ARU hopeful of matching FFA's $40 million TV deal

Super Rugby and International football TV ratings and discussion.
Post Reply
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9890
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 231 times
Been liked: 51 times

ARU hopeful of matching FFA's $40 million TV deal

Post by Beaussie »

Gee, Rugby is really struggling in Australia these days. Hoping to match Soccer's tv deal. :oops:
ARU boss Bill Pulver hopeful of securing similar broadcast deal to FFA’s $40 million

Iain Payten
The Daily Telegraph
April 04, 2014 7:30PM

AUSTRALIAN Rugby Union has bullishly targeted the $40 million-a-year TV deal of Aussie football as the benchmark for their next – and potentially code-saving - broadcast rights contract.

Declaring the Wallabies a superior broadcasting product to the Socceroos, ARU chief executive Bill Pulver believes rugby union should climb from their current $25 million a year to match or better football’s windfall from FoxSports and SBS, struck in 2012.

With SANZAR’s current 5-year deal with FoxSports, Sky Sport (NZ) and SuperSport (South Africa) expiring at the end of 2015, negotiations will soon commence and Pulver is confident increased “competitive tension” for the rights between Australian free-to-air networks and pay-TV can grow the code’s broadcasting revenue sizeably.

It is desperately needed. With forecast consolidated losses of up to $15 million a year in coming seasons, the ARU is banking on big gains in TV money as a lifeline; particularly after backing the expansion of a Super Rugby many believe is structurally geared to sink the finances of Australian rugby.

After a huge cost-cutting push, Pulver conceded the next broadcasting deal is going to be “very important part of restoring balance” at the ARU.

“I think the broadcasting environment is shaping up really well,” Pulver told NewsCorp.

“I do expect substantial interest from multiple players in our content. I don’t want to pre-judge this too early, but there are decent signs there is going to be some real competitive tension around bidding for these broadcasting rights.”

Though in a three-country alliance, since 1996 the ARU has effectively always done exclusive deals for all their games with FoxSports, who on-sell free-to-air rights for Wallabies Tests.

Pulver believes the value of live sport in the modern media environment may see demand from FTA broadcasters for packages of Wallabies and Super Rugby games, potentially seeing rugby strike a combined FTA/Pay TV deal like those of the NRL and AFL.

“With this fragmentation of media, smaller and smaller live audiences become increasingly valuable, that really brings us into play big time,” Pulver said.

“My sense is there is going to be strong demand for our product. Live sport is becoming increasingly popular. It is a must-see component of a broadcasting schedule.

“Everything else can be time-shifted but if you don’t watch sport live you are going to read about it and you lose the magic of it.

“It is a point of difference for them, getting their audiences right. Who would have thought the Big Bash in January was going to be such a runaway success?

“I am very confident there is going to be demand. The product we have got is attractive, and the socio-economic demographic that supports rugby is very, very valuable.”

Though comparisons with the NRL and AFL’s billion dollar deals are fanciful, Pulver said the FFA’s $40m-a-year deal with FoxSports and SBS is the benchmark for rugby.

“Soccer is in a wonderful position and they have done a great job in the last few years with the A-League, but I put the Wallabies in a different league to the Socceroos,” Pulver said.

“The Wallabies are a truly competitive international team. The Socceroos, there are certain periods where opportunity is strong, they play other Asian teams and that’s modestly well supported. The World Cup is enormously well supported but they only come around every four years.

“Unlike the Socceroos, the Wallabies are truly competitive against all of the best teams in the world. So I think as an asset, the Wallabies are in a very strong position from a broadcasting perspective.”

Domestically, the A-League and Super Rugby attract similar ratings on FoxSports, but football plays more games and all of them are in Australia and New Zealand.

Super Rugby’s overall ratings are strong for local and Kiwi games, but averages are sunk by the 40 games a year played at 2am in South Africa.

Internationally, the Wallabies and Socceroos both attract big audiences, with important fixtures drawing top 5 audiences of the year for FoxSports.

The combined Foxsports/SBS deal – which sees an A-League game simulcast live on Fridays and SBS screen Socceroos games on an hour-delay – is a model the ARU are eyeing off, potentially with existing FTA partner Channel Ten.

But unless Ten has the money and desire to threaten FoxSports’ overall hold of rugby (as SBS did with football), the pay-TV outfit will likely continue their negotiating tactic of paying a premium for absolute exclusivity, or a much-reduced offer for sharing the content.

The dual-option FFA deal might even work against the ARU, with FoxSports understood to have willingly partnered with SBS in the hope “a small taste” on FTA might mean more subscribers. It is believed to have had no impact.

Though not yet even close to the valuable South African Currie Cup or New Zealand’s ITM, the new National Rugby Championship – beginning in August – is hoped to grow into an entity that also eventually pulls in money to the ARU coffers.

Awkwardly, however, it only got off the ground courtesy of $3m in funding by FoxSports and Foxtel and though Pulver stresses his appreciation for their support, angst and tension over the next broadcast deal could presumably threaten the NRC’s existence.

The other big area Pulver hopes to see big gains is in the rapidly expanding area of digital rights, with hopes of revenue for SANZAR in global streaming passes and the like.

“The negotiation process will determine where we finish up but clearly, there is a unique value to the digital component of that deal,” Pulver said

“I don’t question for a minute some of those broadcasters, like FoxSports and Foxtel, are going to very eager to have digital as part of their agreement and I have no doubt it will be part of their proposal.”

TELEVISION DEALS

AFL

$250m per annum (Seven/FoxSports/Telstra)

Games per AFL season: 207

2013 Seven/Fox reg season average: 687,000

NRL

$200m per annum (Nine/FoxSports/Telstra)

Games per NRL season: 201

2013 Nine/Fox reg season average: 478,000

Average Origin audience: 3.99m

FOOTBALL

$40m per annum (FoxSports/SBS)

A League games per season: 150

Average AL audience in 2013: 81,000

Socceroos games in 2013: 8

Average SBS/Fox Socceroos audience for games in Australia (4): 1.17m

RUGBY

$25m per annum (FoxsSports)

Games per SR season: 130 (in Aus/NZ: up to 89).

2013 average SR audience: 63,000 (Aus/NZ games only: 88,000)

Wallabies games in 2013: 14

Average Ten/Fox Wallabies audience for games in Australia/NZ (8): 1.19m
User avatar
eelofwest
Coach
Coach
Posts: 2717
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2012 5:15 pm
Team: Eels
Location:
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: ARU hopeful of matching FFA's $40 million TV deal

Post by eelofwest »

Gotta say the ARU are delusional.

The have 5 teams compared to the Aleagues 10

The Soccoroos out rate the Wallabies by a large margin


The Aleague has more local interest as it is played in australia.

I don't see the ARU getting 40m a year, my guess 30ma year at best.




Also your broadcast figures are incorrect,
AFL 225m
NRL 221m a year

Check the financial reports.
Image
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests