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!

The T.V Rights Thread Part III

How much will the Total Broadcast Rights Deal be?


  • Total voters
    213
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ron Swanson

Juniors
Messages
510
I don't recall anyone saying otherwise, although the " if you don't like AFL or Union you must only like one sport" chestnut is favoured by AFL/Union trolls.

And you're not being a realist, you're deliberately distorting the article. Just point out why 7 and their finances will lead them to not bid but 9 can bid despite being in worse financial shape than 7 and we can all move on.

9 desperately need RL, 7 do not. If 9 lose RL, they lose everything. Outside of RL and The Voice, 9's schedule is a disaster.

Meanwhile, 7 are delivering strong ratings with their regular TV and AFL offerings. After disappointing your shareholders delivering below expected results, you really think they can justify spending all that money for what would only be for strategic purposes? They're the market leader, they don't need to take risks. Austerity/budget cutbacks will be the obvious route to return to expected profit levels.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
I don't agree with the changing channels part for Storm/Reds games. I would just prefer more hype advertising wise on where to watch the game. You want people to get used to flicking over to GEM to watch the matches that don't involve those clubs each week.

It's about the Casual Viewer market. Most people - and this will happen even after full digital conversion - will leave their TVs on 7, 9 & 10 and alternate between those.

It's one thing to cater to an already informed market - but those are the people who already know about rugby league and go out of their way for it.

The real growth market is in capturing casual viewers, getting them to watch a game with some degree of interest and then that's what spurs them out to watch another, and another and so on and so forth.

If it's all restricted to the secondaries you'll cut out a large chunk of the casual viewer market.
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
remember these suggestions have come up before

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/how-the-nrl-can-cash-in-on-tv-20110722-1hsrq.html

How the NRL can cash in on TV
Brad Walter
July 23, 2011

NRL matches could be worth an extra $70 million a year to free-to-air broadcasters by using existing stoppages in play as advertising opportunities.

The estimated windfall is detailed in a proposal from NRL Stats chief executive Andrew Moufarrige, who has looked at the amount of time lost in matches due to stoppages for scrums, goal-line dropouts and conversions, and found that more than 10 minutes of extra game time could be found by simply stopping the clock for 15 to 30 seconds each time to allow a television commercial.

The time-off might also appease fans who complain about time wasting due to such stoppages and trainers being constantly on the field as they would only be allowed to give players drinks during designated breaks.

art-Untitled-1-420x0.jpg


Moufarrige has discussed the idea with a number of leading officials and coaches, who believe it would have little impact on the game itself while providing obvious benefits.

He also predicted such changes would encourage a bidding war between all the commercial free-to-air networks for matches, as even the lower-ranked games would have far greater advertising opportunities.

The issue has emerged as officials prepare to start negotiations for the next television deal beginning in 2013 once the independent commission is formally in place, with Channel Nine boss David Gyngell saying this week that the league needed to create more opportunities for commercial breaks to have any chance of matching AFL's recent $1.2 billion broadcast deal.

Under his proposal, Moufarrige said State of Origin games could be worth an additional $3 million each, and a regular season NRL match up to $300,000.

''Remember, we have got MasterChef, [Australian] Idol, Oprah and Seinfeld all rolled into one,'' Moufarrige said. ''The grand final and State of Origin is like having four Super Bowls. Advertisers would pay a premium for commercial slots in those games, and people would watch them because the ads would be so good.

''NRL is the No.1 TV product. It has seven of the top 10 programs on free-to-air and 72 of the top 100 on pay TV. Also, NRL is the No.1 TV product in 16 of the 20 key TV markets in Australia and New Zealand. AFL only wins in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth.

''AFL is a longer game, and there are advertising opportunities after every goal. But we can add an extra $70 million in ad revenue for NRL games with some small changes to breaks and restarts that give everyone consistency.''

Under Moufarrige's proposal, each half would be played over 50 minutes of real time that included stoppages for scrums, penalties, tries, restarts and video referee rulings. The players would have to be ready to resume play after the 15- or 30-second break for each stoppage or risk a penalty.

He also suggested introducing a two-minute drinks break after 25 minutes when interchanges could be made. ''That would divide the game into 25 minute packets of content which are more suitable for mobile and broadband providers,'' he said. ''What we want is to get all the free-to-air broadcasters and Telstra competing with Fox Sports.

