html

RUGBY LEAGUE is guaranteed a $1.2 billion broadcasting deal, with monopoly pay-TV network Fox Sports declaring it won't be beaten for the five-year rights.

Fox Sports' new boss, Patrick Delany, has allayed fears of NRL club bosses his sports production company is complacent about the rights, saying for the first time the company will pay a just, competitive price to televise the code.

''We are motivated to bid strongly,'' Delany said, anticipating strong opposition from channels Seven and Ten.

Advertisement: Story continues below
"Fox Sports still sees plenty of room for subscription growth among NRL fans" ... Patrick Delany, Fox Sports chief executive. Photo: Louie Douvis
Fox Sports has combined with Channel Nine to retain the rights they have held since the formation of the NRL at the end of the Super League war.

Nine has a first and last hold on free-to-air TV rights while Fox Sports has the same control over the pay-TV rights.

Both broadcasters will retain their opportunity to make a final, rights-clinching bid if their initial offer is not bettered by 20 per cent from a rival.

Because it's anticipated Seven and Ten will require a pay-TV partner to program all eight games a week, club bosses feared the combined Nine-Fox Sports bid would blow any rival out of the water.

Seven televises four AFL games a week, meaning it has limited programming space for rugby league, while Ten is cash poor. However, Nine and Fox Sports are aware cash-rich Seven could make what is called a ''swamper'' offer for all games, knowing it can onsell some to Fox Sports, which needs rugby league to retain subscribers in NSW and Queensland.

Alternatively, Seven and Ten could combine, as they have for AFL rights in the past.

Delany rejected fears the Nine-Fox Sports pact was designed to scare off rivals, pointing out a joint venture bid was outside those rights.

''The 'first' and 'last' are contained in the individual arrangements between broadcasters and the NRL,'' he said. ''Combining with Nine does not enhance or detract from existing rights. The driver reason for working with Nine is all positive - it goes to expanding rights contained in the current deals in order for Fox Sports to give life to new opportunities such as 'all games live' on Fox Sports. It also goes to joint production of games, which may reduce costs.''

Fox Sports, which shows five NRL games a week live, clearly wants to broadcast a further three games concurrently with Nine.

A similar relationship between Foxtel and Seven - achieved with their $1.25 billion AFL deal - has all nine AFL games shown live on pay TV.

It is working well, with Easter Monday's Hawthorn-Geelong game shown on both Seven and pay TV, with 334,400 fans preferring to watch the game on Fox Sports rather than free-to-air TV.

Delany allayed another fear that Fox Sports, having reached near saturation subscription levels in the rugby league states, would not be motivated to pay the same as Foxtel has outlaid for AFL where subscriptions in Victoria, South Australia and Western Australia are significantly lower.

''Fox Sports still sees plenty of room for subscription growth among NRL fans and general sports fans in NSW and Queensland,'' he said. ''While it is true that we have good subscription TV saturation in both NSW and Queensland, when, say, compared to Victoria, there is plenty of growth left, especially if we can get new ways to present the NRL, such as every game live.''

The recently approved merger between Foxtel and Austar opens up opportunities for Fox Sports because of rugby league's strong following in rural and regional NSW and Queensland.

The AFL has significantly less support in regional Australia, which is why the southern code traditionally uses six capital city numbers when it boasts about free-to-air ratings.

Delany also sought to allay fears rugby league is at a disadvantage to AFL because rugby league's broadcasting contract was with Fox Sports, while the AFL is with Foxtel.

Foxtel is half-owned by Telstra, with News Ltd and James Packer's Consolidated Media Holdings each owning 25 per cent. News Ltd and CMH each owns half of Fox Sports.

Fox Sports charges Foxtel for the supply of NRL programming, including the cost of the rights.

Effectively, this means Telstra money goes directly to the AFL for AFL rights, while Telstra money goes to Rupert Murdoch and James Packer for NRL rights.

This arrangement has long been viewed as a means of Murdoch and Packer using rugby league to pay for their outlay during the Super League war, a conflict fought over pay-TV rights.

Delany insists the arrangement is merely historical, rather than conspiratorial: ''When subscription TV was originally set up, Fox Sports was paid on the basis that it attracted and paid for the NRL rights within the fees paid to Fox Sports by Foxtel,'' he said. ''At that stage Foxtel had no AFL rights. When the opportunity came up to get AFL rights in 2002 [via Nine] - Foxtel bid for the rights and created the first Fox Footy channel. In 2007, Foxtel again attracted the AFL rights [via Seven] but asked us to produce the games as it was within our core expertise. The same happened in 2012.''

