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

Who would you like to see get the rights providing the price is right?

  • Seven

    Votes: 57 20.5%
  • Nine

    Votes: 49 17.6%
  • Ten

    Votes: 110 39.6%
  • Rights split between FTA channels

    Votes: 147 52.9%

  • Total voters
    278
Status
Not open for further replies.

BDGS

Bench
Messages
4,102
Yeh it will be idiot considering it is one of the most popular games in Australia, the only reason it won't be as big as the AFL is because the NRL don't no how to get a great deal, but mark my words it is still going to be huge.

League is the most watched winter sport going by the TV ratings. They beat the AFL before we played our Granf Final and the NRL won the PayTV battle by a knock out. Something like 74 out of the top 100 most watched on payTV was League and 11 went to cricket.

Gallop isn't a stupid man but the NRL won't need as much as the AFL to get more from it. They just need to be close, then up the teams and make it a more national competition and the NRL will come out winners. If they aren't already.

AFL thinks binary, NRL thinks reality.
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
Yes, but if 7 and 10 blow their budget on the AFL, they have nothing to offer the NRL. Why would 9 offer anything close to $800m if there is nobody else to outbid? What options would the NRL have? Move it all to Foxtel?

the NRL would know that 9 have the cash because of what they offered the AFL and they would also know they need sport

7 and 10 wouldn't blow their budget on one sport
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
http://www.backpagelead.com.au/afl/3101-nine-has-rethink-on-afl-rights-

Nine has rethink on AFL rights

Channel Nine is having second thoughts about whether to bid for the AFL broadcast rights, throwing in doubt the league's much-trumpeted ambition of fetching $1 billion for its new five-year TV deal.

A change in the Nine network’s hierarchy this month has forced a review of the station’s spending priorities on sport. At the top of that list are the broadcast rights to the NRL, also due for review in 2012, and the Olympic Games in 2012 and 2016. But the commitment to AFL remains in limbo.

If Nine chose not to get involved in the auction process – leaving the Seven-Ten cabal and pay-TV network Foxtel to bid in a competitive vacuum – then the AFL’s price for the rights would presumably drop dramatically.

A senior Nine executive told BackPageLead: ‘’We haven’t decided if we’re interested in bidding or not. The Nine network would not pay a silly amount of money for the rights. We’ll have a look at things and if we’re not in the ballpark, we won’t get involved.

‘’No-one should get too excited about the idea we’re absolutely dying to get the AFL rights, because that’s not necessarily right.

‘’I’m not saying we’re not interested – but we need to find out what the terms are, and what the ballpark figure is. We’re not going to get involved in a silly bidding war.’’

The AFL were the beneficiaries five years ago of exactly that - a spirited bidding war – when Seven went head-to-head with Nine.

Nine’s boss Kerry Packer, almost on his death bed, ramped up the pressure on Seven-Ten by raising the stakes to an unimagined level. But Kerry Stokes matched the offer, and more. In the end, the five-year deal fetched $780 million, of which pay-TV network Foxtel contributed an estimated $225 million.

It has been widely tipped that the new deal, to run from 2012-2016, will bring in $1 billion.

But the Nine executive, who did not want to be named, said the AFL’s hopes of securing that amount – a figure touted again by prominent media buyer Harold Mitchell in a newspaper column at the weekend – were ‘ambitious’. A figure closer to $850 million was thought to be more realistic.

Having Nine involved in the bidding process would be very much in the AFL's interests but, as yet, there had been no entreaties from the league. ‘’They’d obviously like us to be involved but they’ve not offered any sweeteners, no. I have seen no evidence of that,’’ said the executive.

Nine is traveling well in the ratings on the back of its NRL coverage in the rugby league heartland of Brisbane, Sydney and Newcastle. Rugby league remains the highest-rating sport on Australian television.

Nine also fares well in Melbourne through its news service. So in four of the biggest TV centres in the country, Nine has a strong market share.

This has given rise to the question within the Nine hierarchy about whether they really need the AFL rights. ''On that basis, no, we don't need the AFL rights,'' the executive said.

