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

[Kwality]

Speaking after Seven claimed the annual TV ratings crown for the second consecutive year, Mr Warburton said:

“But it wasn’t just about securing the AFL deal again – it was securing a comprehensive set of digital rights.

“We’ve done very well with (BVOD streaming platform) 7plus, even though we’ve never had digital rights for AFL, or for cricket.

“But from 2025, we’re going to have the most comprehensive set of digital rights we’ve ever had … it is an absolute game changer for 7plus.”

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/seven-casts-a-wide-sports-net/news-story/f32a630e40bd6b9128310adacf8bdd2c

 

[1pcter]

Foxtel showing all rounds of 2023 season in 4K. Requires IQ4 or IQ5.

"The 2023 Toyota AFL Premiership season doesn’t get any better than on Foxtel. It’s the only place where you can watch every game of every round of AFL live in 4K Ultra HD for the ultimate viewing experience at home."

https://www.foxtel.com.au/watch/afl/2023.html

 

[calculon559]

Foxtel showing all rounds of 2023 season in 4K. Requires IQ4 or IQ5.

"The 2023 Toyota AFL Premiership season doesn’t get any better than on Foxtel. It’s the only place where you can watch every game of every round of AFL live in 4K Ultra HD for the ultimate viewing experience at home."

https://www.foxtel.com.au/watch/afl/2023.html

Yeah, they were spruiking '4K every match' in one of their ads recently.
Question now is whether it'll be real 4K or upscale from 1080p.
I could see Fox maybe making the effort (their cricket coverage is 4K already, no?), but I doubt 7 will considering there's no 4K option for fta tv.
Not that it greatly matters to me, I'm 'only' on Kayo.

 

[pz5151]

Yeah, they were spruiking '4K every match' in one of their ads recently.
Question now is whether it'll be real 4K or upscale from 1080p.
I could see Fox maybe making the effort (their cricket coverage is 4K already, no?), but I doubt 7 will considering there's no 4K option for fta tv.
Not that it greatly matters to me, I'm 'only' on Kayo.

Pretty much the only thing I care about every new negotiation is that 7 loses it…but it keeps getting given to them. They have the laziest camerawork, no effort into the game analysis and the most cringeworthy commentators. Channel 9 had a better presentation back in 2002

 

[Bjo187]

Pretty much the only thing I care about every new negotiation is that 7 loses it…but it keeps getting given to them. They have the laziest camerawork, no effort into the game analysis and the most cringeworthy commentators. Channel 9 had a better presentation back in 2002

Yep 7 have been really poor at promoting the game in the northern states and adding atmosphere to the telecast. Plus they don't even have a football show. I hope a number of points were stipulated in the new contract, they should be promoting and helping to grow the game, not purchasing the rights and shoving it off to secondary channels without promotion. Channel 10 was the best for the game back in the early 2000s.

 

[GoldbergsGold]

Pretty much the only thing I care about every new negotiation is that 7 loses it…but it keeps getting given to them. They have the laziest camerawork, no effort into the game analysis and the most cringeworthy commentators. Channel 9 had a better presentation back in 2002

Channel 7 has atrocious camera work, I swear all their camera angles are long shots. And Channel 9 use to have mics set up to around the goal squares, so you could hear that satisfying thud of the ball.

 

[calculon559]

Channel 9 use to have mics set up to around the goal squares, so you could hear that satisfying thud of the ball.

They also had them around the wings as well, only dead zone was the centre square, everywhere else you could clearly hear the ball as it was being kicked.
Surprised no one has thought to use parabolic mics like they do in America; a couple of mid-size ones either side of the benches and you'd be good to go.
Or one big one on the opposite wing.

Klover MiK 26: The large, 26” parabolic dish is extremely durable and its size allows you to capture detailed audio up to 600’ away!

 

[Bjo187]

They also had them around the wings as well, only dead zone was the centre square, everywhere else you could clearly hear the ball as it was being kicked.
Surprised no one has thought to use parabolic mics like they do in America; a couple of mid-size ones either side of the benches and you'd be good to go.
Or one big one on the opposite wing.

