In a season of strong numbers for the A-League, the most important is arguably the television ratings increase; given the current television deal expires in mid-2013.
According to a recent stat, Fox Sports’ A-League live average audience is up 62 percent on last season.
As far as timing goes, given the recent setbacks for the code, the strong TV numbers are a much-needed boost given that Football Federation Australia (FFA) needs to wrangle more than the current $19 million per year it gets from Fox Sports in order to ease some financial concerns around the league, let alone increase television presence.
And so recent chat has focused on whether the league is ready for a free-to-air presence – that old chestnut.
According to a recent article in The Herald Sun, “TV industry sources say all the free-to-air networks have cast an eye over the soccer rights and it is understood all remain interested at this early stage, although the looming negotiations over NRL rights make the timetable uncertain.
“SBS will almost certainly bid, but industry sources say Channel 10 will emerge as the most serious contender.”
Following on from the AFL’s deal with Channel Seven and Foxtel, the NRL’s television rights become the next most sought after property in the sporting arena, undoubtedly. Then, some way down the pecking order is the A-League.
When Channel 10 rebranded OneHD, moving it away from its sports-only platform, it could have condemned the FFA’s only real chance of getting proper A-League coverage on the commercial networks.
But any interest would only come once networks are left counting the dollars that remain after they’ve splurged on the NRL’s rights, or if they’ve missed out and are left looking for what they can get to help compensate in some small way. And remember there’s V8 Supercars and more out there up for grabs.
Remember too, as a summer sport the A-League falls in the non-ratings period. So even if it had numbers to rival the AFL and NRL, it would still be hamstrung.
And considering cricket’s place in Australia’s summer psyche relative to football, surely the new-look Big Bash League is first in line to be poached from Fox Sports; no matter how artificial it may seem at this stage (Australian free-to-air networks love nothing more than artificiality).
Then look at the NBL and how Channel 10 has treated it. Even if there is free-to-air interest, what degree of interest and how will it translate into the schedule? If the likes of Channel 10 can pick up exclusive free-to-air A-League content for a pittance, then nothing’s stopping them from treating the product like cheap goods it picked up at the Sunday market.
With the World Cups till 2022 locked in at SBS, the commercials’ interest in the round ball is likely to go cold. And, after all, marrying football, with its uninterrupted 45-minute halves, to commercial networks and its need for pauses to slot in ads will always hurt the likelihood that we’ll see Melbourne Victory versus Perth Glory slotted between the summer versions of X-Factor and Beauty and the Geek.
What I’m getting at here is to curb your enthusiasm, A-League fans. The golden free-to-air ticket of live games could be some time away, if it ever happens. It remains to be seen whether the likes of Channel 10, interested or not, are ready to commit to the league beyond a token gesture of an 11pm replay (again, see the NBL).
Fox Sports will likely retain the A-League rights. But, yes, marrying some free-to-air component to the TV deal is critical for the FFA. Fans just need to accept that it could be as minimal as an A-League highlights package sold to a free-to-air digital secondary channel, or a game a week on football-friendly SBS.
Free-to-air is needed for growth, we are told. But as the NBL has shown at what cost?
Better to be a big fish in the small pond of pay-TV than a small fish being monstered by the sharks in the commercial TV world?
This is ultimately about leverage; how much more the FFA can squeeze out of Fox Sports. So the talk of free-to-air interest comes in very handy. But let’s just be realistic here.
RRRRR
Guest
p/s in the spirit of the article, FFA should accept a less financial payment by giving it to SBS for the good of the game, rather than just going with the highest bidder.
RRRRR
Guest
In a way, locking the A-League in a Foxtel prison until mid-2012 is not bad. The A-League has developed from having a low standard of play -- hoofing the ball and kick and run -- and is slowly developing into a good style, if the rest can follow the example of Brisbane Roar. So when 2012 comes around, where this A-League football is finally launched onto the public through free TV, hopefully by then the standard of play will be something really worth watching regularly. As we look back, it could be a blessing in disguise.
Emric
Guest
:). Ka-Blonk Perhaps the FFA who make money from Sky-TV by selling the product there? It's worth about 20% of the total TV rights deal. If you think that the NRL, FFA, NBL have New Zealand teams involved because they have some sort of soft foundness for New Zealand you would be wildly mistaken having a New Zealand team encouragers New Zealanders to watch these programs on Sky-TV (approx 900,000 New Zealanders have Sky) if this happens the ratings justify those institutions selling more TV rights to Sky at ever increasing prices, the NRL and SR rights over a 5 year period are worth approx 75 Million Dollars (NRL) and closer to 140 million dollars for SR. I do not know what Sky is prepared to pay for the basketball, or A-League. So having New Zealanders watching the NRL, A-League, Basketball and SR is well worth it because its real money being paid.
