The next Media rights deal (2023-?)

Remove this Banner Ad

Bjo187

Team Captain
Apr 30, 2020
447
562
AFL Club
Essendon
What do you reckon the capital costs are for outlying for all the cameras, servers, broadcast vans and equipment etc and then the ongoing recurrent costs every week to put it all together are?? What do they do with all this equipment for 6 months when there is no footy on, to get a return on your capital outlay.

Plus the majority of people don't watch footy on kayo.

You are only looking at revenue side, but there is a huge cost side you have ignored.

Specialization is the name of the game. That's why these guys below have all the sports broadcast equipment, camera guys, production guys in studios and access to 39 venues around Oz and just sell their services to 7, 9, 10 and Fox Sports etc, who say to the public they are producing the game when its really NEP doing most of the work.



You must have missed this part in my original post

"Obviously they'd need to put aside 100 mill or something for production costs per year, but wouldn't they be making a whole lot load more this way?"
 

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
70,348
108,908
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
You must have missed this part in my original post

"Obviously they'd need to put aside 100 mill or something for production costs per year, but wouldn't they be making a whole lot load more this way?"
Its why I mentioned capital costs first, then recurrent costs, and then asked what do you do with all that capital equipment for 6 months when there isn't any footy. If it was all as easy as you think, the AFL would have done it by now. This way they get plenty of $$$ without the headache of large production staff they have to control and capital equipment outlay upfront then constant upgrades.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Bjo187

Team Captain
Apr 30, 2020
447
562
AFL Club
Essendon
Its why I mentioned capital costs first, then recurrent costs, and then asked what do you do with all that capital equipment for 6 months when there isn't any footy. If it was all as easy as you think, the AFL would have done it by now. This way they get plenty of $$$ without the headache of large production staff they have to control and capital equipment outlay upfront then constant upgrades.

I suppose if they have their own department it covers almost 9 months of the year now with AFLW, they could potentially hire it out if need be during the off months as I imagine other sports will start to produce their own content in the future too. If the tv stations contract out this stuff already anyway, you'd think that makes it even easier, unless the costs are exorbitant. You are right in saying the afl would have likely analysed this themselves already though, would love to have been a fly on the wall to see why they didn't think it would work.
 

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
70,348
108,908
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
I suppose if they have their own department it covers almost 9 months of the year now with AFLW, they could potentially hire it out if need be during the off months as I imagine other sports will start to produce their own content in the future too. If the tv stations contract out this stuff already anyway, you'd think that makes it even easier, unless the costs are exorbitant. You are right in saying the afl would have likely analysed this themselves already though, would love to have been a fly on the wall to see why they didn't think it would work.
NFL, the richest league in the world, where all 32 teams are run for profit and can pay dividends to their private owners, have their own network, but they still sell rights to free to air networks and subscription TV as well as sell mobile rights thru NFL Game Pass.

There is a big $$ value to having non subscription TV rights. Many free to air networks around the world are prepared to break even, or even have sports rights as a loss leader to have the content volume and it is a way to attract viewers to other programs as they promote them during the sports programs.

Look at cricket in UK, where mobile and pay TV penetration levels are a lot higher than Oz. After nearly 50 years on the BBC, they spit the coverage between Channel 4 and Sky and then since 2005 I think, its just been Sky coverage on pay TV and the amount of eyeballs watching cricket has dropped away substantially because not everyone has easy access to Sky like they did with BBC or Channel 4. That's hurt cricket's visibility in UK.
 

Bjo187

Team Captain
Apr 30, 2020
447
562
AFL Club
Essendon
NFL, the richest league in the world, where all 32 teams are run for profit and can pay dividends to their private owners, have their own network, but they still sell rights to free to air networks and subscription TV as well as sell mobile rights thru NFL Game Pass.

There is a big $$ value to having non subscription TV rights. Many free to air networks around the world are prepared to break even, or even have sports rights as a loss leader to have the content volume and it is a way to attract viewers to other programs as they promote them during the sports programs.

Look at cricket in UK, where mobile and pay TV penetration levels are a lot higher than Oz. After nearly 50 years on the BBC, they spit the coverage between Channel 4 and Sky and then since 2005 I think, its just been Sky coverage on pay TV and the amount of eyeballs watching cricket has dropped away substantially because not everyone has easy access to Sky like they did with BBC or Channel 4. That's hurt cricket's visibility in UK.

Agree and I did say in my original post that still having fta would be required, but with the pay tv 60 percent part, instead of going through foxtel (randomly crunching the numbers) I thought the afl would be able to generate a lot more annually by going it alone.
 

Kwality

Hall of Famer
Aug 14, 2011
36,507
13,688
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
Agree and I did say in my original post that still having fta would be required, but with the pay tv 60 percent part, instead of going through foxtel (randomly crunching the numbers) I thought the afl would be able to generate a lot more annually by going it alone.

Are you comparing apples with apples when you suggest 'the afl would be able to generate a lot more annually by going it alone.'
 

The_Wookie

Queenslander
Jul 2, 2010
35,045
32,825
Scamander
AFL Club
Carlton
Agree and I did say in my original post that still having fta would be required, but with the pay tv 60 percent part, instead of going through foxtel (randomly crunching the numbers) I thought the afl would be able to generate a lot more annually by going it alone.

It takes on all the risk at that point as well.

