Did league reject more money from Channel Ten?
Roar Pro The Sydney Morning Herald is reporting that Channel 10 tendered an offer to the ARLC of $800m for four live games a week. At first glance, it’s easy to think that’s $200M short of the Channel 9 deal, until you consider that Channel 10 offered $800m just for the free-to-air portion of the rights.
Does that strike anyone else as being absolutely insane? The Fox Sports portion of the “billion dollar” deal is $500M for five games a week.
The Channel 9 portion is $425m, and both parties have thrown in $50m worth of advertising.
There is clearly something happening here that is beyond my comprehension. By all reports, Channel 10 have nearly doubled the offering from Channel 9 at the cost of a single extra game.
That obviously reduces the value of the pay TV portion, but I can’t help but think that $225M+ would be an absolute steal for Foxtel to keep a handhold on the sport that keeps their subscriptions afloat.
And let’s think big here for a second – is there any reason why a deal couldn’t be struck to sell the rights to four games to Channel 10, and let Foxtel have the remaining four with a commitment to giving them a fifth game as of 2014?
You’d have to think that’s a deal worth upwards of $1.2 billion – at least a $200m gain on the accepted deal.
Surely a $200m war chest would go a long way toward establishing two new teams and ensuring that they’re able to recruit enough genuine talent from outside the game to ensure the standard of play remains just as high.
So what am I missing? Doesn’t that sound like it’s too good be true? Four games on free-to-air, a desperate pay TV provider that needs to pay the asking price or risk losing a significant portion of its subscription base?
Obviously we don’t know the finer details, but on the surface it seems like the ARLC have gone completely stark raving mad.
Is this just another example of rugby league and Channel Nine staying in bed together?
Passionate about your league? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily league email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
- Explore:
- Channel Nine, NRL, Rugby League
August 28th 2012 @ 6:33am
Bee Bee said | August 28th 2012 @ 6:33am | Report comment
Yep. If this is true. Big if…. The only winner in this deal are channel 9 and Foxtel…. Everyone else, (LOSERS)
Must be more to the story or surely Channel 10 would run with it.
Heloooo…, Anyone from Channel 10 out there in Cyberspace. Tell me it isn’t true, or I will spend all day rocking in the foetal position trying to get the image of Kym Gyngell and Mr Grant in bed together out of my head.
August 28th 2012 @ 6:44am
PaddyBoy said | August 28th 2012 @ 6:44am | Report comment
It was for all the games, to then on sell the rest of the pay TV rights.
August 28th 2012 @ 11:24am
Von Neumann said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:24am | Report comment
great thinking.
but remember, the “pinch” point for the whole thing came when Kin williams of foxtel (rightly from a business perspective) made it harder for 10 to deal with fox, when what fox really wanted primarily was to maintain the status quo.
Why maintain it? Because if fox came back with less games/deal for their subscribers, then foxtel subscribers would be losing out. And foxtel’s first priority is to their customers. And that makes sense to me. I may not think its absolutely the best idea.
BUT we got rid of all holding rights on the code, they won’t ask for the 50 million we owe them, AND they will fund the storm with at least 4 million per year!
Not too shabby.
(though that level of compensation for a “missed” 10 deal is much needed….without that, I would say we got shafted….but rest assured, the commission would never let that happen – ever )
August 28th 2012 @ 7:03am
steve b said | August 28th 2012 @ 7:03am | Report comment
Did anyone really think they would go with another network ,,i didn’t not for one second ,,And if this is true what is being said about TEN then we the fans really did get duded ,,their was probably a shut your face clause in the deal so other networks arn;t allowed to tell the public what really went down ..i was hoping for a whole new approach but no the same old ,,same old and five bloody years of it ..Sus as ..
August 28th 2012 @ 11:26am
Von Neumann said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:26am | Report comment
stevel see my above post when it comes online
its a bit more complex than a choice between “did we get dudded based off the 50/50 selection of A or B?”
its a many layered consideration.
August 28th 2012 @ 7:08am
Stevo4 said | August 28th 2012 @ 7:08am | Report comment
Why is there this absolute obsession with the final dollar figure on the TV deal? I would have thought most people would be interested in what the result was to them as viewers. Thus the Channel 10 deal seemed much better for fans and most clubs, well before you start throwing dollars at it.
As it is, I’m likely consigned to another 5 years of almost never seeing my team play on TV, and never seeing them play live with the exception of their 1-game finals jaunts in even years. More money will never make up for that.
August 28th 2012 @ 11:29am
Von Neumann said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:29am | Report comment
its because the game was broke, and still tied.
the game is more than just whats seen on FTA. The fans are only one segment.
There are players who have not been paid a genuine increase for 20 years. There are the clubs who are running at a loss….there’s all the support staff and juniors/grasstoots organisations……its much broader than those I chose off the top of my head.
The fans are just one thing. There are so many aspects.
Wait for next deal. But buddy, we are off and sailing, and the horizon is clear.
August 28th 2012 @ 7:19am
Boomshanka said | August 28th 2012 @ 7:19am | Report comment
Something is rotten here.
This NRL deal was sealed under outdated anti siphoning legislation which sees FTA networks playing sports broker to Pay TV. This legislation was reviewed in 2009 with the AFL media deal apparently undertaken using the new legislation (with the appropriate approval from the Department of Communications).
