So the big money would come from one of the FTA players .... that'd be a balls & all play by the owners, e.g see 7s owners & Boral, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-07/kerry-stokes-wins-his-bid-for-boral/100272106
AFL announces 4.5billion, 7 year media deal (2025-2031 inclusive)
- Thread starter The_Wookie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
So the big money would come from one of the FTA players .... that'd be a balls & all play by the owners, e.g see 7s owners & Boral, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-07/kerry-stokes-wins-his-bid-for-boral/100272106
Here is Nine CEO:
Nine CEO Mike Sneesby on why a splintered sports streaming market is good for consumers
Mike Sneesby, the man credited with the rise and rise of Stan and now chief executive officer of Nine Entertainment Co (NEC), is rightly pleased by the performance of Stan Sport in its early months.The platform is dovetailing well with Nine’s free-to-air assets, Sneesby says, and subscriber...
mumbrella.com.au
When looking at the numbers understand StanSport at $10/month wont fund an offer to any sport (AFL/NRL) that $50+/month at Fox would.
Except Foxtel is a bloated machine, that was paying for obscure sports like the ALeague as well as paying for exclusive rights to HBO shows.
Kayo makes it work at $25 per month, which is about benchmark I'd say. What are paramount+ charging to watch the a-league?
Kayo is a 100% Foxtel business..
As for a benchmark of $25/mth does that extrapolate to a halving of the value of all sports rights, what would that do to the shape of the AFL business model ? Is the current model of the game the bloated machine you suggest Foxtel to be.
Well that's exactly right. Kayo and Foxtel covers a multitude of sports, where as the AFL paid service would only cover......AFL.
I like the Sat night late slot.
Thurs 7.15 FTA
Fri 7.45 FTA
Sat 2.10
Sat 5.10
Sat 7.10 FTA
Sat 8.20 (Perth/NT/Adelaide)
Sun 12.30
Sun 3.20 FTA
Sun 6.10 (usually Perth / Adel)
For Easter Mon/QB/Anzac swap with Sat 7.10 = no crossovers
Thurs 7.15 FTA
Fri 7.45 FTA
Sat 2.10
Sat 5.10
Sat 7.10 FTA
Sat 8.20 (Perth/NT/Adelaide)
Sun 12.30
Sun 3.20 FTA
Sun 6.10 (usually Perth / Adel)
For Easter Mon/QB/Anzac swap with Sat 7.10 = no crossovers
- Moderator
- #907
Regardless of who gets the rights. It will not result in extra games on Free to Air TV.
If Foxtel ends up with the subscription/streaming rights they will not agree to any further games begin shown on FTA than there already is, they are already wanting to cut the State based FTA games.
If Stan Sports/Paramount+ ends up with the rights they will want to keep those games behind the paywall so they can get the most return from extra subscriptions and a likely increase in the amount they charge. Any extra game they show on FTA is a sunk cost and money that they can't make back.
I think we'll end up with 3 national FTA games and 6 games behind a paywall, with no state-based games shown on FTA.
If Foxtel ends up with the subscription/streaming rights they will not agree to any further games begin shown on FTA than there already is, they are already wanting to cut the State based FTA games.
If Stan Sports/Paramount+ ends up with the rights they will want to keep those games behind the paywall so they can get the most return from extra subscriptions and a likely increase in the amount they charge. Any extra game they show on FTA is a sunk cost and money that they can't make back.
I think we'll end up with 3 national FTA games and 6 games behind a paywall, with no state-based games shown on FTA.
Very much doubt the AFL will give up home team FTA policy for NSW and QLD and I am doubtful they will go much further for WA and SA. The thing is those games do also have very strong commercial value for FTA in those markets
I kinda see where you're coming from, but if there's enough "primetime" slots out there, like Thursday Night and Sunday Night, then the ad dollar will make it worthwhile. If you have 4 games on a saturday afternoon, the money just isn't there.