Ka-Blonk
Guest
Who cares about New Zealand football? They are lucky to have an A-league team in the first place. if the Aussie TV deal outweighs what they bring into the League financially, then there is no point having them in the A-League
Jeff
Guest
My kids play football because I don't want them to play league. I want them to run around and learn to play team sports. But we live in western Sydney and they and all their friends, who all play football too, only talk about league. I'm Victorian, I watch AFL on FTA. When they start to make their own choices about what they play they will not choose football, because they never get to follow a team on TV, they lack the passion. They like the Eels and the Swans and if you asked them who Sydney FC were they wouldn't know. If my life doesn't fit your logic get some new logic, I have not need to lie to make a point.
The Cattery
Roar Guru
I understand Peter, it's true that you are forced to pay a lot of stuff you're never going to watch (on the basic package, and it can be a bitter pill to swallow. There are a couple of stations that the kids watch, and that makes it a bit more tolerable, and I've even caught the wife watching one of the renovation or real estate shows.
Whites
Guest
Deleted
Johnno
Guest
Well soon mobo and others have said here i think fox will introduce A-league packages,
Whites
Guest
Let's look at this year's State of Origin compared to the current stage of qualifying for Brazil 2014. Now I'm not some anti-football nut and I am trying to analyse this in as rational a way as possible. I watch the A-league every weekend, have watched every Australian international for many years no matter what time it is on and have attended an A-League game this year even though my city doesn't have a team. Now the State of Origin is 3 games per year, at the same time each year and has very consistent ratings even though NSW is so pathetic. The consolidated ratings this year for the 5 metro + 4 regional markets covered by OzTAM were- Game 1- 3,495,000 Game 2- 3,388,000 Game 3- 3,760,000 Now the actual number of viewers would have been far higher due to the large numbers watching at pubs, clubs or at a friends house. (This is true of all big live sporting events although not true for most other programming). The FFA can only sell world cup qualifiers, asian cup qualifiers and friendlies. They are on at random times throughout the year, up to half of them at highly inconvenient times, against countries with which the general Australian public has little interest and the big final stage world cup qualifiers only occur every 4 years. The ratings for the current qualifiers(5metro+4regional): 2SEP-Australia vs Thailand- 97,000 6SEP-Saudi Arabia vs Australia- 25,000 (5city only) 19:30, 11OCT-Australia vs Oman- 127,000 11NOV-Oman vs Australia- could not find 22:00, 15NOV-Thailand vs Australia- 104,000 Now let's assume FoxSports is available in 25% of homes. So we'll times these figures by 4 to get a rough rating for if the games were on free to air. That will give us a free to air equivalent of roughly 350-400,000 viewers in our time zone and 75-100,000 for the middle of the night. Granted the next stage will have higher ratings and one-off friendlies in Australia against Brazil or England would have high ratings. But this is nothing compared to what State of Origin achieves on 3 Wednesday nights every single year. I would suggest that if we add up the Fox Sports ratings for the 6 3rd round and the 8 4th round games they would still be less then the lowest rating State of Origin in any given year. Over the period of the 4 year world cup cycle there will be 12 State of Origins(minimum 38 million viewers) and 14 world cup qualifiers(currently no more then 3 million viewers). The difference is quiet stark.
PeterK
Guest
Wouldn't it be wins all round for SBS to pay a (small) amount to Fox for the right to air a replay of "Match of the Round" on a Monday night? Fox have a little extra income, and I can't see Fox's following drop even a small amount from that. The contract could include that Fox can for free advertise on SBS that Fox has all games and live. I think such an arrangement has benefits for SBS (cheaper purchase of something which attracts viewers), for Fox (extra income, plus extra exposure of their own product), for fans who already have Fox (a chance to see a game again), and definitely for fans without PayTV.
PeterK
Guest
Personally I have no (particular) problem with ads during a delayed replay -- generally, no action is missed.
PeterK
Guest
I don't smoke any more, I have NO "nights on the turps" (and I'm not stopping my anti-heart-attack nightly red or two), I never hire movies, I extremely rarely buy junk-food, and I've always drunk lots of water, but I still don't want to pay for a whole lot of stuff on Fox in which I have little or no interest. I need an "A-League only" package!
