RA turn to Optus for TV deal

Midfielder get a Fetch Box bought outright and pay $15 a month for all the beIN sport you can handle

I’ve Got an Old “Rusty Saw “ you can borrow? Problem is I think the Limb is already badly infected..

Where was that Randwick?

Hey I think you will climbing back down Everest, if you think Ruggar will be the first choice option on Pub TV’s when the AFL & NRL start in March.

FREE or they pay me to watch .

Interesting tidbit that may have a bearing on the final outcome with Foxtel is the news (NZ Herald and Daily Mail) is that the Saffas are looking at joining the 6 Nations (to become 7 Nations) after the next RWC. No mention of their SR sides but with two Saffa sides in European competitions, will they stay in SR or move all their teams to Europe. Food for thought.

Bluesfan, I don't think that streaming services are necessarily firewalls anymore. If I wanted to watch Game of Thrones in oz, I got Foxtel, if I thought The Mandalorian looked interesting I got Disney plus, if I was interested in the reboot of Veronica Mars I got Stan... etc.. etc.. People are already having to work with this new reality of content not being available through one ubiquitous source like FTA. I think consumption patterns have changed a lot and serendipity has adjusted to this growing norm that involves moving between services. A lot of content is behind what you call firewalls, including sport which is across a range of services like BeIN, Optus, Rugbypass, ESPN etc..etc.. Foxtel itself is already in your firewall category being a services with penetration to a small subset of the population. I'm not even convinced that Super Rugby will gain much attention on FTA with new viewership. The product already as too many challenges. Say I flick the channel on FTA and catch the Reds playing the Brumbies play on a friday night and I live in Qld so want to support my state team, the next week the game is over in SA at like 1am in the morning for me. Does this format capture me as a casual fan? not likely. I personally feel that there might be some more value in trying to gain new rugby viewership through things like the Shute Shield, Hospital Cup and even NRC. You have local clubs playing each other at viewership friendly timeslots. I think RA is smart to try to better promote this level of rugby whilst hopefully making more apparent links to the higher tiers. I suspect that there is a lot of viewership still to be recaptured in the existing rugby supporter base - those individuals involved in rugby at some level, say parents with kids playing, who don't really watch things like the Super Rugby. This would be the low hanging fruit for the RA, not someone who likes watching the AFL and just happens to flick over to a random rugby game. Anyway, as I said initially, hopefully RA have done their due diligence and have some good analysis and modelling around the realities of Rugby viewership. Whilst I have no doubt growth is important and revenue streams through advertisers also a consideration, at the end of the day I suspect gaining the maximum offer from the market period is their highest priority.

Yip, some really good points and hard to disagree with your points/views. But again to just reiterate my views - by moving to Optus - RA does the following: 1. Put it's product behind Firewalls. 2. Effectively restricts product to the hard core fan base prepared to move to Optus purely because of the rugby. 3. Due to the firewall, ability to attract sponsorship $$ if you restrict ability of people to access etc. I actually think streaming is the future of sporting codes and where eventfully they will produce the product for themselves. But the big but - is that I think steaming will work for sports like Rugby in NZ, NRL, AFL and Cricket in Oz - because all those sports hold such dominant positions in their market and effectively hard/impossible to grow much larger - their fan base will follow to whatever platform they are on. For a sporting code like Rugby in Oz - that is becoming the poor cousin to other sporting codes, to move to a platform like Optus is very risky, the ability to build the code will be restricted due to lack of mainstream coverage and very tough sell to gain and retain sponsorship dollars. That being said - basis $$ being offered, as I assuming Optus will pay up for the rights as they need rugby to build their platform, RA might go with them because those $$ are required to support the code in Oz.

If I had to guess, I'd suspect that Super Rugby would be a better mix as they are likely to have already captured the soccer fans with EPL.

TWAS you'd imagine that Foxtel has some hard metrics about how much each user is watching what, which should would give them a fair idea of what the consumer values. Shouldn't be too hard to draw lines between the value of that consumer as a customer and the cost of particular content that said customer is demanding. I guess it'd be a little trickier to weight the value in a content mix, but again nothing some analysis' couldn't figure out with the right dataset.

