$250m of which was related to impairment of tv license, they only lost about $13m, which was better than forecast. They no doubt will need a cash injection in order to bid.
The 2017 Rights Deal Discussion thread
- Thread starter The_Wookie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
To the contrary, the fact they're making losses means they may well have to bid.
You think it's a co-incidence that 10 have been on a downhill slide ever since they lost the AFL rights?
yes and no, without footy the only thing keeping the station afloat is english TV networks buying episodes of neighbours.
but thats because channel 10 haven't had anything worth watching for years.
they over invested in reality shows like big brother and masterchef when those shows lost the glossy the station was ****ed.
Thats the attraction of Footy to them. Its a known product, they can predict within 5% or so what the ratings will be. Despite the large outlay, they can run the slide rule over the returns they will get beforehand. They can invest a smaller amount in more reality TV shows, but if they tank badly, they have blown their money. Footy is expensive but safe, dramas and reality shows are cheaper, but they have to make a guess at the return they get for their money.
the issue is still whether they can generate enough $$$ to make money off the rights, I've seen claims the rights for the AFL are so expensive channel 7 actually loses money from some matches.
Thats the question. And the reason for the need for a slide rule beforehand. Networks pay an amount that is close to the revenue they can generate because of the relative certainty of that income. I would guess they would go in to a season knowing that if they averaged the costs of the rights over each weekends fixtures, the costs would be greater than the income sometimes, but the deal is done based on the value over the life of the deal. It also includes benefits such as flow on to follow on shows, cross promotion etc. Hard for people outside the industry to value.
End result is, channel 10 will bid or not based on their expectation of a return, not so much on how much cash they have.
Dont Fremantle Media own the rights to Neighbours, not 10 ?
An article on TV rights of both AFL & NRL:
The Courier Mail studied television ratings for all sports in the past three “long weekends’’ of sport, from April 10-26 on free-to-air networks and Foxtel sports channels.
The top 36 sports television audiences of those past three weeks were all broadcasts of NRL (20) or AFL (16) games.
Nine of the 10 biggest audiences for sports in the three-week period were AFL games on the basis of live match audiences for five-city metro ratings and Fox Footy, which Seven agreed could telecast all games live in the 2012 negotiations with the AFL.
The NRL generally draws bigger audiences for its main Friday night free-to-air telecasts in capital cities than the AFL does on Seven.
Seven’s 759,000 audience for the Collingwood-Essendon game on Anzac Day was the biggest five-capital result during the three-week period.
Once Fox Footy live telecast audiences are added, the five biggest audiences in the fortnights are found to be for AFL games, topped by the April 10 Eagles-Blues encounter which attracted 637,000 on Seven’s two channels nationally, plus 237,000 on Fox Footy.
http://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/br...-new-rights-deal/story-fndv2w3r-1227332898850
The Courier Mail studied television ratings for all sports in the past three “long weekends’’ of sport, from April 10-26 on free-to-air networks and Foxtel sports channels.
The top 36 sports television audiences of those past three weeks were all broadcasts of NRL (20) or AFL (16) games.
Nine of the 10 biggest audiences for sports in the three-week period were AFL games on the basis of live match audiences for five-city metro ratings and Fox Footy, which Seven agreed could telecast all games live in the 2012 negotiations with the AFL.
The NRL generally draws bigger audiences for its main Friday night free-to-air telecasts in capital cities than the AFL does on Seven.
Seven’s 759,000 audience for the Collingwood-Essendon game on Anzac Day was the biggest five-capital result during the three-week period.
Once Fox Footy live telecast audiences are added, the five biggest audiences in the fortnights are found to be for AFL games, topped by the April 10 Eagles-Blues encounter which attracted 637,000 on Seven’s two channels nationally, plus 237,000 on Fox Footy.
http://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/br...-new-rights-deal/story-fndv2w3r-1227332898850
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #409
Courier mail not counting regionals apparently. AFL accounts for 6 of the top ten ratings when all included - known at this time in any case, but the NRL accounts for three of the top 4. We know nothing of Victorian regionals, but last year these averaged 101k per game.
Purely on metro figures, all 12 broadcast NRL games made the top 20, against 8 AFL games.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
From above article
Seven is favourite to retain AFL rights, and is paying about $425 million in cash and $50 million in contra over five years of the deal. Telstra is paying $100 million in cash over the five years for the mobile-phone and internet TV rights, while Foxtel is paying an estimated $593 million in cash and $85 million in contra.
