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!

TV rights thread part 4

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...sh-and-a-tv-deal/story-e6frg6z6-1226457676123
League silences critics with a wad of cash and a TV deal

by: BRENT READ
From: The Australian
August 25, 2012 12:00AM

IN hindsight, it is hard not to note the symmetry. On rugby league's version of Big Tuesday, one of the men most responsible for the billion-dollar deal that secured the game's future was overseas on a surfing holiday, enjoying the swell off the coast of Indonesia.

Former NRL chief executive David Gallop -- soon to become the chief executive of Football Federation Australia -- was the forgotten man as his interim successor, Shane Mattiske, and ARL Commission chairman John Grant announced a $1.025bn partnership with the Nine Network and Fox Sports that consolidated rugby league's standing as king of the east coast.

That the sport was even in a position to break the $1bn barrier was in no small part down to Gallop. During his 10-year tenure as the game's pre-eminent figure, Gallop kept rugby league alive, often in spite of itself.

He dealt with a litany of atrocities. He juggled the self-interest of clubs and the political minefield created by having two masters -- the game was formerly owned by the Australian Rugby League and News Limited, publisher of The Weekend Australian.

The code flourished in the face of its own fatalism. Rugby league types often speak about the code's capacity for cannibalism, but it didn't just survive during the Gallop era, it thrived. It saw off the threat of rugby union and, thanks to the broadcasting billions, is well placed to do the same with the AFL.

Ratings maintained record pace -- this year's State of Origin series was the biggest in the code's history. Crowds continued to grow. Now it has a broadcasting deal that reflects its popularity.

"This is a great working-class game," South Sydney chief executive Shane Richardson says.

"That's why it's strong in western Sydney, that's why it's strong in the country, that's why it's strong in north Queensland.

"People play it, they grow up with the toughness of the game. It has lived though Super League because every week there are these people out there who sell raffle tickets and do barbecues to keep it alive. It will never change. It's in our DNA."

Rugby league's rebirth from the wreckage of the Super League war is a story in itself. The mid-to-late 1990s almost destroyed the code, as the ARL and News Limited fought a bitter battle to gain control. Peace eventually arrived as the warring parties formed a joint venture, but the game remained fragmented.

Old wounds were intermittently reopened but, slowly, the sport regained the traction it lost. In 2005, rugby league took a giant step forward when Wests Tigers' exhilarating brand of rugby league captured the imagination. Superstars such as Benji Marshall, Greg Inglis, Billy Slater and the soon-to-return Sonny Bill Williams emerged.

In 2008, the league made a conscious decision to work on its public image during a two-day strategy session at the SCG. That meeting, which focused on the next broadcasting deal, was also the forerunner to the formation of the independent commission.

"There was a clear focus on getting the game the value it deserved in the next media rights deal," Mattiske says.

"We have always had a belief in the game's value and its strength. What we needed to do was put in place some strategies at that point in time with regard to the media rights which would ensure we maximised the outcome.

"One of the things we needed to focus on there was our positive player image."

The success of those measures were exemplified when the ARLC was named Governing Body of the Year at the international Beyond Sport Federation Awards in London last month for its effect on social change, particularly in the indigenous community.

All the while, people kept watching. For all the bitterness over the past 20 years, rugby league never lost its allure as a television sport. Ratings this year have been bigger than ever. Origin is a phenomenon. This year's three games -- it was won by Queensland for a seventh consecutive year -- dominated the broadcasting landscape.

The final piece of the puzzle was the ARL and News Limited handing over ownership of the game to an independent body. After years of negotiations, the NRL finally made way for the ARL Commission.

The commission, formalised in February and led by Grant, has attracted its share of criticism, but it had a major victory this week. As Grant said, they answered the billion-dollar question with a billion-dollar answer. The critics were silenced by a wad of cash.

"It's always been a hugely popular sport," says NSW Sports Minister Graham Annesley, who was Gallop's right-hand man until entering politics last year.

"It obviously went through its well-documented dramas in the 1990s. What Gallop did through the first decade of this millennium was to put stability back in the game. He brought the game back together after its split . . . and set it up to the point where the game has done the richest television deal ever. That hasn't happened without David Gallop's contribution -- it's as simple as that.

"You only have to look at the TV ratings. They have always been unbelievable. I think its true value has been recognised."