Recent Foxtel internal research demonstrates that rugby league is vital to the success of the network and, furthermore, there are significant opportunities for growth.

Yet Foxtel will not bid against Fox Sports for NRL rights.

A Foxtel spokesman cited ''commercial in-confidence'' when asked why Foxtel would not bid, and a Telstra spokeswoman said the telco's interests were protected by having a representative on the Foxtel board.

Rugby league players, clubs and officials will have a strong indication of what the game will receive in less than three weeks when Nine and Fox Sports tender their separate first offers, together with a combined one.

The existing $500 million six-year deal will certainly be exceeded but in the unlikely event the top bid falls short of $1 billion over five years, the new ARL Commission will probably insist on a short-term deal, knowing broadcasters demand surety in their planning and programming. They will gamble on this strategy driving the broadcasters back to the negotiating table.

Meh. Guys like Masters banged on and on about how the AFL deal was overvalued last time, that they'll receive less than 1 billion etc etc and when the time came they delivered 1.25 Billion.

Like the commission, I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[LESStar58]

1.2 billion for TV alone? Given the AFLs 1.25 includes internet etc that is excellent! What can we expect for our internet rights and contra? Doc, you seem to be in the know. Good work mate!

 

[LESStar58]

I just hope Nine don't screw the development states. I'll be ropable if they just used the Gem agreement for leverage!

 

[docbrown]

for TV alone?

7 want both TV & internet

 

[LESStar58]

And can someone expalin to the dumbshit in me what constitutes "contra"...

 

[Cletus]

And can someone expalin to the dumbshit in me what constitutes "contra"...

It's free advertising and promotion. That's why you see so many ads for AFL on 7mate and 7. I wouldn't be shocked if they give advertisers a discount on their ads if they use AFL in them and take the money out of the contra. I honestly can't remember the last time I saw someone playing league in an ad.

 

[Edwahu]

Pretty sure the contra in the AFL deal also included the production costs for the broadcasts. Basically it was the fluff to get over the 1 billion.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...k-anti-siphoning/story-e6frg996-1226325865029

Sport bodies urge senate to rethink anti-siphoning

by: Nic Christensen
From: The Australian
April 13, 2012 2:18PM

AUSTRALIA’S major sporting codes have urged a Senate committee to amend new anti-siphoning legislation or risk eroding the commercial value of major sporting rights.

The AFL, NRL, Cricket Australia and Tennis Australia all urged a Senate committee today to revise the proposed anti-siphoning bill to limit ministerial discretion over what is shown.

The sports bodies fear the "quality mechanism" that will determine which games each week are reserved for free-to-air TV gives too much discretion to the Communications minister.

“We think the bill is an improvement on the previous regime but we would ask the committee to look at the ministerial discretion that exists in the current bill,” Libby Owens from Cricket Australia told the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee.

Many of the codes object to provisions that would give the communications minister greater discretion to choose what sports should be listed at short notice.

Pay-TV operator Foxtel and Free TV Australia, representing the free to air commercial TV stations, said the provisions giving discretion to the Minister undermining the value of commercial sports rights.

“We have some serious concerns about the discretionary powers the government hope to give to the minister under this legislation” said Richard Freudenstein chief executive of Foxtel.

“What rights holders and broadcasters are looking for here is certainty. Discretion creates uncertainty and potentially undermines the amount broadcasters are willing to pay for rights and thus the money that flows back to sporting codes.”

Tennis Australia argued that the legislation is flawed because it treated tennis in the same way it treated football codes, even though the tennis season lasted two weeks in January while football codes lasted for six months. .

“The anti-siphoning scheme simply does not work for a grand slam tennis tournament, this is ‘one-size fits all’ legislation for all sporting events even though each sporting event is different,” said Tennis Australia’s Tim Brown.

 

[whall15]

THE Ten Network is considering a joint bid with Seven for the rugby league broadcasting rights, to challenge the stranglehold of Nine and Fox Sports on televising games.

A bullish Fox Sports boss Patrick Delany declared in the Herald yesterday that the pay-TV network would not be beaten for the five-year rights, with its partnership with Nine expected to guarantee the ARL Commission a deal of $1.2 billion.

As a result, competitor Ten is believed to be weighing up the prospect of joining forces with another contender, Seven, in an effort to out-bid the existing rights holders, who have first and last rights with the ARLC. There was no official reaction from either network yesterday but a source with knowledge of the rights process said Ten would look seriously at a partnership.