The 7 telecast had more crowd atmosphere during covid, when the stadium was empty and they had the fake noise. It legit had more noise than it does now with an 80k crowd at the mcg. They may as well be off site commentating the game, it's pathetic really.

Whoever the idiot was that decided to dull out the crowd noise or not put enough microphones around the ground should be sacked. I've never met a sports fan that prefers less crowd noise/ atmosphere on a telecast.

 

[kranger]

If we ignore the potential impact to crowd sizes (as games may be played in unpreferred timeslots for attendance).

Would the broadcast rights deal be worth more, if the fixtures removed all overlapping games on a Saturday and Sunday.

So moving a Saturday game to Thursday and another to Monday each week, and better staggering the game times on a Sunday?

Giving all games clear air so viewers aren’t split watching different games at the same time. Therefore giving the broadcaster more times of the week with live content?

It would also probably increase the average viewership of AFL games.

Would it be cause to increase the value of the broadcast deal?

 

[calculon559]

If we ignore the potential impact to crowd sizes (as games may be played in unpreferred timeslots for attendance).

Would the broadcast rights deal be worth more, if the fixtures removed all overlapping games on a Saturday and Sunday.

So moving a Saturday game to Thursday and another to Monday each week, and better staggering the game times on a Sunday?

Giving all games clear air so viewers aren’t split watching different games at the same time. Therefore giving the broadcaster more times of the week with live content?

It would also probably increase the average viewership of AFL games.

Would it be cause to increase the value of the broadcast deal?

I would be all for every round with no overlaps, although I don't know how popular regular Sunday & Monday nights would be in terms of attendance.
The other problem would be whether 7 would be willing to trade the Sunday Arvo game for either Sunday Night or the early game on delay. If not, then you can't do a triple header unless the first match is at 12:20.

 

[Freomaniac]

Pretty much the only thing I care about every new negotiation is that 7 loses it…but it keeps getting given to them. They have the laziest camerawork, no effort into the game analysis and the most cringeworthy commentators. Channel 9 had a better presentation back in 2002

the crazy thing was, I liked the 2002-2006 era.

Yes there were 4 games on free to air.


Channel 9 had the Friday night and sunday games.

Channell 10 had the saturday arvo and saturday night games.

it wasnt a monopoly.

 

[pz5151]

the crazy thing was, I liked the 2002-2006 era.

Yes there were 4 games on free to air.


Channel 9 had the Friday night and sunday games.

Channell 10 had the saturday arvo and saturday night games.

it wasnt a monopoly.

Yeah I did too. It was such a massive improvement on what came before it. Channel 9 was the one who made Friday Night Footy into the big event that it became today.

 

[calculon559]

Did the AFL have a bad experience during the 2002-2011 years?
Is that why they don't want to deal with more than one fta network?
I remember when there were reports of Nine only wanting Thursday Night Footy this time around and thinking
Yes, just divvy it up like they do in the NFL
But no, Nine was told they had to go for all or nothing.

 

[Bjo187]

Did the AFL have a bad experience during the 2002-2011 years?
Is that why they don't want to deal with more than one fta network?
I remember when there were reports of Nine only wanting Thursday Night Footy this time around and thinking
Yes, just divvy it up like they do in the NFL
But no, Nine was told they had to go for all or nothing.

It's better promotion for the game too having an investment from multiple networks into the sport. A tv viewer basically can't avoid it if it were on both 7 and 9 for example.

 

[Walshawk]

If we ignore the potential impact to crowd sizes (as games may be played in unpreferred timeslots for attendance).

Would the broadcast rights deal be worth more, if the fixtures removed all overlapping games on a Saturday and Sunday.

So moving a Saturday game to Thursday and another to Monday each week, and better staggering the game times on a Sunday?

Giving all games clear air so viewers aren’t split watching different games at the same time. Therefore giving the broadcaster more times of the week with live content?

It would also probably increase the average viewership of AFL games.

Would it be cause to increase the value of the broadcast deal?