Another reason Nine might want to keep its powder dry is to again secure the NRL rights, with both Ten and Seven reportedly ready to enter the fray this time around and threaten Nine's stronghold.

These developments come on the eve of the Federal Government making a momentous decision about its anti-siphoning laws; which sporting events will remain on free-to-air television and the rules which free-to-air networks must abide by if they win the rights to broadcast these events.

The anti-siphoning list, which "protects" 1300 sporting events for the free-to-air networks, already allows Foxtel to buy four AFL games each round from the rights holders, Seven and Ten.
 

Goddo

Bench
Messages
4,257
Thats good news if true.

I still want to see our game split into packages to create a bidding war - more likely to occur if its in affordable chunks to each station.

Also, having our code promoted on more than one channel is advantageous. This coupled with a "use it or loose it" clause in the new Anti-siphoning legislation puts the NRL, not the AFL, in the box seat for the $1b price tag.
 

smithie

Juniors
Messages
527
Thats good news if true.

I still want to see our game split into packages to create a bidding war - more likely to occur if its in affordable chunks to each station.

Agreed.

Example

NRL Regular Season - 9 games per week (assuming two new teams are added)

Package 1 - Fri - 2 games - live 7:30pm + delayed 9:30pm
Package 2 - Sat - 2 games - live 5:30pm + live 7:30pm
Package 3 - Sat - 1 game - live 7:30pm
Package 4 - Sun - 2 games - live 2:00pm + live 4:00pm
Package 5 - Sun - 1 game - live 6:30pm
Package 6 - Mon - 1 game - live 7:00pm
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
Agreed.

Example

NRL Regular Season - 9 games per week (assuming two new teams are added)

Package 1 - Fri - 2 games - live 7:30pm + delayed 9:30pm
Package 2 - Sat - 2 games - live 5:30pm + live 7:30pm
Package 3 - Sat - 1 game - live 7:30pm
Package 4 - Sun - 2 games - live 2:00pm + live 4:00pm
Package 5 - Sun - 1 game - live 6:30pm
Package 6 - Mon - 1 game - live 7:00pm

It's likely going to be 4 FTA games with 9 games total - so the combination on free to air would be:

1) 2 Friday games, 1 Saturday game, 1 Sunday game
2) 1 Friday game, 1 Saturday game, 2 Sunday games
3) 2 Friday games, 2 Sunday games

Nine's on a good wicket with the two Friday night games allowing them to maximise their audiences in NSW & QLD. The only way there'd be 1 game on a Friday is if 7 picks up that night's coverage.

I believe 2 Sunday afternoon games back to back do more than a stand alone Saturday game. On a Sunday with 4 teams, 4 sets of fans and up to 4 cities to cater too, the NRL stands to get a massive follow on audience watching both (and leading into 6pm news). The AFL can't do that unless they 2 games in 12-6pm block (which is unlikely).


Package 1 -

2 Friday games - both live at 7:30pm
One on the FTA main & one on the FTA digital - then swap over at 9:30pm - game Picks #1 & #6
+ City vs Country, ANZAC Test Match
+ 3 Friday & 1 Saturday finals

Package 2 -
3 Saturday games - 5:00pm (pref NZ), 7:00pm, 7:00pm or 9:00 (pref WA)
1 Sunday game - 12:00pm (pref NZ) or 6:30pm (pref WA)
1 Monday game - 7:00pm
- game Picks #3, #4, #7, #8 & #9

Package 3 -
2 Sunday game - 2:00pm & 4:00pm
live back to back on FTA main & on the FTA digital
- game Picks #2 & #5
+ Week 1 Sunday Final & 3 Saturday Finals

Or it should be noted that if 10 wins Sunday and has games at 1pm & 3pm - then the Foxtel Sunday game would air at 11am or 5pm

Package 4 -
World 7's (bring it back), Four Nations & World Cup

Package 5 -
World Club Challenge, Charity Shield, NRL All Stars

Package 6 -
Alternating agreement between two networks showing Friday & Sunday:

One year - State of Origin II & Grand Final
Next year - State of Origin I & III
 

Green Machine

First Grade
Messages
5,844
Interesting debate coming up in the parliament:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/labor-mps-fear-end-game-for-free-sport-20101116-17vzi.html
Labor MPs fear end game for free sport

