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 TV rights thread part II

Providing the price is right which is your preferred FTA broadcast option?

  • All games on Seven

    Votes: 11 4.2%
  • All games on Nine

    Votes: 17 6.5%
  • All games on Ten

    Votes: 59 22.6%
  • Seven/Nine split

    Votes: 10 3.8%
  • Seven/Ten split

    Votes: 109 41.8%
  • Nine/Ten split

    Votes: 55 21.1%

  • Total voters
    261
Status
Not open for further replies.

juro

Bench
Messages
3,825
Delaney doesn't want to talk negative. But one way of putting a price on what Fox currently has is to look at the consequences of them not having it anymore. That is not negative, it is considering Fox's options!
 

rednblack

Juniors
Messages
275
So NSW & QLD as you can see represent approximately 60% of the market.

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.
 

BuffaloRules

Coach
Messages
15,564
He has hired veteran broadcast rights negotiator Ian Frykberg to assist him.

I recommend the NRL has plenty of doughnuts and sandwiches on the table when they negotiate to distract Frykberg...

The bloke makes Nathan Tinkler look like Allan Langer ( when he was 20)
 

Raiderdave

First Grade
Messages
7,990
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.

play Chicken with the NRL at your peril
if anyone is in doubt as to the importance of a massive increase in TV dollars to the NRL & its clubs
if anyone still thinks the NRL will settle for underselling itself .... again & is a sport that still has insecurity issues & thinks its inferior to its sthn rival where TV is concerned ... then think again.



we'd give the 4 games to another FTA bidder
( or 2 each to 2 bidders ) short term for the same money Foxtel is prepared to pay .. even a tiny bit less if required
no real skin off our nose is there .... but it would be a huge blow to foxtel
they'd stagger from it & the boggerball apologists who run it .. would be sacked
this absurd suggestion the NRL needs foxtel will be exposed for the myth it is
its the otherway around .. & if foxtel think we're bluffing

try us :)
 

Goddo

Bench
Messages
4,257
A lot of the language in that article was trying to hose down the value.

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.

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
 

Raiderdave

First Grade
Messages
7,990
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.


Really :?
because they found 1.25 Billion for a sport that has suffered a 30% decrease in its FTA Ratings over the last 5 years .. & continues to slide
& attracts only 2 veiwers to every 3 that the NRL does on PAY

thats a pretty neat trick if you ask me :sarcasm:

if this is the result for a sport that is on the decline
& really it is
it has an aging demographic that is falling in number
it is a cr@p comp anyway .. with blow out scores getting worse because useless expansion teams that have had the talent pool spread so thin it is impossible to keep pace with a handful of better sides


then what result can one reasonably expect for a sport that is hitting the mark in almost every regard & looks like its best years are ahead of it ..in the coming couple of decades

a bloody good one
thats what

we don't have to settle
& we won't.
 

Edwahu

Bench
Messages
3,697
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.
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
he also got the figures for last years finals wrong

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...r-as-much-as-afl/story-e6frg7mf-1226081603237

Last year's NRL finals games averaged almost 700,000 metro viewers

http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2010/09/week-37-3.html

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-38-2.html
6 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
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2010/09/week-39-3.html
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

That averages at 803,375

that is well above his clam of "almost 700,000 metro viewers"
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
Chessell would have to be one of the most despised journos working at the Australian and he is there to push an agenda.

PMG's plan has always been to secure all games live in order to retain their current body of subscriptions. However they need to do it as part of a package in conjunction with a F2A broadcaster.

I have it on good authority that Channel 10 have already met with PMG to discuss a potential advertising revenue trade off scheme. Basically 10 would sacrifice a share of the direct revenue and give it subscription for the first few years of the contract. In turn, PMG would partially ensure the loan agreement for 10 to outbid 9 and they'd go in together. Nothing has changed, the strategy is going ahead. Do not be surprised to see a Friday Night doubleheader on Ten and a Sunday Afternoon doubleheader on Nine with all games live on a dedicated Fox channel.

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.

True but LEK's numbers show a direct television revenue generation of $300 million+ a year from Rugby League. This does not include halo viewers.

We're just fighting for a larger portion of that annual figure.
 

Billythekid

First Grade
Messages
6,837

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.

The other one that i think is very important is the regional revenue. Regional NSW for example is around double Adelaide and well in front of Perth as well. Regional QLD is also a bigger market than Adelaide.

This is what i get annoyed about when people say the AFL has a better national spread. They have zero presence in regional NSW, a much bigger market than Perth. They also have little presence in reional QLD, a bigger market than adelaide.

If we put a team in Perth we will have a far better spread than the AFL without even including our presence in NZ.

These figures also show just how little the regionals matter in the southern states and we need to harp on this point in negotiations.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
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.
 

Stormarekings

Juniors
Messages
90
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.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
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.

They fluctuate up and down all the time. The overall trend is upwards.

It's not like the networks just stop buying programmes as such efforts play out over 3-5 year periods, rather 6 months.
 

Edwahu

Bench
Messages
3,697
In total they are up about 400 million year on year. Internet and Pay TV ad revenue would also be up. So there is probably more cash then ever.
 

BDGS

Bench
Messages
4,102
who's your source ? or would that be a breach of doctor / patient confidentiality ?

I don't know who his source is, but on topics that surround the TV deal ever claim he has made with a 'source' has turned out in the papers a few months later.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top