Bluesfan, you've got to hope that RA have done their analysis. There is always is always going to be a decision to be made around trying to grow your supporter base vs. maximising the return on your product with your existing base. I'm not sure that Super Rugby has enough growth with the casual viewer to warrant the potential short to medium term loss of going with a FTA style hybrid deal vs an exclusive deal. As such I'm not sure your inference of how people view television, flipping channels to perhaps watch something they haven't seen before and then becoming a fan actually plays out. Either way, general viewership numbers on Foxtel I believe have been declining so the data you would imagine runs counter to the notion that people who currently have Foxtel for other sports viewership are becoming Rugby watching fans. RA hopefully can make an informed decision around this. You also present Foxtel as a cable company. Most of that cable to going to the NBN and Foxtel will be a sat product. Their real future though is their Foxtel Now/Play/Go product which is in direct competition with all the other streaming services. I suspect that consumers are adapting to the changing landscape and that a streaming option in Optus isn't as restrictive with the general populace as you'd think. I've also always suspected that RA see the Wallabies and the international games as the potential gateway to increased viewership of rugby more broadly... but again, I'm really not sure what the conversion rates are. I have many a mate who enjoys watching the Wallabies but has never tuned into Super Rugby match even with a Foxtel subscription.

Don't forget that there was only one game with Aus teams in prime time hours. That may have been one reason for for lower viewer numbers.

Membership was around $200, the cost of $300+ was for tickets and food per game on top of the membership fee, if I took the family to. Travel is about an hour unless the wife doesn't go and she then plays taxi and then it was only 20 to 30 minutes. As a Tah's Life Member, you still had to buy tickets on top of your member ship fee and the seats I was getting were around $75 per seat if I remember correctly.

On rugby on FTA, what will happen to the Shute Shield games we had last season. With a shakeup with the broadcaster would these still be on FTA? If Foxtel wins out, will the Shute Shield only be available on Foxtel. Would be woeful for Shute Shield to be not on FTA. If RA signs with Optus, what happens to SR with RA not signed up with Foxtel. Do they still play?

The importance of the causal view, particularly in discussing the benefits of Foxtel v Streaming, is overstated in my opinion. Particularly when you consider that at any time an NRL, AFL or Soccer fan can watch 'their' sport on foxtel with the dedicated channels showing games on repeat. I know id rather watch a replay of a rugby game rather than the other options...but maybe that's just me. Another point with Foxtel is that without Super rugby, there is still going to be rugby on Fox, with the Northern Hem stuff, so these casual viewers still have the opportunity to fall in love with the game...although if it hasn't happened for non-rugby following fox subscribers already...why would that change? I do agree with you that exposure is key, but not for these casual viewers, more for the kids (won't someone please think of the children!!) that have been playing Union (often along with league/soccer/AFL) or been to a camp/ had a school visit. For them to be able to see the game at the highest provincial level is key to keeping them engaged in the sport and, for me, that is a major contributing factor into why Super rugby often loses the talent battle to NRL..kids have more week-to-week access to their idols. Ideally the new deal, whether with Fox, Optus or other, will include more FTA games and these games must be live. It looks like this is what RC is thinking as well, from recent reports. Something has to change, and for all the spouting from Fox about how they built Super rugby and have supported the game, i believe they have done more harm than good. Particularly in their rubbish promotion and devaluing of the game recently to improve their negotiating platform. I think Fox's days are numbered and id like Rugby to move on. For me, streaming is the future and while it is undoubtedly a risk, its a growing medium and if its one thing Aus rugby needs, its growth.

I think it's more the fact that the shute shield is seen as the only viable competition. Don't get me wrong I think the Shute shield is great, but there's more rugby than just Sydney club rugby.

In which case, follow the prototype in its entirety. Neither of those competitions relied on money from an umbrella international level, they did it entirely for themselves. So have at it, instead of claiming it as the way forward but only if RA pours money into it. Leave that money where it belongs, funding the actual grass roots.

Bluesfan, I tend to agree with you re quality of internet. I'm hoping the rollout of 5G is going to change that. Optus are on the front door in that regard, by being a mobile carrier (something they have over Kayo). I know Telstra have a sports app, but I quickly discovered watching the NRL that it was merely Nine Network Sydney content being beamed over the 4G network. If Optus can get the content side ride they could put it through a Kayo like app, or make a rugby channel for BeIn sport.

Not necessarily. Pay TV is first about driving subscriptions. If you are paying huge money for a product people watch, but won’t subscribe for (because they can still watch a lot on FTA) then you’ve overpaid.

The point is TWAS, their own ratings show the NRL & AFL investments were sound as ratings are impressive despite the massive FTA component. The same can't be said of the SR & A League comps.