There is much silence from the department regarding this NRL deal which contrasts dramatically from their grandstanding following last years AFL one.
With the new proposed legislation (that is still awaiting final parliamentary approval), draft quality provisions currently see live AFL beamed into their respective markets. This NRL deal has no such guarantee that markets outside of NSW or QLD will even maintain the current low level of rugby league on our TV’s
Sports fans are yet again shafted.
August 28th 2012 @ 11:29am
Von Neumann said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:29am | Report comment
please, this is utterly false.
we were not shafted. good lord.
August 28th 2012 @ 11:46am
Boomshanka said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:46am | Report comment
Von Neumann (or good news spokesperson for Fox/9/ARLC)
What part of the above is “utterly false”?
August 28th 2012 @ 11:53am
Von Neumann said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:53am | Report comment
You are implying that the deal is somehow illegal, or not in the spirit of “justice”
its a deal, a done deal, and thats that.
Plus, the author has made a mistake in his article.
He seems to think that under the ch10 deal we also get money from foxtel – well, we don’t. In the channel 10 deal they own the rights to nrl….including live streaming.
August 28th 2012 @ 1:11pm
Boomshanka said | August 28th 2012 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
So what “untruth” or “false statement have I made above?
If this deal was carried out “in the spirit of justice” then Nine should never have anything to do with the game.
Yes it may be a done deal, but the fact remains that for the next five years, two games each round will be squirreled away from fans, played on delay (in SD) and pumped full of ads. For followers of other codes other options exist (such as live HD coverage).
August 28th 2012 @ 7:36am
GoGWS said | August 28th 2012 @ 7:36am | Report comment
I think RL press is a bit to blame…they whipped up expectations of $1.2bn or 1.4bn deal…the ARLC had to deliver $1bn deal or else..so that sacrificed coverage. If the RL media spent 12 mths banging on about the need for live coverage of all games then maybe the ALRC would have acted to secure this. The RL fans access to the game was secondary to $$ in these negotiations..the ALRC could have negotiated more access but chose the dollars instead.
August 28th 2012 @ 8:20am
Crosscoder said | August 28th 2012 @ 8:20am | Report comment
Not exactly, the press did not whip definitive expectations of those deals.The adviser to the then NRL and ARLC gave a range of options,and used the starting point $1bn(which turned out to be spot on).Then there are additions to come into the picture,the mobile and internet rights and skyy nZ,which will bring the figure so close to $1,2bn ,it won’t matter.
One could argue in this case,the press were close to getting it right,which would be a first.
It was in fact many AFL people on this site ,who indicated and were emphatic the code would not get $1bn, eg when your maximum figure was $800m over 5 years GOGWS.People had no trouble bagging Masters,yet they fell into the same trap and deflect.They did a Masters .
The code received more rthan double for the same coverage,and will go close to the AFL figure with all the additonal ad time,and with 16 teams not 18.The additonal expansion teams using the GWS and Suns as an example did not warrant additional monies.
Rugby league received its real payday,and all it was doing in effect was getting back monies ripped off 6 years ago by News/ch9.
The first objective of the deal was to secure maximum funding,as the code in reality was living off the smell of an oil rag,with junior development being limited,the bush suffering and a cash up AFL making inroads.The current NRL clubs losing money and many relying on leagues’club’grants,were in danger in a couple of instances of not being commercially viable.
.Thus the fans who may well be given no bettter deal this time,would have had no club to follow.Eg like a north Sydney.And the code doesn’t have to fund two basket cases clubs for $200m,out of their own kick.
The ARLC did what any sensible business,( whether sporting or in the commercial world would do ),underpin their organisation and ensure grassroots to elite level are secure.Wiithout that constant flow and clubs going under,the fans would have nothing to follow,and would then be liable to really bitch.
I am sure many people in the other codes,would have loved the ARLC to have received a much lower deal,thus hamstrung them in development
The code did sacrifice additional coverage,but for obvious reasons,and they also ensure F&L rights have gone,a 20 rd fixed schedule(not on before).Just don’t look at the negatives.In any negotiations of this magnitude,there has to be give and take.
The next Tv deal will be a diffferent matter and will be worth even more,and they will be in a much stronger position for more fTA coverage..I can smell the fear at times in some of these threads.
Finally if the NRL had received the true value of their sport on TV 6 years ago) blame News/9/Gallop),we would not be having this debate today.The problems that exist would have been in many cases rectified.Even Folau would still be at the Broncos.
August 28th 2012 @ 2:11pm
GoGWS said | August 28th 2012 @ 2:11pm | Report comment
CCoder – yeah they did reach 1bn (just), and there will be some extra money from online rights though it won’t be much because these are already partially sold to foxtel for their streaming app – foxtel sunscribers will use thd foxtel steaming app not Telstra app..whatever money Telstra pays will be much less than they paid the AFL… as it stands today the NRL has achieved 82% of the value of the AFL (1.025/1.253) ..about a month ago Masters came out and declared on TV that the NRL would match the AFL – so as we stand now he’s about 20% off the mark, whereas he was a whopping 50% in error on the AFL rights. So don’t try to argue Masters has improved – he overestimates the NRL by 20% and underestimates AFL by 50% – the only thing you can say about Masters is that he is reliably unreliable. Whatever he says will be way off the mark.
