"We need to go from 'I have Foxtel for the sport' to 'I have Foxtel because I love Fox Sports'."
So NSW & QLD as you can see represent approximately 60% of the market.
He has hired veteran broadcast rights negotiator Ian Frykberg to assist him.
Sad reality is they know full well they wil not lose the NRL rights no matter how under valued their bid. The AFL deal is actually a very good one for them and will no doubt do what it sets out to do which is increase their subscription rates in Vic,SA and WA up to what they are in NSW and Q'land. They had to pay overs to get the coverage they need to drive this, ie every game live, where as they will basically want the same as they have now from NRL and as they already own it won't feel the need to offer overs.
Now if we had a real alternative bidder for 4 games a week then it would be a different scenario.
Free-to-air and pay-TV will end up paying more for the 2013-17 rights and the total package (including digital and advertising contra) could be up to $1bn.
Correct. But we also must not overlook the fact that the $4b quoted by FTV also must purchase the rights to ALL the other programming on FTA networks, not only during the NRL season but for the entire year. Whilst I absolutely agree that the NRL deserves PLENTY more, and I'm in no way defending the networks, we have to understand that the networks aren't magic money pits.
For example, I'm told that Seven paid royalties of over $1m per episode for the rights to hold the X Factor last year. This is purely a royalty for the X Factor NAME, paid to Simon Cowell. It didn't include production costs, nor the remuneration of the celebrities involved. Whether it is your kind of entertainment or not, millions of viewers watched each and every show, so it's in the network's interests to broadcast it (despite the hefty costs involved).
My point is simply that, whilst any prospective NRL rights bidder must be prepared to dig significantly deeper this time around, we should be mindful of the hard negotiations ahead, as we can't just demand money that does not yet exist (it shall only arrive once the networks begin airing the broadcasts and receiving the advertising revenue). There is still, and always will be, an inherent risk on the broadcasters' part in this regard. There are delicate months ahead in these negotiations, and going at them like a bull at a gate will not work. Massaging and shaping is the way to manipulate these negotiations, not brute force.
A lot of the language in that article was trying to hose down the value.
Its up to the NRL IC to have a spine and tell 'em to keep going higher. $1B is the floor amount, and trying to count contra in with that is a bit weak - the NRL is definately worth more than a $900M cash component.
Pay up News Ltd merkins
I think Chessell was the bloke who did his own analysis a while back and came up with 1 billion. I don't think he has any more clue then the rest of us.
he also got the figures for last years finals wrong
Last year's NRL finals games averaged almost 700,000 metro viewers
9 Rugby League Final Series Qf1 Nine 790,000 441,000 19,000 318,000 5,000 6,000
6 Rugby League Final Series Qf2 Nine 737,000 471,000 23,000 224,000 5,000 13,000
12 Rugby League Final Series Qf3 Nine 465,000 254,000 *** 209,000 2,000 ***
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2010/09/week-39-3.html6 Rugby League Final Series Sf1 Nine 942,000 604,000 30,000 296,000 3,000 8,000
5 Rugby League Final Series SF2 Nine 852,000 555,000 21,000 259,000 8,000 8,000
19 Rugby League Final Series Qf4 Nine 605,000 389,000 12,000 193,000 5,000 5,000
6 Rugby League Final Series Pf1 Nine 1,004,000 583,000 15,000 394,000 8,000 4,000
10 Rugby League Final Series Pf2 Nine 1,032,000 697,000 23,000 299,000 7,000 6,000
Correct. But we also must not overlook the fact that the $4b quoted by FTV also must purchase the rights to ALL the other programming on FTA networks, not only during the NRL season but for the entire year. Whilst I absolutely agree that the NRL deserves PLENTY more, and I'm in no way defending the networks, we have to understand that the networks aren't magic money pits.
There are some very interesting figures in there. The most important one is as you said that 60% of the revenue is coming from NSW and QLD.
Well I didn't draw any attention to it but I'm surprised no one questioned this -
Sydney 621,757,219
Melbourne 465,598,961
Sydney 526,924,232
Melbourne 383,347,892
Two fairly similar sized cities yet as you can see the majority of dollars are spent in Sydney.
So not only do we have the regional advantage but our spend dollars are much higher per capita.
I hope those figures dont keep going down or the networks will try to screw RL in the next contract. those figures are down about 17% in six months. If they keep dropping like they are they might be down 30+% when the negotiations are drawing to a close.
I have it on good authority that Channel 10 have already met with PMG to discuss a potential advertising revenue trade off scheme.
who's your source ? or would that be a breach of doctor / patient confidentiality ?
who's your source ? or would that be a breach of doctor / patient confidentiality ?
who's your source ? or would that be a breach of doctor / patient confidentiality ?