The TV rights thread

[bobmar28]

I just hope there is at least more game on FTA with the next deal.

1) A second Sunday afternoon game on before the current 3pm game to make Sunday arvo football a doubleheader.

or

2) A Sunday or Monday night game. (Probably on ONEHD so as to not interfere with other primetime viewing.)

What about Saturday? A the moment there's nothing on Saturday but AFL.

 

[griff]

What about Saturday? A the moment there's nothing on Saturday but AFL.

I agree.

It's not just something to put on Saturday afternoon against AFL, just as important is the free kick this gives AFL on the Saturday night news and sports shows.

 

[saint pebba]

I can't see how the AFL could get any more than 180million a year.
League should get approx 140-150 million a year.

If this was the case I could see the salary cap rising to approx 6million a year which would enable us to keep more players in the NRL

 

[Lambretta]

he lives in his own little world

Gallop has been saying this on radio when questioned over why we get f**k all for the rights

he's already making excuses and must go

Demetriou talks his game up seeking $1billion

Gallop talks us down and is only confident he can get more than the last deal when we got unders

has anybody shown him the recent TV figures?

does he realise AFL only goes into 5 cities because they wrote it into their contract?

Gallop won't even make 9 honour their deal by showing games before midnight in Melbourne. he came out with his "use it or lose it" demand and then did diddly when 9 gave him the bird

I dont want to defend Gallop because he really should be talking up Rugby League at every opportunity, but I dont think his comments are aimed at the people he is negotiating with, rather he is voicing what he has probably already been told by the other side when negotiating.

ie, that he's managing the expectations of Rugby League fans, rather than giving easy ammunition to the people he's negotiating with.

We all expect Rugby League to earn $1billion from television because AFL got that. We believe that we have the better product, so if Gallop doesnt get more than then from our point of view, he's failed.

But we should recognise the World doesnt work like that. The price is based partially on demand but also upon having multiple networks with deep pockets willing to outbid each other for the rights.

Gallop cant create those conditions, so much of what League gets is beyond him, regardless of what he says in public. The Networks know what's available and the NRL will have a pretty good idea of what will be tabled.

It's how the power brokers in the League World react to the news of the size of the deal - THAT'S what Gallop needs to be worried about and that is what he seems to be focussing on.

 

[perverse]

I dont want to defend Gallop because he really should be talking up Rugby League at every opportunity, but I dont think his comments are aimed at the people he is negotiating with, rather he is voicing what he has probably already been told by the other side when negotiating.

ie, that he's managing the expectations of Rugby League fans, rather than giving easy ammunition to the people he's negotiating with.

We all expect Rugby League to earn $1billion from television because AFL got that. We believe that we have the better product, so if Gallop doesnt get more than then from our point of view, he's failed.

But we should recognise the World doesnt work like that. The price is based partially on demand but also upon having multiple networks with deep pockets willing to outbid each other for the rights.

Gallop cant create those conditions, so much of what League gets is beyond him, regardless of what he says in public. The Networks know what's available and the NRL will have a pretty good idea of what will be tabled.

It's how the power brokers in the League World react to the news of the size of the deal - THAT'S what Gallop needs to be worried about and that is what he seems to be focussing on.

sensible, well thought out post. whilst i'm not gallops biggest fan, i think you've hit the nail on the head. he is trying to manage the expectations of the public based on what he's already been told (numerous times, i'm sure) in negotiating. gallop can only do so much to manipulate market forces that are largely beyond his control.

these opinions have no place amongst the tinfoil hat brigade that is active in this thread, though.

 

[El Diablo]

I dont want to defend Gallop because he really should be talking up Rugby League at every opportunity, but I dont think his comments are aimed at the people he is negotiating with, rather he is voicing what he has probably already been told by the other side when negotiating.

ie, that he's managing the expectations of Rugby League fans, rather than giving easy ammunition to the people he's negotiating with.

We all expect Rugby League to earn $1billion from television because AFL got that. We believe that we have the better product, so if Gallop doesnt get more than then from our point of view, he's failed.

But we should recognise the World doesnt work like that. The price is based partially on demand but also upon having multiple networks with deep pockets willing to outbid each other for the rights.

Gallop cant create those conditions, so much of what League gets is beyond him, regardless of what he says in public. The Networks know what's available and the NRL will have a pretty good idea of what will be tabled.

It's how the power brokers in the League World react to the news of the size of the deal - THAT'S what Gallop needs to be worried about and that is what he seems to be focussing on.

well he's keeping that a secret and not even telling clubs http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league/528801

i think the bloke has nfi

 

[butchmcdick]

well he's keeping that a secret and not even telling clubs http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league/528801

i think the bloke has nfi

If only you were running the game eh El

 

[El Diablo]

if only

 

[butchmcdick]

if only

:lol:

You have my full support mate let me tell you. It certainly wouldn't be dull

 

[perverse]

i reckon we'd hear about twice as much about AFL than we would about NRL if El D was in charge... rofl.

the AFL would have to put him on retainer, any publicity is good publicity in the long run, lol.

 

[Cletus]

I hope everyone knows that the $1billion for the AFL rights was put out there by Harold Mitchell, who worked for the AFL on the pricing of their bid. So the $1billion is basically the AFLs dream amount, not an independant figure.

