Doc and El D, you boys seem to be pretty knowledgeable with the TV deal we are about to begin negotiating, what are you honestly expecting $$$$ wise for us this time around?
Well there's a load of variables (which expansion teams, 9th game time slots, internet stream/download rights, media exposure, conflicts of interest, additional rights for 2nd tier comps, splitting up games into distinct packages, season scheduling, forcing News/Fox to pay up, competitive auction et al).
I do believe that with a 9th game we are capable (and better get) at least $850 - $900 million for 5 years. I also think if we show some unified foresight and tenacity, $1050 million is achievable.
Right as we speak, the NRL should be whispering in the network's ears as the AFL negotiations conclude. The question is: are they?
Doc, you wouldnt have the ratings of when monday night games used to be on fta?
No bit before my time, I'm sorry.
Also do you have any projections/figures on the storm on how they rate when on fta in melbourne?
It's such a rare event but they were spiking 200,000+ at one point which is more than triple what the AFL usually pull in Sydney for Swans games. Though it's hard to tell what impact last season will have now if fringe viewers will drop away.
There is an audience for Rugby League in Melbourne. With regular live coverage on say Go! or Gem! they could be drawing 50,000-125,000 for non-Storm games, bigger than the usual digital TV audience. It's also a similar story in Perth. We need that coverage written into the next deal.
Here is a hypothetical for you.
The AFL and NRL are obviously in direct competition.
So just say the AFL in constructing a deal with Ch 7 and Ch10 said we will compromise some cash in this deal and in return you can not broadcast any NRL matches.
That would leave Nine the only FTA bidder for the NRL TV rights. Why then, as the only bidder, would Nine pay the NRL anything more than they currently pay in order to broadcast the NRL?
Therefore the AFL win by collecting more cash and leave their rivals the NRL unable to lift salaries and putting further pressure on its abaility to attract/retain players....
Unlikely obviously, but just a hypothetical thought...
Well I wouldn't put it past the AFL to try this. It'd be like the Qantas incident (trying to use their muslce to gain exclusivity).
If it were ever proven - which as we've seen these things almost always leak out in the long run - then I'd think about the ramifications.
Number 1: anti siphoning would be killed. it would be open slather next time
Number 2: the government will react to save face by severing support for the networks implicated and to distance themselves from the AFL
Number 3: Channel 9's CVC will sue the AFL for loss of income
Number 4: News/NRL will have an opportunity to sue 7/10/AFL for loss of income and potentially also the government for structuring an anti-siphoning arrangement that favoured the AFL
Number 5: this will go on for years, millions will be spent
I doubt it would happened though. After Stokes lawsuit with News he knows the financial impact of this and would be smart enough to tell the AFL to get f**ked.