Id like to see them try for non exclusive streaming rights though. Take the hit from Fox, and sell direct to the masses worldwide.
 

The_Wookie

Queenslander
Jul 2, 2010
35,045
32,825
Scamander
AFL Club
Carlton
so individual pay for view ?

yes. I think some money will still be paid by Fox - AFL is a key driver for Kayo and Foxtel after all -but less if its not exclusive. The AFL would take a smaller payment from Fox and hope to make it up from the average punter.
 

Kwality

Hall of Famer
Aug 14, 2011
36,507
13,688
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
yes. I think some money will still be paid by Fox - AFL is a key driver for Kayo and Foxtel after all -but less if its not exclusive. The AFL would take a smaller payment from Fox and hope to make it up from the average punter.

Sorry, I feel like I'm making hard work of this, the AFL would market it direct & get paid direct.
Personally I'm no fan of a bigger AFL, full stop.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Seedsfan

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 10, 2013
13,949
8,530
AFL Club
Collingwood
Stan getting into PPV boxing, can see them putting up serious money for the AFL
 

Kwality

Hall of Famer
Aug 14, 2011
36,507
13,688
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
Stan gained nearly 150,000 sport subscribers since it began broadcasting rugby union matches earlier this year. May 2021
In a presentation to the Macquarie Australia Conference, Mr Sneesby indicated about 75,000 of those subscribers were new users to Stan altogether, with the remaining half existing subscribers who had upgraded to the $10 a month sport add-on package.

 

Gigantor

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2012
15,415
5,500
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
Gained 150,000 sports subscribers, but only 75,000 were new to STAN.
At $120 per annum, or whatever it is, it's about $9 million in revenue per annum.
I mean seriously, that's chicken feed in the scheme of things.
When you think about the A-League rights on Paramount, and hard to imagine that they're even reaching that figure.
 

Kwality

Hall of Famer
Aug 14, 2011
36,507
13,688
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
Gained 150,000 sports subscribers, but only 75,000 were new to STAN.
At $120 per annum, or whatever it is, it's about $9 million in revenue per annum.
I mean seriously, that's chicken feed in the scheme of things.
When you think about the A-League rights on Paramount, and hard to imagine that they're even reaching that figure.

Worthwhile read to understand NINE/Stan sports rights from 6 months back:
'.. what we are doing with sports television. Tennis and rugby in particular are two sports that fit into the total TV strategy where we acquired all rights with a distribution model that sits across subscription streaming with Stan as well as free and ad-funded on Nine and 9Now.

Being able to acquire rights for both platforms makes it a viable proposition for those platforms. This past week in particular, with both sports running, you have seen the numbers of Stan Sport accelerating.
 
Last edited:

Seedsfan

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 10, 2013
13,949
8,530
AFL Club
Collingwood
Gained 150,000 sports subscribers, but only 75,000 were new to STAN.
At $120 per annum, or whatever it is, it's about $9 million in revenue per annum.
I mean seriously, that's chicken feed in the scheme of things.
When you think about the A-League rights on Paramount, and hard to imagine that they're even reaching that figure.
To be fair that article was written about 2/3 months post the launch of Stan Sports when all it had was super rugby. Now it has expanded its overall offerings and rugby offerings the numbers have probably climbed again. Also a proper tier one sport would drive the numbers up big time.
 

Gigantor

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2012
15,415
5,500
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
To be fair that article was written about 2/3 months post the launch of Stan Sports when all it had was super rugby. Now it has expanded its overall offerings and rugby offerings the numbers have probably climbed again. Also a proper tier one sport would drive the numbers up big time.

I accept that, but it does help illustrate the sorts of numbers you need to drive to make a quid in the caper.
 

JohnZ

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 10, 2016
6,515
9,612
AFL Club
Geelong
Gained 150,000 sports subscribers, but only 75,000 were new to STAN.
At $120 per annum, or whatever it is, it's about $9 million in revenue per annum.
I mean seriously, that's chicken feed in the scheme of things.
When you think about the A-League rights on Paramount, and hard to imagine that they're even reaching that figure.
Depends on how you want to calculate it.

75k were new to Stan all together and 75k were upgrades from the basic package.

So in terms of revenue you have 75k * $120 (per year for upgrades) plus 75k * $288 (assuming standard package, and that the $14 revenue would not be achieved independent of the sport offering)

That's $30.6m per year, which for niche sports is a solid amount of income. Remembering that these pay tv sport providers still have ad revenue.
 

Gigantor

Brownlow Medallist
May 13, 2012
15,415
5,500
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
Depends on how you want to calculate it.

75k were new to Stan all together and 75k were upgrades from the basic package.

So in terms of revenue you have 75k * $120 (per year for upgrades) plus 75k * $288 (assuming standard package, and that the $14 revenue would not be achieved independent of the sport offering)

That's $30.6m per year, which for niche sports is a solid amount of income. Remembering that these pay tv sport providers still have ad revenue.

Fair enough.
STAN is still needing to pay for the remainder of its offering from the new lot of $288 per annum, still has to pay production costs (or at least share that with RA), and let's be honest, the ad revenue for those sorts of numbers is pretty meagre to say the least.
They're not really the sort of numbers that would make anyone do somersaults down the corridor.
Also, the main point I was making is that Paramount's numbers, at this point, are likely to be even smaller (and their annual price is pretty rock bottom, even lower when you consider the discounted subs they are handing out to A-League members).
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad