AFL announces 4.5billion, 7 year media deal (2025-2031 inclusive)

[JohnZ]

Who or what are NEP?
What do they do 'for AFL production'?
Who pays them?

What/who are PLP?

NEP are the current behind the scenes production company for both 7 and fox. They provide the cameras, and any at ground equipment needed to air the game. So instead of Ch7 or fox paying for this, the AFL could directly. If you’re outside the ground you might see their trucks, which is where their directors are to change the camera feeds, play graphics and replays. NEP provides 7/fox with a pure output with all graphics for direct play on TV with no intervention.

PLP is premier league productions. They do a combination of what NEP does (they provide all cameras at all EPL games) but also act as the host broadcaster (have commentators at the ground, have people back in the studio for analysis). If you watch EPL outside of the UK, PLP has been the production company behind it.

 

[Kwality]

NEP are the current behind the scenes production company for both 7 and fox. They provide the cameras, and any at ground equipment needed to air the game. So instead of Ch7 or fox paying for this, the AFL could directly. If you’re outside the ground you might see their trucks, which is where their directors are to change the camera feeds, play graphics and replays. NEP provides 7/fox with a pure output with all graphics for direct play on TV with no intervention.

PLP is premier league productions. They do a combination of what NEP does (they provide all cameras at all EPL games) but also act as the host broadcaster (have commentators at the ground, have people back in the studio for analysis). If you watch EPL outside of the UK, PLP has been the production company behind it.

Thanks John:
About NEP Group

As the TV companies of the 70s have been sold & resold they've been hollowed out, with the production & hard assets (e.g OBs) including Willoughby & South Melbourne to the likes of NEP Group, international companies, not local: NEP Australia - Behind Powerful Production (nepgroup.com.au)

Did not realise the breadth of the outsourcing, John.

I can see where 747 is coming from:

Do you mean the production costs or the cost of the channel? Either way the outcome was conclusively in favour of AFL owning and selling it.

 

[The_Wookie]

Thanks John:
About NEP Group

As the TV companies of the 70s have been sold & resold they've been hollowed out, with the production & hard assets (e.g OBs) including Willoughby & South Melbourne to the likes of NEP Group, international companies, not local: NEP Australia - Behind Powerful Production (nepgroup.com.au)

Did not realise the breadth of the outsourcing, John.

I can see where 747 is coming from:

Eddie Maguires JamTV is another production company thats done footy - ej whitten matches and aflw, as well as soccer and cricket

 

[Kwality]

Eddie Maguires JamTV is another production company thats done footy - ej whitten matches and aflw, as well as soccer and cricket

I was aware of Gearhouse who supplied OB facilities & they are now part of NEP - these guys are serious players.
Good luck to Ed, he's got lots to offer in this space regardless of what the AFL do.

 

[JohnZ]

I can see where 747 is coming from:

Yup. Basically we're at the point now where Ch7/Fox is giving most money to the AFL and some money to NEP and not doing much if anything themselves. Would make sense to consolidate the production on the AFL side (even if the AFL outsources this) to sell the complete product to host broadcasters.

 

[Gigantor]

Yup. Basically we're at the point now where Ch7/Fox is giving most money to the AFL and some money to NEP and not doing much if anything themselves. Would make sense to consolidate the production on the AFL side (even if the AFL outsources this) to sell the complete product to host broadcasters.

The question becomes: do the existing broadcasters pay a premium to keep things as they are?
The evidence is that they probably do.
The day might come when the AFL can replicate that income doing it all themselves and onselling, but there's a big question mark as to whether that time is now.

 

[JohnZ]

The question becomes: do the existing broadcasters pay a premium to keep things as they are?
The evidence is that they probably do.
The day might come when the AFL can replicate that income doing it all themselves and onselling, but there's a big question mark as to whether that time is now.

Ch7 and fox know the costs to them paying NEP. So theyd also know how much extra they could spend without actually costing them more.

Its an easy way fir the AFL to chestbeat an increase in rights money without costing the broadcasters more (unless a streaming giant , 9 or 10 come to the table and drive the price up which would be half the point of changing)

 

[Kwality]

The question becomes: do the existing broadcasters pay a premium to keep things as they are?
The evidence is that they probably do.
The day might come when the AFL can replicate that income doing it all themselves and onselling, but there's a big question mark as to whether that time is now.