Phillip Coorey CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT

November 17, 2010
LABOR backbenchers are growing jittery at the prospect of their constituents having to pay to watch sport they now view free of charge under long-awaited changes to the anti-siphoning list to be unveiled next week.
The Communications Minister, Stephen Conroy, who will take a final plan to cabinet on Monday, was lobbied again yesterday by free-to-air TV executives who were in Canberra for a Free TV Australia function.
It has been known for some time that under the changes the free TV stations will be allowed to broadcast sport live on their digital channels such as 7Mate, One HD and Gem.
If they choose not to, then under a use-it-or-lose-it provision pay TV would be able to televise the event.
Because this arrangement would heavily favour free TV, the list of events that are now off limits to pay TV will be changed so pay TV can bid against the free TV network for the first rights to more events.
The Herald understands that second tier sporting events such as the French Open tennis will be taken off the anti-siphoning list but the Australian Open will not.
The British Open golf and Wimbledon, both of which Channel Nine chose not to show live this year, may also be subject to change. But the real concerns remain with the AFL and, to a lesser extent, the NRL.
A handful of backbenchers raised questions in a caucus meeting yesterday, including the South Australian MP Steve Georganas.
He sought and received an assurance from Senator Conroy that World Cup soccer would stay on free-to-air.
Other MPs who did not wish to be identified said it was a big concern in their electorates.
One said people in his seat were generally not well-off, to the point that they rarely went to the cinema and did not subscribe to pay TV. For them, a night in front of the football was their main entertainment. ''Mate, it's a huge issue,'' he said.
Another said voters raised concerns about AFL at a recent ''street corner'' function. ''People are talking about it,'' he said.
At present, channels Seven and Ten have the rights to the AFL but sell a number of games to Fox.
Under the changes being considered, Fox would be able to bid for the rights to four games, meaning they would be off limits to those without pay television.
''They are fighting over every game of next year's fixtures,'' a source intimate with the negotiations said.
A free TV source expressed fear that Senator Conroy would give pay TV the right to bid on the best NRL matches.
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...stays-on-free-tv/story-fn6atwd0-1225954628176

Premium football 'stays on free TV'

* James Chessell and Lanai Vasek
* From: The Australian
* November 17, 2010 12:00AM

NRL chief executive David Gallop says free-to-air television networks will retain access to premium matches if proposed changes to anti-siphoning rules are approved by cabinet.

The NRL and AFL are backing plans by Communications Minister Stephen Conroy to allow pay-TV operator Foxtel to bid directly for games it sources now from FTA commercial networks.

The current anti-siphoning rules, which were discussed in caucus yesterday and are due to be considered by cabinet next week, give the FTA networks first right to bid for all AFL and NRL games.

The major football codes say that allowing pay-TV to bid directly for games would increase the amount of revenue generated from the sale of lucrative broadcast rights and allow them to better fund grassroots organisations. The FTA networks argue the codes could be tempted to give blockbuster games to Foxtel.

News Limited, publisher of The Australian, is a shareholder in Foxtel and the NRL.

"Our track record indicates that we we will always have high quality games on free-to-air and we've indicated to the government that wanting to introduce some more flexibility into the system won't change that," Mr Gallop said.

Senator Conroy met with FTA chief executives at a cocktail party yesterday evening organised by lobby group Free TV to mark the digital switchover.

He has described as a "nonsense" suggestions that blockbuster AFL games would be lost to FTA television.

"The public interest needs to be served," Free TV chairman Wayne Goss said.

"I would have thought that they (pay-TV) would have an obligation to their shareholders to try and get the best games so isn't it common sense that people who don't have pay-TV would miss out."

Senator Conroy is also considering giving FTA networks the right to show listed sport on digital multi-channels.

Exactly how games would be divided between FTA and pay-TV is yet to be resolved.

The FTA networks believe the federal government should give a guarantee that premium games will not go to pay-TV in the new legislation.

