It is the one debate that everyone has a strong opinion on and the one debate that, shortly, will be put to bed. Should Socceroos games be placed on the anti-siphoning list?
For those living under a rock, or outside Australia, the anti-siphoning list is a Government-approved list of sporting events that are “culturally significant” to Australians, and thus, are only available for free-to-air (FTA) to bid on.
CURRENT SPORTS EVENTS ON THE FULL AUSTRALIAN ANTI-SIPHONING LIST: BROADCASTING LAWS EXPLAINED
The current anti-siphoning list expires on 31 December 2010 and the Government are preparing to introduce the new legislation into Parliament this week.
While many argue that having Socceroos games on FTA is crucial as it drastically increases exposure (currently only 34 per cent of Australians have Pay-TV), is placing the Socceroos on the anti-siphoning list the best thing for the sport?
As it currently stands the Socceroos are broadcast on FOX SPORTS as part of a seven-year agreement that ends in 2013. FOX SPORTS paid $120 million for the rights, or just over $17 million a year.
The deal has been a tremendous one for FOX SPORTS with the Socceroos recording the two highest rating shows in history across the entire FOXTEL platform, with more in the top ten.
FOX SPORTS wants the Socceroos and they’re prepared to pay big money for it.
But, by placing Socceroos games on the anti-siphoning list FOX SPORTS are unable to even bid for the rights, therefore reducing the competition for the FTA networks and in turn the money they will pay for the rights. Without competition amongst the bidders, the value of the rights is greatly reduced.
Is that good for football?
There are important details, however, that cloud the picture even further.
For starters, it is only Socceroos World Cup qualifiers played in Australia that are on the anti-siphoning list. Away qualifiers and friendly internationals aren’t on the list.
Theoretically, the FFA could sell the rights to friendly games as a separate package. Away World Cup qualifiers are a little different in that generally the FFA buy these rights and then on-sell them, currently to FOX SPORTS.
Again, theoretically, there is nothing stopping the FFA from agreeing to on-sell all these games to a particular network, say FOX SPORTS, and packaging them up with friendly games.
In the course of a year, there would be more away WCQ’s and friendly games than there would be home WCQ’s.
But the question is whether the FFA would want to split up the Socceroos rights, or sell the rights to all games to one network, as they currently do with FOX SPORTS.
But what of the A-League?
Despite a push from ONE HD early in the year the include one game per week from the A-League on the anti-siphoning list, the A-League, it seems will be free from the list and open to a competitive bidding “war”.
Most people recognise that bundling the Socceroos/A-League together is what helped reap the FFA $120m back in 2006, when the A-League was in its infancy.
But with the Socceroos now seemingly destined for the anti-siphoning list and a FTA network, just how much value is the A-League worth on its own? The general feeling is not much, at least not as much as it would be bundled with the Socceroos.
Is getting less money for A-League TV rights good for football?
The answer, of course, is a resounding no. More and more sports are relying on their television deals to fund the game. Certainly it was hoped the next TV deal for the A-League would help it out of its current financial predicament and put it on the path to profit and, ultimately, a stronger competition.
The FFA recognise the importance of FTA, they have repeatedly mentioned over the last few years their desire to have both the Socceroos and A-League on FTA. But they also want strong competition for the rights to bump up the price they receive.
Ben Buckley travelled to Canberra last week to meet with Senator Conroy, the man responsible for the new legislation, imploring him to keep the Socceroos OFF the list. Buckley, the man who masterminded the AFL’s last deal worth $780 million, knows how important it is to have competition.
Football is not yet at the stage where networks are climbing over themselves to secure television deals, we need all the competition we can get and FOX SPORTS are a big (and wealthy) competitor. Take them out of the equation and all you have left is, most likely, ONE HD.
Given the FFA know how important FTA is, there was a good chance that they would have sold the rights to a FTA network in any case.
Claims that having no anti-siphoning list will lead to all sports simply being sold off to pay-TV are just baseless scare-mongering.
Every sport knows the value of FTA and they would ensure that the right balance is reached between FTA and Pay-TV. But they shouldn’t be dictated to by a Government, to be even more precise a Minister (it is Sen. Conroy, and Sen. Conroy only, who determines the make up of the anti-siphoning list), on who they can and can’t sell their rights to.
