The TV rights thread

[ME SO HORNBY!]

So David 'Conflict of Interest' Gallop wants to get negotiations started before an independent commission is in place eh.

Was thinking the exact same thing as I read the article

 

[Rockin Ronny]

this was from earlier this year

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...-rights-hardball/story-e6frg996-1225843487154



and this was an article on the fella from LEK

The man who holds the key to TV sport

So - the negotiations are in the hands of a News Limited lackey with no balls and a bunch of NRL club execs with the business expertise of Pauline Hanson.

This TV deal will be worse than the last one - then Gallop will offer Tiwi Islands $100,000 to play out of Gosford.

 

[Apey]

good move my Gallop.

 

[BranVan3000]

100% agreed. There is no other CEO in world sport who would talk down their own organisation in public like he did.

What do you mean? What did he say?

 

[Berkeley_Eagle]

These Negotiations need to be done by an independent commission not Gallop,

 

[applesauce]

the AFL rights were negotiated after the NRL's

If that's the case why are we trying to go 1st again (without an IC as well)? It didn't work last time....

 

[DINGb@T]

The only reason the deal got done before the AFL rights last time was so that we wouldn't be left at the altar after the AFL was carved up by Ten and Seven. If it had been negotiated after the AFL deal, like it was going to be, there would have been absolutely no competition for Nein and they would have got the rights for whatever they wanted. By getting in first Gallop got a better deal than otherwise.

And your faith in the ability of the media, and what's said in the media, is bordering on... well it's bordering on the religious zealotry shown by Demetriou and the AFL fundamentalists with the $6 million doallar headline known as Israel Folau. If the only reason you hate Gallop is because he didn't say nice enough things in the media then give up cause the game will die regardless by that logic.

 

[hillbillyjazzer1954]

So - the negotiations are in the hands of a News Limited lackey with no balls and a bunch of NRL club execs with the business expertise of Pauline Hanson.

This TV deal will be worse than the last one - then Gallop will offer Tiwi Islands $100,000 to play out of Gosford.

if he did, they would win more premierships then norths ever did

 

[Perth Red]

If that's the case why are we trying to go 1st again (without an IC as well)? It didn't work last time....

Because there is then no pressure to beat the AFL's deal as we would know what they got. Lets say we get in first and get $750mill, we would be clapping our hands and patting each other on the back. Now if AFL had gone first and got $1billion then the pressure would be on NRL to at least get the same, which it is very unlikely they will do. We would see them as a failure and the IC would be off to a very bad start.

Sad but true I believe.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

The only reason the deal got done before the AFL rights last time was so that we wouldn't be left at the altar after the AFL was carved up by Ten and Seven. If it had been negotiated after the AFL deal, like it was going to be, there would have been absolutely no competition for Nein and they would have got the rights for whatever they wanted. By getting in first Gallop got a better deal than otherwise.

Not true, Gallop was advised not to allow any bids from other broadcasters. Channel 7 expressed interest last time too but Gallop was quick to accept the Channel 9 deal. If im not mistaken, I believe the person who advised him to take the Channel 9 deal without hearing 7 out, was an employee of News Ltd.

Im sure El D will have a link for me

 

[intentcity]

We will never forget him justifying why the AFL deserved more money in the last contract.

This cannot be forgiven.

to put it simply, the AFL got (will get) more because they have a much more broadcaster friendly game, this isnt exactly rocket science man, let me explain it to you.

lets just say rating are 50/50, one game goes for 2 hrs and the other for 3hrs, which game do you pick if you own a TV station to sell adverts on? also considering the AFL brand can sell an add after every goal (around 25/30 kicked per game, qtr time and 3 qtr time breaks.

payTV.
NRL has something like 60 of the top 100 ratings i hear, but fact is, AFL overall out rates league on pay, sounds stupid i know but its true, this is because AFL FTA games go head to head with AFL payTV games, BUT, the thing is, the replays of the AFL games massively out rate the NRL replays and with the extra veiwing time of an AFL game they rate higher on a veiwer to hr scale.

the NRL outrated the AFL GF last year, but when you consider that there was a melbourne team in the NRL GF and 2 relatively small AFL teams playing thats not surprising, also consider that the NRL GF was played on Sunday twighlight, fact is man, people who are in charge of spending hundreds of millions of dollars arnt stupid, channel 9 threw everything bar the kitchen sink at the AFL and still lost, also, that offer was a one time thing, theres no auctions for the AFL rights, chanell 9 have one chance, they must make there highest bid, because chanal 7 bought the last port of call for the next 10/15 yrs i beleive.

the AFL have there own fixture, something gallop himself said not less than 3 mnths ago would cost the NRL 50mill in broadcast rights.

in summery, the NRL rights arnt worth anywhere near the AFLs, its just common bloody sense man.

 

[Jason_(Is_our_King)_Smith]

We will never forget him justifying why the AFL deserved more money in the last contract.

This cannot be forgiven.

Possibly the most perplexing position by the CEO of a large organisation ever.

And I agree, it should never be forgotten. Until that moment, I was a big supporter of Gallop.