August 28th 2012 @ 2:18pm
Hamish said | August 28th 2012 @ 2:18pm | Report comment
He is inaccurate on finances but surely he knows NRL because he has been involved for 60 years..
August 28th 2012 @ 2:28pm
Renegade said | August 28th 2012 @ 2:28pm | Report comment
Honestly, who cares about Masters?? “I was off the mark, but look how far masters was out” rubbish….
You are incredibly unreliable on everypost you have made on a RL thread…..wipe the egg off your face and move on buddy.
August 28th 2012 @ 4:05pm
Crosscoder said | August 28th 2012 @ 4:05pm | Report comment
It won’t be much!!! You have the usual reliable inside info on internet/mobile rights and indeed Sky NZ.
It was noted even if Telstra or another internet provider,pays half the money Telstra outlaid for AFL online rights,it will deliver $1bn cash;.before even including the Sky deal.The difference would then be minimal.
Considering the ranges provided by Lek start at $1bn ,$1.2Bn and max $1.4bn,the code will end up achieving a figure close to $1.2bn ,for 8 matches not 9.IOW the” just “comment $1bn “looks a tad silly.
And indeed it was also argued having 9 and Foxtel paying $90m cash upfront is worth another $20m to the deal value.
The code was according to you”$800m is plenty for the NRL.”and If the NRL can make it to 75% of the AFL (and that is a very big if.”"For the NRL $1bn over 5 years just won’t happen”You were quite emphatic.
.I suggest Masters is looking good.Perhaps like AR you could be humble and suggest you were way out in your figures or got it wrong.
Well it has already achieved that ($1bn)before the extra yet to be negotiated.
In fact the last deal had ch9 $42m pa,this deal including promo $95m pa (more than double)
Fox Sports last deal $45m pa ,this deal $110m pa )more than double.
Sky News last contract $14m pa meaning $70m for 5 years if no increase..
i like the way you downplay “some extra money”from online rights
All this with 16 teams (no change) and thus fans are upset understandably,20 rounds fixed scheduling,no first and last rights
Quite the contrary GOGWS I am suggesting that you and Masters appear to come from the same school , with wildly innacurate estimates.You have already proven to be way off the mark,as has a few of your compatriots.
I openly admitted I was way out in my AFL estimates,seems others in regard to the rugby league result, have extreme difficulty in offering the same concession.
.
August 28th 2012 @ 9:19pm
GoGWS said | August 28th 2012 @ 9:19pm | Report comment
Let’s see …the AFL got $153m for online rights….the NRL will get less than $153m and therfore from where they are now ($1.025bn) they will fall short of $1.253bn that the AFL received…that’s just maths. Even when the figures are black and white some people hang onto the myth that the AFL and NRL rights were equal in value…they weren’t. If the NRL was going to match or beat the AFL they would have stitched up all aspects of the deal at the same time and made a grand announcement about how they exceeded $1.253bn, and how it was the largest deal in Australian sport…as it was all there was was Gyngal’s nonsensical comments about it being a better deal than the AFL
Anyway a matter of weeks ago Masrers was on the ABC assuring us he had sources assuring him the broadcast deal was $1.2bn…his guess was very current and supposedly informed by reliable sources, and he still got it spectacularly wrong… As I say, it just goes to show how unreliable he is, as are the chorus of RL journals who seem to like to parrot his claims..
August 28th 2012 @ 9:24pm
yewonk said | August 28th 2012 @ 9:24pm | Report comment
you do no about the tv rights in new zealand don’t you?
August 29th 2012 @ 8:17am
Crosscoder said | August 29th 2012 @ 8:17am | Report comment
I have continued to read your posts rather bemused.You were out ATM at least 28% up to this stage and at the worst case scenario on conclusion, you will be out by at least 46%.
Sky News has not yet been negotiated.It is not part of the ch9 and Fox sports negotiations. It is a separate Tv deal involving another country (Sky NZ).I know this is strange to AFL people,but we have a NZ team in the NRL.
I am not going to get into the nitty gritty of the AFL deal v a deal not yet secured on the internet /mobile,except to quote ABC net and streaming of NRL matches as a possibility
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-22/arlc-keen-to stream-matches-in-2013/4216130
So my good man,we still do not lknow the final figure secured by the code,and you as usual jump the gun.
The deal in which Gyngell was involved was secured ,so had to be announced before leaking.As he stated 8 matches compared to 9,and you can include less ad opportunity secured a deal $1,025bn,which you said was unachievable.In terms of per minute viewing it was greater than the AFL,and that was his point.
You again have deflected and not had the intestinal fortiutude to admit, that you were well out with your emphatic figures.Masters may have egg on his face(we still dont have the final washout),but you have a fair whack of yoke to remove from your face.
August 29th 2012 @ 10:43am
towards 21 said | August 29th 2012 @ 10:43am | Report comment
Telstra after the first season admitted it only made $6,000,000 while out laying $30,000,000 for it’s rights. Humble opionion League will get between 25% to 40% of the AFL moner=try rights from Telstra but also in the next negotitaions AFL will get a greatly reduced amount as well. Telstra has admitted on numerous occasikns at AGM etc that it overpayed and it will not be doing a gain. Both sports will pay for this over the next ten years as Telstra will be wanting profits for it’s shareholders.