I can see the state based game leaving SA and WA, but staying in NSW and QLD. In return, I think we'd get 4-5 games on FTA. 6 is definitely stretching it, but would be nice to have.
Having 2 players on FTA is a must, it was our best era of coverage and is sorely missed today. Fox does its best, but it's not the same as those 9/10 days.
edit: Honestly 7 needs to lose the rights, like 9 needed to lose the cricket rights. The product is just way too stale now. Need to clear house and shake up the landscape.
Foxtel covers significantly more than just sport, e.g current affairs.
Are you suggesting the AFL should run its own coverage, or ..... a 9 style FTA/Stansport model would be able to pay the AFL dollars the Foxtel model does?
What I'm saying is that the $50 a month to Foxtel, or the $25 to Kayo (the cheapest to access the AFL) doesn't all go to paying for the AFL rights. Half of that goes to the NRL as well, before you start adding in ESPN for basketball and baseball, the cricket, sky news, australian dramas, HBO dramas etc (For the $50 foxtel).
So if you had to pay $10 to $15 a month for Stan Sport or PAramount+ Sport ontop of the base entertainment, I don't think too many people would complain, and it would help pay for it.
Having a game on FTA on Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday 7pm every week (plus Saturday and Sunday arvo) would bring in a heap more ad dollars than just Friday/Saturday Night plus Sunday Arvo, more than double. That too would help the TV broadcasters put more games on FTA.
As for production, personally I think the AFL should do it in house, let the rights holders do studio coverage, but let an operator like AFLnation do all the on the ground stuff (if a rights holder wants to broadcast from the ground, they can pay for that too, like when Fox and 7 both do Test Matches). So you have local based commentators in every state, every game gets done properly from the ground.
Understand where you are coming from, its where the money comes from to the sports that I question.
'According to AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan, the Australian rules football league will now receive some AUS$946 million (US$711 million) from the pair of deals with Foxtel and Seven across the 2023 and 2024 campaigns.'
AFL gets AUS$946m boost after extending Foxtel and Telstra broadcast deal to 2024 - SportsPro
CEO Gillon McLachlan says partnerships provide league with “greater financial certainty”.
www.sportspromedia.com
Its a lot of money, all the providers will be taking a profit margin.
Yes it is. Some of it is loss leading. Apple are looking at buying Sunday Ticket which is the NFLs version of if 30 AFL games were all played on a Saturday Afternoon at 2pm, and if your team isn't based in your city, you have to buy this product to watch your team play. Why would they buy it? To get people to pay to watch their other content.
Why does Ch7 pay for Sunday Arvos but not Saturday Arvos? Because they're buying eyeballs for their Sunday News (highest rating) as a loss leader to beat Ch9 (who buys the NRL for the same reason). So it's not just the ads from 3 to 6, it's the ads from 6 to 9 as well that help pay for it.
That figure above is ~$500m for 2 seasons. Let's assume that 20% of that is finals, 80% of that value is for the H+A. So we're looking at $400m to cover 198 games, or ~$2m per game. How much money does Ch7 bring in advertising for a typical Friday Night game?
This article suggests that Ch7 makes an extra $2m from advertising on Friday Nights from the extended Ad-breaks (not clear if that's for the season or for one game, I'm guessing one game)
So we're looking at maybe $4m or so in national ad revenue for a Thursday, Friday or Sunday Night game. We know national 30s Grand Final slots go for $200k each so the figures check out (20 goals = 30 ads, plus another 30 for QT, HT, 3QT so 60 total or so for a game)
As for streaming, let's assume 3 games per week exclusive to streaming and 4 rounds in a given month. That's 12 games or $24m in costs to buy it. This is where it gets a bit harder to justify. $24m/$10 = 2.4 million people subscribed. $20 = 1.2 million subscribed. So clearly the proposition needs to be about the people subscribing, but staying and paying for other content (The Foxtel Model). Although if streaming included ads like Kayo/Foxtel does at the breaks, then you could bring in $1m to $2m per game, which then at least halves those subscriber numbers needed that were mentioned above (so 600k to 1.2m subscribers).