I went back and looked at the news paper clippings/articles I kept from the last TV deal announcement on 28th April 2011 so 29th and 30-31st weekend papers and The Fin Review reported those figures above but The Oz had it at $425mil cash + $50 contra for 7, $540m cash + $85mil cotra for Foxtel, and $153mil cash from Telstra. I have no idea why their is a $53mil difference between Foxtel and Telstra cash between the 2 papers but I know Telstra paid more than $100mil for the rights. I put up a spread sheet in page 2 of this thread using the figures from the Oz, as in the Weekend Oz they printed a table reconciling the 3 deals ie 2002-06, 2007-11 and 2012-16 and free TV, pay TV and Telstra contributions.
Seven is favourite to retain AFL rights, and is paying about $425 million in cash and $50 million in contra over five years of the deal. Telstra is paying $100 million in cash over the five years for the mobile-phone and internet TV rights, while Foxtel is paying an estimated $593 million in cash and $85 million in contra.
I went back and looked at the news paper clippings/articles I kept from the last TV deal announcement on 28th April 2011 so 29th and 30-31st weekend papers and The Fin Review reported those figures above but The Oz had it at $425mil cash + $50 contra for 7, $540m cash + $85mil cotra for Foxtel, and $153mil cash from Telstra. I have no idea why their is a $53mil difference between Foxtel and Telstra cash between the 2 papers but I know Telstra paid more than $100mil for the rights. I put up a spread sheet in page 2 of this thread using the figures from the Oz, as in the Weekend Oz they printed a table reconciling the 3 deals ie 2002-06, 2007-11 and 2012-16 and free TV, pay TV and Telstra contributions.
- May 13, 2012
- 15,812
- 5,965
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- Brumbies, Socceroos
Adds up to $1.253B (cash and contra) - that's the number I recall.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
Yeah the total is right but the two newspapers have reported the break up differently for 4 years now. As I said I put my spread sheet up in page 2 of this thread.
they produce it today but i doubt fremantle media even existed when neighbours started, if ten sold the rights when they outsourced production they are dumber then i thought.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #416
Was originally a Grundy TV production. Grundy is now owned by Fremantle (formerly Pearson), sold in 1995.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reg_Grundy_Organisation.
precarious
Senior List
Strictly speaking, the Courier Mail not adding in regionals appears to be correct, at least according to Doug Peiffer in 2013 (Oztam CEO). I think you and others have discussed this before.
Lastly, Peiffer was asked why OzTAM does not include Regional audiences with 5 City Metro numbers.
Regional viewers are measured separately by RegionalTAM (owned by Regional broadcasters) and there is some cross-over in some geographic areas.
“Technically there are some math reasons why you can’t do it. But I think we’re heading towards a national panel eventually when the Reach Rules change and consolidation happens in the marketplace.”
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
Only problem with these figures is that both Ch7 & Ch9 look at the country ratings as well. Remember that the NSW regional market is bigger than Adelaide, add these in and you'll find that the NRL would easily take the top 2 spots.Courier mail not counting regionals apparently. AFL accounts for 6 of the top ten ratings when all included - known at this time in any case, but the NRL accounts for three of the top 4. We know nothing of Victorian regionals, but last year these averaged 101k per game.
Purely on metro figures, all 12 broadcast NRL games made the top 20, against 8 AFL games.
Regional Vic & Tas & WA would offset against regional Qld & ACT, so no real net impact on the placings.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
Regional Queensland is bigger than Adelaide and about the same size as Perth
Ticky009
Moderator
- Jun 2, 2014
- 22,088
- 56,018
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- The Rebel Alliance
- Moderator
- #420
Haven't seen this posted but its relevant: With particular references to the upcoming AFL & NRL deals.
http://www.afr.com/brand/advertisers-refuse-to-fund-sports-rights-inflation-20150510-ggvm8u
http://www.afr.com/brand/advertisers-refuse-to-fund-sports-rights-inflation-20150510-ggvm8u
somehow i don't think traditional Sports advertisers like Carlton draught or sportsbet will look to invest in some british tv drama over footy.
The networks will pay what they have to get the rights Have a look at CH10 since they dumped AFL football
These guys are just speaking through their pockets trying to keep the price down.I still expect the AFL to get an increase esp if CH 10 gets back in the game but not a lot.
Saw this on twitter, also goes to your point about number of different properties they have to offer networks;
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #425
Saw this on twitter, also goes to your point about number of different properties they have to offer networks;
yep. I firmly believe that the AFL misses out by having no rep games. And dont try and tell me that international rules qulaifies. Its a pale imitation.
- Status
Similar threads