August 28th 2012 @ 9:38pm
GoGWS said | August 28th 2012 @ 9:38pm | Report comment
And as for my estimate…I’m sure you can quote me differently, but closer to the date I thought the NRL would get around $850m …so I was about $150m off….compare that to a $450m error for many of the sources Masters happily repeated estimated at $800m – at one point he was even happy to reference speculations that the AFL would get less than $780m… The bottom line is that I’m not a sports journalist and he is – so he should do a lot better than he does – he seems to love righting about the financial aspects of the game but he is always just so inaccurate….Inaccurate and unrepentant.., if he is still writing in 5 years he’ll once again low ball the AFL deal in his articles, and exaggerate the NRL deal..very predictable
August 28th 2012 @ 9:40pm
GoGWS said | August 28th 2012 @ 9:40pm | Report comment
writing
August 29th 2012 @ 8:29am
Crosscoder said | August 29th 2012 @ 8:29am | Report comment
You had so many estimates some well below $800m ,it was hard to keep up.Proving once and for all ,you really had no idea.
Just admit you got it wrong,there is more to come.
No you are not a sport’s journalist and neither am I,but we make comments on public forums that we should stand by.More so when you are prepared to bag a sport’s journo and yet are doing exactly the same thing.
And Gyngell is the head of a TV organisation and negoaited the deal and was heavily involved in AFL negotiations.Yet you calmly not he has no idea,when he talks abouyt the value of the NRL deal compared to the AFL one.iit’s like me telling Neil Armstorng he has no idea about Lunar modules.
August 29th 2012 @ 3:08pm
NF said | August 29th 2012 @ 3:08pm | Report comment
Gogws just admit you got it wrong.
August 28th 2012 @ 11:32am
Von Neumann said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:32am | Report comment
mate, haha
they were in fact going to go with ch7 or ch10 until the very last minute.
the carrot of first and last rights removal, 50 million dollars cash payments NO LONGER being taken out of the game (that would have went to news) and the continued Storm funding at 4 million per year….obviously tipped the scales.
Importantly, the game maintains the right to sell ITS LIVE INTERNET RIGHTS….
in the ten offer, I believe, they wanted ALL that stuff.
Guys, it was a fantastic deal. Please, be less glum, and you will see its not really a negative thing you behold.
August 28th 2012 @ 7:39am
Matt_S said | August 28th 2012 @ 7:39am | Report comment
This is pretty simple maths. If the NRL go with Tens proposal, then the NRL get $800 million. Ten then get to onsell 4-5 games to a desperate Foxsports and make a profit with money staying with Ten.
The question is why foxtel couldn’t or wouldn’t make a deal with Ten? Why wouldn’t they deliver league fans a similar deal to the Foxtel/7 AFl deal of 4 live games and the rest all simulcast on Fox.
August 28th 2012 @ 8:39am
don't do it said | August 28th 2012 @ 8:39am | Report comment
That’s easy. Kim Williams, the effective decision maker for fox sports felt it was their best interest to keep the status quo. Tens proposal would have been an improvement in free to air coverage of 1 live and 2 delayed to 4 live. That is significant and would have eaten into foxtel subscriptions. This was deemed unacceptable given the poor returns from the AFL deal, being that AFL fans have so much free to air access and by comparison can get away with not having pay tv.
August 28th 2012 @ 10:16am
Matt_S said | August 28th 2012 @ 10:16am | Report comment
That’s right and one wonders why Fox allows this? Why would you subscribe with 4 FTA live games? Doesn’t make commercial sense and I’ll keep harking, there are those in these companies with vested interest/passion in AFL ahead of their companies. Foxtel is a charity arm of the AFL
August 28th 2012 @ 10:34pm
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League said | August 28th 2012 @ 10:34pm | Report comment
Foxtel is getting what it deserves for throwing so much money at the AFL. I hope they continue to lose money for paying over-the-top for a product that doesn’t pull ratings consistently. Fox Sports should have paid no more than $30,000,000 for the AFL rights. It just doesn’t rate well enough to deserve anything higher.
August 29th 2012 @ 8:51am
clipper said | August 29th 2012 @ 8:51am | Report comment
Qgirl – The NRL used to have 77 of the 100 top rating shows on Fox. If this is still the case, you could be right, if not, it sounds like sour grapes. It will be interesting to find out the mix now.
August 29th 2012 @ 2:09pm
Australian Rules said | August 29th 2012 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
More baseless comments from QGirl:
“Foxtel is getting what it deserves for throwing so much money at the AFL. I hope they continue to lose money for paying over-the-top for a product that doesn’t pull ratings consistently.”
Well here’s the truth for 2012…
For the AFL, 21 out of 22 rounds (a 6 game round being the exception) have exceed 3.1Million viewers in the national ratings.
To put that into context…
The NRL has had just 2 rounds out of 25 in which the national ratings have been over 3M.
*regionals excluded for both comps.
keep at it chief
August 29th 2012 @ 2:57pm
Hamish said | August 29th 2012 @ 2:57pm | Report comment
To be fair, NRL rates its tops off in 2 of the 4 fast growing NSW/Qld regional TV markets but advertisers are keener on cap cities where you can get big coverage from 1 spot..Regionals are worth something but discretionary spending in these areas lower….Hence AFL keen to get into these markets (last frontier)..
