Play Nice The 2021 Soccer Broadcast Rights Thread

[The_Wookie]

Yawn

Its not negative commentary that bothers me, its the constant running down of other sports and trying to run roughshod over posters from other sports who are trying to engage in positive or constructive discussion. And im tired of it. I thought you'd get the hint, but you havent.

No, it is borne of the statement that Network ten will only produce one match each week (i.e. not 5 of the 6 A League matches or any of the W League matches)

and paramount?

But the fact that they had to pay the for the AFC rights to sell them is a massive qualifier on that figure. It could be a massive portion of that number. Not to mention there is no word on who pays production costs including for things like FFA cup and other "content" that is included in the deal.

Again, things we dont know.

Ultimately there are 10s of millions of dollars in the combined headline figures for production and purchase of content that we know were not including in the dollar figures of their last deal (or deals of other codes for that matter)

Again things we dont know. Theres a hell of a lot we still dont know about the last deal

Like I said, this certainly seems like the place we can discuss this but am I wrong?

This isnt discussion.

 

[Gigantor]

They also said it wouldnt happen overnight and that it was a worthy ambition to chase.



Theres a lot of hate in this thread for a deal that has little in the way of details.

I think it's ok to discuss the deal without accusing people of hate.
I watch a fair bit of socceroos and matildas, so certainly no hate from my end.
You are right that we don't have much in the way of details, but we know enough to conclude that this is not necessarily some sort of game changer (as is being trumpeted by a few).
For example:
1. Various sources, including at least one noted soccer writer, has described the $100 mill is containing a larger than normal amount of contra. We already know that the A-League deal's contra was an above-average 20%. So we conclude at least 20% of the $100 mill is contra, although I'd be willing to bet that the figure is going to go beyond 25%.
2. We know that the FA had to buy back the international rights from the AFC. We know that the FA used to receive around $10 mill per annum from the AFC, depending on how many games were played in any one year. How much would it cost to buy that out? Well, $10 mill x 3.5, or $35 mill might be a good starting point.

All of a sudden, the net cash form the deal is sitting around $40 million across 3.5 years.

Now that might be good for the FA, I actually don't know, but it doesn't really strike as a huge advancement on where soccer is currently.

As for the claim that a weak network like TEN is going to make soccer no. 1, well, if I had $1 for every time I've heard that one over the last 45 years, I'd be extremely rich.

 

[The_Wookie]

Get "the hint"? Maybe I just don't agree with you?

Who are these "posters from other sports" you speak of anyway?

Dont play dumb.

There are a set of posters "from other sports" that have at least started here pretending to be AFL fans but I can't think of one that has openly introduced themselves as being a supporter of another code here for a cordial discussion. Is there any poster that has openly presented in such a way consistently?

They apparently dont have to. You and others like you, tend to asign them labels. They dont become hostile until you start attacking them.

Yeah sure, it says channel 10 are paying production costs for one game so, naturally, the parent company is paying for the rest.

Who the hell knows? You dont.

It is what is called conjecture. It is precisely what folks do in the presence of incomplete information

You cant call it delusional if you dont know the answers either. And you did.

We know:
-foxtel were covering production costs
-foxtel were procuring ACF content directly
-channel 10 are not covering most of the production costs for the A League
-channel 10 are procuring ACF content via the FFA which is included in the figure

The last one is wrong. We know the FA bought the rights. This amount is NOT included in the 100m that is being contracted by Paramount/10. The commentary has been that the 100m has less of an impact becase of the money the FA spent, it is not taken or subtracted from the Paramount figure.

 

[The_Wookie]

I think it's ok to discuss the deal without accusing people of hate.

Ill do that when it happens. The non AFL thread seems to be hotbed of it. im not the only observer of this. I think that should end, and steps will be taken in that regard.

I watch a fair bit of socceroos and matildas, so certainly no hate from my end.

Fair enough.

A-League deal's contra was an above-average 20%.

Ill need some sort of evidence for that given the deal was $310m in cash and $36m in contra at signing - under 12%.

So we conclude at least 20% of the $100 mill is contra, although I'd be willing to bet that the figure is going to go beyond 25%.

I wouldnt. The only things we are seeing is "substantial" and "sizeable".

