The 2017 Rights Deal Discussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

bigleague

All Australian
Apr 4, 2011
907
357
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
No - five games are exclusive, but all nine games are shown live - and the various talk shows on Fox Footy are also quite popular.
'entirely' exclusive, not shown anywhere except fox? Aren't games involving expansion sides always on FTA in those markets?

I wonder if the games on Seven are also the highest rating on fox? Clearly people are valuing the paid product superior to FTA.

The NRL shows also rate well for magazine shows.
 
Nov 8, 2000
33,295
21,790
South of the river
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Peel Thunder
'entirely' exclusive, not shown anywhere except fox? Aren't games involving expansion sides always on FTA in those markets?

I wonder if the games on Seven are also the highest rating on fox? Clearly people are valuing the paid product superior to FTA.

The highest rating Fox games tend to be the games where there is no other AFL game on at the same time - Friday night and Saturday twilight. Put 2 games against each other and it splits the audience. Last Saturday night for instance Fox had 184k for Eagles v Hawthorn and 169k for Geelong v Sydney. Both very attractive matchups. The Q-Clash got pretty much the same audience.

The NRL shows also rate well for magazine shows.

They do, but only around half of what AFL shows like 360 and On the Couch rate. 360 is more often than not the highest rating pay TV show from Mondays to Thursdays.
 

bigleague

All Australian
Apr 4, 2011
907
357
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Why would they have to pay up big though? Who will out bid them?
Who will outbid them at any time, for any rights? They hold a STV monopoly. the anti-siphoning list and 30% penetration is about the only thing that keeps FTA in it.
The highest rating Fox games tend to be the games where there is no other AFL game on at the same time - Friday night and Saturday twilight. Put 2 games against each other and it splits the audience. Last Saturday night for instance Fox had 184k for Eagles v Hawthorn and 169k for Geelong v Sydney. Both very attractive matchups. The Q-Clash got pretty much the same audience.



They do, but only around half of what AFL shows like 360 and On the Couch rate. 360 is more often than not the highest rating pay TV show from Mondays to Thursdays.
But people are still watching in big numbers a game on fox that is being shown for free on Seven, there's no reason it can't be replicated for the NRL, Thursday nights in particular would work well for them, particularly around a lead in for the magazine shows, like Monday Nights with Matty Johns, which in its current slot is the highest rating magazine show on foxtel.
 

cruiser80

Rookie
Aug 17, 2009
29
28
AFL Club
Sydney
So if fox wanted all games would they only be paying the NRL for the other 4 not so good time slot games while having to pay the rest of the money back to Ch9 to simulcast the prime time ones?
If so would this mean the NRL may not get the big chunk of foxtel dollars?
 
Nov 8, 2000
33,295
21,790
South of the river
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Peel Thunder
But people are still watching in big numbers a game on fox that is being shown for free on Seven, there's no reason it can't be replicated for the NRL, Thursday nights in particular would work well for them, particularly around a lead in for the magazine shows, like Monday Nights with Matty Johns, which in its current slot is the highest rating magazine show on foxtel.

They might watch, but it's not the simulcast matches that's likely to get that many subscribers in. Bear in mind FTA and Pay TV networks want to different things. FTA networks want viewers, Pay TV wants subscribers. They probably need to spend hundreds of millions to get the rights to simulcast games (just to compensate Channel 9) - whether it's worth it is questionable because it might not actually attract subscribers. It may well though, I don't know.
 

bigleague

All Australian
Apr 4, 2011
907
357
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
They aren't. Not as much anyway - as you know, the Fox uptake in NSW and Queensland is much higher.

And i'm not saying this as a code war sort of comment, but there are a lot more hardcore AFL fans than hardcore NRL fans. As evidenced by crowds and the TV ratings for 2 or 3 blokes sitting at a desk talking footy. Despite the subscription rates being much higher in NRL states, Fox Footy is easily the highest rating Foxtel channel every single week from March to September.
that's usually what happens when you have more content.
 
The Nine deal is so big (and doesn't start for two years) that the NRL can afford to play hardball, afterall, that Nine deal alone is almost as much as what they get now in total, and if the NRL do play hardball and said no to Fox (for any amount of money), Fox would just about go the way of C7 when it lost the AFL.

In short, NRL are in a very, very strong position - Fox either cough up whatever the NRL is asking, or it decides to close its doors earlier than it had anticipated.

I actually like rob's post from the previous page, where he speculates that Nine might be doing this to destroy Fox - what if Seven went down the same route? (obviously without colluding, wink, wink....)

We know traditional TV is on its last legs - we might have assumed that Pay TV would have survived longer because of live sport - but would FTA be able to extract a tiny bit more shelf life if Fox bit the dust? Doesn't it make sense that they would want to chase that live sport themselves rather than let Fox specialise in it?