August 29th 2012 @ 3:06pm
Australian Rules said | August 29th 2012 @ 3:06pm | Report comment
I agree with all that Hamish – the regionals are also excluded nation-wide for the AFL.
When Qgirl says the the “AFL doesn’t pull ratings consistently”, he’s probably talking about his little pocket of Queensland.
Posting the ACTUAL national figures helps these discussions in terms of understanding the national marketplace…otherwise they all descend into pointless “my favourite code is better” debates.
August 29th 2012 @ 11:17pm
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League said | August 29th 2012 @ 11:17pm | Report comment
Revenue for QLD Regionals, Brisbane, NSW Regionals and Sydney is far higher than the revenue from Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth. Regional NSW is bigger than Perth. Regional QLD is almost as big as Adelaide.
Advertising revenue for commercial television networks
July to December 2011
Metro Service
Sydney
$577,597,088
Melbourne
$434,129,053
Brisbane
$283,258,091
Perth
$174,983,262
Adelaide
$117,750,735
Regional Service
NSW
$207,315,118
QLD
$115,558,314
Victoria
$69,500,589
NT/Tas
$37,523,430
WA
$24,343,211
SA
$18,272,479
RL Heartland Areas
$1,183,728,611
AFL Heartland Areas
$876,502,759
“When Qgirl says the the “AFL doesn’t pull ratings consistently”, he’s probably talking about his little pocket of Queensland.”
I’m talking about the most watched programs. There are far more rugby league games inside the 100 most watched programs on pay TV.
August 30th 2012 @ 9:34am
Australian Rules said | August 30th 2012 @ 9:34am | Report comment
Oh dear, you’ve used these figures before…it seems you don’t undertsand their relevance.
I’ll explain again…
You’re citing ADVERTISING REVENUE across all markets.
The AFL’s ad revenue comes from QLD, NSW, VIC, SA, WA (Tas & NT).
This happens because of the number of AFL teams all around the country and the sheer volume of FTA and Pay AFL content nationwide.
By contrast, the NRL ad revenue is largely limited to 2 states (although Vic has recently been tapped into via Storm games on Gem).
Try to understand, this is NOT about which sport is “better” or more popular in regional Queensland, it is about which code receives more nationwide advertising revenue across FTA and Pay TV networks.
THAT’s the conclusion that is drawn by the figures you provide in reference to the current broadcast deals of the 2 codes.
August 30th 2012 @ 11:17pm
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League said | August 30th 2012 @ 11:17pm | Report comment
No Aussie Rules, YOU don’t get it.
I posted these statistics in responding to Hamish’s comment about regionals:
“Regionals are worth something but discretionary spending in these areas lower….”
Why would companies fork out more money on advertising their products in regional Qld/regional NSW if they would get a better return in Adelaide and Perth?
The only reason I can think of is that the companies are convinced that people from the bush are going to buy the products.
But let’s get back to your fantasy.
Revenue from 7Mate’s coverage of the AFL in Brisbane and Sydney isn’t going to be very much because most television viewers will be watching the programming on Ten, Nine, Seven, One, Eleven, Go!, GEM, 7TWO, ABC, ABC2 and SBS.
A rugby league match is going to rate very well in regional QLD/regional NSW. Hardly anyone from these areas would bother to tune into an Aussie rules game. You’re mad if you think that a broadcast of an AFL match into regional QLD/regional NSW is going to command the same sort of revenue that an NRL match would get.
The Sydney, Brisbane, Regional NSW and Regional QLD markets are larger than the southern markets. The statistics I posted prove it. The ad revenue that the NRL draws from Brisbane, Sydney, Regional QLD and Regional NSW would dwarf the amount the AFL gets from Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth, Regional Vic, Regional, WA, Regional SA, Tasmania/NT. The tiny amount that the AFL gets from Brisbane, Sydney, Regional QLD and Regional NSW wouldn’t close the gap.
August 31st 2012 @ 8:55am
Australian Rules said | August 31st 2012 @ 8:55am | Report comment
I’m starting to get a sneaking suspicion that you don’t like Australian Footy Qgirl…
August 31st 2012 @ 2:56pm
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League said | August 31st 2012 @ 2:56pm | Report comment
“I’m starting to get a sneaking suspicion that you don’t like Australian Footy Qgirl…”
It took you this long to figure that out?
I hate Aussie rules with a passion.If the game died then I would be over the moon.
August 31st 2012 @ 3:29pm
Australian Rules said | August 31st 2012 @ 3:29pm | Report comment
Seems strange that you would “hate with a passion” a game invented by Australians for Australians.
Each to their own I suppose.
August 28th 2012 @ 11:33am
Von Neumann said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:33am | Report comment
please, become informed. It was made more difficult to deal with foxtel by Kim Williams, because he needs to look after his customers….and if he came away with less coverage they would not be happy. He could not risk that.
Thats as much as anyone knows, and it makes a lot of sense.
August 28th 2012 @ 11:58am
Boomshanka said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:58am | Report comment
His rugby league “customers” are now obliged to pay the same money for up to five live games a week when fans of other sports (Rugby Union, A League, AFL) get to enjoy their games, live, in HD and free of ads between sirens.
They are only now paying what they should have paid six years ago in a competitive market. Why should we accept “baby steps” towards decent coverage when we’ve been sold short for so many years?
It’s a crap deal.
