News New AFL TV Rights Deal (2017-2022) - 2.508 Billion

[Bring_Back_Brad]

Channel 7 will broad 3.5 games on FTA per week on average.

Foxtell will on-sell their Saturday afternoon time slot to (presumably) Channel 10, which gives 4-5 FTA games per week, an increase on the current agreement.




The CEO of channel 7 said "technical difficulties" are why they aren't broadcasting in HD, I don't think its as simple as you may presume.

That's utter rubbish.

 

[ppoiter]

They would be just as big as they are now, but with less of them to enjoy.

Hurray

Doesn't the EPL go for 38 weeks or something? And I think that league goes alright...

So does the nfl, which has 15(?) home and away games. Every game is a big deal and points from individual games matter more too. The idea would be to add a few weekends of state of origin too, which would also draw a huge audience. I know it'll never happen but I do think it would be better

 

[Bring_Back_Brad]

Yeah my understanding is that HD cameras are significantly more expensive than SD ones (not even considering the cost of the telecast) and consider the sheer number of cameras they need at an AFL game. (and then the number of venues they need to get these to) - not an easy or cheap task

It's all shot in HD and down scaled for broadcast. They aren't using SD cameras, they barely exist in broadcast world these days. Any other station is capable of running the production in Full HD channel 7 are just morons and cheapskates.

 

[Kappa]

It's all shot in HD and down scaled for broadcast. They aren't using SD cameras, they barely exist in broadcast world these days. Any other station is capable of running the production in Full HD channel 7 are just morons and cheapskates.

So why don't channel 7 use the HD then to boost ratings if it was that easy?

 

[Kirby]

I think it's the expense of broadcasting in HD that is the issue. As BBB says it's always recorded with HD equipment.

 

[Kappa]

I think it's the expense of broadcasting in HD that is the issue. As BBB says it's always recorded with HD equipment.

They make back that expense by the higher ratings they get.

 

[Kirby]

They make back that expense by the higher ratings they get.

You would think so. I can't explain why they don't just do it.

 

[Mkcaptain]

I hope a game is onsold to Channel 10. It would be great to have Michael Christian on TV again.

 

[Kappa]

I hope a game is onsold to Channel 10. It would be great to have Michael Christian on TV again.

Some free to air competition would be a great thing, also AFL would get a better coverage on channel 10 (as well as 7)

 

[Bring_Back_Brad]

So why don't channel 7 use the HD then to boost ratings if it was that easy?

I think it's the expense of broadcasting in HD that is the issue. As BBB says it's always recorded with HD equipment.

No it's easy for them to broadcast in HD.
They are required by law to broadcast on their primary channel which is SD.
This is also their highest rating channel.
If they wanted to, for love of the sport and respect of the fans, they could simulcast it on their HD channel, which is what people are asking for, and the decent thing to do. But if they do this, they lose viewers on their primary channel so their ratings drop and they can't charge as much for premium advertising, and they lose the dollars of ad time they are selling on their HD channel. It's all about counting pennies. They know that viewers have no other choice but to watch in SD so they go for what the accountants say is the more profitable thing to do.
The legislation is outdated and needs to change and channel7 need to stop being tight arses and do the right thing by the fans, at the very least for the grand final.

 

[Kirby]

No it's easy for them to broadcast in HD.
They are required by law to broadcast on their primary channel which is SD.
This is also their highest rating channel.
If they wanted to, for love of the sport and respect of the fans, they could simulcast it on their HD channel, which is what people are asking for, and the decent thing to do. But if they do this, they lose viewers on their primary channel so their ratings drop and they can't charge as much for premium advertising, and they lose the dollars of ad time they are selling on their HD channel. It's all about counting pennies. They know that viewers have no other choice but to watch in SD so they go for what the accountants say is the more profitable thing to do.
The legislation is outdated and needs to change and channel7 need to stop being tight arses and do the right thing by the fans, at the very least for the grand final.

Cheers mate. That makes perfect sense (as to why they dupe us).