Interesting times.

Will not both eventually get bypassed by direct streaming models (perhaps tied in with discount rates for club members)?
 
That wouldn't surprise me either. NSW and QLD is what they're built on.

I fear the number on offer to footy won't be close. Sadly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, I think that if FOX ends up paying heavily for NRL there may not be the money left for a big spend on AFL as well.
 
I agree the no one else is going to come in and offer the sort of money the NRL are hoping to get out of Fox.
I agree that Fox are now in a tough spot because if they just offer minimal money for the other four games, they are going to lose subscribers - noting that the Nine deal represents the most NRL games NRL fans have ever had an opportunity to see live each round - that will satisfy a lot of NRL fans.
The Nine deal is so high (almost as high as the present complete TV deal), and the NRL has been able to build up a bit of a nest egg, meaning they can afford to play hard ball - they can say pay up or see you later.
Fox can't afford to lose the NRL in its entirety, and to be honest, I don't think they can even afford to just go after the remaining four games - they are going to have seek content which retains NRL subscribers - they are going to have to offer something similar to what the AFL currently have on Fox - and Fox are going to have to pay for it.
The NRL are now in a position to pay hardball - and you'd have to think they are going to take up that opportunity because Fox's choices appear to be: pay up or go out of business.

9 may also be counting on FOX having to pay 9 lots of $ just to be able to simulcast the 9 games.
 
Jul 2, 2010
37,957
36,136
Adelaide
AFL Club
Carlton
How many AFL games are currently entirely exclusive on foxfooty? One?

What's the highest rating slot on foxfooty? Friday?

Why are people paying to watch games that are free on Seven?

5 games a week are generally exclusive (although in some cases it can be 4 in NSW and QLD) - but it will be a different 5 games in some areas due to the policy of local broadcast priority (Tas/NT/Vic, WA, SA, NSW/ACT, QLD)
 
Apr 7, 2012
18,188
13,947
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Coney Island, GWS, The Exers!
Does anyone really think that Google, netflix or whoever would be able to offer an alternative to Foxtel HD sport given Australia's current net speeds over the next 5-10 years? Yes the NBN is coming but most households would be more than 3 years away from getting it I would think. Happy to be corrected but I know my Sydney suburb isn't even in planning stages yet.

Also what chance has Foxtel got of increasing their NRL subscription base given that NRL fans now have 2 extra live free games at times that most people want to watch them. If I was a subscriber and dollars were a bit tight I would now be looking to see if I could survive with the CH9 offering on its own. Sure a standalone NRL channel might gain some but that might be offset by those leaving who are happy with CH9 offering.

I have had Foxtel a couple of years ago myself for the AFL but found the 4 games on 7 were enough and dropped it to save some money.

I watch live proper HD baseball on my smart tv and laptop 4 days a week. i never approach my data limit and very rarely have an issues with streaming.
the idea Aussie speeds aren't fast enough for streaming HD content is pure bullshit. the MLB networks coverage is far clearer then anything fox provides.

and people leaving is exactly why Fox will blink. The simple fact is if Fox lowballs the remaining games they run the risk of ten re-entering the show, they run the risk of other stream and subscription services replacing. it may delay the NRL's goals for their games but the damage done to fox is far, far higher.

this talk that its a disaster is pure BS just as the talk that this is amazeballs is BS.
the fact is they will end up with something between 1.5 and 1.8.
 
Jul 4, 2012
5,427
9,150
County Grant
AFL Club
Geelong
I don't have fox sports because they have fox footy, if I just wanted footy I can get the live app for that. I get it because it has not only has the footy but all a-league games, premier league games, the mlb on espn, and if I get bored on night I can switch on some rugby or league every now and then...all the while avoiding Luke Darcy as much as possible.

But for real nrl fans simulcasting has one big advantage for those in the northern states, all games live and uninterrupted in full hd. If fox can guarantee than then It's enough difference from nine to drive a half decent subscription campaign on. Wouldn't bother those outside of nsw and qld though since we get games on gem in hd.
 
Nov 8, 2000
33,295
21,790
South of the river
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Peel Thunder
Yes, I think that if FOX ends up paying heavily for NRL there may not be the money left for a big spend on AFL as well.

That's not how it works. The amount they spend is going to be directly attributable to what they think its going to bring in, not how much they're spending on other things.
 

papabear

All Australian
Jun 18, 2012
693
126
AFL Club
Carlton
That's not how it works. The amount they spend is going to be directly attributable to what they think its going to bring in, not how much they're spending on other things.
true but they would also have a budget...

if fox pay overs for nrl they will unlikely want to do it for two sports.

The same could be said in reverse though.
 
May 13, 2012
15,809
5,960
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
Why would they have to pay up big though? Who will out bid them?