August 28th 2012 @ 10:36pm
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League said | August 28th 2012 @ 10:36pm | Report comment
Foxte should charge customers about $30 a month to access the Fox Footy channel.
August 29th 2012 @ 7:16am
Boomshanka said | August 29th 2012 @ 7:16am | Report comment
Or give us league fans a discount for the reduced coverage we have to endure.
Cancelled my foxtel subscription a couple of weeks ago. Have had three follow up phone calls with the last offering $29/month for the base stuff until next season. They obviously hate churn and I’m really starting to wonder if I bother next year.
August 29th 2012 @ 2:58pm
Hamish said | August 29th 2012 @ 2:58pm | Report comment
Boom,
Keep up the pressure…
August 31st 2012 @ 3:41pm
NF said | August 31st 2012 @ 3:41pm | Report comment
‘Seems strange that you would “hate with a passion” a game invented by Australians for Australians.
Each to their own I suppose.
AR please don’t give us this Australia’s game nonsense seriously just because it’s ‘Australian’ doesn’t mean everyone in Australia has to fall head over heels for it. Different strokes for different folks.
August 29th 2012 @ 10:46am
towards 21 said | August 29th 2012 @ 10:46am | Report comment
Simulcast is a dirty word with broadcasters, Fox have exclusive Saturday and Monday and it is worth Hundreds of millions. Why would they bastardize profits for viewers??
August 28th 2012 @ 8:11am
mushi said | August 28th 2012 @ 8:11am | Report comment
There are two issues here one. League then becomes a forced seller of the last four games to fox with zero competitive tension. Why does fox take the same deal when they can look around and say “hey, we’re the only guys in the line.”
The second is this enables them to get rid of the first and last rights that fans had a bipolar view on.
August 28th 2012 @ 8:38am
Matt_S said | August 28th 2012 @ 8:38am | Report comment
Plus the NRL has also no need to repay Newsltd 50 million dollars over the next 5 years.
I see a lot of AFL zeolots among all these whispers trying to say we got dudded. Last contract we got dudded-lack of control over game and no big money in return.
least this contract we will see some control handed back i.e first & last rights, fixed schedule to 20 rounds but the TV stations have now paid the money to atleast have a say in the running of things i.e. night GF
August 28th 2012 @ 10:07am
Australian Rules said | August 28th 2012 @ 10:07am | Report comment
Matt
Have you been reading this site over the last week or so?
It’s not “AFL zealots” saying that NRL fans got dudded…it’s the NRL fans themselves…hundreds of them.
August 28th 2012 @ 10:40am
Matt_S said | August 28th 2012 @ 10:40am | Report comment
And you guys there whipping it up!
Of course there are those who won’t be happy.
On the contract side there are things there I’m not happy with but I’m a realist and league’s rod in the back is its fast natured pace-NOT suitable for LIVE FTA and commercial ads in great numbers like AFL.
The biggest gripe I have is with Nine ITSELF. The station’s employees on the front line, like the Today show, have no affinity to the game. They don’t push it and even guys like the sports reporter are toned down by it. They highlighted bloody AUSKICK for $^$^ sake this morning.
You may come back and say they don’t want to be seen as a station not favouring NRL but that doesn’t stop 7 & prior 10. Thank goodness ch. 10 are becoming more balanced. Just get rid of those morons on The Project.
August 28th 2012 @ 2:17pm
Australian Rules said | August 28th 2012 @ 2:17pm | Report comment
“They highlighted bloody AUSKICK for $^$^ sake this morning.”
Matt, it’s the biggest national sports program for juniors in the country. You honestly have a problem with them showing kids playing sport… because it’s not the sport you prefer?
August 28th 2012 @ 11:55am
Von Neumann said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:55am | Report comment
no offence, but the ones who have not seen the truth of the deal. It was the best deal on the table.
by a country mile.
August 28th 2012 @ 4:38pm
Boomshanka said | August 28th 2012 @ 4:38pm | Report comment
Von Neumann
Please advise where we can see the details of the “deal”. How do you know this was the best by a country mile?
Only customers have the right to judge quality. As a consumer of rugby league, who’s had to put up with third world coverage over many years, only to find we’ve five more of the same, I’ll say the deal stinks
August 28th 2012 @ 6:33pm
Australian Rules said | August 28th 2012 @ 6:33pm | Report comment
I must say, I too am intrigued by Von’s assertions that it was “the best deal on the table”.
Indulge us…what else was on the table?
August 29th 2012 @ 7:24am
Boomshanka said | August 29th 2012 @ 7:24am | Report comment
Von hasn’t even replied to my request in a thread above as to untruths or false statements, yet he/she is very happy to come online and spout consistently with no substance that this is a great deal.
Unlike the AFL deal which was announced with much fanfare and detail the NRL deal appears yet again lost in the mire with little information as to how we’ll be able to access our sport next year. I’m still cringing in anticipation of losing the grand final at the final whistle, no all stars game, and delayed internationals (all in glorious standard definition).
August 30th 2012 @ 12:42pm
Crosscoder said | August 30th 2012 @ 12:42pm | Report comment
dear oh dear.There is indeed more money to flow into the code’s coffers.
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/addons-set-to-take-nrl-rights-price-up-to-125b-20120828-24yv.html
Some people should perhaps take a little notice of Graeme Samuel(rformer AFL commissioner) who was deeply involved in the negotiiations.The very same gent who had input in the last AFL deal.