Richardson says: "The reality is it is a great game -- you start from there. The players are great, it is a great game to watch, it's great for TV -- that's the first thing.

"The second thing is, I think we have all underestimated how great the game is. If you look at a scale from one to 10, we have probably been at a two for a long time. Now everyone can see the opportunity to be a 10. That has been shown up by the TV deal.

"We obviously undervalued ourselves for a long time on TV. We spent three or four years analysing what it was worth -- we never did any of that stuff before."

Again, Gallop can take some credit for the game finally realising its potential. Three years ago he appointed consultancy firm LEK to help prepare for the broadcasting negotiations.

One of the first things media expert Colin Smith discovered was the game's capacity for underselling itself. Despite rampant ratings on television, rugby league was content to live in the shadow of the AFL. Not any more.

"When I first started, rugby league didn't know how big and strong it was," says Smith. "It was very self-effacing.

"It just didn't realise it is very significant in its own right. It didn't realise it had the mojo. It believed a whole lot of hype that came from down south. It had been the poor cousin of the (AFL).

"People were surprised when I showed them the numbers.

"I think one of the things that has come out of this process has been that at club level, at the NRL level and the ARL Commission level, it has discovered how big and strong it is.

"I think the work that David did in getting people like me and others on board . . . culminating in breaking away from the old model to a new commission, that was the final catalyst for what happened."

The challenge is to keep building. Rugby league now has the finances to confront its many challenges head-on. It has the muscle to protect its heartland in western Sydney and the Gold Coast, which is under siege from the AFL.

Clubs can expect greater financial support. Players can start earning as much as their counterparts in the AFL and rugby union. Thanks to the commission, decisions will be made for the greater good. Money will be distributed where it is needed most.

Some should trickle back to grass roots. Good times lie ahead.

"We have been restricted in whatever we have done," Richardson says. "People want to bag the NRL, but the bottom line is they were restricted by finances. I wouldn't be overly critical of the NRL in what they have done, because they have done it in difficult circumstances.

"We had to put this game back together again. It was Humpty Dumpty, mate. It had fallen off the wall. There wasn't enough soldiers to put it together again. But we now have the soldiers. So beware . . . I am telling you, Humpty is not only back together again, he is looking to get a girlfriend."
 

LESStar58

Referee
Messages
25,496
The challenge is to keep building. Rugby league now has the finances to confront its many challenges head-on. It has the muscle to protect its heartland in western Sydney and the Gold Coast, which is under siege from the AFL.

this shits me. We seem to be doing well in these areas prior to Tuesday... :s
 

Dogs Of War

Coach
Messages
12,721
this shits me. We seem to be doing well in these areas prior to Tuesday... :s

We have been, but it helps when clubs can offer better deals to get people to games via discounted membership packages. Especially packages that offer a lot of value for families. You want the next generation to feel that you need to be at the game to be part of the experience and take their own families as part of that tradition when they have their own kids.

Currently a lot of clubs are in no position to do that, so the increases in membership we have seen are to be commended, but I think it's only just begun. As a game we have the ability now to ensure we lock in families and make afl's forays into nrl areas much costlier propositions than they would have ever imagined. That said the nrl need not worry what afl is doing, rather ensure the game is promoting itself as best it can, and offer lots of opportunities for people to be part of the game.
 

LESStar58

Referee
Messages
25,496
It has been pretty laughable how silent the AFL media have been about our T.V Deal.

I watched the AFL Footy Show tonight out of curiousity, to see if they would try and rubbish it. Not a peep was said about it. Clearly, they've ignored the details of the deal, taken one look at the dollar value and realised it is nothing but bad news for the AFL, especially in regards to the viability of GWS and GC.

The fact of the matter is this: If the AFL were only providing half the funding they currently are to those two clubs, they would be on deaths door already. Both their crowd attendances and their T.V ratings are quite frankly embarrassing, and Channel 7 are inevitably going to crack the shits and have the same attitude as 9 does with the NRL and refuse to give them the best time slots if they don't drastically improve over the next year or so.

I know there is a lot that can be criticized about this new deal, but if there's one good thing we can take away from it, it is that it has shut the AFL up good and proper; and at some point, the AFL are going to have to realise that NSW and QLD will never be AFL strongholds, despite what their delusions of grandeur might suggest.

