The T.V Rights Thread Part III

[Phil McGrawhan]

Probably, but never underestimate the stupidity of the Australian public.

Victoria leads the way.

 

[CC_Roosters]

Am i rght in saying that the exclusive negotiating period ends on monday then? What happens then

 

[El Diablo]

7 and 10 can bid

no idea if we'll find out what 9 and Fox's first offer is

 

[beave]

Does 7 and 10 learn of the rival bid $$$$$ before mounting their charge?

 

[El Diablo]

they would have to be told everything or they'd have no idea what they have to beat

 

[elbusto]

Does 7 and 10 learn of the rival bid $$$$$ before mounting their charge?

I am guessing but surely yes. Nine gets the last shot at it and could only do that knowing what they are up against. 7 and 10 will be allowed to bid against a known 9 $ amount.

 

[The Elephant In The room]

Does 7 and 10 learn of the rival bid $$$$$ before mounting their charge?

Where's Doc when you need him?

Also just guessing, but I'd assume that they wouldn't initially, otherwise it make the "first/last rights" part the deal somewhat worthless because the opposition would know exactly what they'd need to do to break it.

 

[El Diablo]

they would have to know all the details

not just the dollars but what coverage they've offered

 

[elbusto]

Where's Doc when you need him?

Also just guessing, but I'd assume that they wouldn't initially, otherwise it make the "first/last rights" part the deal somewhat worthless because the opposition would know exactly what they'd need to do to break it.

Logically you cannot make a counter bid against a bid you cannot see and cannot counter counter bid either!!!!

 

[docbrown]

Where's Doc when you need him?

Also just guessing, but I'd assume that they wouldn't initially, otherwise it make the "first/last rights" part the deal somewhat worthless because the opposition would know exactly what they'd need to do to break it.

I believe due to anti-monopoly laws the NRL are required to disclose the details to 9 & Foxtel's competitors (this was part of 7's reason for being pissed off last time). For example, say the NRL was still owned by Fox with News lackeys on the board and they didn't disclose to 7 the details, then 7 could argue that they prevented at putting in a competitive bid.

By 7 & 10 breaking the 20% margin though, 9 loses the right to know what 7 & 10 offered (competition is no longer an issue as rival tenderers have already bid). This puts everybody into a blind auction - the NRL don't have to tell them what 7 &/or 10 offered if they don't want to and 9/7/10/Foxtel are forced to guess and if there's back and forth between bid offers, NRL retain the right at what level of disclosure they want to reveal.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

I believe due to anti-monopoly laws the NRL are required to disclose the details to 9 & Foxtel's competitors (this was part of 7's reason for being pissed off last time). For example, say the NRL was still owned by Fox with News lackeys on the board and they didn't disclose to 7 the details, then 7 could argue that they prevented at putting in a competitive bid.

By 7 & 10 breaking the 20% margin though, 9 loses the right to know what 7 & 10 offered (competition is no longer an issue as rival tenderers have already bid). This puts everybody into a blind auction - the NRL don't have to tell them what 7 &/or 10 offered if they don't want to and 9/7/10/Foxtel are forced to guess and if there's back and forth between bid offers, NRL retain the right at what level of disclosure they want to reveal.

Question, without telling 9 the exact details of a 7 and/or 10 bid, how are they supposed to know it's 20% above theirs? We tell them and they just trust us?

 

[docbrown]

Question, without telling 9 the exact details of a 7 and/or 10 bid, how are they supposed to know it's 20% above theirs? We tell them and they just trust us?

They tell them that the bid has been exceeded by 20%. It can be independently verified I suppose but there's no way the NRL could lie about it anyhow as all bid details would be recorded back through Conroy's office afterwards so they can ensure that there was a clear competitive auction.

So for instance that 9/Fox put in $1 billion.

7 puts in $1.2 billion etc.

If the NRL just tell 9/Fox you've been beaten by 20%, 9/Fox have to guess by how much and can over estimate it. Do they presume it was just a minimum of 20% or do they go more than that?

This is why F&LR are a competition killer and we should all hope/pray/sacrifice animals so that they will be broken.