Obviously all these costs talked about are before production, including paying for both on and off air talent.
You missed where all the advertising is coming from .... Stokes bought Boral, it didnt sink the money into FTA for good reason, FTA is a big winner.
Either way the current FIXturing is forcing the AFL to move away from the home & way template that has held back the national comp with a concept that applied last century in State based comps.
Hopefully the AFL Commission is up to keeping the Administration up learning the lessons in the PostCovid world.
Either way the current FIXturing is forcing the AFL to move away from the home & way template that has held back the national comp with a concept that applied last century in State based comps.
Hopefully the AFL Commission is up to keeping the Administration up learning the lessons in the PostCovid world.
If you don't quote or tag me, I won't always see your reply.
Who cares who buys the ads, the market sets the rate and it's paying well. How much does Maccas pay to be the sponsor for a goal replay? How much does Hilux pay to be the Friday Night sponsor for fox. All these $$$ add up and make it cheaper for the consumer. If you're not paying, you're the product being sold.....
The next media deal will have data on streaming through VOZ, now being reported:
VOZ brings together broadcast viewing across metropolitan and regional free-to-air and subscription broadcasters’, TV and online (BVOD) services on TV and connected devices such as smart TVs, desktop/laptop computers, tablets and smartphones, to provide all-screen, cross-platform planning and reporting for Australia’s television industry.
Participating BVOD broadcasters include: ABC, Foxtel, Network 10, Nine Network, SBS and the Seven Network.
2021-launch-662011
The numbers for Wimbledon/Barty & Origin 3 have reflected the expected increase from measuring BVOD, ie Broadcast Video On Demand:
mumbrella.com.au
The big question is whether increased viewer numbers can be reflected in advertising dollars ?
VOZ brings together broadcast viewing across metropolitan and regional free-to-air and subscription broadcasters’, TV and online (BVOD) services on TV and connected devices such as smart TVs, desktop/laptop computers, tablets and smartphones, to provide all-screen, cross-platform planning and reporting for Australia’s television industry.
Participating BVOD broadcasters include: ABC, Foxtel, Network 10, Nine Network, SBS and the Seven Network.
2021-launch-662011
The numbers for Wimbledon/Barty & Origin 3 have reflected the expected increase from measuring BVOD, ie Broadcast Video On Demand:
First consolidated 7 day VOZ report gives Ash Barty's Wimbledon win top score
The Australian television industry’s long-awaited VOZ reporting system is now live, with the first public reports dropping today on the official Virtual Oz website.The first Total TV Top 20 Programs Consolidated 7 Audience report tracked television consumption across linear and BVOD (broadcast...
mumbrella.com.au
The big question is whether increased viewer numbers can be reflected in advertising dollars ?
I have a question. Perhaps the Wookee can answer, but if anyone else can, that would be appreciated.
Has there ever been a break down, as to how much each state is worth to the media rights deal. As in how much do the broadcasters make from each state from advertising etc, which then allows them to increase their bid to win the broadcast rights?
I’m thinking in regards to how it is thought that GWS and Gold Coast are good for the broadcast rights, as they allow for more games to be shown into NSW and QLD respectively with local interest, therefore increasing the broadcast rights, and essentially paying the subsidies they receive from the AFL.
If the contribution from each state to the broadcast rights were broken down based on the number of AFL teams based in that state, could it be shown if any state was contributing more or less to the broadcast rights in terms of their number of teams?
As an example, WA has 2 out of the 18 teams. We also have about 2 out of 20 people in the nations population. But with NSW and QLD not being as supportive of AFL, do we result in more than 2 out of 18 viewers, and therefore likely contributing more than $2 out of every $18 of revenue to the broadcasters?
