The TV rights thread

[Brutus]

Is it a coincidence that Austereo the only FM station in Melbourne with the right to broadcast AFL, employs half of Melbourne Nine employees?

Doesn't Austereo in Sydney do likewise? Rabbs, Joey, Sterlo and last year Gus were all on the Austereo pay roll.

Interesting post.

My theory as to why they don't show NRL games at a decent hour in Melb is to ensure Melbourne people who want to watch rugby league, subscribe to Pay TV. This suits the part owners of our game down to the ground. Some of the highest rating pay tv games have been Storm ones.

 

[Brutus]

Not to mention possibly our biggest advantage over AFL which is SOO. Three extra games a year that rate like a GF.

There is also our International game which is growing.

An international game that almost always outrates the Wallabies.

Should be funny comparing the ratings for the May RL test against the Kiwis to the Bloodyslows. Should be an absolute smash up in RL's favour.

 

[NRLMad]

An international game that almost always outrates the Wallabies.

Should be funny comparing the ratings for the May RL test against the Kiwis to the Bloodyslows. Should be an absolute smash up in RL's favour.

I didn't believe you at first.. but you're indeed correct (as can be seen here): http://www.leagueunlimited.com/tv_ratings_2009.php
http://www.leagueunlimited.com/tv_ratings_2010.php

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/seven-in-hunt-for-rights/story-e6freye0-1225896477068

Seven in hunt for rights

* By Phil Rothfield and Rebecca Wilson
* From: The Sunday Telegraph
* July 25, 2010 12:01AM

CHANNEL Seven is deadly serious about pinching the NRL television rights from Nine and believe it is possible now that Kerry Packer is no longer alive.

Seven owner Kerry Stokes went into a direct bidding war with Packer for rugby league last time the rights were available and even spent $200 million on legal action when his network missed out on the rights. Nine has always kept rugby league, not just for the ratings but because of Packer's love for the game. Industry sources are telling us Stokes and his CEO David Leckie will stop at nothing to get the rights this time and will be armed with the bigger cheque book now that KP is no longer with us.

 

[smithie]

God I hope not. Seven have always been crap at broadcasting sport.

I'm hoping for a Nine/Ten/OneHD/Fox deal.

 

[seaeagle sam]

Give it to the highest bidder that also a) keeps to its contactual obligations in terms of telecasting the game at reasonable hours in all States and Territories b) doesn't employ Phil Gould and Ray Warren.

 

[Green Machine]

You’ve got to laugh at Rebecca Wilson and Phil Rothfield’s campaign to get Channel 7 the TV rights. A couple of weeks ago, it was because of Phil Gould, yesterday it was more garbage

Seven in hunt for rights

* By Phil Rothfield and Rebecca Wilson
* From: The Sunday Telegraph
* July 25, 2010 12:01AM

CHANNEL Seven is deadly serious about pinching the NRL television rights from Nine and believe it is possible now that Kerry Packer is no longer alive.

Seven owner Kerry Stokes went into a direct bidding war with Packer for rugby league last time the rights were available

Channel 7 didn’t even put in a bid for the rights last time they were available

and even spent $200 million on legal action when his network missed out on the rights.

Wasn’t the legal action against Foxtel and Foxsports in particular? And wasn’t that legal action over the PayTV rights, not the FTA rights?

Nine has always kept rugby league, not just for the ratings but because of Packer's love for the game.

Is this the same Kerry Packer who bid the AFL rights up to $150m?

Industry sources are telling us Stokes and his CEO David Leckie will stop at nothing to get the rights this time and will be armed with the bigger cheque book now that KP is no longer with us.

Didn’t Channel 7 lose the Wallaby Tests to Channel 9 because of the toxic relationship between News Ltd and Stokes?

