TV rights thread part 4

[El Diablo]

Take the cash now. Thats what the game needs.

The REAL value in copping what we have to now will come in 5 years time. Its not that long a period.

The ARLC will be truly free to do as they please. They won't even have to talk to Nein and Fox if they don't wish to do so. Its true we could have gone to 10, but Nine were still entitled to be informed of what we were doing next time around even if they weren't the incumbent and that would have been the case for another 15 years.

If there was no value in first and last rights, they wouldn't have been inserted in the first place.

some idiots would have proffered us to take less money and still be bound to 9 in 5 years and still bound to News Ltd until 2027 :crazy:

 

[Raiders_Premiers]

Mate look at the f**kin press conference.

Gynge had all the power

It'll take time for the ARLC to increase their assertiveness towards their partners. It doesn't happen overnight. A strong CEO coupled with equally strong right hand men will create a strong management culture, which will go a long way towards this.

If you watch the conference again you'll see that Gyngell is pretty pissed, and outed Elliott as a difficult negotiator.

 

[Perth Red]

some idiots would have proffered us to take less money and still be bound to 9 in 5 years and still bound to News Ltd until 2027 :crazy:

I don't think fans appreciate how much of an issue the first and last rights were, I certainly didn't think it made much difference. The fact the ARLC saw these as the key factor (after the $'s) of the deal would suggest they were actually a very big issue for the game. Have to trust the commission on this one.

 

[Ronnie Dobbs]

some idiots would have proffered us to take less money and still be bound to 9 in 5 years and still bound to News Ltd until 2027 :crazy:

I dunno if they're idiots mate.

Its a complex business situation. Not every man and his dog is exposed to those or looks at the big picture.

They WERE a big deal. Nine's coverage will improve over the next 5 years because it will have to. And besides, who knows, with the way the world is now, the next rights may decrease in real term value.

You take the money now. Plain and simple. They're smart operators these people. They'll have contingencies in place paid for with the cash they will have.

Seriously, we have been getting butt humped for ever. This is a good a first step to rectifying that as could have been put in place.

 

[El Diablo]

I dunno if they're idiots mate.

Its a complex business situation. Not every man and his dog is exposed to those or looks at the big picture.

They WERE a big deal. Nine's coverage will improve over the next 5 years because it will have to. And besides, who knows, with the way the world is now, the next rights may decrease in real term value.

You take the money now. Plain and simple. They're smart operators these people. They'll have contingencies in place paid for with the cash they will have.

Seriously, we have been getting butt humped for ever. This is a good a first step to rectifying that as could have been put in place.

it really is a great deal

the previous deal was pretty much identical except it was worth $500 million over 6 years and 9 and Fox retained first and last rights

 

[Diesel]

By taking the cash now, does that mean in 2017 when the rights are renegotiated that the IC will be demanding a 3pm kick off, finals of week 2 and 3 played on Sat night and Sun arvo and more day games?

It'll be interesting to see if what direction they take, tradition such as AFL or ratings and mainly night games. I hope they go traditional

 

[Perth Red]

Well if they have used the money wisely the game will be in a much stronger position to dictate terms next time and go for the deal that delivers best outcomes financially and for fans.

We still have a slight hope of a 9th game at some point in the next few years which the NRL can do whatever it likes with. They could make that a Sunday afternoon game as well if they wish seeing as TV aren't paying anything for it. If they wanted to test the water they could produce this game themseleves and have it available exclusively on the internet.

 

[Perth Red]

Re the contra money, what does this pay for? I am sick of seeing AFL ads on Fox and FTA showing them as "Australias game" with immigrants from around the world kicking a Sheridan, remote communities being converted to AFL fans, even Sydney advertised as an AFL city. Wonder what ads our marketing geniuses will come up with for NRL/RL? How many 1 minute adds does $100mill buy?

 

[Edwahu]

Re the contra money, what does this pay for? I am sick of seeing AFL ads on Fox and FTA showing them as "Australias game" with immigrants from around the world kicking a Sheridan, remote communities being converted to AFL fans, even Sydney advertised as an AFL city. Wonder what ads our marketing geniuses will come up with for NRL/RL? How many 1 minute adds does $100mill buy?

It's mostly the production costs for the games and all the filler for fox footy.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

....and endless ads on other Fox channels.

 

[Ron's_Mate]

Well if they have used the money wisely the game will be in a much stronger position to dictate terms next time ...

Dictating terms is what it's all about.

 

[some11]

Nine's coverage will improve over the next 5 years because it will have to.

haha good one.

 

[Perth Red]

Very interesting in uk union has become the first major sport to ditch pay tv for a deal with an Internet provider. Sign of things to come?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/sep/12/premiership-rugby-bt-deal-broadcast

 

[carlosthedwarf]

The NBL did it here too (their terrible deal with Ten for 1 game a week barely counts)

 

[Tiger-Sean]

Have we ha any update on the possibility of an online season pass for next season (all games live over the internet). How likely is it that this will happen?

 

[Ronnie Dobbs]

Very interesting in uk union has become the first major sport to ditch pay tv for a deal with an Internet provider. Sign of things to come?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/sep/12/premiership-rugby-bt-deal-broadcast

The NBL did it here too (their terrible deal with Ten for 1 game a week barely counts)

Have we ha any update on the possibility of an online season pass for next season (all games live over the internet). How likely is it that this will happen?

It will be tough here because, due to the simple tyranny of distance, our wireless internet services are not as good. Even inner city areas with ADSL2 would struggle with the bandwidth required to cast in reasonable quality over the net.

