FTA, cable companies...more recently telcos..
Why would the role as "loss leader" change in the future just because technology has changed?
More likely the only way a sport becomes less valuable is if a sport becomes less culturally dominant
Play Nice 2020 Non AFL Admin, Crowds, Ratings, Participation etc thread
- Thread starter Our Game
- Start date
- Tagged users None
FTA, cable companies...more recently telcos..
Why would the role as "loss leader" change in the future just because technology has changed?
More likely the only way a sport becomes less valuable is if a sport becomes less culturally dominant
- May 13, 2012
- 15,812
- 5,965
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- Brumbies, Socceroos
An interesting aspect about the NINE negotiation is that getting the price down is important to them, but they are also interested in getting a slice of NRL.com, which is a bit cheeky of them, but their perspective is: why should we pay more and more just so they can build a capacity which effectively makes us redundant in the future?
I mention that because I wonder whether that sort of thinking ever enters Sevens' collective heads. They'd know that even right now, the AFL has the capacity to go it alone, and I guess the only thing which refrains the AFL is getting top dollar out of Seven/Fox. Anytime that offer gets too low, there must be a tipping point where the AFL Commission decides: ok, threshold reached, we are now better off doing this alone.
I mention that because I wonder whether that sort of thinking ever enters Sevens' collective heads. They'd know that even right now, the AFL has the capacity to go it alone, and I guess the only thing which refrains the AFL is getting top dollar out of Seven/Fox. Anytime that offer gets too low, there must be a tipping point where the AFL Commission decides: ok, threshold reached, we are now better off doing this alone.
kaypee
All Australian
I’ve no idea how it will play out beyond this: people will pay to watch sport and crap will fall away. AFL will be fine.
So it will meammore money next time media rights are on offer. Does this mean more money day one by someone with deep pockets?
First to agree the current FTA/Pay model is past its used by date, my problem who is going to step up. That the AFL were looking to extend the current contract last year suggests they dont know either.
- Apr 20, 2006
- 9,142
- 12,202
- AFL Club
- Carlton
With FTA I think it’s because if your market halves then it comes to a point where you can’t make it back.
pricing is the problem for pay/subscriptions. atm it seems near impossible to find a model that would work when everyone has so many cheap options. Too cheap they never make it back and too expensive they lose previous customers who have no interest or little in football. Considering apparently less then 20% of the population can’t be bothered watching the grand final that is the majority.
Is there any such sport deal in our part of the world?
Yes but how much, the millions paid today? Most on BF want it for nothing, someone else to pay.
Last edited:
- Apr 20, 2006
- 9,142
- 12,202
- AFL Club
- Carlton
How many people do you think would actually pay though and how much? Someone like me would happily pay $1000 a year because I love it but I also know a lot of people would be happy just watching a game a week on FTA or just their local team.
I also know I live in a house of five Carlton members yet we would only pay for one subscription.
I struggle to see how the figures will ever work especially when we want to make the game accessible. People have got the product for free for so long that it’s hard to make people pay, we also have governments who pour huge money into the game that would want it being accessible for everyone.
RedV3x
It's about time some mods started being fair
That isn't a good model. That'd be like the AFL having their own FTA channel or someone having a FTA sports channel.
No, the best model for sports is pay-for-view. People pay for what they want to see.
It's a simple and direct process and bypasses all the convolution.
FTA requires a production team, a network, a ratings system, advertisers and marketers.
The increasing loss of sports to streaming puts pressure back on FTA.
Sports are good for FTA and not just pure ratings. They give a network balance and direction.
Sports are a staple like the news and the most popular part of the news is the sports section.
Having the dominant sport in your FTA network allows for a lot of cross-promotion.
Sport on FTA will be important for a considerable time.
RedV3x
It's about time some mods started being fair
Let's use some current figures. There are 1 million AFL members and the current cost of a season streaming is about $100.
So getting $100 million is very doable but how much extra will be charged to get it onto the big screen?
As you mentioned families and groups are going to bring the numbers down but probably push the price up.
Look at the large number of people and the large amount of money paid for memberships.
There are two ways at looking at the situation .
Sport streaming services are much about getting the cream and extending that to be the main revenue is
difficult when looking at the revenue generated by current FTA media rights.
Then again, sports streaming might be comparable to the suggested drop in FTA media rights.
Sports on FTA will always be important to the networks beyond the pure ratings/advertising figure.