Out of this Football appear to be on the course for less money for Socceroos rights and less money for A-League rights. In return they will get more viewers and exposure for a minimum of 2-3 games a year.
Less money for the FFA means less ability to promote the A-League, less ability to initiate important components of the National Development Plan and National Curriculum, less ability to grow the game at the grassroots.
Is that good for football?
What I think will happen:
Socceroos games (all) – ONE HD
A-League – FOX SPORTS
FFA Cup – FOX SPORTS
2015 Asian Cup – FOX SPORTS
Asian Champions League – FOX SPORTS
Danny_Mac
Roar Guru
Don't forget that Fox threatened Ch7 a few years ago that they wouldn't buy the 2-3 dud AFL games a week of them, they didn't see the value. Ch7 freaked out because they had already bought the rights and ASSUMED that fox would be happy to get the scraps off the table. If you hand all the blue ribbon events to FTA, where lets face it we'll be behind AFL, NRL and if we go the OneHD option, we'll probably be behind their Motorsport programming and their Basketball programming which they've invested heavily in (Ironically, the new NBL is their A-League). Fox, who have been football's great cash cow in recent years, aren't stupid, they won't pay top dollar to have the rubbish that nobody else wants to see...
Danny_Mac
Roar Guru
Unless somebody is going to pay you a premium price for all of the eggs, the basket, the ribon around the basket, the chicken that laid the egg, the barn the egg was laid in... LOL you get the drift. What concerns me is that while this woud be good for exposure, the lack of an "exclusivity premium" will hurt the league while it is still trying to cement its place. I guess what we need to know is how much is the "exclusivity premium" acutally worth, It may not actually be that significant, in which case I'm quite happy for a breakdown such as what you have above. However what I do know is that by putting football on the A-SL, we lose the OPTION of negotiating with Fox at any point, and we can kiss any possible premiums away right there...
JAJI
Guest
Conroy believe it or not is actually a big football fan - supports Chelsea and loves the Socceroos. Recall early this year him giving quick permission to SBS to televise some of the World Cup on sbs second digital channel when the 2 first round games were being played at the same time I wouldnt think he would be aiming to harm football in anyway. He will probably tailer the list to suit football This is a very difficult call to make - keep the game away from Free to Air but get vast more dollars or force its cash cow (Socceroos) on to Free to Air and get less money and more exposure Remember - the more cash they get the higher the salary cap in the A League and better standards you will see Ben Buckley. Either lobbying Federal Government or FIFA at present. Talk about a busy dance card
Mobo
Guest
This is what I think is going to happen Ten/One will get home qualifiers, fox sports will get away,friendlies and all the Asian cup stuff. I also see a strong possibility that Ten/one will go for two blockbuster matches from the a-league a week, even if it is at a very moderate price because the FFA will want the exposure for their league.
Football United
Guest
most of the sport i watch these days apart from collingwood games is on Pay TV. while super 14, a league and EPL are exclusive to Fox, in melbourne its the only way to watch the wallabies or NRL and thus pay tv works fine for me. in the end Pay TV is just another utility, australia hasn't seemed to realise these and the media love to blast it as the big dark evil when in reality it does a mighty fine job of broadcasting their sport LIVE. take note channel nein.
Football United
Guest
david gallop is gutless in general when it comes to rugby league in melbourne
Mike
Guest
No one screws soccer like 7 lol. I remember that back in the day
apaway
Guest
Let's not forget the debacle of Channel Nine's 2002 World Cup coverage. The World Cup was on the anti-siphoning list and Nine saw the potential of prime-time football games from Japan and South Korea. However, when the Socceroos failed to qualify the idiots at Nine assumed no-one would be interested and only covered the semi finals onward. Thank God for SBS who hopped in and showed all the games live. And the irony was that they outrated the other channels (including the idiots at Nine) even though there was no Australian team playing. Legend has it that Kerry Packer fired a few sports execs that July when he saw the numbers.
