Foxtel withdraws offer for Rugby broadcast rights, Optus move looms

Multiple reviews of what's wrong, only for results to get worse. Leading rugby into social/political positions Folau debacle Fighting with coach at key event at rwc Massive drops in club playing numbers (no i don't think that playing with the data by including growth of female participation (which is great) to cover loss of club player numbers cuts it ) And so on....

Get a fta deal for goodness sake. You can track the current poor following from when they removed super and club rugby from fta. Not all followers live in pymble and have full suite foxtel

Why aren’t Optus a viable alternative? Their coverage of football is amazing and much cheaper than FOXTEL.

If Foxtel doesn’t broadcast the Rugby, ie Super Rugby, Mitre 10, Test Rugby etc, then it will be bye bye from us for sure. The only reason we have Foxtel is for the Rugby.

Frankly, unless SR teams and the WBs actually start winning games, TV viewer numbers and game attendance numbers will both stagnate/decline. Therefore any TV rights deal (Pay TV or FTA) won't be worth much. On field results, as well as measurable grass roots support for the code are required urgently before any worthwhile media deals can be written. With the current status of the code, at present TV channels would be within their rights to charge the code to broadcast games. RA have a tough job on their hands. Are they up to it?

Reading between the lines on what RA has said before about need for balancing $ but also a need to grow reach, and previous posturing from FOX on Rugby seeking more FTA, I think what's happening here is that Optus are interested, able/ willing to pay more, and would be looking to provide much more FTA as it will grow prominence and pull-through into their service as they would recognise where Rugby is at, and putting it all on their service and expecting strong take up isn't realistic. FOX on the other hand just want to make it as exclusive as possible and are desperately trying to minimise churn on their dwindling base. Kayo is a real concern for them, not growing anywhere near where they had hoped in numbers and certainly on $$ at $25 a throw vs. the $80 for the cable box numbers that are receding every quarter. Surprised there isn't more commentary about their strategy failing and their Cricket deal having done nothing but load up huge cost on their P&L. FTAs won't bid standalone for the package - the depth of all the content out of NZ, SA etc is made for a subscription service, but they could come in as a partner of an Optus or similar for a once a week broadcast of Super/ Tests/ other premium Rugby matches - Club, NRC etc. Im cautiously optimistic that RA is well placed to get what everyone wants - more money, more FTA and a partner that actually cares about growing the game. Or at worst, it pushes FOX to pay more to keep Optus at bay as a viable sports alternative, and they release more Super Rugby onto FTA.

Same here, got it to watch Rugby and now the kids are older we really don't watch much else other than the commercial stations on it.

I suspect the size of the market limits the number of likely bidders for the content, so would need to balance up the costs of having that "content packager" set up/engaged vs what is actually out there in terms of interest. In a market where is few interested parties, it may be a case of just having to go with whatever they put forward. Or are you thinking of retail direct to the consumer via the "content packager" (presumably an RA-affiliate organisation)?

That is one approach but it is based on a broadcast model. Another approach is to setup an organisation to package what you have to offer in a way that reflects what the end users want to buy. Then you have a far more marketable product for the future and you aren't basing most of your funding on a doomed publication model. Then again Rugby Australia seem to be more focused on being politically correct than on trivial things like their fiscal sustainability - so I guess my expectations are misguided.

Thanks Smiggle.

She probably needs to wear anything Folau related, but even then its hard to predict your best paid player is going to lose his mind. Still, would have been nice to have him in that Wales game.

So why put a picture up of Raelene Castle to accompany your headline.... She is being dismantled...... Remember a wonderful Canadian band called The Crash Test Dummies.... Their signature chant.. Mhhhh, Mhhhh, Mhmmm.

I can see and understand what Optus are doing. I can see and understand what Foxtel are doing. I can see and understand what the FTA channels are doing. But can someone PLEASE EXPLAIN what the heck the ARU are doing and why!? Have any of these people ever negotiated a tv deal previously? Or is this another training session for Castle at the expense of Aussie Rugby?

And fair comments as I don’t watch rugby so have no idea re quality of the coverage. I’ve been interested in this thread because it’s a parallel discussion on cricket section. But Fox has done an excellent job on cricket and AFL IMO. Perhaps the attention they pay these individual sports is aligned to how much they have paid for the broadcasting rights to each?

Fox could have done a far better job of promoting rugby...The commentators are terrible and the support programs around rugby are cringeworthy. Put a decent show on and people will watch but I tune out and Im rugby mad so if guys like me are tuning out because there is no quality in the support shows then how do they expect a less dedicated fan to watch. Improve the by-products and it brings in viewers which makes their investment a better choice. They have no one but themselves to blame for the lack of support for their coverage..

A League has been dire on Fox and SBS. Below Super Rugby

If Fox no longer has rugby I will no longer have fox.....that simple really and I signed up as 1 of their first customers....97 or 98 i think...

yep

Suspect Foxtel would want as much sport content as they can get to support their shift towards streaming products such as Kayo which they've heavily invested in, plus they are already geared up within Australia for sports production across multiple sports (including Rugby already) which makes would make it an attractive proposition for them to continue so, yes smoke an mirrors and just part of the commercial by-play. Foxtel would know they are in a strong negotiating position with few likely other bidders so they're making RA sweat in an effort to improve their deal. If it was a more competitive field, they probably wouldn't take this approach.

I did get Kayo and much prefer it but given that they are owned by Fox it looks grim for local rugby coverage.