''Games one to four will rate and pay for themselves on free-to-air without these changes but with them they could be worth up to $300K extra per game. The bonus is that games five to eight would now become valuable on free-to-air with even 300,000 to 500,000 viewers, as there is now 10 to 15 minutes ad time set over two hours.''
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
There is no point with even debating this Ron Swanson guy because

1) He's an idiot
2) He will be proven wrong over the next fortnight and then slip away into obscurity

As for all this 7 & 10 can't afford to bid nonsense, the 10 plan has been on the cards since March 2011 - go search the original thread if you don't believe me. How many profit downgrades has 10 had since then - and yet they still come out and announce it publically 12 months later.

Same with 7. You all heard the same story weeks before Masters published it and weeks before the 7 downgrade.
 

RLNY

Juniors
Messages
163
9 desperately need RL, 7 do not. If 9 lose RL, they lose everything. Outside of RL and The Voice, 9's schedule is a disaster.

Meanwhile, 7 are delivering strong ratings with their regular TV and AFL offerings. After disappointing your shareholders delivering below expected results, you really think they can justify spending all that money for what would only be for strategic purposes? They're the market leader, they don't need to take risks. Austerity/budget cutbacks will be the obvious route to return to expected profit levels.

10 is in the same position as 9. And for 7, all I can say is Sunday News.:cool:

The thing that annoys me is we are looking still likely to get $250mill less than AFL despite our product being worth more.

The thing is, it is still early in the tv rights negotiations. The AFL was stuck on right below the $1B mark until the right of the end of the negotiations.
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
There is no point with even debating this Ron Swanson guy because

1) He's an idiot
2) He will be proven wrong over the next fortnight and then slip away into obscurity

As for all this 7 & 10 can't afford to be nonsense, the 10 plan has been on the cards since March 2011 - go search the original thread if you don't believe me. How many profit downgrades has 10 had since then - and yet they still come out and announce it publically 12 months later.

Same with 7. You all heard the same story weeks before Masters published it and weeks before the 7 downgrade.

channel 10 purposely gave up on AFL because they want NRL

apparently Ron says they're full of shit despite numerous articles with quotes from them saying otherwise

ten have even said they want all 8
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
channel 10 purposely gave up on AFL because they want NRL

apparently Ron says they're full of shit despite numerous articles with quotes from them saying otherwise

ten have even said they want all 8

Exactly. Nothing has changed about the 10 strategy since even before it made the papers. Now the elements of 9 & Fox's first bid may change that but the fact that it's almost 14 months have past and we're still hearing the same song is a good thing.

As for the V8 thing, I even read something the other day where a senior 10 exec stated that V8's were only a fall back if they don't get a solid share of Rugby League, a viewpoint which has also been stressed for quite some time.

10 is in the same position as 9. And for 7, all I can say is Sunday News.:cool:



The thing is, it is still early in the tv rights negotiations. The AFL was stuck on right below the $1B mark until the right of the end of the negotiations.

Yep. No point getting hung up on prelim numbers. It's the final number and the details of coverage extents/concessions etc that will have some real world meaning on the game.

The predictions by idiots like Stormcap & Ron Swanson will fall into the ashheap of history.
 

Cletus

First Grade
Messages
7,171
The AFL include online and mobile rights in their $1.25B figure. If we get a bit over $1billion we'll be fine once the NZ and online/mobile rights are added. It would be nice for the commission to be able to spend more on grass roots than they do now and that should be possible whatever the new TV deal is.
 

carlosthedwarf

First Grade
Messages
8,189
Profit downgrades mean nothing because the NRL will bring advertising dollars. So it's worth going for the NRL rights.

The downgrades will just affect more risky programs.
 

applesauce

Bench
Messages
3,573
Isn't this a good thing?

Provided the bid is $1billion from 9 with the stoppages, can't CH7 then just offer $1billion + $1 without breaks and therefore force 9 to pay $1billion + $1 on first and last rights also without ads (as they have to match CH7 scheduling).

This allows 7 to force 9 into overs with little return and gets us a billion. If 7 were smart they could add in national coverage live in HD too, just to rub salt into the wounds.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
I hope I'm proven wrong, I really do...