We know that the FA had to buy back the international rights from the AFC. We know that the FA used to receive around $10 mill per annum from the AFC, depending on how many games were played in any one year. How much would it cost to buy that out? Well, $10 mill x 3.5, or $35 mill might be a good starting point.

FA's payments from the AFC would be dependent on the entire broadcast rights, not just the Australian ones. Not that I can find a source for your figure - and one would expect the FA to continue to receive funding from the AFC from the total broadcast rights regardless of who paid. The more apropriate question might be what did Fox pay annually for the Australian rights to the ACL and work from there. I dont think we have an answer.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I get that contra dollar figures are a bit meaningless, but it doesn't mean the contra output is intangible. It's money saved that the APL would have had to spend otherwise to market the league. And the synergies (god I hate that word, but it's appropriate here) between the broadcaster and the league here makes such spending more efficient for both parties - because of the investment from both parties, they're going to work in lockstep as a broadcaster and a league.

And I'm sure that the APL left some money off the table to achieve different strategic goals. Maybe they thought raw money wasn't the best solution to their problems given past evidence. It kind of proves its points - the league was more of a failure despite being richer in the last few years than previous to the bigger TV deal, having more money but a directionless and compromised strategic aim in search of that money didn't achieve anything. Most people can say that Western United was a failure, but it did get them more Fox broadcast money per the contract. Critics can't have it both ways - should they search for more money with compromises, or not?

 

[weewilly]

Is anyone suggesting the AFL or NRL are being challenged ... a non AFL thread ?

Didn't you read the BS headline?

Ten backs soccer to become ‘No.1 sport in Australia’ after $300m investment

 

[NoobPie]

I get that contra dollar figures are a bit meaningless, but it doesn't mean the contra output is intangible. It's money saved that the APL would have had to spend otherwise to market the league. And the synergies (god I hate that word, but it's appropriate here) between the broadcaster and the league here makes such spending more efficient for both parties - because of the investment from both parties, they're going to work in lockstep as a broadcaster and a league.

Sure, contra has a value. I think it also provides value for sponsors (could be reading this wrong). In terms of the "investment from both parties" that was more true of foxtel (in that it provided more money).

Channel 10 only having soccer is a factor but by the same token channel 10 aren't going to go down with the ship if this thing tanks - which is quite likely

And I'm sure that the APL left some money off the table to achieve different strategic goals. Maybe they thought raw money wasn't the best solution to their problems given past evidence. It kind of proves its points - the league was more of a failure despite being richer in the last few years than previous to the bigger TV deal, having more money but a directionless and compromised strategic aim in search of that money didn't achieve anything. Most people can say that Western United was a failure, but it did get them more Fox broadcast money per the contract. Critics can't have it both ways - should they search for more money with compromises, or not?

I'm not sure anyone here is being critical of them not getting as much money as they could have. People (AKA "the haters") are critiquing and disecting the announced figures.

I personally haven't been critical of the deals themselves at all, nor the FFA or the APL themselves. They are both likely OK deals - particularly the A League one given the collapse in interest.

 

[Rob]

Im not wrong. Its simply not true. The $100m flatout does not include any content the FFA paid for. This is a completely separate transaction that while meaningful in terms of the overall cash available to the FFA is not part of the Viacom rights agreement.

Not sure how you came to this conclusion as the FFA don't actually own the broadcast rights to most Socceroos games. Either the FFA had to pay the AFC first for the rights or most Socceroos games weren't part of the deal. And it's been widely reported that they are.

 

[Gigantor]

I get that contra dollar figures are a bit meaningless, but it doesn't mean the contra output is intangible. It's money saved that the APL would have had to spend otherwise to market the league.

This is true.
I guess there's contra, and then there's contra.
Soccer writers have already referred to a "sizeable" chunk being contra, without stating the exact percentage - that already says to me that it is well above average, in fact, so large, the FA doesn't want to disclose it (because it would put a bit of a dampener on the "headline" figure).
The other point is that I've already heard what some of the contra will entail - things like mentions in shows like The Project, which has already started, and probably a good move by the FA because they get so little media coverage, but who are the ones putting the value on a two minute spot on The Project? I'd suggest it's TEN itself.
Lastly, TEN talked about a childrens soccer show. Ok, great idea, good for soccer, etc.
What we don't know is whether the production costs of that show are part of this "sizeable" contra portion of the deal. It may not be, but then again, beggars can't be choosers, and if the production of the show helped the FA hit the magical $100 million headline figure, are they going to object?
Speaking of production - it transpired that the APL was actually going to cover 80% of the cost of production of broadcasting all A_league games.
Now this has not been mentioned in this international deal, and you'd expect the FA would NOT have to cover the cost of production (the net cash component is already too low), but then again, who knows.
Bottom line - it's a pretty basic run-of-the-mill deal for the FA, it's not bad, but it certainly ain't anything spectacular AND there's a very good reason why they don't want to disclose the full details, because it would put a huge dampener on what is meant to be a positive news story for soccer.