There is speculation Mr Conroy might have to roll over the current anti-siphoning list, which expires on December 31, because the new legislation will be delayed until next year.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
67,163
They need to introduce a use it or lose it clause if they are going to demand fta for events. It's wrong that they should tag some codes/events as must be FTA then allow the FTA station with the rights not to show it live. Basically they need a show it live nationally or it can be shown by Pay TV live.
 

smithie

Juniors
Messages
527
They need to introduce a use it or lose it clause if they are going to demand fta for events. It's wrong that they should tag some codes/events as must be FTA then allow the FTA station with the rights not to show it live. Basically they need a show it live nationally or it can be shown by Pay TV live.

Completely agree. Post of the day.
 

Perth Tiger

Bench
Messages
3,133
They need to introduce a use it or lose it clause if they are going to demand fta for events. It's wrong that they should tag some codes/events as must be FTA then allow the FTA station with the rights not to show it live. Basically they need a show it live nationally or it can be shown by Pay TV live.

Bingo
 

BunniesMan

Immortal
Messages
33,700
They need to introduce a use it or lose it clause if they are going to demand fta for events. It's wrong that they should tag some codes/events as must be FTA then allow the FTA station with the rights not to show it live. Basically they need a show it live nationally or it can be shown by Pay TV live.
They are introducing use it or lose it. I have no problem with that, the issue is with their now being less off limits to pay tv in the first place. Ideally free tv would get first go at everything, and whatever they didn't want would go to pay tv.
 

Goddo

Bench
Messages
4,257
They are introducing use it or lose it. I have no problem with that, the issue is with their now being less off limits to pay tv in the first place. Ideally free tv would get first go at everything, and whatever they didn't want would go to pay tv.

I think that is wrong.

Without the competition between FTA and Pay TV stations the NRL and AFL wouldn't get fair reasonable deals - they will be undercut if Pay TV know they are guarenteed exclusive access to so many games - its too tempting for colusion to occur - we need the market forces to dictate value, not a back room deal between Telstra/News and Channel 9.

This is why there needs to be an "A" list which must be on FTA and a "B" list which is open to bidding from anyone (possibly including internet based sources like II Net, Big Pond, YouTube et cetera in future)

They need balance between Market forces to generate revenue and providing content for free.
 
Last edited:

jargan83

Coach
Messages
14,916
Apologies if this has been posted elsewhere.

Apologies also for the AFL related nature, but it comes from the Herald Sun and was unable to find it on the Telegraph website

HIGH-profile sporting events will be split into an A and B list under broadcasting rules to be released next week.
A-list events will include the Melbourne Cup and AFL Grand Final and must be shown live on the main channel of free-to-air TV stations.

Events on the B-list will also be protected from pay TV snapping up the rights. Free-to-air stations will have the first right to bid but will have the option to broadcast on either their main channel or digital channels.
This would give a TV station the flexibility to switch away from a live sports event to the news or other programs and continue broadcasting the game on its digital channel.

About 70 per cent of households have a digital TV and these channels include the Ten Network's sports channel ONE, the Seven Network's 7Two and 7Mate, and Nine's Go and Gem.


The Herald Sun has also learned that the Collingwood-Essendon Anzac Day clash will be one of the AFL blockbuster matches that will remain on free-to-air TV, as well as Friday night games.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy told Labor MPs in a meeting yesterday that "major AFL blockbusters would stay on free-to-air".




The current rules, known as the anti-siphoning list, expire on December 31.

There has been fierce lobbying by free-to-air TV networks, pay TV including Foxtel - which is 25 per cent owned by the Herald Sun's publisher News Ltd - and sporting organisations such as the AFL.

The list of protected sports is expected to cover about 30 categories across 12 sports.

This includes the Olympic Games, Commonwealth Games, Ashes Test cricket, Test cricket played in Australia, some Twenty20 cricket games, the Australian Open tennis, and major golf, netball and rugby league games.

Australia's World Cup soccer qualifying games will be added to the free-to-air list after 2013. The AFL finals will remain protected and the existing practice of four AFL matches each round on free-to-air and four on pay TV will be maintained.

Pay TV may gain the right to bid directly for games instead of having to buy them from free-to-air TV.

A big change will be interstate, particularly Sydney and Brisbane, where some AFL games are not shown until 10pm or midnight. The new rules will allow them to be live on digital channels.