 

[Kappa]

No it's easy for them to broadcast in HD.
They are required by law to broadcast on their primary channel which is SD.
This is also their highest rating channel.
If they wanted to, for love of the sport and respect of the fans, they could simulcast it on their HD channel, which is what people are asking for, and the decent thing to do. But if they do this, they lose viewers on their primary channel so their ratings drop and they can't charge as much for premium advertising, and they lose the dollars of ad time they are selling on their HD channel. It's all about counting pennies. They know that viewers have no other choice but to watch in SD so they go for what the accountants say is the more profitable thing to do.
The legislation is outdated and needs to change and channel7 need to stop being tight arses and do the right thing by the fans, at the very least for the grand final.

If it's the law holding them back then how have they agreed to do HD broadcasts on their main station in 2017 (and maybe 2016)

And why did the CEO of channel 7 say it was a "technical issue" to the public and his shareholders? I don't think making such a public lie would be a good career move, and would make no sense.

 

[Bring_Back_Brad]

If it's the law holding them back then how have they agreed to do HD broadcasts on their main station in 2017 (and maybe 2016)

And why did the CEO of channel 7 say it was a "technical issue" to the public and his shareholders? I don't think making such a public lie would be a good career move, and would make no sense.

He's talking s**t, that's what big execs and politicians do if you hadn't noticed, don't be naive.
Likely channel7 expect to switch their primary channel to HD by 2017. They haven't yet because there is still a perception that a large enough percentage of viewers aren't equipped for full HD viewing so their audience is reduced by having their primary channel in HD. Either that or they plan to simulcast on their HD channel.

 

[TradeDraft]

I hope a game is onsold to Channel 10. It would be great to have Michael Christian on TV again.

But you have Tim Lame Back

 

[Gungadin]

I'm sure channel 7 use the same cameras all around Australia, because the ones that 7 use over here in Perth at Subiaco Oval have a HD logo's on the side of them next to the 7 logo. I worked as an usher last at the ground last year and saw them.

 

[35Daicos]

This is obviously huge news for the AFL, as just about everyone should benefit from it. They'd have to be rather annoyed that in what has been a somewhat troubled year their very good news story will have been pushed off the front page by the even bigger story from Essendon!

 

[Wooljay]

That picture of them all at the table with Rupert Murdoch is like some sort of evil empire s**t.

God I hate that wretched old piece of s**t.

 

[Bard]

Can someone explain why it's so difficult for 7 to step into 2015 and present the game in HD? It's ridiculous. So much is done by the AFL to try and present that game in a way that's more attractive to fans yet on free to air where the game is reaching the majority of people it looks like s**t compared to other sports.

I've always thought the game looks worse on Foxtel (which I don't have)... But maybe my TV is just superior to everyone else's?

 

[Markfs]

There's a rumour going around that after his segment on Lulie Street, Dave the Man has been seen in discussions with Rupert Murdoch late this afternoon about fronting the Foxtel AFL footy team when the new broadcast rights contract starts.... Dave the Man is a part of Bigfooty royalty - as the boys on Lulie Street referred to him. As Caff said, it was great to put a name to a face and it seems that we will be seeing that face on foxtel every weekend for the next 6 years....lock up your daughters

 

[Kappa]

Yes, I can answer that one ...

The current broadcast deal is worth $1 billion a year. The new one will be $2.5 billion a year.

Every year there are 198 H&A games a year + Finals + Draft + Brownlow + Preseason.

So currently that means they are paying on average around $500,000 per game. That will go up to over $1 million per game.

$1 million per game is a bargain for a game like the Grand Final. Or any final. Or a Carlton v Collingwood game (even with low game attendances, you can be guaranteed there'll still be a pretty big TV audience).

But what about a GWS versus St Kilda game? Or the Essendon versus Adelaide game - more TV viewers watched the ladies game! (No disrespect intended to the ladies game). Having to recoup over a million bucks for those by selling "cheap cheap" woollies ads?

Little wonder the quality of the coverage is crap - the broadcasters have sunk all their money into buying monopoly TV rights ... There's no money and no motivation to provide a decent broadcasting service.

