- Apr 12, 2012
- 46,268
- 42,108
- AFL Club
- GWS
Resource The 2017-2022 Six year, 2.508 billion Rights Discussion - Summary in OP
- Thread starter The_Wookie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
lol Roy. As Caro says every 5 years when he claims we got paid overs, at what point is he simply going to accept that the AFL rights are worth whatever media companies pay for them.
- Banned
- #703
Wonder what the total of overs both Packer and Murdoch paid for the rights.
I'd have sworn Kerry Stokes & 7 were players.
Interesting that Rupe might not get something he wants From Todays Age
Ten-Foxtel deal: ACCC concerned about sports and advertising
Date
September 14, 2015 - 10:44AM
Ten-Foxtel deal: ACCC concerned about sports and advertising
Date
September 14, 2015 - 10:44AM
- 84 reading now
Max Mason
Media Reporter
The ACCC has proposed to make a final decision on the Ten-Foxtel deal on October 22. Photo: Getty Images
Sports rights are at the top of the list of concerns for the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission about Foxtel's proposed acquisition of up to 15 per cent of Network Ten Holdings.
The competition watchdog has released a statement of issues on Foxtel's proposed acquisition of up to 15 per cent of Network Ten Holdings, as well as the merger of Ten's advertising business with the Foxtel-Fox Sports joint-venture Multi-Channel Network, and will invite for further submissions from the media industry.
The ACCC has proposed to make a final decision on the deal on October 22.
The statement of issues provides the corporate watchdog's preliminary views, highlights issues that cause varying degrees of competition concern and identifies what inquiries it would like to make.
Advertisement
"The ACCC is concerned that the proposed acquisitions have the potential to substantially lessen competition for the supply of free-to-air television services in Australia, particularly in the broadcasting of sports content," ACCC chairman Rod Sims said.
"The proposed acquisitions may increase the likelihood of Ten and Foxtel entering into joint bids and other commercial arrangements for acquisition of sports rights, to the exclusion of other free-to-air networks. Such arrangements could enhance Ten's ability to acquire the rights to sports, including premium sports, and could increase the likelihood of more sport being shown exclusively on Foxtel."
Given the importance of sport to the free-to-air broadcasters, the watchdog is concerned that Ten may gain advantage in acquiring those rights, which could lead to a substantial lessening of competition, Mr Sims said.
"The ACCC is also concerned that the proposed acquisitions may reduce competition in the sale of advertising, including by further consolidation in this market, and by removing or reducing competition between Ten and Foxtel for advertising sales."
The ACCC said the proposed acquisition of 10 per cent of Presto, Foxtel and Seven West Media's joint venture subscription video on-demand service, by Ten would not likely raised concerns about the supply of SVOD services
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/business/m...dvertising-20150913-gjlqxi.html#ixzz3lfw711n7
Follow us: @theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #706
to which i ask: is this not why we have anti siphoning legislation? Besides, At present ten isnt a player in most premium sports markets anyway.
1873 United
Team Captain
It's odd that there would be concern surrounding Network 10, noting that they barely have 5 cents to rub together. Perhaps they are worried about the 2 networks working together in the future, noting channel 9 don't seem to be performing as they might have hoped.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #708
decision made
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...ween-fox-and-ten/story-fnk6pqot-1227578999451
Look forward to a Fox produced game on Ten on saturdays from 2018.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...ween-fox-and-ten/story-fnk6pqot-1227578999451
Look forward to a Fox produced game on Ten on saturdays from 2018.
Experimental
Norm Smith Medallist
Fantastic news! Strengthens the new rights deal even more.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
The new deal starts in 2017. Did you make an error or is there something about 2017?
boncer34
Formerly "Dos23"
League unlimited appear to be slowly realising that they aren't going to bring down Fox.
Experimental
Norm Smith Medallist
What a sad day for the flog squad
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #713
Ten purchasing the Saturday arvo game doesn't look promising given these comments by its CEO:
Despite rumours of Ten having access to AFL games through its arrangement with Foxtel, Anderson ruled it out as an option.
“In terms of AFL, we have had no discussion around them,” he said.