I will quote his viëws on the NRL deaÏ: -
“I think the outcome that they got was the VERY BEST deal the league could have done.I think it is fair to say that the league has done a very good deal and they should have been delighted”.
Now before anyone predictably suggests he would say that,consider the fact that media pundits were downplaying the code getting $1bn due to the tough economic environment and ad revenues.
This deal is not even concluded to the point where all avenues are taken into account.
Wait til the final washout ,and then we can work ouselves into the usual lather.
August 30th 2012 @ 2:45pm
Australian Rules said | August 30th 2012 @ 2:45pm | Report comment
CC
No-one disarees with that…
For the cash, it’s a great deal.
For the fans, it’s a dud.
August 30th 2012 @ 3:30pm
oikee said | August 30th 2012 @ 3:30pm | Report comment
I think what he is trying to get across is what i think. It is the best deal for the game, fans and the games self esteem.
Mate, it has made a huge difference at grassroots, fans feel more confident knowing they are kicking the life outta the AFL deal, the crowds are increasing, people are starting to look, ask questions, how on earth did they get the same amount as AFL, 1 billion plus, and its that magic Billion mark that made it possible, now the sky is our oyster.
We have scraped clawed and dig, now we can be driven with confidence,.
That is the can of whoopass now opened, we no longer have to think we are second best.
Trying to buy Gillion is no more than a shot across the bow, another one.
The game can afoard not to get him, if we get him, imagine what that alone will do for growth.
All these little pieces are part of Grants puzzle, this man is borderline genius.
He wants Gillion because he can start with a clean slate, if he gets a league man it will just take a little longer, he wants to fast-track league.
Anyhow, watch this space, i am interested to know if Gillion takes the job, i hope he does.
August 30th 2012 @ 6:12pm
Crosscoder said | August 30th 2012 @ 6:12pm | Report comment
For what fans AR?.Not everyone is claiming it is a dud.Those near the coal face,those who want a schedule fixed at the start of the year,for those fans who want their club to survive,for those fans who don’t want to see their players going to other codes,those in the bush who have been struggling,juniors who pay high insce .
The code had little money,the ch10 offer for 4 FTA was according to Mattiske a lot less than the $800m caimed.
The code had litlle money to throw around,if they had a “warchest”then one could argue about more FTA coverage.The next deal,the code can be a lot more flexible.
Sorry ,you dont ‘speak for all fans of rugby league..
In any deal there has to be give and take,Samuel’s comments hold a fair amount of legitimacy.
The code hasn’t even scratched the surface of mobile and Sky NZ.
One minute AFL fans proudly boasted the NRL wouldn’t achieve $1bn,it was plastered all over some of these threads.Now they have they have joined the chorus of rl fans who wanted more FTA,to justify or deflect from their previous predictions.A tad ironic.
Gil has stated the deal gives the code many opportunities,I suggest $800m would not have done so.
August 30th 2012 @ 7:00pm
Australian Rules said | August 30th 2012 @ 7:00pm | Report comment
I don’t pretend to “speak for all fans of rugby league”.
The fans have spoken loudly enough themselves…on this site especially.
And to clarify, when I refer to “fans”, I mean those that watch the game on TV.
August 31st 2012 @ 7:37am
Crosscoder said | August 31st 2012 @ 7:37am | Report comment
You were quite happy to call it a dud deal,but apparently like in any decision of this magnitude lacked insufficient knowledge, to come up with one positive.Just the usual generalisation.
I supplied up with at least half a dozen. Know your subject well my teacher use to say.
.I suggest if the deal had been less than $1bn ,the whingers would be complaining there is not a lot of money available to use on grassroots etc.
At the same time AR,your mob of flag wavers,would be jumping up and down,see rugby league is not worth as much as the AFL,because of the game going longer,and the tV stations think so.
That argument was kicked up the Kyber Pass by the deal and the pending ones yet to come.
The fact the game secured the funding (it has)has put a few noises out of joint and left eggs on a few faces.You only have to read some of the posts from the usual mob
Not all fans on this site BTW. Anycase I have spelt out the ones who will benefit the most,and numberwise they leave the posters on this site in their wake.
Samuel,McLachlan,the media journos,the clubs,the players,grassroots,the bush have asserted it was an excellent deal.you say its a dud.I just wonder where I will take my authoritative assessment from ,as being reliable……………………………..
The code had SFA cash,and you call it a dud deal.Dud because it had the audacity to go close to matching the AFL’s one,more like it..
August 31st 2012 @ 9:07am
Australian Rules said | August 31st 2012 @ 9:07am | Report comment
Oh please
You haven’t responded like this to the hundreds of league fans that have criticised the deal. You ignore them and target me…wonder why…?
Anyway,
1) I acknowledged the deal exceeded what I thought they would get.
2) The reason for that was because I thought they’d go for more live games and more FTA – they didn’t, they went for cash…fair enough.
3) No, they didn’t get as much cash as the AFL did but it’s still an incredible result for the NRL.
4) Yes, it sets them up for the future, but fans have been angry that the tv product remains unchanged from the last 5 years…and most league fans have been complaining about the Ch9 product for a long time now.
I am genuinely happy that the NRL got such a cash boost, it was sorely needed.
But at the same time, I feel for the fans because the tv product maintains the status quo, when many were calling for improvement, or at least change.