I will say though, that if the ARLC rules out expansion for the period of this deal, I will officially think of them as gutless penny pinchers who aren't interested in making our game bigger then it is. There should be at least 1 club introduced over the next 5 years, and it should be the Pirates.

Tune in to Offsiders tomorrow morning. Roy will surely be on and if Harpie Wilson is also there you canm be guaranteed she will lisp and splutter her way through reasons to downplay the deal and will hide behind the skirt of hand bag Cassidy when Roy takes her to task.


The only peep i've hear from the AFL so far is some article in the telecrap written by AFL bottom feeder and ex-player Neal Cordy

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...in-code-cash-war/story-e6frexnr-1226456124908
 

Quidgybo

Bench
Messages
3,054
Would cost $20mill to bring in two new teams. I doubt you couldn't get that if you offered it as a live FTA game to any bidder. Maybe Ch10 would take it up as an entree into 2018 bidding rights.
But that's the key question. Under the $1 Billion deal just signed do Nine and Fox have first refusal on any 9th game before the current rights expire, or is the ARLC free to take it to the open market? I think the latter is unlikely. And if we introduce a 9th game and Nine and Fox have first refusal then we won't be getting $20m for it. We'll be getting whatever Nine and Fox value it at and paying the rest out of our own pockets.

That doesn't mean we don't expand but it means we'd want to be sure what we're committing to in terms of ongoing support. Are we confident when we go to the open market at the next rights negotiation that it will substantially pay for itself? Will the 9th game bring in $20 million in 2018 after one or two of the new teams have been running a couple years? If so then the cost of paying out of our own pockets for a couple seasons might be worth it.

Leigh
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
But that's the key question. Under the $1 Billion deal just signed do Nine and Fox have first refusal on any 9th game before the current rights expire, or is the ARLC free to take it to the open market? I think the latter is unlikely. And if we introduce a 9th game and Nine and Fox have first refusal then we won't be getting $20m for it. We'll be getting whatever Nine and Fox value it at and paying the rest out of our own pockets. 4 games on F2A, up to 3 live and potentially more money. Win-win.

That doesn't mean we don't expand but it means we'd want to be sure what we're committing to in terms of ongoing support. Are we confident when we go to the open market at the next rights negotiation that it will substantially pay for itself? Will the 9th game bring in $20 million in 2018 after one or two of the new teams have been running a couple years? If so then the cost of paying out of our own pockets for a couple seasons might be worth it.

Leigh

Well due to the exclusivity clause it can't go to 7 or 10 but what isn't known is if its Fox or 9 that owns or if it goes to a second bidding round between the two if it does come in early. I would like to see the NRL clarify this point. If it's a second bidding round then you may see tension leading to additional $$$ however in my opinion its better to gift it to 9 and get another game on F2A in exchange for the other Sunday game going live.

In 2017 when the next negotiations occur in an open market with no first and last rights and all parties bidding blindly - you can be certain that the 9th game will be worth money. By expanding before the negotiations though, the NRL can prove that teams 17 & 18 are going to be competitive and that all 9 games are contests (unlike the AFL...)
 

Desert Qlder

First Grade
Messages
9,452
Tune in to Offsiders tomorrow morning. Roy will surely be on and if Harpie Wilson is also there you canm be guaranteed she will lisp and splutter her way through reasons to downplay the deal and will hide behind the skirt of hand bag Cassidy when Roy takes her to task.

They will use their standard approach - accentuate the negative.

The focus of the discussion will be on how the free to air coverage has not changed and how RL fans will be 'big losers'.

They will then use a graphic comparing the the deals of the NRL and AFL. This graphic will show the total media deal made by the AFL including all media while of course the NRL is yet to conclude their negotiations in certain areas. This fact will be overlooked however and only Roy will be at pains to mention that NZ TV and mobile are not yet finalised.

Wilson will quickly turn the discussion to AFL and remark how during the press conference AFL was mentioned three times whilst during the AFL announcement last year, NRL was never mentioned.

You could set your watch to this shit.
 

Desert Qlder

First Grade
Messages
9,452
In 2017 when the next negotiations occur in an open market with no first and last rights and all parties bidding blindly - you can be certain that the 9th game will be worth money. By expanding before the negotiations though, the NRL can prove that teams 17 & 18 are going to be competitive and that all 9 games are contests (unlike the AFL...)