Or Tassie, they have no teams, but would contribute to the broadcast revenue. Would their share of viewers be equivalent to 1 out of 19, if they were to receive the 19th team?
I’m interested if this has been calculated before?
Has there ever been a break down, as to how much each state is worth to the media rights deal. As in how much do the broadcasters make from each state from advertising etc, which then allows them to increase their bid to win the broadcast rights?
I’m thinking in regards to how it is thought that GWS and Gold Coast are good for the broadcast rights, as they allow for more games to be shown into NSW and QLD respectively with local interest, therefore increasing the broadcast rights, and essentially paying the subsidies they receive from the AFL.
If the contribution from each state to the broadcast rights were broken down based on the number of AFL teams based in that state, could it be shown if any state was contributing more or less to the broadcast rights in terms of their number of teams?
As an example, WA has 2 out of the 18 teams. We also have about 2 out of 20 people in the nations population. But with NSW and QLD not being as supportive of AFL, do we result in more than 2 out of 18 viewers, and therefore likely contributing more than $2 out of every $18 of revenue to the broadcasters?
Or Tassie, they have no teams, but would contribute to the broadcast revenue. Would their share of viewers be equivalent to 1 out of 19, if they were to receive the 19th team?
I’m interested if this has been calculated before?
Last edited:
It's impossible to calculate, because the national rights are worth more than the sum of the parts.
Wookie would probably have a breakdown of viewers, but even then it's not an exact science.
Wookie would probably have a breakdown of viewers, but even then it's not an exact science.
- May 13, 2012
- 15,812
- 5,965
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- Brumbies, Socceroos
Putting aside the exact metrics of each state, the mere fact that the game is viewed as being national, it becomes attractive to both advertisers wanting a national reach, as well as the sponsors of the AFL and each club.
So you'll get fans of other codes trying to put the AFL down by saying it's popular in three states, etc. while at the same time, the sponsorship deals the AFL and clubs generate dwarf the other codes combined.
At one point, the Swans had the most valuable playing strip in Australia in terms of sponsorship - and they are supposedly a part of the AFL's weakest market!
Just then I was trying to work out who the Victory's major sponsor was, who is perhaps the biggest club in the A-League. I went to the merchandise shop via the Victory website to see what was on their playing strip. Would you believe I got a "page not found" message?
So you'll get fans of other codes trying to put the AFL down by saying it's popular in three states, etc. while at the same time, the sponsorship deals the AFL and clubs generate dwarf the other codes combined.
At one point, the Swans had the most valuable playing strip in Australia in terms of sponsorship - and they are supposedly a part of the AFL's weakest market!
Just then I was trying to work out who the Victory's major sponsor was, who is perhaps the biggest club in the A-League. I went to the merchandise shop via the Victory website to see what was on their playing strip. Would you believe I got a "page not found" message?
- Sep 7, 2009
- 5,878
- 5,957
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Real Madrid, Man City, GS Warriors
Good idea.
- Sep 7, 2009
- 5,878
- 5,957
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Real Madrid, Man City, GS Warriors
If 7 has the sole rights with Peacock. That's if Comcast buys SWM in the future with 7 going down the path of 10.
Thursday night - 7
Friday night - 7
Saturday 2:10 - 7
Saturday 3:35 - peacock
Saturday 5:20 - peacock
Saturday 7:40- 7
Sunday 11:10 - peacock
Sunday 2:10pm - 7
Sunday 6:10pm - peacock
Thursday night - 7
Friday night - 7
Saturday 2:10 - 7
Saturday 3:35 - peacock
Saturday 5:20 - peacock
Saturday 7:40- 7
Sunday 11:10 - peacock
Sunday 2:10pm - 7
Sunday 6:10pm - peacock
There was a interesting article on the future of FTA in The Aus business pages recently:
www.theaustralian.com.au
'None of us will forget the amazing Tokyo 2020 Olympics. For Australia it was a return to the glory days. But in the years ahead Tokyo 2020 will also be remembered as the event that accelerated the demise of free-to-air television as we have known it for more than half a century.