PeterK
Guest
From the perspective of someone in NQ living over 1000 km from the nearest live games, and not willing to pay for all that other content on Fox, I'd prefer any FTA weekly programme to be a single full game (even if condensed to an hour) rather than a general "highlights of the whole round" programme. I would think Fox could onsell the delayed game to FTA and have as part of their contract smart adverrtising for people to watch the whole round LIVE on Fox. What a pity Fox can't come up with an exclusively A-League package -- now that might be worth buying!
PeterK
Guest
We can't attend ANY games in NQ, yet!
mobo
Guest
I think it's the long term future we have to look at. As much as I hate how commercial networks have screwed dozens of sports in the past, football needs that wider audience, particularly the youths of today who are missing out. Whether that's one or two games a week on delay, a whole bunch of them live, if it helps the sport become a contender in the ring with the NRL and AFL in the future than why not? Whatever happens I really hope something is given to FTA and by the way I love Foxtel's coverage, it's just, in the wider sense we have to look at the benefits. Fox Sports, FTA and the FFA have to realize football in Australia is not going to be anything more than a moderately big deal unless they agree to compromise for one another, eventually, the results will come for the sport and the ratings.
panatellas
Guest
Jaceman It's only the Socceroos' World Cup qualifying games (and World Cup games) that are going on the anti-siphoning list from 2013. All their other games - Asian Cup, friendlies etc. - will still be be able to be shown exclusively on pay TV.
daniels
Guest
A-league coverage is only a small tiny part of the product, and is a part that will , in all likelihood be offered as a separate contract. The FFA know that the money is in the national teams games.
Midfielder
Guest
TC You are right, in what you say ... but it assumes that FFA are not aware of what to do... I would go so far as to say I think the A-League FTA payment will not be great and my prediction for the A-League is closer to 140 to 150 Million over 5 years... the Socceroos are the big money spinner ... my estimate on the Socceroos is based on a State of Orgin match has been valued between 11 & 16 million ... so six home and six away Socceroo matches .... my guess is between 5 & 7 million ... that is if you count the six home games less than one sixth of what a SOO match is valued... 3 SOO valued between 11 & 16 million each ... so 3 matches between 33 & 48 million per year... Socceroos six home matches, say another 2 matches played in the same time zone meaning effectively 8 home games and 4 games played at various hours ... I think 5 to 6 million per match is very achievable... As for Overseas markets ... NZ, PNG, Singapore all have a reasonable A-L following ... OK OK I hear ya not massive either... BUT if you got 320 hours of programming and say replay rights ... 1.5 million works out at just above 4, 500 per hour for a prime time sports product with a established following and no costs ... ie. take the Fox feed.... that is very achievable ....
asanchez
Roar Guru
I think we can get $50-$60m a year. While it is an optimistic figure, we'll probably get or go close to best ever viewing figures and attendances this season. Also the sport does have a lot of potential, especially with how this season is going. Foxtel also will have a huge interest in keeping the league alive and thriving, not only they played a huge role in creating it, but they need a quality domestic competition in the summer months to keep their customers engaged. FTA is no silver bullet though, SBS would be the only channel that would play the A-league in primetime if they bought it for peanuts. They'd also advertise it heavily on their channels. For me, that would be a good start. As we've seen with the Super 15 show on CH 9 after midnight, and the NBL on ONE also on at around midnight, FTA is not always best. Unless a FTA network pays big dollars for Football it will treat it like dirt. If it does pay a large amount of money then it will have to show the league at a good time to recover and get a return on their investment.
The Cattery
Roar Guru
I'll just make one general comment about increasing TV rights, it's hard, hard work - no one is going to plonk a blank cheque on the table unless you are offering real value back to the TV station. As an example, look at what the NRL has done to give value back to the broadcaster: doubling up games on Friday nights, introducing Monday night football, letting TV stations choose their preferred games 5 or 6 weeks out, gone to a night grand final, etc, etc. The AFL too has had to be innovative over the years: introduce a light on the scoreboard to signal to the umps when they can bounce the ball to start play (while an ad shows), moved away from playing all games on a Saturday arvo, explored unique starting times, thrown in a few Thursday night games, miking up umps and runners, etc, etc If you want big money from a broadcaster, you have to offer them something, you have to work with them, you have to let them have a few wins, let them dictate some terms over your game - that's the landscape. You have to remember that TV stations have the choice of endless cheap TV product that rates as much as sport, endless, absolutely endless. So we have to understand something that is very important: the game on its own is not enough to provide value to a broadcaster, you have to be prepared to sell a little bit of your soul along the way.