 

[Wosh]

I’ve cleaned up some posts in here, if you wish to discuss/argue anything off topic take it elsewhere.
All discussion of moderation must be taken to a private pm as per BF rules.
Thank you.

 

[Kwality]

Didn't you read the BS headline?

Ten backs soccer to become ‘No.1 sport in Australia’ after $300m investment

What is BS in your post?

 

[Colonial]

Didn't you read the BS headline?

Ten backs soccer to become ‘No.1 sport in Australia’ after $300m investment

I love giving grief to the troll Pippen but there is nothing wrong or BS with the headline.

Ten are backing football to become number 1.

They have also said it will take a long time.


I would expect the bosses of all major sports and their media partners to aim for that.

 

[weewilly]

What is BS in your post?

NEVER going to happen!
Soccer in Australia has had over 100 years to become #1 and are still along way off and nothing CH 10 do will make a difference!
Maybe if they invested $3 BILLION they might have a chance

 

[Kwality]

NEVER going to happen!

S was not soccer?

 

[Colonial]

NEVER going to happen!
Soccer in Australia has had over 100 years to become #1 and are still along way off and nothing CH 10 do will make a difference!
Maybe if they invested $3 BILLION they might have a chance

Rugby said League would never take them over.
League said AFL will never get a foothold in NSW and Qld.

Never is a ridiculous word to use.

 

[BobbyMorri]

Another good aspect of the deal is the fact it is partnered up with the A-league. That is, soccer isn't split over another different provider. It will be interesting what happens with the TV rights for the 2022 World Cup. SBS has them, but I read that they might be looking to off-sell them as they have gutted its soccer journos.

We have already seen some cross-promotion(via the project). That is a lot more than what the ABC could. The ABC is a great channel but they aren't going to do an interview with Matty Ryan on the 7:30 report just to promote a match. it is against their culture. They would do it only if it is a news story. For a sport in the re-build, they need a willing partner to build the sport back to the levels it saw 10 years ago. If that means less actual money and more contra, then I think it is a worthwhile trade-off.

 

[Kwality]

NEVER going to happen!
Soccer in Australia has had over 100 years to become #1 and are still along way off and nothing CH 10 do will make a difference!
Maybe if they invested $3 BILLION they might have a chance

There is a relevant argument to Soccers failure to gain more public support in Australia & that is an ability to shoot itself in the foot.

 

[Kwality]

Another good aspect of the deal is the fact it is partnered up with the A-league. That is, soccer isn't split over another different provider. It will be interesting what happens with the TV rights for the 2022 World Cup. SBS has them, but I read that they might be looking to off-sell them as they have gutted its soccer journos.

We have already seen some cross-promotion(via the project). That is a lot more than what the ABC could. The ABC is a great channel but they aren't going to do an interview with Matty Ryan on the 7:30 report just to promote a match. it is against their culture. They would do it only if it is a news story. For a sport in the re-build, they need a willing partner to build the sport back to the levels it saw 10 years ago. If that means less actual money and more contra, then I think it is a worthwhile trade-off.

Partnered up with the A-league: what will this partnership deliver?

 

[Gigantor]

Partnered up with the A-league: what will this partnership deliver?

I understood Bob to be saying that the same platform/network has taken both the domestic game and the international game (socceroos and matildas), and yes, that's true, that is a positive.
I would have been a poorer result if the international rights had ended up somewhere different to the domestic game.

 

[weewilly]

Rugby said League would never take them over.
League said AFL will never get a foothold in NSW and Qld.

Never is a ridiculous word to use.

I don't see any reason to not use that word.
Have a look at Soccer's long history in this country (started in 1880 in Sydney)its been one failure and disaster after another including the latest iteration the failing A League!