One good thing about 19 teams is that some rounds will have Eight games and some nine, so this helps with eliminating five day breaks for Thursday games, and reducing/eliminating crossovers. Say we stick to 24 rounds, 17 would have one bye (9 games) and seven have three byes (8 games). For eight game rounds then Thur, Fri, Sat (1.45, 4.35, 7.25), Sun (12.30, 3.20, 6.10 (WA/ SA games)) works with no overlap. Then you have rounds like Easter, Anzac, KB where you just add the Monday game. Also maybe in school holiday and round 24 you could also do a Monday night. That leaves just 11 rounds with four Saturday games. If none are on FTA (say C7 go with Thurs/Fri/Sun, public holidays and half Saturdays (same. Umber if games as current deal), you can bring the times forward have have two games on Sat night. (12.30, 3.20, 6.10, 9pm (WA only).
Ratings would increase, and thus broadcast rights.

 

[RedV3x]

One good thing about 19 teams is that some rounds will have Eight games and some nine,

Why would that be so ?

 

[Walshawk]

Why would that be so ?

In response to a post regarding avoiding games overlapping, eight games obviously makes that easier.

 

[Freomaniac]

It's better promotion for the game too having an investment from multiple networks into the sport. A tv viewer basically can't avoid it if it were on both 7 and 9 for example.

It wasn't a bad thing for the AFL at the time.

There was harsh competition for those AFL free to air games.

That drove the value of the tv rights up. And that was a good thing for the AFL

 

[deck]

Why would that be so ?

19 teams with 2 byes each doesn't go in to 24 or 25 rounds with only 1 team having a bye a week.

So you must have weeks where multiple teams 3 or 5 or 7 have a bye. If you go 3 that gives you 7 weeks the rest have 1 team having a bye in a 24 round season.

 

[RedV3x]

In response to a post regarding avoiding games overlapping, eight games obviously makes that easier.

Please explain.
I don't see how with 18 teams how there is any inherent problem with 9 games.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

the crazy thing was, I liked the 2002-2006 era.

Yes there were 4 games on free to air.


Channel 9 had the Friday night and sunday games.

Channell 10 had the saturday arvo and saturday night games.

it wasnt a monopoly.

You also had 5 different state versions of Fox Footy Channel stations, so that the games weren't live against the gate and FTA games weren't live against the gate, except for 7 in Sydney, which had been the case for 20 years, and then 10 asked for lots of Brisbane games on Saturday night to develop the SE Qld market and Brisbane got a lot of their home games live against the gate.

I was living in Sydney for the first season, then SE Qld in 2003-04 then back to Sydney and IIRC, 9 showed the early 1.10pm EST Sunday game so that it wouldn't clash with their Rugby League live game between 4pm-6pm. I reckon late at night we got a replay of the 9 produced Sunday, and I seem to remember the first half was basically a highlights package for about 10-15 minutes then the full second half of the game. I assume the southern states had a very different set up for the Sunday game.

 

[calculon559]

Wonder how many non-Vic* AFL fans will cancel Kayo and watch the footy on 7+ come 2025, considering all their local team's games are on free-to-air.
*excl. NT and Tas, who get the same games on f2a as Vic.

 

[new0066]

Wonder how many non-Vic* AFL fans will cancel Kayo and watch the footy on 7+ come 2025, considering all their local team's games are on free-to-air.
*excl. NT and Tas, who get the same games on f2a as Vic.

At the same time, Fox will get their own commentators. So I can see 7 losing viewers for games they show nationally (similar to 9 with NRL, where Fox sometimes have more than 9)

 

[Bjo187]

Wonder how many non-Vic* AFL fans will cancel Kayo and watch the footy on 7+ come 2025, considering all their local team's games are on free-to-air.
*excl. NT and Tas, who get the same games on f2a as Vic.

Aren't they already like this anyway?

 

[The_Wookie]

Wonder how many non-Vic* AFL fans will cancel Kayo and watch the footy on 7+ come 2025, considering all their local team's games are on free-to-air.
*excl. NT and Tas, who get the same games on f2a as Vic.

um they can do this now?