Advertisement: Story continues below
''That would be the preferred option. I don't think they would want to buy the whole lot,'' the source said.

A pact between Ten and Seven has a precedent, with the two free-to-air networks having combined in the past to win the AFL broadcast rights.
While Seven has the resources to make an audacious bid for all games, their AFL programming means it is restricted in how many NRL matches it could televise. A combined bid with Ten would also make sense for the independent commission, who would be in a position to drive up the price of the overall deal with two free-to-air channels on board rather than one.

Ten and Seven cannot officially engage with the ARLC until after April 30, when Nine and Fox Sports' individual periods of exclusivity in negotiations expires. The bidding process is set to accelerate quickly once that date is cleared.

''It is early days and people are getting their ducks in a row,'' the source said. ''If Seven and Ten do bid, you've got to figure out how much they can pay to knock out Nine's last rights.
''It makes sense [for the ARLC] to bring in two free-to-air networks - it's one of the ways to get the price up. When the AFL sold their free-to-air rights to two networks it drove the rights up by 30 per cent.''

Ten's new chairman Lachlan Murdoch and chief executive James Warburton have made clear their intentions to be serious bidders for the NRL broadcast rights but it is increasingly apparent they may not be able to compete on their own. The third-ranked broadcaster confirmed a 70.1 per cent dip in half-year profit on Thursday, so it should come as no surprise they are open to bidding in tandem with another network.
Seven, meanwhile, is reported to be interested in getting its hands on State of Origin but if it chooses to bid for every game, or in partnership with Ten, it could on-sell particular games to subscription television or even other networks.

Whatever the result, a joint Ten-Seven bid is almost certain to drive up the price Nine and Fox Sports will be made to pay to secure the five-year rights. The final figure will comfortably exceed the present $500 million, six-year deal and clubs remain hopeful it will pass the $1 billion mark.

Alternatively, the ARLC could seek to break up its games and sell the television rights in packages to particular networks; for example State of Origin to one, a format such as Monday night football to another and Friday night football to another.
Fox Sports wants to broadcast all games live, televising Nine's three games concurrently in a move to retain its subscribers in NSW and Queensland. Both Fox Sports and Nine will be able to make a final bid if their first offer to the ARLC is not bettered by 20 per cent by their rivals.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.a...l#ixzz1rvrXTTvC

 

[babyg]

http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=/&gl=AU#/watch?v=6wKgXR8hbEA

 

[Perth Red]

what happened to splitting the games up? Surely if that was the case 10 could bid for just some of them?

 

[Noa]

Make it rain b1tches

 

[docbrown]

what happened to splitting the games up? Surely if that was the case 10 could bid for just some of them?

They still can, as mentioned in the article. The point of buying all the matches is to block out your competitors.

I have heard nothing to discredit the 10/Fox agreement nor the 7 plan so until I hear a source claiming otherwise I'm inclined to think that this is just speculation on whether a 7-10 arrangement is possible rather than a preferred choice from the network heads.

One thing is certain - 7 don't need 10.

 

[Goddo]

There was also this

Ten, Facebook explore alliance

TEN Network and Facebook are in advanced talks about forging a strategic alliance in which the two media companies would share content, audiences and advertising revenue, sources have confirmed.
Such a deal would see Facebook emerge as the digital entity that would allow Ten to go to market with a full suite of media assets to sell to advertisers.
It already offers advertisers the ability to simultaneously book ads on DMG's radio network, which is half owned by Ten's chairman, Lachlan Murdoch, and includes the Nova and Classic Rock brands, on outdoor sites through its Eye Corp division, and obviously on its TV network.
Advertisement: Story continues below
According to those familiar with the talks, the relationship would involve Ten integrating content for some of its larger shows onto the Facebook platform in a way that goes beyond traditional display advertising on the site or the simple proposition of a Facebook page. It would also put it in a strong position to talk to its target audience of younger Australians where they are congregating online.
For Facebook the deal would give it greater access to Ten's content and allow it to be at the centre of the conversation around ''event TV'' - the term for marquee programs such as Ten's MasterChef, Seven's My Kitchen Rules and Nine's The Block.
It would also give Facebook a fillip to its business here in Australia, which boasts some of the highest penetration levels in the world, with 10.2 million users - of which more than half log on daily. Media buyers estimate Facebook Australia is expected to book revenues of $50 million to $60 million this calendar year, through trading through apps and selling display ads on its site.
Analysts and media buyers have been wondering what Ten had up its sleeve digitally. Unlike its competitors Nine and Seven, which have had their own digital platforms for years, in Ninemsn and Yahoo7! respectively, the market has marked down Ten for its lack of a digital strategy.
At Ten's results on Thursday chief executive James Warburton flagged that it was exploring a number of ''digital options'' and that there would be an announcement soon. Some analysts have speculated that it will be a joint venture with News Limited's digital operations because of the link between Ten's chairman, Mr Murdoch, and News.
Landing a player as large as Facebook would be a major coup for Mr Warburton. Facebook executives have been holding informal talks with media buyers about the partnership.
While details, including the trading terms, are still being worked out, one person with knowledge of the talks questioned the wisdom of the deal. He said that Facebook would not want to lock itself in with one player in the media but would prefer to deal with them all.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/business/ten-facebook-explore-alliance-20120413-1wyyo.html#ixzz1ryEK8HRt