Sports on FTA will always be more important to the sports themselves as FTA generates something
that sports streaming finds very difficult to do and that is generate sports newbies.
RedV3x
It's about time some mods started being fair
And it's major disadvantage as well as it increases the price.
But that's ok for at least the next couple of decades. For the AFL anyway, because they offer value for FTA broadcasters.
No longer as a loss leader imho, the FTA sector are having their reality check costwise, see this pre Covid:
NOVEMBER 17, 2019
'Media analysts are bracing for further cost cuts and industry consolidation as companies continue to fight weak advertising markets.
However, despite warnings from Nine Entertainment Co and Seven West Media last week, analysts believe traditional media companies can endure conditions if they diversify assets and find more efficiencies.'
NoCookies | The Australian
The AFL will always go with some kind of "freemium" model regardless of how the "free" and "subscription" components of that model work (eg how that might work under different technology)
Currently, antishiphoning laws constrain the AFL's ability to put the game behind a paywall even if it wanted to
Beyond that, to the extent the governments "pour huge money into the game" it is through co-investments that comes with specific obligations for things like community access to facilities. It has no relevance to antisiphoning laws
RedV3x
It's about time some mods started being fair
It doesn't prevent the AFL from value adding like their streaming app.
No longer as a loss leader imho, the FTA sector are having their reality check costwise, see this pre Covid:
NOVEMBER 17, 2019
'Media analysts are bracing for further cost cuts and industry consolidation as companies continue to fight weak advertising markets.
However, despite warnings from Nine Entertainment Co and Seven West Media last week, analysts believe traditional media companies can endure conditions if they diversify assets and find more efficiencies.'
NoCookies | The Australian
www.theaustralian.com.au
Well that's another issue. But my point was that the AFL is suited to FTA TV (as it allows ads during the game) so can feasibly still get decent dollars without compromising access to the masses.
- Apr 20, 2006
- 9,142
- 12,202
- AFL Club
- Carlton
And this is the problem i see in the future. There will always be a free option so people will only spend so much on subscription before they are just happy getting what they get for free
RedV3x
It's about time some mods started being fair
The other side of the coin is that there already indicators of what people will currently pay on top of FTA.
People pay for the AFL App, Foxtel sports package, memberships, travelling interstate etc.
As well, it's likely to be add-free and different commentators or additional production.
So no up front dollars for the AFL?
Begs the question on what the AFL put to the NAB/ANZ, be surprised if either/or was next to the media rights dollars.
Ned_Flanders
Make me an Admin!
- Aug 22, 2009
- 77,158
- 142,364
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- 76'ers
Add to that app fatigue
Data is already showing people don't like paying for more than two services.
The latest from The Aus on the NRL media rights today Thu 14:
Both Nine and Foxtel are likely to receive healthy reductions for this season — according to last year’s financial report, the NRL had budgeted on a 2 per cent increase each year over the life of the broadcasting deal, that runs until the end of 2022.
That expectation has now dramatically changed. The NRL received $324.6m in cash from the broadcasters last year — as well as the Nine Network and Foxtel, that amount included Telstra streaming rights and New Zealand television — but that figure is expected to diminish in 2020 by as much as 30 per cent.
www.theaustralian.com.au
Both Nine and Foxtel are likely to receive healthy reductions for this season — according to last year’s financial report, the NRL had budgeted on a 2 per cent increase each year over the life of the broadcasting deal, that runs until the end of 2022.
That expectation has now dramatically changed. The NRL received $324.6m in cash from the broadcasters last year — as well as the Nine Network and Foxtel, that amount included Telstra streaming rights and New Zealand television — but that figure is expected to diminish in 2020 by as much as 30 per cent.
NoCookies | The Australian
Which is how it has been for two and a half decades and will almost certainly be for the next two and a half decades.
Some people will pay for a premium quantity / quality of content while others will take a smaller offer for free but cop adds. It's just the technology that changes which actually creates as many opportunities as is lost from the obsolete old tech.
I'm not sure how it is a problem.
The only question is the quantum of the dollars, & the reliability of the cash flow. (e.g team has a bad year & subs drop off)
That's with one particularly option where the AFL streams itself and wears the full demand risk. They would only go down that route if it is commercially preferable to the second best option (eg risk v reward)
Is that 2nd best option ready to roll any time soon.
Similar threads
- Poll