Free-to-air television will now set off on a journey similar to newspapers after the internet took over the bulk of classified advertising in employment, real estate and cars.'
'Last May, under the heading “Connected TV a new challenge to free-to-air television” I set out how television connected to the internet was forecast to grow at a 30 per cent plus annual rate and take substantial revenue from free-to-air television.
What I did not anticipate was that the Olympics would send Australians to connected television in unprecedented numbers. Australians now know what is there and how they can gain a better viewing experience. It will transform television for decades to come.'
Well worth a read !
NoCookies | The Australian
'None of us will forget the amazing Tokyo 2020 Olympics. For Australia it was a return to the glory days. But in the years ahead Tokyo 2020 will also be remembered as the event that accelerated the demise of free-to-air television as we have known it for more than half a century.
Free-to-air television will now set off on a journey similar to newspapers after the internet took over the bulk of classified advertising in employment, real estate and cars.'
'Last May, under the heading “Connected TV a new challenge to free-to-air television” I set out how television connected to the internet was forecast to grow at a 30 per cent plus annual rate and take substantial revenue from free-to-air television.
What I did not anticipate was that the Olympics would send Australians to connected television in unprecedented numbers. Australians now know what is there and how they can gain a better viewing experience. It will transform television for decades to come.'
Well worth a read !
Last edited:
Advertising rates differ in all markets & advertising dollars are what drives FTA television. How bids are put together would be an open secret in the industry & by the AFL & the clubs (e.g AFL Commissioner KIm Williams was with the ABC & ran Foxtel).
I often point to State of Origin as driving the value in the NRL rights because the AFL do not have a comparable product, just as the value in the AFL is the strength of its viewers week in & week out. Both 7 & Foxtel would report internally against their original costings & market by market including Regionals.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #924
You do indeed point to Origin a lot for some reason, but the 8-9 million viewers who watch Origin over the course of the series are around a 10th of the overall years viewing for the NRL.
No one here can properly answer that. Ive been collating ratings and state by state measurements are borderline pointless. Seven signs national broadcast partners for its broadcasts, like the AFL, Cricket and Olympics - note that it doesnt count simulcast Fox games as its own broadcasts, and these arent counted in its ratings summaries.
We could show that from the ratings audiences alone as they stand. On FTA, more than half the ratings come from Victoria alone, which isnt surprising as Melbourne is the best rating tv market in the country, and not just the AFL. We can tell from the way the fixture favours Victorian teams in marquee slots that the broadcaster prefers certain things as well.
Its around 20% of the broadcast ratings for WA. Similar for SA. Tasmania/QLD/NSW combined are about 9%.
Tassie is entirely a regional market, and the smallest one at that. A Tasmanian team - like most non victorian teams - is likely to primarily feature on Tasmanian tv under the AFLs local markets for local teams rule, except we've never had a situation where a regional broadcaster would be the primary, and this could be the catalyst for that policy to change, much to the delight of Foxtel.
probably not. Too much guess work.
Not quite ready to write off FTA yet.
Dont forget that Seven is showing an Origin level broadcast every damn day on Olympic FTA. Streaming is up here in Australia, but its notable that it was down on the opening weekend in the USA too[/QUOTE]
The relevance of the top rating Sport is the advertising rates to the marketers.
The article quoted does not write off FTA, more like a repositioning around the advertising dollar:
Seven West Media chief digital officer, Gereurd Roberts, said: “Even before Tokyo 2020 formally starts, Australians are flocking to 7plus to cheer on their teams.
“Tokyo 2020 will not only be the world’s biggest sporting event, it will also be the biggest digital event in Australian history. If yesterday was any indication – and we think it was – the audiences are going to be enormous.”
Similar threads