Cpaaa
Roar Pro
Excellent article. It is strange that one man decides what goes on FTA and what dosnt ? I dont think that Football can afford to be locked up exclusively again with Foxsports beyond 2013. How do i say it simply..... Share it around. this is how id like to see it FTA- I like the sounds of National Team Home Games FTA- 2 live games per week packaged with NT home game. Fox- All other A-League games Fox- All NT qualifiers and friendlies from abroad Fox- Asian Champions League matches involving Australian Clubs home and abroad SBS- All other ACL matches ABC- W-League/ Asian Cup and Womens World Cup FTA- Asian Cup Finals, Australia 2015. SBS- FFA Cup ( No body does it better at grass roots than SBS). Plenty of Football for everyone to see. Whats that saying they in business...oh thats right. Dont put all your eggs in one basket !!!
BrisbaneBhoy
Guest
They should go to whoever bids the highest. All this list does in lower the market value of the product. Why should FTA networks have exclusive rights to the events? The screw the product and fans over. The day the minister of Communications realizes that damage that is being done the better IMO. NOTE: I'm talking all sports, not just football.
Gob Bluth
Guest
Interestingly Buckley was actually out doing Fox Sports work in Canberra. He wanted to ensure that they could continue to sell away qualifiers to Fox and package them with the A-League. Buckley's concern was if they couldn't sell the A-League with the qualifiers they'd get a lot less for the A-League. Seeing the vast majority of football fans want football on FTA it seemed odd the code's CEO was doing his best to keep it on Pay TV. Of course, maybe Buckley realises that any anger that this won't be directed towards him but towards the Labor party.
Ian
Guest
Trouble is, if we win the World Cup bid and are stuck with this antiquted piece of legislation then only three free to air networks will be allowed to bid. And one (or two) of these will no doubt have some BS clause with the AFL such that they can't/won't compete seriously.
Danny_Mac
Roar Guru
What the government is failing to realise, is that there is a premium price paid for exclusive broadcasting rights, and at this stage in football's development, we need the cash! We need to be able to prop up struggling clubs until the game can stand on its own two feet. at the moment the FoxSports cash is why the game even exisits. I see little interest apart from OneHD who aren't going to be able to match the FoxSports money, espcially when their focus is on AFL and Motorsport. SBS/ABC are the graveyard of sports... community broadcasters don't have the cash to maintain a fully professional league. if we win the 2022 WC bid, then we'll have the cash to run the game independant of TV money, and having better FTA exposure will be an advantage with the increased publicity that hosting the WC will have... but other than that... you don't bite the hand that feeds you... I'd be interested if the FFA doesn't want their product on the ASL, can they sue the govenment on a restraint of trade? Any lawyers out there?
Danny_Mac
Roar Guru
It is so painfully ironic, isn't it?!
AndyRoo
Roar Guru
The funniest part is what Ian alludes to...the anti siphoning list leads to a fair few fans getting worse access to sport!
dasilva
Roar Guru
I see the anti-siphoning list as a cute peculiarity of Australian culture and their disproportionate focus towards sports. When there were threats to remove the anti-siphoning laws and the main TV network campaign together with ads to protest it was just hilarious. The idea that we have an inherent right to watch sporting events for free and that it will be unfair if we don't have the opportunity to watch the game without paying more money seems rather petty. I could imagine one day, we may campaign to see it introduced in the UN declaration of human rights. I'm all for government intervening with regulation to correct shortfall and limitations of marketbased force but please don't try to tell me that people can't afford pay TV to watch sporting events as a priority area. When I try to demonstrate to international students about Australian obsession with sports. I usually tell them about the anti-siphoning list and it's always good for a laugh. Although I do want Socceroos to be on free to air as I believed it's a good idea to spread your brand to a larger population based. I don't think they should be forced to do it by Government regulation especially when these anti-siphoning laws are uncompetitiveness and artificial lower the amount of money FFA gets from TV rights.
The Phantom
Guest
Or that it does not cover some regional areas - I think that will change in the next 2 years
Ian
Guest
And: no one screws rugby league like 9 (also with help from the AFL)
Ian
Guest
I doubt Gina Rinehart would have bought in to the Ten Network so close to the announcement of the anti siphoning list without some insider knowledge of some kind. http://www.news.com.au/business/mining-heiress-becomes-major-ten-network-shareholder/story-e6frfm1i-1225959036628
Chris White
Guest
You don't mention the fact that ONE HD may not be on air much longer... if James Packer gets his way.