 

[whall15]

Just reposting this here, though it was relevant.

Someone at Mediaspy found out that the exemption runs out on April 30.

Rugby League Football

5.1 Each match in the National Rugby League Premiership competition, including the Finals Series, except for:

(a) all matches to be played between 30 March 2012 and 30 April 2012 as part of the 2012 National Rugby League Premiership competition.

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2012C00195

So this means what? No RL on Gem in Melbourne post April 30?

I'll go on a f**king murderous rampage through this hellhole of a city if it does.

Hahaha, that's 9 for ya, if they lose the rights, they'll stop showing the games they only just started showing.

Weak merkins.

Funny that.
The "90 Days Exclusive "negotiating period with 9 ends on the 30th Apr.
If they havnt signed up with 9 by then,(which they wont),then 9 know they have lost..
Will get very very nasty .

Yep that's 9 trying to screw the NRL and fans over. They could have asked for - and received - an exemption for the entirety of the 2012 season - as the AFL have achieved.

Do not be fooled for one second if 9 claim that they're not allowed to apply for the longer than that or were denied or are waiting for the ammendment's ratification. That would be a lie.

This hinges entirely around the rights auction and if 9 lose they will dump the digital coverage straight away.

This is a very good find and sharp work.

 

[Brutus]

http://www.cootamundraherald.com.au...r-billiondollar-baby/2521532.aspx?storypage=3

Gallop and commission at loggerheads over billion-dollar baby


ROY MASTERS
15 Apr, 2012 03:00 AM


Relations between the new ARL Commission and the administration of chief executive, David Gallop, risk becoming dysfunctional, with some commissioners holding private meetings with stakeholders.

Wayne Pearce, one of two former internationals on the commission, has met referees' co-coach Stuart Raper, while another commissioner, Ian Elliot, has held discussions with free-to-air rights holder, Channel Nine. Titans boss Michael Searle has complained he received more calls from commissioners during the drama over Gold Coast's financial plight, than he took from Gallop.

But is this an indictment of the lack of interest from the code's Sydney-based administration, or an example of commissioners desperately trying to make themselves relevant?

The initial purpose of the commission was to have a body independent of any vested interests. This has now been turned on its head, with the commissioners vested with promoting themselves. Admittedly, their collective passion for the game has driven much of their meddling. For nearly 15 years, the game was ruled by an uneasy alliance between Super League foes: the ARL and News Ltd.

Club bosses, coaches, the players' association, broadcasters, media players, sponsors, country leagues and virtually anyone with a grievance against what they perceived to be inertia in the administration now have a new sounding board for their problems. The lobbyists know that all bar Pearce have no recent background in the code, no corporate knowledge of how decisions were reached in the past and why.
The ARLC was to have two survivors from the old NRL boards with intellectual history: ARL chairman Colin Love and management board member Katie Page. The QRL objected to Page because the part-owner of Harvey Norman is a sponsor, while the NRL clubs killed off Love in a final power play. This effectively means the eight commissioners, as enthusiastic as they are to make themselves indispensable, are open to exploitation by those who haven't got their way with Gallop over the past 10 years.
Searle, one of the architects of the ARLC, has a tense relationship with Gallop and no doubt would have encouraged the dialogue with commissioners, believing he could obtain a superior financial rescue package from them, compared to Gallop's administration. The danger with commissioners holding private meetings with referees' bosses, broadcasters and clubs is that it compromises the executive staff with the responsibility for these tasks.