The NBN is the only ting that will fix this. Until then, the internet thing will be a gap filler.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...ts-rights-debate/story-e6frg996-1226473748535

Crucial changes force delay on television sports rights debate

by: David Crowe
From: The Australian
September 14, 2012 12:00AM

THE federal government has stalled a crucial vote on laws to decide the way major sports are shown live on television amid warnings last night the reforms had become a "dog's breakfast" that would not work.

The government has delayed a decision on the sports broadcasting laws in the face of confusion over how it could enforce a plan to take AFL and NRL games from free-to-air networks.

The rancorous debate raises questions over how the government could guarantee audiences get the best football games on free-to-air TV each week rather than having to switch to pay-TV.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy sought to gain more time to complete the reform as the Coalition and the Greens called for more clarity over how his proposed regime would work.

As the Greens press for a new Senate inquiry into the contentious reforms, Senator Conroy's department is said to be drafting as many as 20 amendments to its own bill in order to restart negotiations when parliament resumes next week.

Four years after the government said it would overhaul the rules, known as the anti-siphoning regime, the changes have been the subject of a formal review, two draft bills and a Senate inquiry in the build-up to this week's debate in the upper house.

Senator Conroy has assured voters that they will not be forced to pay to see the best football games or other live sport under a revised anti-siphoning list of events that must be shown on free-to-air TV networks.

But the minister has also promised a way to allow the "partial delisting" of football games so that the AFL and NRL gain more control over the way they sell rights to Foxtel, maximising the value of their rights.

Senator Conroy outlined his plans in November 2010 but said changes to the listing of NRL and AFL games would be made once there was a regulation in place with a mechanism to ensure the quality of the free-to-air games was agreed by stakeholders.

But the "quality mechanism" is yet to be revealed because it is to be defined by regulation rather than written into the legislation, prompting warnings from legislators that they cannot take the reform package on trust.

"The main sticking point is whether there is sufficient protection for AFL and NRL games," said one source. "They haven't come up with a draft that works. Nobody's seen a draft that delivers a result with any certainty."

The laws are central to sporting rights potentially worth billions although the AFL regime is set until 2016 and the NRL rights are locked in until 2017.

A spokesman for Greens Senator Richard di Natale said the Greens would send the bill to another short inquiry.

"There have been a number of amendments since the bill was introduced and how these amendments interact with each other is unclear," he said.

Senator Conroy's office did not respond to The Australian's queries last night.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...n-increased-cost/story-fnca0von-1226473729411

The NRL TV rights were a must-win for Nine and they came at an increased cost

by: Darren Davidson
From: The Australian
September 14, 2012 12:00AM

THE debt-laden Nine Network part-funded the $1 billion-plus NRL TV rights deal by striking an agreement with one of its lenders.

Nine's total debt stands at $3.8 billion, less $500 million if the sale of ACP Magazines is approved.

Nine's ability to bid competitively for the coveted free-to-air NRL rights with Kerry Stokes's Seven Network and an enthusiastic Ten Network was a concern for Goldman Sachs, which manages the debt. It wanted to protect its investment on the basis it would stand a better chance of getting a return if Nine retained the rights.

Instead of accepting interest from Nine on the high-yield debt, Goldman agreed to payment-in-kind. This meant Nine would pay interest in the form of additional high-yield debt, which increased the face value of the debt that must ultimately be repaid.

Crucially, the agreement enabled the cash to be retained in the Nine business as working capital, which was deployed to fund the NRL bid and hit programs such as The Voice and Howzat! The Kerry Packer Story.

At the time of the bid, sources close to Nine's private equity owners CVC Asia Pacific told The Australian it had "full knowledge" of the costs involved in the NRL bid, and was "supportive".

The increased cost of the new deal will turn the NRL from a profit-maker to a loss-maker at least during the first years of the five-year contract,.

It is estimated that Nine writes about $60 million a year in advertising against $40m that it is paying under the current deal.

But the rights were a must-win for the brand identity of Nine and it can generate revenue through other avenues.

The high costs explain why Nine chief executive David Gyngell said last month after winning the bid: "We all feel like losers today."

 

[undertaker]

The one noticable thing this year that I'm sure other ppl on this forum have noticed is the decline in tv ratings for Brisbane. Even an elimination final last week against their highest drawing side - Nth QLD - failed to crack 300k in Brisbane (only got 280k), whereas their wk 1 finals match against the much lower-drawing Warriors last year got over 100k more (389k).

Do you think the decline in ratings is due to the Bronco's average performance this year (performing well in the first half of the season, and crap in the second half) or that like Sydneysiders, they're bloody sick and tired of hearing Ray Hadley calling their matches (although Vossy did fill in on the odd occasion)? Maybe some Broncos fans on this forum could shed some light into this

 

[applesauce]

I don't have a problem with Ray, but he has had an unprecedented amount of bitching about on Facebook, Twitter, LU etc.

I think it also has to do with Brisbane having no 'face' in the team. The Broncos are filled with young backline stars, and a great forward pack, but Thaiday and Petero have never been the face of the Broncos it has usually always come from the halves/fullback.

The loss of Locky is a big deal IMO. Every other team has a big name 'playmaker' we don't so it is hard to get excited about attacking footy which is what people want to watch. People will bitch saying 'aww Broncos are hard done by' but at least one well known and loved player in our spine would of helped ratings I think.

We are just coming back to the pack.