 

[El Diablo]

You’ve got to laugh at Rebecca Wilson and Phil Rothfield’s campaign to get Channel 7 the TV rights. A couple of weeks ago, it was because of Phil Gould, yesterday it was more garbage
Channel 7 didn’t even put in a bid for the rights last time

the NRL didn't let them. they wanted to

Seven seeks chance to bid for NRL rights

 

[Green Machine]

the NRL didn't let them. they wanted to

Seven seeks chance to bid for NRL rights

In 2005 (not 2004 as per article attached), there was quite a few articles around about Channel 9’s negotiations with the NRL. Channel 7 had plenty of opportunities in 2005. Gallop was asked on Grandstand last season if Channel 7 put a bid in 2005 and he said no, but he thought they would have. The article by Wilson and Rothfield is full of their usual mistruths. I wonder how News Ltd would approve of Channel 7 televising the NRL, if they favoured Channel 9 with the Union rights?

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-union/union-news/nine-scores-bledisloe-coverage-for-five-years-20100414-se4h.html

Channel Seven, which is expected to televise Bledisloe Cup matches for the final time this season, was unhappy with a deal in which Fox Sports stole viewers by showing internationals at the same time, without advertisements.
Sources also insist News executives haven't forgotten the Federal Court action Seven owner, Kerry Stokes, took against News and others, claiming they had conspired to close his C7 pay-TV network.

 

[jasonstevenswedgie]

interesting times ahead

 

[El Diablo]

In 2005 (not 2004 as per article attached), there was quite a few articles around about Channel 9’s negotiations with the NRL. Channel 7 had plenty of opportunities in 2005. Gallop was asked on Grandstand last season if Channel 7 put a bid in 2005 and he said no, but he thought they would have.

of course they didn't put in a bid. Gallop never let them as he did exactly what they asked him not to do.

 

[Green Machine]

of course they didn't put in a bid. Gallop never let them as he did exactly what they asked him not to do.

I reckon it had more to do with the court action that Stokes initiated against News Ltd, the ARL, the NRL and host of others. I reckon Channel 7 were not interested in the NRL rights and were putting all the eggs in the one basket to get the AFL rights back off Channel 9. Channel 7 let a few of those others out of their court action including Channel 10 and the AFL to get those AFL rights.
Personally, I hope the FTA rights are split over the networks and Channel 7 gets a piece. I don’t think Wilson and Rothfield add anything to the issue by putting out mistruths about past rights,

 

[DeBroncos]

Give it to the highest bidder that also a) keeps to its contactual obligations in terms of telecasting the game at reasonable hours in all States and Territories b) doesn't employ Phil Gould and Ray Warren.

Doesnt employ Phil Gould will be good Enoughfor me

 

[typicalfan]

the NRL didn't let them. they wanted to

Seven seeks chance to bid for NRL rights

It wasn't just Rugby League either this was a bigger issue than the NRL. Channel 7 and Stokes had many many lawsuits mostly about Kerry Packer and Channel 9/Foxtel trying to kill off the C7 network that was attempted to be set up at the time. Lots of programs and sports were filed against.

 

[Cumberland Throw]

When are we going to get the anti siphoning decision.. This will have a massive on everything... AFL looks like having Live MNF on FTA accross the country being on the GO/ONE/7Two in the non core states.. If they get this it will be awesome for RL.

FNF can be nationally live and in Sydney we could have viewers choice.. The third super sat game could be shown live at 7.30 on One/GO/7two for eg...

Fox will be the loser if this gets approved... any comp alligned with FOX should be worried... Oh wait..

 

[Perth Red]

What do people think the min increase we would need to get us out of the hole were in?

I'd suggest a min of $125mill+ a year on top of our current deal. $6mill grants to each club + 2 new clubs. Some $'s to keep Storm afloat, some $'s to help the Reds get established, some extra $'s to develop grass roots and approx 8% increase to run the NRL.

I wonder what hope we have of getting that much?

 

[zombie jesus]

NRL keen for early start on TV talks
GLENN JACKSON
July 30, 2010

NEGOTIATIONS for the most critical broadcasting deal in rugby league history are likely to begin early in the new year - almost two years before the current rights expire.