Events likely to be on A-list
Melbourne Cup
AFL Grand Final
Rugby League grand final
Australian Open tennis finals

Events likely to be on B-list
Four AFL matches each round, including Friday night games and blockbusters such as Collingwood-Essendon Anzac day match.
Ashes Test cricket played in Australia or England
Test cricket played in Australia
Possibly Twenty20 cricket
Olympic Games
Commonwealth Games
World Cup soccer tournament and Australia's qualifying matches from 2014
English FA Cup final
Bathurst 1000 motor racing
Australian Formula 1 Grand Prix
Rugby world cup
Wimbledon tennis finals
Australian Masters and Australian Open golf tournaments
Netball games involving senior Australian team

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/na...n-free-to-air-tv/story-e6frf7l6-1225954715915

I bolded that last part because I assume the NRL can then take advantage of it in Vic, SA and WA states to get NRL on a decent time
 

jc155776

Coach
Messages
13,517
Siphoning laws damage Rugby Leagues ability to get full dollar value from our game.

If it was free for all then prices would be pushed up. The NRL could still choose if they wish to keep games on FTA for exposure.

Some people think that the abolition of anti siphoning laws means no sport on FTA. Rubbish. All it does is give sporting organisations more choice as to who can show their product.

Currently Rugby League viewers are treated by chumps by Channel 9. Bring in Fox to challange them for the prime time games and watch them lift their game and deepen their pockets to keep our product.
 

applesauce

Bench
Messages
3,573
No easy answer to the $1b question
Roy Masters
November 20, 2010


The NRL and AFL should receive approximately the same rights fees as they generate roughly the same amount of money.

A senior TV executive recently told NRL boss David Gallop of the AFL's expectation of its next broadcasting contract: ''No one at the AFL wants to accept the fact that they got hit on the arse by a rainbow with their last contract.''

The comment was in reference to Channel Nine's then owner, Kerry Packer, making a deathbed offer of $780 million over five years for the rights, a sum that a Channel Seven-Ten consortium was forced to equal under its first-and-last rights deal with the AFL.

The AFL is demanding $1 billion for its 2012-16 contract but negotiations have stalled while the football codes and TV networks await the announcement of changes to the Federal Government's anti-siphoning laws. The NRL is also seeking $1b, based on superior viewer numbers.

However, the comment made by the TV executive to Gallop could also be interpreted as a message the NRL should temper its own expectations, insofar as a leap from the existing payment of $90m a year to $200m is a significant jump.

Yet advertising revenue figures obtained by the Herald from Sydney sources indicate both codes generate about the same amount of money from commercials shown during games, which means - assuming broadcasting costs are similar - both codes should receive approximately the same rights fees.

Three Sydney experts calculate the AFL's eight games a week yield $100m from free-to-air TV, with pay TV adding a further $15m.

They estimate NRL matches shown in Sydney and Brisbane write $70m of commercials on Nine and a further $15m in the regional networks but admit these figures could be higher because of uncertainty over advertising revenue written on Nine's second Friday night game.

The second match (Nine typically beams a Queensland club game into Sydney and a NSW club game into Brisbane) is on delay, and therefore allows the network to slot multiple advertisements into its telecast. Nine's Sunday afternoon game is also on one-hour delay, allowing the network to load up with commercials.

According to Sydney media buyers, rugby league also generates $15m in advertising from pay TV, the same as AFL, a surprising figure considering Foxtel shows five NRL games a week, and AFL three.

Barry O'Brien, the chief executive of PHD Network, said of the AFL's total of $115m and NRL's $100m in advertising: ''These figures seem to be a true reflection of what each of the networks write in advertising revenues for both of the nation's major winter sports.''

However, there are agendas being played in this exercise, with a Melbourne media buyer saying the amount of advertising written was heavily skewed to the AFL.

Based on 13 minutes of commercials per hour in every AFL game, the advertising revenue raised on Seven and Ten in the six metropolitan capitals was cited as $220m and $45m in the regional networks. Pay TV wrote $20m, for an AFL total of $285m.

NRL games, according to the source, generated only $60m on Nine in metropolitan areas; $20m in the regionals and $20m on pay TV.