 

[Colonial]

I don't see any reason to not use that word.
Have a look at Soccer's long history in this country (started in 1880 in Sydney)its been one failure and disaster after another including the latest iteration the failing A League!

Then you are as foolish as those other individuals.

 

[Freomaniac]

A-league signs $200m, 5 year deal with Ten/Paramount+

The A-league has announced that it has signed a $200 million, 5 year deal with the CBS Viacom for A-league and W-league matches on Ten and Paramount+. The deal does not include the FFA Cup or Socceroos and Matildas matches, as these are sold separately by the FFA.

• The A-League and W-League has signed a five-year contract with Ten and its streaming subsidiary Paramount+ worth $200 million in cash and commercial contra, according to sources, and contains triggers for a further three-year extension. In the first year, it contains $32 million in cash – with Football Australia receiving a 20 per cent share, as per the APL’s independence terms brokered last year – and a further $11 million in contra, which will be gradually reduced over the term of the contract.
• A-League live and free every Saturday night on 10 and 10 Play on demand. Every Saturday night during the season is Football Night on 10, with the A-League’s match of the round broadcast live at 7:30pm. The deal guarantees one A-League match each week, on Saturday nights, will be broadcast live on Ten’s main channel for the duration of the agreement, preceded by a magazine-style discussion show – ensuring a level of free-to-air coverage hitherto only dreamed of in the league’s 16-year history.
• Westfield W-League live and free every Sunday afternoon on 10 Bold and 10 Play on demand. 10 Bold will be the new home of the Westfield W-League, with a match broadcast live every Sunday of the league.
• All A-league and W-league free-to-air matches will also be simulcast on 10 Play.
• All other A-League and Westfield W-League matches will be shown on the brand new Paramount+. Paramount+ launches on Wednesday, 11 August for $8.99, with football fans and Club members given a special deal to access all games.
• As part of the five-year tie-up between the Australian Professional Leagues and US giant VIACOM CBS, the latter has acquired a minor 2.5% stake in the former – becoming a shareholder as well as a partner.
• The APL has also agreed to share responsibility for broadcast production, a move rarely undertaken by major sporting competitions in Australia. This ensures a minimum standard of production will be upheld across both the A-League and W-League and the ability to scale the number of cameras used at matches up or down based on the importance of certain fixtures.
• APL will from next season produce its own “product” – that’s the A-League and Westfield W-League games, plus myriad features and news around them – and package it appropriately, in readiness for distribution via the commercial stature of the Ten Network and on Australia’s newest streaming channel. Before the start of the new season, some of that content will also be central to a new digital platform that APL promises will become the Australian home of football content.

References

• 26.05 – ViacomCBS And Australian Professional Leagues Announce Landmark Rights Deal (A-league)
• 26.05 – Why new broadcast deal smells like Ten spirit (A-league)
• 26.05 – Network 10 And Paramount+ Will Be The New Home Of A-League and Westfield W-League (Ten)
• 26.05 – A-League seals landmark five-year, $200m broadcast deal with Network Ten (The Age)
• 26.05 – Network Ten and Paramount+ sign A-League broadcast deal (Mumbrella)
• 26.05 – A-League announces Channel 10 as new broadcast partner in five-year deal (ABC)

Paramount+/Ten sign $100m Football Australia deal

10 ViacomCBS and Football Australia announce largest Socceroos and Matildas broadcast deal ever. A new era for Australian football begins. While US streaming giant Amazon Prime Video, in partnership with free-to-air broadcaster SBS, was considered to be the favourite to secure the next broadcast deal, the Nine owned Stan platform also became a contender.

https://twitter.com/ParamountPlusAU/status/1404673612485840900

The Sydney Morning Herald revealed that Ten’s owners, ViacomCBS, have invested a further $100 million into the sport – according to sources with direct knowledge of the deal – to secure a suite of key international fixtures involving Australia’s men’s and women’s teams as well as the FFA Cup and other Asian tournaments. The $100 million figure is not all pure profit for the governing body. The deal also includes a significant amount of contra, while FA had to spend an unspecified amount to buy the rights to much of the Socceroos and Matildas content off the AFC’s confederation’s marketing agency to facilitate the package it has now sold to Ten.