No one.

On the other hand, lose the NRL rights and Fox may as well close up shop.

The Nine deal is almost as much as the totality of the previous deal, in other words, the NRL can afford to play hard ball (especially since the present deal goes for a couple more years anyway).

What hurts who the most?

The NRL not getting an extra $700+m from Fox (which they might be able to partially offset, still leaving them better off than the last deal)

or

Fox going out of business?

Live sport is meant to now be the saviour of Fox, but it isn't if the FTAs decide that it might just be their saviour as well.
 

Subprime

Premiership Player
Sep 27, 2007
3,967
442
Ether
AFL Club
Collingwood
No one.

On the other hand, lose the NRL rights and Fox may as well close up shop.

The Nine deal is almost as much as the totality of the previous deal, in other words, the NRL can afford to play hard ball (especially since the present deal goes for a couple more years anyway).

What hurts who the most?

The NRL not getting an extra $700+m from Fox (which they might be able to partially offset, still leaving them better off than the last deal)

or

Fox going out of business?

Live sport is meant to now be the saviour of Fox, but it isn't if the FTAs decide that it might just be their saviour as well.

Not sure why Fox would go out of business, I'd imagine a fair bit of their business is at the margin so paying too much wouldn't be a great option either.

Then I guess it depends what the remaining 4 games per round are worth to 7, 9 or 10. I assume they are a Sat arvo, twilight and night game and a Sunday arvo game or is it 2 Sat and 2 Sun games. In any case they are not going to be worth as much on FTA as the primetime slots 9 have bought (as well as finals and SoO).

Then there is the mooted netflix/google option and it remains to be seen how interested those parties might be.
 
May 13, 2012
15,809
5,960
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
Not sure why Fox would go out of business, I'd imagine a fair bit of their business is at the margin so paying too much wouldn't be a great option either.

Then I guess it depends what the remaining 4 games per round are worth to 7, 9 or 10. I assume they are a Sat arvo, twilight and night game and a Sunday arvo game or is it 2 Sat and 2 Sun games. In any case they are not going to be worth as much on FTA as the primetime slots 9 have bought (as well as finals and SoO).

Then there is the mooted netflix/google option and it remains to be seen how interested those parties might be.

As a couple of posters have mentioned - Fox is interested in subscriptions (in the main).

The bulk of subscriptions remain in NSW and Qld (primarily because of NRL).

In the current TV deal (with two more years still to run) - a Fox subscriber gets to see 5 live games, including Monday nights, plus the various talk shows - as compared to one live game on FTA (plus two on replay).

So the very first thing we notice is the very strong incentive for NRL fans to get a Fox subscription, because the FTA offering has been pretty small in comparison to date.

Now (in two years time) we have Nine showing four live games, including Thurs and Friday nights (no Monday nights) - meaning Fox are bidding for the four remaining games - the incentive for an NRL fan to get a Fox subscription isn't as strong anymore.

Fox are going to want a more attractive offering to retain NRL subscribers.

The NRL is going to force Fox to play top dollar, and it's in a position to do so because:
1. if Fox just tries to retain the remaining four games, it's going to leak subscribers (and head to irrelevance a bit quicker than it is currently doing); and
2. if it has no NRL at all, it goes out of business overnight (a la C7).

Fox doesn't really have a lot of choice - it has to pay to offer enough NRL to retain subscribers (not to grow them - just to retain them).
 
May 13, 2012
15,809
5,960
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
Will not both eventually get bypassed by direct streaming models (perhaps tied in with discount rates for club members)?

Yes - both will eventually get bypassed - we all accept that on this board - but - who on here is willing to forecast the tipping point?

This is what's so interesting about the Nine play - this is the fascinating bit - we had all assumed that Pay TV could carve out a little bit of extra shelf life for itself by focusing on live sport, and with good reason, live sport sells pay TV subscriptions all over the world and in Australia.

What we hadn't counted on was FTA waking up one morning and deciding: hang on, where is it set in concrete that only Pay TV can focus on live sport? Why can't we extend our own shelf life by buying more live sport?

As fans of Australian Football (which I am by the way, I'm not an NRL fan at all), the question becomes: where is our $2 billion coming from? Are both Seven and Fox wanting to pay approx 60% more for the exact same offering? Are Seven looking at what Nine has done and thinking of doing something similar? Will Fox want to pump up AFL if the NRL decide to play hardball?

Who knows?

The other interesting thing here is that the AFL TV rights are actually due a year earlier, yet the NRL/Nine deal has come through - looks like a fantastic deal - we'll only know if the NRL has gazumped the AFL once the AFL announces their deal.
 
Nov 8, 2000
33,295
21,790
South of the river
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Peel Thunder
No one.