There is a cash flow issue & the AFL get their money on a due date as it is, clean & simple.

 

[Kwality]

The Australian Government has delayed the expiration of the anti-siphoning list for two years, ensuring free-to-air networks will continue to have first access to some sports rights, including the NRL and AFL, Melbourne Cup, and Olympics.

Communications Minister Paul Fletcher’s decision to push back the expiration of the list, which details the events the government thinks should be free to watch, to April 2023 comes as a sporting rights battle ramps up between the free-to-air broadcasters and new streaming competitors: Amazon Prime, Optus Sport, Sports Flick, Stan Sport and Foxtel’s sports streaming brand Kayo.


The list ensures subscription services such as Foxtel can not nab exclusive rights to events of “national importance and cultural significance”, to the detriment of free-to-air TV networks and audiences. If the list were to expire, Foxtel could pay to become the exclusive broadcaster for the NRL and AFL, for example, potentially meaning Nine and Seven, respectively, could not air the sports at all.

Industry group Free TV is pushing for streaming services to also be bound by the list, and Minister Fletcher promised to review it over the following two years as part of his reform focus.

FTA networks receive 2-year reprieve while anti-siphoning list remains untouched (mumbrella.com.au)

 

[The 747]

The Australian Government has delayed the expiration of the anti-siphoning list for two years, ensuring free-to-air networks will continue to have first access to some sports rights, including the NRL and AFL, Melbourne Cup, and Olympics.

Communications Minister Paul Fletcher’s decision to push back the expiration of the list, which details the events the government thinks should be free to watch, to April 2023 comes as a sporting rights battle ramps up between the free-to-air broadcasters and new streaming competitors: Amazon Prime, Optus Sport, Sports Flick, Stan Sport and Foxtel’s sports streaming brand Kayo.


The list ensures subscription services such as Foxtel can not nab exclusive rights to events of “national importance and cultural significance”, to the detriment of free-to-air TV networks and audiences. If the list were to expire, Foxtel could pay to become the exclusive broadcaster for the NRL and AFL, for example, potentially meaning Nine and Seven, respectively, could not air the sports at all.

Industry group Free TV is pushing for streaming services to also be bound by the list, and Minister Fletcher promised to review it over the following two years as part of his reform focus.

FTA networks receive 2-year reprieve while anti-siphoning list remains untouched (mumbrella.com.au)

TL;DR Australian Government continues cartel arrangement to protect obsolete businesses

 

[Gigantor]

The fact that streaming services aren't even part of these rules shows just how far behind the federal government is.
If I'm understanding this correctly, it effectively means that right now, the AFL could sell exclusive rights to a streaming service because they don't form part of the current anti-syphoning legislation.

 

[Kwality]

The fact that streaming services aren't even part of these rules shows just how far behind the federal government is.
If I'm understanding this correctly, it effectively means that right now, the AFL could sell exclusive rights to a streaming service because they don't form part of the current anti-syphoning legislation.

Interesting suggestion . I'd suggest the rights holders would have this covered by their commercial agreements.

The Foxtel freemium has resulted in reduced dollars to the sports as I understand reading Mr Warburton of 7, who has been more publicly demanding of cricket.

 

[Kwality]

TL;DR Australian Government continues cartel arrangement to protect obsolete businesses

TL;DR .... er, who?

FTA is regarded as a social right these days. so many fans believe that is where the media rights money comes from.

In defence of the current owners of what were once BIG money making standalone businesses, both 7 & 9 are looking to move into the modern era, ahead of current limitations. 10, who knows where their US owners see them going?

 

[The 747]

TL;DR .... er, who?

FTA is regarded as a social right these days. so many fans believe that is where the media rights money comes from.

In defence of the current owners of what were once BIG money making standalone businesses, both 7 & 9 are looking to move into the modern era, ahead of current limitations. 10, who knows where their US owners see them going?

FTA is a dinosaur that has been prevented from going extinct by Government intervention in the market. The way of the future is if you want to watch a sport you pay for it. In fact, if you want to watch anything you pay for it. Whether or not people like it, that is what is going to happen.