People seem to forget that the last NRL deal was only about a 60% increase. If we were to simply match the same level of increase it would only be around $690 million over 5 years.

It's every cent over that which will really prove the game's worth and provide for its future.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
Isn't this a good thing?

Provided the bid is $1billion from 9 with the stoppages, can't CH7 then just offer $1billion + $1 without breaks and therefore force 9 to pay $1billion + $1 on first and last rights also without ads (as they have to match CH7 scheduling).

This allows 7 to force 9 into overs with little return and gets us a billion. If 7 were smart they could add in national coverage live in HD too, just to rub salt into the wounds.

The main thing is - they have to be willing to do it. I disagree that profit downgrades will play a major part in this. As others have stated, that's the main reason to be spending up to secure a long term ratings guarantee like the NRL or AFL.

9 & Foxtel - against what all idiotic critics have suggested - appear to be putting in a strong first bid - this should immediately discredit the profit downgrade conspiracy.

This more than anything else will be what affects 7 & 10's ability to respond.

That said $1 billion+ opener probably isn't enough to stop 10 or 7 based on numbers doing the traps, which is what I've said for some time. They can push it beyond that but it probably won't get to a blind auction under that scenario.

Whether or not 7 or 10 can win reacting to a $1b opener remains to be seen. Adding $100 million on to that may not be enough to stop 9 reacting in kind.

I'm at the point where I feel comfortable saying that all the rights (Aus & Nz for F2A, TV & Internet) will be over $1 billion minimum. How much more than that remains to be seen.
 
Last edited:

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
Isn't this a good thing?

Provided the bid is $1billion from 9 with the stoppages, can't CH7 then just offer $1billion + $1 without breaks and therefore force 9 to pay $1billion + $1 on first and last rights also without ads (as they have to match CH7 scheduling).

This allows 7 to force 9 into overs with little return and gets us a billion. If 7 were smart they could add in national coverage live in HD too, just to rub salt into the wounds.

the 20% only applies to 9's bid

Fox retain first and last rights no matter what
 

franklin2323

Immortal
Messages
33,546
The downgrades will just affect more risky programs.

Bingo. RL is guaranteed 700k+ on a Friday night. 1m on a Monday night. The production crew is contractors. That cost can be off set by getting stats sponsors. Replay sponsors etc. Unlike the Simpsons etc they don't pay every time it's shown. Over the course of the year it more then pays for itself. Add the lead in to other programs it can soon turn the fortunes around.
 

IanG

Coach
Messages
17,807
we'll be fine once the NZ and online/mobile rights are added.

Have wondered what the structure of that side of things was. Who is that outsource matches in NZ to Sky Sports. Even when Channel 9 show games from NZ they take the Sky Sports vision. Dare say cheaper than sending a crew over there.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
Bingo. RL is guaranteed 700k+ on a Friday night. 1m on a Monday night. The production crew is contractors. That cost can be off set by getting stats sponsors. Replay sponsors etc. Unlike the Simpsons etc they don't pay every time it's shown. Over the course of the year it more then pays for itself. Add the lead in to other programs it can soon turn the fortunes around.

All that plus it's the fan base that will casually leave it on one channel.

Despite being overwhelmed with a plethora of options, we are creatures of habit.
 

seanoff

Juniors
Messages
1,207
Isn't this a good thing?

Provided the bid is $1billion from 9 with the stoppages, can't CH7 then just offer $1billion + $1 without breaks and therefore force 9 to pay $1billion + $1 on first and last rights also without ads (as they have to match CH7 scheduling).

This allows 7 to force 9 into overs with little return and gets us a billion. If 7 were smart they could add in national coverage live in HD too, just to rub salt into the wounds.

they don't broadcast the AFL in HD, i wouldn't start wishing for HD from 7 anytime soon. even though i suspect the content is captured in HD.
 

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,479
Great article today in The Australian by a journo who actually writes about media for a living and knows his shit.

7 and 10 ain't bidding. The overstating of RL's value by Roy Masters and this forum needed to be shot down.

Did you actually read the article,or are you directing another one pointer to keep the scoreboard ticking over.
No wonder you guys need an extra two sticks to show up your lack of skills ,now it appears to be the case in newspaper articles.
Nowhere does it state 7 and 10 will not be bidding. :oops:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top