On the other hand, lose the NRL rights and Fox may as well close up shop.

The Nine deal is almost as much as the totality of the previous deal, in other words, the NRL can afford to play hard ball (especially since the present deal goes for a couple more years anyway).

What hurts who the most?

The NRL not getting an extra $700+m from Fox (which they might be able to partially offset, still leaving them better off than the last deal)

or

Fox going out of business?

Live sport is meant to now be the saviour of Fox, but it isn't if the FTAs decide that it might just be their saviour as well.

You've summed up why it makes it interesting. Fox's decision isn't whether or not they want it, but how much to offer. If they low ball it, are the NRL really going to simply walk away? AFAIK there's no obvious alternative suitor. Let's say Fox offer $250m for 5 years for the 4 games. They can certainly justify to the NRL why the money has dropped. What can the NRL do then, other than push Fox for more money? Hard to see anyone else trumping it - only a FTA network could offer more and there's no doubt 9 would not allow that in the contract. A streaming service maybe? I doubt it, they are unlikely to enter the market for a few years. The only option is the NRL could broadcast those games themselves and sell them direct to market. Do they have that capability? I don't know.
 
As a couple of posters have mentioned - Fox is interested in subscriptions (in the main).

The bulk of subscriptions remain in NSW and Qld (primarily because of NRL).

In the current TV deal (with two more years still to run) - a Fox subscriber gets to see 5 live games, including Monday nights, plus the various talk shows - as compared to one live game on FTA (plus two on replay).

So the very first thing we notice is the very strong incentive for NRL fans to get a Fox subscription, because the FTA offering has been pretty small in comparison to date.

Now (in two years time) we have Nine showing four live games, including Thurs and Friday nights (no Monday nights) - meaning Fox are bidding for the four remaining games - the incentive for an NRL fan to get a Fox subscription isn't as strong anymore.

Fox are going to want a more attractive offering to retain NRL subscribers.

The NRL is going to force Fox to play top dollar, and it's in a position to do so because:
1. if Fox just tries to retain the remaining four games, it's going to leak subscribers (and head to irrelevance a bit quicker than it is currently doing); and
2. if it has no NRL at all, it goes out of business overnight (a la C7).

Fox doesn't really have a lot of choice - it has to pay to offer enough NRL to retain subscribers (not to grow them - just to retain them).

I've heard that if Fox want to simulcast the Nine broadcast, they also have to broadcast the Nine ads? If this is true that's a massive win for Nine and a disincentive for Fox subscribers to choose to watch on Fox (as it is the same as Nine anyway, including the ads which are a reason some choose pay tv in the first place).
 

Smokin

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 9, 2001
5,024
1,190
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
So the very first thing we notice is the very strong incentive for NRL fans to get a Fox subscription, because the FTA offering has been pretty small in comparison to date.

Now (in two years time) we have Nine showing four live games, including Thurs and Friday nights (no Monday nights) - meaning Fox are bidding for the four remaining games - the incentive for an NRL fan to get a Fox subscription isn't as strong anymore.

I posted this years ago in relation to the AFL deal - it actually was a bad deal for Foxtel and not sure they understood the market. Giving FTA all the major spots - Fri, 2x sat, sun arvo etc, meant if somebody didnt already have foxtel, they probably werent going to be forced into it. Sure, they may miss their club every so often, but that doesnt means somebody will fork out monthly x 12 for a product they hardly need.

What is probably ideal for fox, is to purchase a day. Ie Saturday. All Saturday AFL games are on fox. Then people who haven't signed up yet have a decision to make. The AFL will probably never sell this, but if foxtel offer enough they may.
 

Smokin

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 9, 2001
5,024
1,190
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
who is going to be the first of the major codes to actualy put a rocket up FTA and foxtel, and offer something which actually threats their existance? Big Cable and Network TV in America is coming out and say they totaly underestimated the power and growth of streaming.

Offer a streamed Game. Make it free, make it the same game every week (Sat twilight?) and...schedule every team in that spot as quickly as possible.

Which platform? I think the most under-utlised product out there is youtube live. Sure, a lot of stuff has already streamed live on it, but it is hardly mainstream. I am sure why, for such an innovate company like google/alphabet whatever they call themselves now.

The quality is near perfect, but most importantly it is available to pretty much everyone already! If you have any sort of pc, tablet, smart phone, smart tv, google TV, whatever - you have it! one click and you are live! Easy as pie to put it on your tv.

IT nerds will want to create their own platform, in an AFL app, needs to be downloaded, compatible with nothing - errors etc. The AFL cant get sucked into them. Make it accessible, make it easy and make it free!

I currently have netflix (us), a host of other global streaming options all for a fraction of the foxtel price. Without sport, I have no idea why Id need or even want foxtel. Or TV at all for that matter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back