 

[babyg]

So if rugby league has reached saturation point for foxtel and foxtel are paying roughly half per game as that of the free to airs, why are we not trying to maximise the number of games on FTA given that it is worth more. ie. bring in one or two saturday games on FTA. We really should be selling each timeslot to the highest bidder.

I agree perth should be a priority

 

[Bluebag]

Statistics, statistics and damn lies.

The AFL teams have stronger membership bases while we struggle with much lower levels. This means AFL teams attract stronger sponsorships as clubs market to their members and tend to spend more on AFL advertising and hence TV when they play. If we use the logic as posted about our ratings then why does Union get any money at all yet the powers that be that spend corporate dollars still spend plenty on this horrible game through the old boys network.

League cannot afford to expand for expansion sake at this stage and with many league clubs losing money the NRL needs to ensure existing clubs survive. Expansion will happen gradually and who cares about the GWS, it will be a money pit for the AFL as will the Gold coast and that will be good news to our game.

Anyone who has gone to an auction does not bid at the top and the AFL may price themselves out while the NRL represents better value by attracting more bids and if Gallop does split the rights that will be even better for the game. The AFL have a seperate Paytv channel which may cost subscribers extra (not sure) and if that is the case how many people subscribe so how much revenue do Fox get to recoup costs.

At the end of the day we can ask for more than the AFL but will we get it?

 

[Cletus]

The AFL have a seperate Paytv channel which may cost subscribers extra (not sure) and if that is the case how many people subscribe so how much revenue do Fox get to recoup costs.

They did have an extra channel (Fox Footy) but lost an absolute fortune on it so closed it down.

 

[Goddo]

How do you recon Benny Elias would go as CEO? Can't be worse than Gallop... I understand where gallop comes from when he talks facts and figures and how they effect the value, but he has to have a pair and stand up and act as if Rugby League is the greatest thing ever know to man, and push the boundaries.

We need a mongrel in charge, supported by a team of lawyers and number crunchers, someone like Kerry Packer working for us rather than against us...

 

[LESStar58]

Searle or Greenberg for mine.

 

[LESStar58]

it's a given that the NRL will not get anywhere near as much as the AFL. QUOTE]

Thank goodness thats finally cleared up.

Now explain it to the proletariat...........with some semblence of fact if you dont mind.

In the past they have... can't see it being any different this time around, that's all.

 

[Ray Mosters]

At the end of the day we can ask for more than the AFL but will we get it?

As has been pointed out a hundred times, we CANT get as much as AFL because we just dont have as many ads in our game. They have twice as many, and each of their broadcasts can generate twice the ad revenue. We have two extra rounds, Origin and more, but it still doesent ad up to the ads they are selling

So there are two choices

1. Increase the number of ads in NRL games that are going to FTA
2. Move more games to where ad revenue doesent matter...PayTV

I wonder whether we should move to a model the EPL uses, have all H+A games on Foxtel, and have just Origin and finals on TV.

Honestly thats the only way i could see us getting the 900 million that AFL is going to get.

 

[VictoryFC]

As has been pointed out a hundred times, we CANT get as much as AFL because we just dont have as many ads in our game. They have twice as many, and each of their broadcasts can generate twice the ad revenue. We have two extra rounds, Origin and more, but it still doesent ad up to the ads they are selling

So there are two choices

1. Increase the number of ads in NRL games that are going to FTA
2. Move more games to where ad revenue doesent matter...PayTV

I wonder whether we should move to a model the EPL uses, have all H+A games on Foxtel, and have just Origin and finals on TV.

Honestly thats the only way i could see us getting the 900 million that AFL is going to get.

That would never happen. And there's no way Foxtel would pay for all games anyway + FTA networks need high rating sport.

Also, how much do ads really matter? The EPL can sell its domestic rights for AUD $3.2 billion over 3 years, with no ads during game time. Ads add a bit sure, but ultimately it comes down to the reach of your audience, and how well you sell your product to the networks when it comes down to it.

 

[typicalfan]

As has been pointed out a hundred times, we CANT get as much as AFL because we just dont have as many ads in our game. They have twice as many, and each of their broadcasts can generate twice the ad revenue. We have two extra rounds, Origin and more, but it still doesent ad up to the ads they are selling

So there are two choices

1. Increase the number of ads in NRL games that are going to FTA
2. Move more games to where ad revenue doesent matter...PayTV

I wonder whether we should move to a model the EPL uses, have all H+A games on Foxtel, and have just Origin and finals on TV.

Honestly thats the only way i could see us getting the 900 million that AFL is going to get.

Eyes on the tele means more than this is the real world. The AFL don't use this as a marketing tool they use the reach they have via the 5 main cities and say that with two extra areas their deal should be more. The NRL can advertise in different ways than purely through TV ads, NRL grounds are better suited to having advertisements on them because they are smaller and rectangular, if used properly we could get big deals with sponsors for advertisements for the entire match plus tv advertisements. This is all part of the way it is viewed and this is part of the way the packages are done. The big importance for the next deal for us and highest priority is a broadcaster willing to show games in other states and increase exposure. Money going up is great too but we have to also be thinking of the ratings deal after the next one and continue to grow.