“We're open to having discussions on any sports rights but clearly what we want are sports rights that give us a franchise.
“A game just by itself is more problematic than having a franchise that gives you finals and the opportunity to cross-sell and integrate across the whole year.”
http://www.adnews.com.au/news/ten-eyes-audience-growth-will-be-selective-on-live-streaming
Despite rumours of Ten having access to AFL games through its arrangement with Foxtel, Anderson ruled it out as an option.
“In terms of AFL, we have had no discussion around them,” he said.
“We're open to having discussions on any sports rights but clearly what we want are sports rights that give us a franchise.
“A game just by itself is more problematic than having a franchise that gives you finals and the opportunity to cross-sell and integrate across the whole year.”
http://www.adnews.com.au/news/ten-eyes-audience-growth-will-be-selective-on-live-streaming
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #715
See what his board has to say about it later.
Experimental
Norm Smith Medallist
The 'all or nothing' approach simply won't work for channel 10 while their value continues to shrink and their relevance in Australian society remains minimal.
Airing one game per week nationally wouldn't take too much off their bottom line given it's a simulcast, and it gives a reason for people to turn onto the station for that 3 hour period.
It gives them a leg to stand on when the rights pop up again at the end of the 6 years, but I can understand where he's coming from. But he quite simply isn't in the position to pick and choose considering the largest sporting codes are all on rival channels.
Gotta start somewhere.
Got to agree, what do media executives know about the media business. Forget the reports, business modelling, inside stats and specialist know how, they just need to come on boards like this to find out whats what and what they must do. Seriously, we should charge a commission. Especially the League United boys, the great advice coming out of their must be worth a fortune.
Some figures from Roy Morgan. http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/5488-sports-viewing-on-tv-201403140213
You can bet that the media executives have these sort of figures broken down to the nth degree. They know how many watch, how often they watch, and how long they watch for. If there are roughly a million fewer people who watch NRL regularly compared to AFL, and the AFL has more matches, and longer matches, this may explain why LU is always so confused, as they seem to think their sport is the most popular in the land, and the failure to match the AFL deal must be due to some AFL/Media conspiracy.
You can bet that the media executives have these sort of figures broken down to the nth degree. They know how many watch, how often they watch, and how long they watch for. If there are roughly a million fewer people who watch NRL regularly compared to AFL, and the AFL has more matches, and longer matches, this may explain why LU is always so confused, as they seem to think their sport is the most popular in the land, and the failure to match the AFL deal must be due to some AFL/Media conspiracy.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #719
Ive always figured that the League and AFL have access to different figures to what we do.
Note these figures are from march 2014.
I do not think it will change by a million from year to year. Those figures would be relatively stable as they represent the numbers who consider themselves regular watchers, not those watching at a particular time.
Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #721
Posts on the NRL and EPL/Aleague rights have been moved to the AFL v NRL admin thread.
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threa...oderator-approved-rules-in-op.1033254/page-96
Posts in this thread should only concern the AFL rights.
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threa...oderator-approved-rules-in-op.1033254/page-96
Posts in this thread should only concern the AFL rights.
Does anyone know what is happening with the football department salary cap when the new TV rights deal comes into effect? I really hope it is not risen because the clubs do not need to spend anymore on their football departments and it would make it so much easier for all the clubs to remain financially healthy if they do not have to spend millions more competing for off field staff. If the football departments salary cap goes up with the new TV rights deal then getting all that extra money will mean nothing.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
Of course non player payments component of the football department expenditure cap will go up. There is a little thing called inflation which has to be factored in plus the AFL wants coaches, fitness staff, etc full accredited so that comes with cost. There is travel and accommodation and lots of other costs that will go up so a 3-5% annual increase should be expected.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
Based on the last 2 TV deals, expect a detailed document in September 2016 saying how the AFL has budgeted spending the 2017-22 TV monies plus other income it expects to earn in that 6 years, and how to spend it and what part of the pie they are giving to the players and the clubs and that will determine how much the non player payments component of the cap goes up by. I'd expect a 10% annual increase for 2 or 3 years and then 3-5% for the rest of the period.
Similar threads