The Herald understands NRL powerbrokers can begin their much-anticipated discussions with the current free-to-air broadcaster, Channel Nine, from January 1. It is believed Nine has a 90-day window in which only that network can be part of the talks - after which the NRL can then start negotiating with the other networks.

Given the strength of the game and the uncertainty over salary cap changes - as well as the awareness that the AFL's television rights deal expires a year before that of the NRL - it is likely the rugby league figures involved in the negotiations will push for a start as early after New Year's Day as possible.

''There's a strong argument of, why wouldn't you test the market,'' a key figure involved in the current discussions over the new rights said.

But that course is still not guaranteed, especially as the federal government has not revealed any details of its proposed anti-siphoning laws.

The federal election on August 21 could have a bearing on the NRL's new deal, or at least how soon the talks can begin. If the Labor government is re-elected, it is likely that the anti-siphoning laws would be confirmed by January 1, but should Tony Abbott be victorious, the negotiations could be delayed. It is unlikely discussions will begin before the anti-siphoning legislation is passed.

NRL chief executive David Gallop suggested yesterday that the talks over the broadcasting deal were likely to begin early in the new year.

''Given the pressure on our clubs and players, and the mounting interest from the broadcasters, we would expect to take up the opportunity as early as our contract allows for,'' he said. ''We need to be conscious that all of the rights come up at the end of 2012, and we want a clear opportunity to auction those rights to provide the best outcome for the game.''

Gallop has already confirmed the code would consider breaking up the rights into representative, premiership and perhaps finals bundles.

The NRL is hoping to significantly better its six-year, $500 million broadcast rights deal with Channel Nine and Fox Sports, partly to ease player unrest over wages - a key reason the NRL will be keen to start negotiations as soon as possible.

Once a figure is finalised, and once they know how much money will be flowing into the game, and when, officials can consider increases to the salary cap.

It appears the only chance of any new deal beginning in 2012, rather than 2013, would depend on Nine retaining the rights.

But if, for instance, Channel Seven wins a piece of the broadcasting pie, the NRL might be able to negotiate - or at least ask - for advance payments, which could lead to a rise in the salary cap before the Nine deal finishes at the end of 2012.

If the NRL is not happy with the discussions, it can suspend them and re-commence at a later date.

The bosses of the 16 NRL clubs are today expected to be briefed on the issue by the sub-committee which has been discussing the deal.

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...r-early-start-on-tv-talks-20100729-10y0h.html

 

[Brutus]

I just hope with this new deal, no stupid 'first and last rights' type crap is included.

 

[oldmancraigy]

What do people think the min increase we would need to get us out of the hole were in?

I'd suggest a min of $125mill+ a year on top of our current deal. $6mill grants to each club + 2 new clubs. Some $'s to keep Storm afloat, some $'s to help the Reds get established, some extra $'s to develop grass roots and approx 8% increase to run the NRL.

I wonder what hope we have of getting that much?

Current deal = $500 over 6 = over $83mill per year.

If 2 new teams are part of the negotiations, then by default there will be an extra game each week = + 12.5% exposure.

even allowing for a minimal CPI factor of only 2% per year, that increase (over 6 years) = over 12%. (we'll take 12 to be ultra conservative)

So a 24.5% increase on the current deal would be $103.75 million per season. Basically THAT number is exactly the same deal as we got last time. And it's widely touted that the rights were undersold last time. One would hope that we push for a better 'equivalent' deal from last time, which with increases should take us past $125million without too much problem.

So to get to $125 million shouldn't be hard PROVIDED they negotiate the rights properly.

If Nine/ Fox can cough up $140 mill in the negotiating window, then I think they should jump on it for a 3-4 year period!

 

[applesauce]

The federal election on August 21 could have a bearing on the NRL's new deal, or at least how soon the talks can begin. If the Labor government is re-elected, it is likely that the anti-siphoning laws would be confirmed by January 1, but should Tony Abbott be victorious, the negotiations could be delayed. It is unlikely discussions will begin before the anti-siphoning legislation is passed.

What to do....?