• Football Australia and 10 ViacomCBS enter into landmark media rights agreement until the end of 2024.
• Network 10 and Paramount+ to be the new home of National Teams football and the FFA Cup bringing more football to more fans providing unprecedented reach.
• New deal includes all Westfield Matildas and Socceroos matches outside of FIFA World Cup Finals plus the next four (4) seasons of the FFA Cup from Round of 32 matches onwards.
• A minimum of 16 Senior National Team matches over the term and the annual FFA Cup Final to be broadcast on Network 10.
• The first ever direct commercial free-to-air broadcast deal for Football Australia’s National Teams.

The agreement, which encompasses the media rights for all national teams (Socceroos, Westfield Matildas, Young Socceroos, Westfield Young Matildas, Joeys, and Westfield Junior Matildas) owned or controlled by Football Australia, as well as AFC Asian Qualifiers – Road to Qatar, AFC Asian Cups, and other AFC tournaments until 31 December 2024, also celebrates the largest Socceroos and Westfield Matildas broadcast deal ever. Football Australia acquired the rights to the AFC competitions from the AFC to enable this compelling package of rights to be created.

In a ground-breaking move, the agreement will also include coverage of the FFA Cup (from the Round of 32) on Paramount+ with the FFA Cup Final, to be broadcast on Network 10 each year.

For the fans, this means that extensive coverage of Australia’s National Teams and the FFA Cup (in addition to the A- League and Westfield W-League) will be available on 10, 10 Bold and 10 Play, as well as Paramount+, which will be available in Australia from 11 August, for $8.99 per month.

As part of the deal, 10 ViacomCBS will also commission a children’s programme focused on promoting participation in football.

Having once made the Big Bash League the country’s hottest sporting property in the summer, Ten believes it can now make the round-ball code the most popular in Australia.



Under this landmark agreement, 10 ViacomCBS will broadcast the below content across Network 10 and Paramount+:

• Matildas Friendly Internationals (home and away)
• Socceroos Friendly Internationals (home and away)
• U23 Men’s Friendly Internationals (home)
• Socceroos’ 2026 FIFA World Cup Asian Qualifier Round 2 matches (home)
• Other Football Australia controlled Youth National Teams matches (home)
• FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 Asian Qualifiers – Round Three (including prospective Play-Off matches)
• AFC Asian Cup China 2023TM Finals
• AFC Women’s Asian Cup India 2022TM Finals
• AFC U23 Asian Cup Finals 2022, 2024
• AFC Women’s Olympic Qualifying Tournament (Final Round) for Paris Olympics 2024
• AFC U20 Asian Cup Finals 2023
• AFC U17 Asian Cup Finals 2023
• AFC U20 Women’s Asian Cup Finals 2022 and 2024
• AFC U17 Women’s Asian Cup Finals 2022 and 2024
• AFC Futsal Asian Cup Finals 2022, 2024
• AFC Solidarity Cup 2024
• A-League Club Play-Off matches to enter FFA Cup Round of 32
• All FFA Cup matches played from Round of 32 onwards, including the Round of 16, Quarter Finals, Semi-Finals and the FFA Cup Final
• All non-Australian matches across AFC competitions, including Round 3 FIFA World Cup Qualifying matches and AFC Asian Cup matches

References

• Football Australia reaches landmark media rights agreement with 10 ViacomCBS
• Ten backs soccer to become ‘No.1 sport in Australia’ after $300m investment
• 10 WINS BIDDING WAR FOR SOCCEROOS AND MATILDAS MATCHES

sounds like a solid deal

 

[Gigantor]

No one really knows how solid the deals are because a lot of ifs, buts and maybes are woven into the deal merely to achieve a semi-acceptable headline figure.
What we do know is that the amount of net cash which will eventually drip through in no way shares any resemblance with the headline figure.

 

[Colonial]

Already doing wonders for the sport as It gets coverage on ten news and other programs that it never has had before.
Been a great 1st step by ten.

 

[BobbyMorri]

Interesting to note for the Olympics.

The women are on the main channel on Wednesday at 9:15pm while the men are on 7MATE on Thursday 8:15pm.

Perhaps 7 have another program on at 8:15 on Thursday, while 9:15 is less empty. Could well be the case. Or could 7 think the womens full side be a bigger drawcard than the Olyroos.