 

[VictoryFC]

Came across this. Is this shit journalism or what?

http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-...-second-brisbane-nrl-team-20120424-1xis2.html

The ARL Commission is currently locked in negotiations with host broadcasters Channel Nine and other interested parties for a new 10-year TV rights deal tipped to bring a one billion dollar revenue windfall to the game.

This can't have any substance can it?

 

[Lockyer4President!]

Came across this. Is this shit journalism or what?

http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-...-second-brisbane-nrl-team-20120424-1xis2.html



This can't have any substance can it?

What's the bet he's heard someone say the NRL is negotiating two 5 year deals (one for eight games, one for nine games) and misunderstood it :lol:

 

[RLNY]

I think the article in the Age mentioning a 10 year deal for the NRL was a misprint.

I have a couple of questions with respect to first and last rights.
1. How does Fox's first and last rights get broken?
2. Let's say 9 bids $500M for their original package, 7 bids $500M, and 10 bids $200M. Would 9's first and last rights be broken in that case/

 

[LESStar58]

That age article is just laughable.

Ten years for 1 billion? More like ten for 2 billion!

 

[Canucks]

All I know is this will take forever... But the 20% first and last rights clause I think helps the NRL.... If that clause wasn't there and Nine offered $900m, the back and forth would be going up in small incriments...


So every Dollar that Nine/Fox bid they add 20 cents to the rivals' bid.... I love it


Initial Bid / Breaking Bid
$900m / $1.08B
$1B / $1.2B
$1.1B / $1.32B
$1.2B / $1.44B (you would have to assume at this amount the threshold won't be surpassed)


The AFL got their money from foxtel by playing hardball, they didnt assume Fox had a role, they would have asked for $X and said don't call us until you have it.... the NRL need to have that mentality....


If Nine offer $600m as Doc said for 4 games plus SOO, Tests, Finals, GF, I think the NRL could get another $300-$400 for the other 4 games on FTA.... Tell Fox not to call until they slip a $600m cheque under the door....


A $1b even deal with all 8 games on Free to Air would be huge for the NRL. The sharks would have average audiences between 600k-1.2m instead of 250k, and they would then be living more off sponsorship than off the grant.


The ARLC need to extract more off Fox to compensate for the destruction of some of the teams' brands, otherwise Foxtel fk off and be buried next to Optus Vision and Galaxy.

Imagine Western Sydney households with access to 8 games on FTA. What is the dollar value of that exposure?? You can't calculate it

 

[attila_the_gorilla]

I think the article in the Age mentioning a 10 year deal for the NRL was a misprint.

I have a couple of questions with respect to first and last rights.
1. How does Fox's first and last rights get broken?
2. Let's say 9 bids $500M for their original package, 7 bids $500M, and 10 bids $200M. Would 9's first and last rights be broken in that case/

Good question, and also what happens if they split up the rights in a completely different way than they are now? Eg. 1 Friday game, 2 Sat. games and 1 Sunday game for one package.

 

[docbrown]

All I know is this will take forever... But the 20% first and last rights clause I think helps the NRL.... If that clause wasn't there and Nine offered $900m, the back and forth would be going up in small incriments...

I have to disagree on that point. It's better to be in control of the information then being at its mercy.

 

[docbrown]

Good question, and also what happens if they split up the rights in a completely different way than they are now? Eg. 1 Friday game, 2 Sat. games and 1 Sunday game for one package.

The F&LR only cover the existing packages, not a new simulcasting arrangement or a different breakdown of packages.

If 7 or 10 offer better terms for a completely different set of packaging options then the NRL are under no obligation to inform 9 & Foxtel of the offer. They can just say 'your offer has been beaten, would you like to submit another bid'.

9 & Foxtel could put in a $1,000,000,000 simulcasting bid and 7 and/or 10 could put in a $1,000,000,001 simulcasting bid. As it is a totally different arrangement there is no obligation by the NRL to tell 9 & Foxtel that they were beaten by $1. All that have to say is - "You were beaten on simulcasting, would you like to have another tender?"

That puts the focus back on 9 & Foxtel to guess how much they were beaten by.