The major risk over the coming months is the broadcasting deal. Three commissioners - chairman John Grant, Jeremy Sutcliffe and Elliot - are now dealing directly with Gallop's director of strategy and special projects, Shane Mattiske, on the new TV deal. They initially sought to have former Channel Ten sports boss, David White, as their negotiating agent but are now heavily involved themselves, with Elliot, a former advertising executive, appointed chair of a sub-committee charged with signing off on the broadcasting contract. Significantly, the one commissioner who knows most about TV - Gary Pemberton - has stayed out of the picture. He helped negotiate the global TV rights for the Sydney Olympics.

At issue is the bragging rights if the code achieves a billion-dollar plus payday. Anything less than that will be considered a failure, falling $250 million short of the deal the AFL secured last year. Understandably, Gallop will be equally keen to stand in front of the TV cameras when a mega deal is announced.

For six years he has been continually blamed for the code's TV deal, an undervalued $500 million over six years because he was compromised by answering to News Ltd chief operating officer, Peter Macourt, who was both a director of Fox Sports and the NRL. It will require discipline for the 2013-17 NRL deal to eclipse the AFL's $1.25 billion.
During last year's AFL negotiations, stagnation set it at the billion-dollar mark. Channel Nine pushed Seven as far as it could; Ten withdrew and Foxtel had made its final offer. AFL chairman Mike Fitzpatrick remained aloof from negotiations run by executive Gillon McLachlan before encouraging Gallop's equivalent, Andrew Demetriou, to assume a more hands-on role. Demetriou used his excellent relationship with then Foxtel chief Kim Williams to extract more money from Telstra for online rights. Finally, the figure of $1.25 billion was reached.
There are some very wily operators, such as Ten's James Packer and Lachlan Murdoch and Seven's David Leckie, interested in rugby league rights. These guys will exploit any mixed messages if the commissioners aren't on the same page with the administration during the negotiations. In which case, league won't get its much-deserved pay day.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...thout-masterchef/story-e6frfmyi-1226326814471

Ten to cook up winning recipe without MasterChef

Richard Clune
The Sunday Telegraph
April 15, 2012 12:00AM


NETWORK TEN has taken a battering this week - as it has over the past 12 months in terms of profit margins and ratings - but new CEO James Warburton has a plan. To make rivals Nine and Seven look old.

In an extensive interview with The Sunday Telegraph, Warburton laid bare his tactics to deliver Ten a new heart -- one that beats with the verve of its former irreverence and youthful playfulness; a core that will also feature the NRL as its marquee sport.

Despite last week announcing a dire profit downturn - a 70 per cent decline in after-tax profits in the last six months on the same period last year - Warburton's aims are steadfast, cloaked in a self-belief that he says has already reinvigorated the once "messy", directionless Pyrmont bunker, which was overly reliant on culinary series MasterChef.

"We have been too skinny and there has not been enough depth. You have to start to think about what joins MasterChef," Warburton said

"Our commissions (The Shire, Puberty Blues, Everybody Dance Now, I Will Survive) are about going back to being fresh and being the innovator. When you do that, by being fresh and edgy, you make your competitors look old."

Sitting atop an office that is literally being rebuilt, Warburton doesn't baulk at the billion-dollar cheque he'd need write to secure the television rights to the NRL after Nine and Foxtel last week publicly outlined their desires to retain the game.

"I'm a Sydney boy, a very loyal Bulldogs supporter and I love the game," he said.

"Are we interested in the NRL? Absolutely. Very few things are ratings-proof and live sport is one that is.

"There's an exclusive negotiating period with Nine (the network has first and last bids as the current rights holder) and it's too early to have engaged with the (Rugby League) Commission."

Similarly, there's an ongoing, positive interest in Ten's underperforming morning show, Breakfast.

According to Warburton -- who began his tenure with Ten in January after defecting from Seven -- the format is financially viable and will remain in the schedule despite the ratings mountain it must hike to match market leader Sunrise.

"It is a long, long-term strategy. We're under no illusions we have work to do.

"But as (Warburton's predecessor and now Ten chairman) Lachlan Murdoch said originally, this is a long-term commitment. I see my role as providing some leadership, courage and vision, for our teams to perform to their potential. Things take time, but we're a motivated, passionate place. We're in a turnaround situation and I wouldn't be writing us off."

 

[Brutus]

Postive stuff there.

Get the chequebook out Warbo!!!