August 31st 2012 @ 8:03pm
Crosscoder said | August 31st 2012 @ 8:03pm | Report comment
Please! It’s a debate,the kitchen too hot?
There are rugby league fans who are not excited with it.But there also many fans who are excited by the deal.With due respect there would be lucky to be 100 rl fans posting here.I understand where the naysayers are coming from.I have a little contact within the game,give me some idea.
I responded to you because you as an AFL fan(with the in your face Australian Rules moniker) called it a dud deal.I gave you reasons.I have given my $5 worth on many boards here ,in response to rl fans ,who are against it,just as others in favour have.I have expressed my anti ch9 views.But I look at the overall good of the game,and not for us fans who want to watch at our convenience.
You generalised.Anyone can generalise.I have stated there are good and bad points.
Last time the code had no fixed schedule ,they have one now for 20 rds.That is a plus,yet you can’t se it.
If you cannot see benefits for fans,and remember the tv deal is no worse than before ,if that were the case I would agree.
The code needs money ,substantial amounts.
I respond to AFL fans who come on board,because sometimes their motives are not what they seem and history has proven that right.GOGWS and the Cattery are classice examples. Particularly as they were quite vigorous on how little the code would achieve,now that has hit them between the eyes,they join the chorus of rl fans who call it a dud deal to cover their rear ends.The number of posts predicting the amount by them was astronomical.
The fact I spend so little time on AFL threads,means my agendas reveolve arounf rl threads.
If you cannot see plusses for the fans in the deal,you have not read ther details.
August 28th 2012 @ 11:35am
Von Neumann said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:35am | Report comment
good post Matt.
People think we got dudded, but when you really examine the deal, its the best thing that could have happened to the game.
JUST because some people will be upset with 1 less FTA game, or commentators they don’t like (but for how long will they hang round)…ect, they blast the deal…
well its a fantastic deal, and its put the game in the best position.
How dare you doubt a bunch of business men and women who have been widely successful in their careers. They have done well here too.
come on.
August 28th 2012 @ 8:50am
Matt_S said | August 28th 2012 @ 8:50am | Report comment
I do not begrudge the Nine/Foxsports deal. They are in the business of making money. I understand that league is a game with few natural breaks and 1 live game on FTA is probably the best we can have atm.
The thing I hate is being with a station that has little regard for its league viewers who make up a fair portion of its viewership. This morning on the Today Show we had a segment on AFL Auskick, and Richard Wilkins whining about his Swans in the tipping. It seems Nine’s passion for league stops at the broadcast. They are happy to promote junior AFL when they could show people the great Kids to Kangaroos program which all other junior footy programs are based on including Auskick.
August 28th 2012 @ 11:09am
Captain Obvious said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:09am | Report comment
If you produced a nationally broadcast show, would you give preference to a sport that has a strong national reach… or one that pretty much only cares about two states?
August 28th 2012 @ 11:39am
Von Neumann said | August 28th 2012 @ 11:39am | Report comment
I think they need to give some kind of balance. You can’t just take one issue and paint a picture with it. For all we know it was probably a contractual thing or something the AFL paid for.
I am not going to think about it. Except to say they are looking to beef up the RL side of the “auskick” equivalent.
August 28th 2012 @ 10:46pm
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League said | August 28th 2012 @ 10:46pm | Report comment
Nine runs stations in Brisbane, Sydney, Newcastle, Melbourne and Darwin. The stations in Adelaide and Perth are run by their affiliates.
Over 50% of Australians live in Queensland and NSW.
August 29th 2012 @ 3:01pm
Hamish said | August 29th 2012 @ 3:01pm | Report comment
Many of those 50% dont follow NRL but have an interest in RU which lowers the coverage I would suggest..Many follow both but a lot dont and the RU types are usually the highly sought after A-B demographic whereas AFL has a broader base…
August 29th 2012 @ 11:11pm
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League said | August 29th 2012 @ 11:11pm | Report comment
Go look at the ratings. Rugby league draws far higher ratings. Even the National Youth Competition draws higher ratings than the Super 15. Face it, rugby union is nothing but a niche sport in QLD and NSW.
August 29th 2012 @ 9:45am
me, I like football said | August 29th 2012 @ 9:45am | Report comment
I doubt Auskick was based on Kids to Kangaroos program, as Auskick is a continuation of Vickick that was going on in the 80′s
August 29th 2012 @ 6:45pm
Matt_S said | August 29th 2012 @ 6:45pm | Report comment
Actually Kicky Vicky is based on mini/mod league introduced in the 70′s. Rugby League was the first sport to introduce modified version of the senior game for kids. Just like Rugby league was the 1st footy code in Australia to introduce a level 3 in coaching for its code.
August 30th 2012 @ 3:28pm
Ian Whitchurch said | August 30th 2012 @ 3:28pm | Report comment
Regrettably for rugby league, it then massively dropped the ball.
Yes, league should be putting as much time and effort into mini league as the AFL puts into Auskick.
August 30th 2012 @ 6:19pm
Crosscoder said | August 30th 2012 @ 6:19pm | Report comment
One word Ian.Money .The very thing the code has secured.It is a lot easier to do so,with a larger number of D/Os.
It may well have dropped the ball,but still has its highest participation Auswide on record.Imagibe what they wil be able to do with more of the filthy lucre.