Did you catch the Masters article this morning in which he states that F&L was not able to be utilised in the negotiations?

That seemed unusual. Can you shed any light on that revelation?
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
They will use their standard approach - accentuate the negative.

The focus of the discussion will be on how the free to air coverage has not changed and how RL fans will be 'big losers'.

They will then use a graphic comparing the the deals of the NRL and AFL. This graphic will show the total media deal made by the AFL including all media while of course the NRL is yet to conclude their negotiations in certain areas. This fact will be overlooked however and only Roy will be at pains to mention that NZ TV and mobile are not yet finalised.

Wilson will quickly turn the discussion to AFL and remark how during the press conference AFL was mentioned three times whilst during the AFL announcement last year, NRL was never mentioned.

You could set your watch to this shit.
she asked a question about the NRL rights at the AFL press conference last year
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
Did you catch the Masters article this morning in which he states that F&L was not able to be utilised in the negotiations?

That seemed unusual. Can you shed any light on that revelation?

Got a link to the quote?

We know they did use the First Rights and that 9 & Fox came in with a revised final deal to trump 7 & 10.
 

Desert Qlder

First Grade
Messages
9,452
Got a link to the quote?

We know they did use the First Rights and that 9 & Fox came in with a revised final deal to trump 7 & 10.
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/packer-holds-winning-hand-20120824-24rsu.html

THE biggest winner from this week's $1.025 billion rugby league broadcasting deal was casino tycoon James Packer.
News Ltd's offer to pay Packer $2 billion for his share of Fox Sports and Foxtel was conditional on Fox Sports securing the pay TV rights to rugby league.
If the Australian Rugby League Commission cut out Fox Sports and awarded the contract to a free-to-air network and IPTV, as it had threatened to do, News Ltd's deal with Packer was off.
So, when News Ltd chief executive Kim Williams agreed to release rugby league from the prohibitive first and last rights hold the media company had until 2027, it guaranteed the Fox Sports/Channel Nine combine had won the auction and Packer's $2 billion transaction could proceed.
Advertisement
Packer can't bank the money yet because News Ltd must come to terms with Seven's Kerry Stokes, who also has equity in CMH, the company that owns half of Fox Sports and 25 per cent of Foxtel.
But Stokes is merely holding out for an enhanced offer, knowing that News Ltd is desperate to own all Fox Sports and half of Foxtel.
The ARLC team that negotiated the broadcast rights did not know that News's purchase of Packer's stake was conditional on Fox Sports winning the contract.
The $2 billion offer was in the public domain but the condition over the Packer purchase was top secret.
It certainly reflected News Ltd's valuation of the worth of rugby league rights to Fox Sports/Foxtel and could have been used as a bargaining chip.
Yet, in the final analysis, it didn't make any difference to the ARL Commission. The commission team knew that without rugby league programming, the value of Fox Sports would plummet.
Some may have suspected that News Ltd would have withdrawn the offer to Packer to pay $2 billion for an asset whose value would drop dramatically.
After all, rugby league is the single biggest factor driving subscriptions in NSW and Queensland. The AFL's deal with Foxtel has not delivered the number of subscribers in Victoria and South and Western Australia that had been hoped for.
Fox Sports faced a major churn when the ARLC indicated it would decline the offer from the Channel Nine/Fox Sports consortium.
There was another closely guarded secret of which the ARL Commission was aware and which gave it the courage to act: News Ltd's long-term first and last rights did not apply to the 2013-17 broadcasting contract.
It meant the media company could not, on behalf of Fox Sports, retain the rights simply by equalling the bid of the highest-priced rival broadcaster.
The commissioners were therefore able to stand up to the Nine/Fox Sports consortium and demonstrate an independence that would not have existed when the code was half-owned by News Ltd.
The competitive tension around the auction delivered the $1.025 billion and the release of News Ltd's long-term hold on first and last rights.
The ARLC could have won more money for the code as a trade-off for News Ltd retaining the restrictive conditions but the commissioners put their release as top priority in order to open opportunities in the 2018 broadcasting deal.
The interest from Ten and Seven and the bizarre clause that prevented News exercising a last option handed the ARLC a rare and brief-moment-in-time opportunity to win both cash and control of the code's future.
''We were shot in the arse with a golden arrow,'' said one of the rugby league contingent involved in the negotiations.
This was similar to the sentiment expressed by Channel Seven's former boss, David Leckie, when the AFL sought its billion dollar-plus deal last year. ''They forget they were kissed on the arse by a rainbow last time when a bidding war between the two Kerrys handed them $780 million,'' Leckie said.
Kerry Packer, then owner of Nine, made a death bed offer of $780 million for AFL rights, anticipating that Seven's Kerry Stokes, who held a last right in the auction, would go broke or withdraw.
As it transpired, Stokes equalled the offer and won the rights, saving Packer $780 million.
But this time around, in a different code and via a different route, his son has been struck by a $2 billion lightning bolt, both golden and rainbow hued.
 