It's to the deep detriment of the game

It's 2.5 billion over 6 years, not 2.5 billion every year

Channel 7 has already forked out a shitload of money for HD cameras at every game across the whole season, they wouldn't do that if they were using SD to save money... I believe there is a genuine issue somewhere down the technical line which you would have to be in the technical industry to understand.

 

[Linda Lovelace]

Was kind of hoping for a somewhat lacklustre number.

Of course getting the best deal is essential for the game. But these TV rights deals are used to dismiss any criticism of the AFL's overall performance by shills like Caroline Wilson. Anybody who questions them is dismissed as a simpleton by those who just repeat the mantra of '$2.5 Billion'.

It's always going to be a pack of flogs at the top, but it is my belief that the current bunch is the biggest bunch of flogs that ever flogged. Now all the bad press just disappears.

 

[76woodenspooners]

It's 2.5 billion over 6 years, not 2.5 billion every year

Channel 7 has already forked out a shitload of money for HD cameras at every game across the whole season, they wouldn't do that if they were using SD to save money... I believe there is a genuine issue somewhere down the technical line which you would have to be in the technical industry to understand.

Right you are ... My post deleted

 

[76woodenspooners]

Was kind of hoping for a somewhat lacklustre number.

Of course getting the best deal is essential for the game. But these TV rights deals are used to dismiss any criticism of the AFL's overall performance by shills like Caroline Wilson. Anybody who questions them is dismissed as a simpleton by those who just repeat the mantra of '$2.5 Billion'.

It's always going to be a pack of flogs at the top, but it is my belief that the current bunch is the biggest bunch of flogs that ever flogged. Now all the bad press just disappears.

Disappointing if their only measure is the $$$ figure.

The AFL is a not-for-profit enterprise, there are no obligations to return financial dividends to shareholders.

The AFL has obligations to keep the game in a healthy state. The financials are an important part of that, but they're not all of it.

 

[Bring_Back_Brad]

Little wonder the quality of the coverage is crap - the broadcasters have sunk all their money into buying monopoly TV rights ... There's no money and no motivation to provide a decent broadcasting service.

It's to the deep detriment of the game

The whole production is done in HD. This is not any big deal.
It's not costing anything extra to shoot and produce it in HD cos that's all basic stock standard and has been for along time. HD is actually on its way out in favour of 4k, and many broadcasters are starting to upgrade to 4k so their content is compatible when it becomes standard.
they are downscaling to SD for the broadcast.

What this is all about entirely is tvc advertising income and nothing else. No technical problems or extra expenses working in HD.

Channel 9 do the same thing, but just to piss fans off even more, they broadcast in SD to the main fan base in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane where the ratings warrant putting it on their primary stations, but in Perth and Adelaide broadcast it in HD on Gem cos they don't get the ratings there to warrant using the primary station.
All a big joke. Should be over in a couple of years when the SD channels are retired.

 

[76woodenspooners]

The whole production is done in HD. This is not any big deal.
It's not costing anything extra to shoot and produce it in HD cos that's all basic stock standard and has been for along time. HD is actually on its way out in favour of 4k, and many broadcasters are starting to upgrade to 4k so their content is compatible when it becomes standard.
they are downscaling to SD for the broadcast.

What this is all about entirely is tvc advertising income and nothing else. No technical problems or extra expenses working in HD.

Channel 9 do the same thing, but just to piss fans off even more, they broadcast in SD to the main fan base in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane where the ratings warrant putting it on their primary stations, but in Perth and Adelaide broadcast it in HD on Gem cos they don't get the ratings there to warrant using the primary station.
All a big joke. Should be over in a couple of years when the SD channels are retired.

There do appear to have been some genuine technical difficulties ...

(1) The video codecs used by the AFL broadcasters clearly struggle with the LED advertising boards. Any video that's got a closeup of those LED sign boards in the background collapses after a few seconds. It's happened all year.

(2) We have seen from the video review process that they lose significant signal fidelity when recording / playing back the video in that review. You look at a slo-mo and the ball looks clear ... Then a few moments later they go back to the same slow mo shot and the ball is blurred to buggery. There's a BigFooty thread about it here