The wide gap between an AFL total of $285m and an NRL total of $100m is at odds with an observation the nation's leading media buyer, Harold Mitchell, made in a recent Fairfax column when he said he expected the AFL to win $1b at its next rights deal, and the NRL possibly the same.

It also contradicts the main reason given by AFL chief Andrew Demetriou when explaining why the AFL has been so desperate to set up teams on the Gold Coast and Western Sydney.

Demetriou has regularly justified the northern expansion on the basis that nearly 60 per cent of advertising is written in NSW and Queensland.

Given the fact the NRL, which is essentially a game followed in these two states, has eclipsed AFL with a cumulative national audience of 120m this year, compared with the AFL's approximate 115m, it can be safely assumed NRL games attract a significant share of advertising in NSW and Queensland.

The AFL Gold Coast Suns, which enter the competition next season, and the Western Sydney Giants, which begin the following year, will not attract advertising dollars in the north for some time.

For this reason, the AFL is looking to pay TV to provide most of the increase in its hoped for $1b broadcasting contract beginning in 2012. But Foxtel will want better quality AFL games from the anticipated changes. While pay TV is installed in 30 per cent of homes nationally, it is in only in 26 per cent of Melbourne homes, compared with 34 per cent of Sydney homes.

Whereas the NRL's third-best game each week is allocated to Foxtel on Monday nights - generating the highest ratings on pay TV - Seven and Ten effectively on-sell to Foxtel the AFL's fifth-, sixth-, seventh- and eighth-best games.

The Herald revealed this year the AFL and Communications Minister Stephen Conroy were close to agreement on the AFL allocating the third- and fourth-best game to pay TV but this has been denied by the AFL. In any case, who decides what are the best games each round? The AFL? The broadcasters? The government?

The NRL allows Nine and Fox Sports to select their games, where Nine picks one, two and five, with Fox taking picks three, five, six, seven and eight.

Gallop said the choices made by the networks did not necessarily mirror the positions of the competing teams on the premiership ladder.

''It's a very subjective judgment what constitutes the best games when seeking to maximise ratings, as well as showing the best performing teams,'' he said. ''Clearly, there are teams that rate well, irrespective of their position on the ladder. The Broncos [are] a prime example.''

The greatest fear of the football codes and pay TV is the possibility Senator Conroy allows free-to-air TV to buy all games and divert all but the best to the new digital channels.

This is unlikely since it would kill off the Packer-Murdoch-owned Fox Sports but with the anti-siphoning list expiring at the end of the year, and the Greens and independents threatening the new legislation, there might be no list.

No prohibitions of any kind would suit subscription TV. While this would deliver NRL and AFL great riches, the sports are not so short-sighted.

Gallop said: ''Pay TV provides fans with live games, and they pay for it, but free-to-air TV is in every home in Australia, and you need to be there with your high-quality games.''
 
Last edited:

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
I've been saying for a while. The ad revenue in regional NSW & QLD exceeds WA, SA, NT, TAS & VIC outside Melbourne - combined.

AFL - 4 games on FTA + 1 simulcast = $100 million
- 4 games on Fox - 1 simulcast = $15 million

NRL - 3 games on FTA = $85 million
- 5 games on Fox = $15 million <-- this we need an answer to, as Rugby League has 80% of the Top 100

If NRL had 4 FTA games though, it would be generating $110 to $115 million on FTA - this is why a back to back Sunday game - that retains both audiences - will be massive.

If one FTA network can get Friday picks #1 & #5, another FTA can get Sunday #2 & 6 and Fox can get #3, #4, #7, #8 & #9 - all parties would benefit.
 

Edwahu

Bench
Messages
3,697
The 285 million quoted by the Melbourne bloke seems a bit dodge. I think that would mean AFL is supposedly generating close to 10% of all annual TV advertising revenue in Australia.
 

nrlnrl

First Grade
Messages
6,842
"The NRL allows Nine and Fox Sports to select their games, where Nine picks one, two and five, with Fox taking picks three, five, six, seven and eight."

good to see bitter old Roy is as accurate as ever in his boring rants
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top