 

[Jason_(Is_our_King)_Smith]

to put it simply, the AFL got (will get) more because they have a much more broadcaster friendly game, this isnt exactly rocket science man, let me explain it to you.

It's a pathetic spectacle on TV compared to league.

 

[taipan]

Not a Gallop lackey by any stretch.But negotiating at the same time as the AFL makes a bit of sense to me.More so with an indpendent guy,who was the same guy who secured decent monies for the AFL.
1) it takes a bit of air out of the AFL negotiating tyre,having a competitor hovering around,with a Tv product that rates its t*s off.
2) It gets in early and as the IC is expected to be in place by 1st November(meaning News Ltd out),would give the commission real figures to work on,in terms of new clubs,development and player contracts and grants to clubs.
3) Gallop after losing cutie and Israel to AFL,would have to be a dummy not to realise the NRL cannot stuff up a 2nd time on Tv deals.
4) The Tv stations,internet companies have X amount to spend.if we let the AFL get in first andtake the lions share by waiting till next year,we are stuffed.
5)With ch9 having 1st and last rights,ch7 and 10 will really have to come up with the goods,as they both claim they want a slice of the action.I believe they are serious players this time.
6) there is no K Packer to assist the AFL indirectly with Tv contracts.
This must be like an SAS raid search,destroy and capture,but bloody well plan the assault well in advance with experts.

 

[oldmancraigy]

I don't get the Gallop hate.

He has been 10x more proactive than any of those who walked before him. Yes, he used to work for News Ltd - but used to must be the operative word here.
He got us a bigger deal last time, which bought the league some time to work on areas of extreme weakness - namely club membership. And under Gallops initiative several clubs have pushed past 10k in that department.

He's secured another $3-500k in salary cap for clubs in the next few seasons; has ensured that marquee players leaving the sport have barely caused a ripple in the ratings department; and is NOW in a great position to secure a big TV deal.

Sure, if he takes a piddly deal this time we should be upset - but I think we'll be seeing more money coming into the game this time around...

 

[Perth Red]

But when you put his failing against his successes it is hard to consider him a great CEO. Lets look at his successes:

1. Just got a good deal for the GF out of the NSW Govt
2. Toyota cup has been a success
3. Decisive action over salary cap breaches and player misbehaviour
4. ermmmmm

Failings:
1. The TV deal was not great and put us on the back foot for 5 years
2. His comments during the centenary year about NSW clubs going broke destroyed the feel good factor for the season
3. He gave away the internet rights whilst AFL got $12mill for theirs
4. The income of the NRL is $100mill less than AFL even after TV deal difference is taken into consideration
5. % of the games income given to clubs is lower than most other codes
6. He comes across as weak in the media, rarely talks the game up and seems incapable of stopping "leaks" to the media that are damaging ie expansion not worth anything, fixed schedule would mean less money etc
7. The game hasn't grown beyond its traditional boundaries in a decade
8. No National FTA, damaging the Storms growth and the game in Victoria
9. Very little growth in Avg game crowd attendance in the last decade (in 2000 14,300-16,000 last year)
9. Seemingly no vision or strategy for where the game wants to be in 5, 10 or 20 years time. Where is the Strategic Outcomes document linked to an action plan linked to KPI's for the game?


I'm sure there are plenty more! Overall can you honestly say the last decade has been a boom time for the game? His time is past, an IC should be free to appoint the best CEO available for the next phase of RL's development.

 

[Stormcap]

Theres never been a TV rights deal in all of sports that was double the previous one, a $billion just isnt going to happen. The AFL is adding an extra game and 2 new teams and only expecting a 25% increase.

 

[El Diablo]

problem is those games are in areas that are TV ratings poison for AFL

the Swans have been in Sydney for 30 years and always rate below 100k in Sydney if shown on FTA

they get beaten by repeats of 20 year old movies ffs

 

[Perth Red]

Theres never been a TV rights deal in all of sports that was double the previous one, a $billion just isnt going to happen. The AFL is adding an extra game and 2 new teams and only expecting a 25% increase.

What was the NRL TV deal before the last one?

Also the last one was undersold so in theory if we had sold that at true value we wouldn't be looking at a doubling of $'s.

 

[russ13]

to put it simply, the AFL got (will get) more because they have a much more broadcaster friendly game, this isnt exactly rocket science man, let me explain it to you.

lets just say rating are 50/50, one game goes for 2 hrs and the other for 3hrs, which game do you pick if you own a TV station to sell adverts on? also considering the AFL brand can sell an add after every goal (around 25/30 kicked per game, qtr time and 3 qtr time breaks.

The FTA advertising dollar in Queensland & NSW is nearly 60% of the Australiam market (actually 57.8% in the last half of 2008).


NSW + Qld = 1.5 times the rest of Australia....

1,131 billion / 1.957 billion
http://www.thinktv.com.au/media/Media_Releases/PR11_Revenue_ figures_Jul_-_Dec_08.pdf

Therefore all thing equal 2 hours of RL equals 3 hours of AFL.