I agree people see it as a social right but it isn't. If the product is good people will find it and watch it and pay for it.

7 & 9 are worth very little if anything IMO. They have a tape library and some equipment.

 

[The_Wookie]

TL;DR Australian Government continues cartel arrangement to protect obsolete businesses

as opposed to that bit where they handed a pay tv broadcaster tens of millions

 

[Kwality]

as opposed to that bit where they handed a pay tv broadcaster tens of millions

Not here please. Plenty of political threads on BF.

 

[Seedsfan]

FTA is a dinosaur that has been prevented from going extinct by Government intervention in the market. The way of the future is if you want to watch a sport you pay for it. In fact, if you want to watch anything you pay for it. Whether or not people like it, that is what is going to happen.

I agree people see it as a social right but it isn't. If the product is good people will find it and watch it and pay for it.

7 & 9 are worth very little if anything IMO. They have a tape library and some equipment.

That’s a s**t model for sport there are numerous examples of sports struggling after going behind a pay wall

 

[Kwality]

That’s a sh*t model for sport there are numerous examples of sports struggling after going behind a pay wall

Best demonstrated by the involvement of the Private Equity sharks in international rugby. Paying for coverage is not unknown.

 

[The 747]

That’s a sh*t model for sport there are numerous examples of sports struggling after going behind a pay wall

Yes but what I am saying is in my opinion there won't be any other model other than paywall around soon. Or something like the IPL did with YouTube.

FTA TV is dying.

 

[Kwality]

Yes but what I am saying is in my opinion there won't be any other model other than paywall around soon. Or something like the IPL did with YouTube.

FTA TV is dying.

No argument here, its a question of how long without siphoning style support.
Any idea of the IPLs financial arrangements you mentioned.

 

[The 747]

No argument here, its a question of how long without siphoning style support.
Any idea of the IPLs financial arrangements you mentioned.

I had a look and they did do Youtube for a couple of years but then reverted to a more traditional licensing arrangement. The IPL is hard to compare to AFL because the IPL market is so large both domestically and worldwide that all the broadcasters want IPL. But as I have argued many times, the way forward is for the AFL to produce their own product and sell it on a pay per view model.

They could even mimic FTA by showing some games for free and get advertising revenue from that. Or run it freemium, free but you get ads, pay and you get no ads. Not sure how those financials would stack up but that sort of thinking is well beyond the capacity of the current AFL.

 

[NoobPie]

Masters article drawing lessons from the NFL's new deal....

Why NFL’s $100 billion broadcast deal is great news for NRL, AFL

The record 11-year deal between the major US broadcasters and the NFL shows that networks can’t exist without a country’s leading sports.

www.smh.com.au

While the pandemic forced a renegotiation of TV rights in Australia and created an expectation the fees paid by broadcasters would fall globally, Smith argues there are two exceptions: where a sport is a nation’s unique or dominant game (AFL in Australia, NFL in the US, IPL in India), or where it is the dominant nation for a sport (NRL in Australia, NBA in the US, EPL in England).

Obviously for the above, both are true for the AFL.

 

[Kwality]

Masters article drawing lessons from the NFL's new deal....

Why NFL’s $100 billion broadcast deal is great news for NRL, AFL

The record 11-year deal between the major US broadcasters and the NFL shows that networks can’t exist without a country’s leading sports.

www.smh.com.au

Obviously for the above, both are true for the AFL.

Happy to quote Masters ......

 

[NoobPie]

Masters article drawing lessons from the NFL's new deal....

Why NFL’s $100 billion broadcast deal is great news for NRL, AFL

The record 11-year deal between the major US broadcasters and the NFL shows that networks can’t exist without a country’s leading sports.

www.smh.com.au

Obviously for the above, both are true for the AFL.

Well, I was actually quoting some dude called Colin Smith ultimately

 

[The 747]

Happy to quote Masters ......

Interesting article, but not sure whether press release or news

Using the old abacus this deal doesn't look all that promising when compared to the AFL rights, considering the US has more than 10 times the market and the figure is split between six partners.