Quidgybo

Bench
Messages
3,054
So that says Fox/News didn't have first and last for this round of rights. Doesn't say Nine could not come over the top of Ten and Seven with first and last in the battle for FTA rights. Now no one has first and last going forward to the next deal.

Leigh.
 

docbrown

Coach
Messages
11,842
Desert Qlder said:
Did you catch the Masters article this morning in which he states that F&L was not able to be utilised in the negotiations?

That seemed unusual. Can you shed any light on that revelation?

So that says Fox/News didn't have first and last for this round of rights. Doesn't say Nine could not come over the top of Ten and Seven with first and last in the battle for FTA rights. Now no one has first and last going forward to the next deal.

Leigh.

To highlight the issue:

There was another closely guarded secret of which the ARL Commission was aware and which gave it the courage to act: News Ltd's long-term first and last rights did not apply to the 2013-17 broadcasting contract.
It meant the media company could not, on behalf of Fox Sports, retain the rights simply by equalling the bid of the highest-priced rival broadcaster.


You're right, it seems bizarre as to why there would be a break in the chain. We do know that Fox had first rights for this round because the other parties had to wait until after Fox had put in their first offer.


Perhaps there was something that happened during the negotiations for the formation of the new commission that created a legal loophole around News's last rights for this particular round --or --- that it was something that News conceded back then.



If true the NRL have done well to keep it a secret - perhaps potentially even keeping it a secret from News until the intensive negotiations. I can't recall seeing it in the papers until now. A few months ago there were stories at Fox Sports and 9 that the NRL were testing out the legality of first and last rights in regards to breaking it into packages. Maybe that's how the NRL found it.



Anyhow if true it sounds like it was part of the NRL committee's strategy to bring Fox Sports to its knees and it worked. Just think about what will happen next time when they're bidding blindly.




 

Rosetta

Juniors
Messages
683
Mattiske will be taking open questions on Sky Sports Radio this morning, I've asked for him to expand on what the plans are for the online rights, specifically whether it means the option of providing live streams into local markets such as those provided to overseas markets, let's see what he says.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
70,262
What really surprises me about the deal is how much Foxsports have payed for the same coverage. The new deal is not going to drive any subscription increase for them so no extra income coming there way from the deal. I'm still struggling to see what is in it for them, with no extra content it offers nothing more than they had before and is hardly going to get RL fans excited about subscribing to Foxsports. Maybe they think they have maxed out RL viewers as subscribers?

I would have expected them to have gone for every game live and a 9th exclusive game on Sunday evening which would have probably convinced a lot more fans to sign up. Maybe they are just hoping Ch9's coverage being so poor is going to drive people to Fox?
 

Quidgybo

Bench
Messages
3,054
It's not the same coverage though, is it?

IPTV rights are a massive get.
IPTV rights to their five games only, and even then there's an open question about exclusivity. It's sounding a lot like the NRL still has the right to sell all games as part of online and mobile rights.

Leigh.
 

Edwahu

Bench
Messages
3,697
What really surprises me about the deal is how much Foxsports have payed for the same coverage. The new deal is not going to drive any subscription increase for them so no extra income coming there way from the deal. I'm still struggling to see what is in it for them, with no extra content it offers nothing more than they had before and is hardly going to get RL fans excited about subscribing to Foxsports. Maybe they think they have maxed out RL viewers as subscribers?

I would have expected them to have gone for every game live and a 9th exclusive game on Sunday evening which would have probably convinced a lot more fans to sign up. Maybe they are just hoping Ch9's coverage being so poor is going to drive people to Fox?

They got to keep Saturday and Monday as exclusive.
 

Latest posts

Top