Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL

[TLPG]

You have no idea what you are talking about.

[truthbomber]

You have no idea what you are talking about.

5 years fumbler

off a cliff goes the drops & giggles in NSW & QLD
5 years

[TLPG]

Aussie rules will still be played in Queensland and in New South Wales north of the Barassi Line (aside from the four AFL clubs) in 2032 to a similar degree to now. Live with it.

[Beaussie]

Bidding war is on.

AFL broadcast rights war continues as free-to-air viewing threatened in WA
4 HOURS AGO

OLIVER PETERSON


Article image for AFL broadcast rights war continues as free-to-air viewing threatened in WA

Four of Australia’s biggest media companies have entered a multi billion-dollar bidding war for the rights to broadcast and stream AFL games from 2025 in a contest that could change the way fans watch the game.

Currently, Channel 7 and Foxtel will retain their rights however uncertainty looms over whether WA footy fans will get Fremantle and West Coast matches free-to-air. Foxtel is now pushing for exclusive rights for Saturday and Saturday night football.

“In the last 24-48 hours, Foxtel and Channel 7 have made a bunch of concessions to one another that will see them able to retain it,” Zoe Samios, Sydney Morning Herald / WAtoday media reporter told Oliver Peterson Perth Live.

“If this bid is successful, every game that Channel 7 broadcasts on their free to air channels will also broadcast on their online app 7 Plus. However, Foxtel has not wanted to give up their exclusive digital rights to all AFL games as that is how they get their subscribers for their streaming platform Kayo.”

“The AFL will have to weigh up how much they want these two partners to go together or alternatively look at another bid if they want to make sure there are more games on free to air.”

“If it does go that way this will be a perfect example of what happens to a sport when there are loop holes in the anti-siphoning laws that haven’t been over-hauled since the 1990s,” Ms Samios told Oly.

https://www.6pr.com.au/afl-broadcast-ri ... ned-in-wa/

[truthbomber]

Bidding war is on.

AFL broadcast rights war continues as free-to-air viewing threatened in WA
4 HOURS AGO

OLIVER PETERSON


Article image for AFL broadcast rights war continues as free-to-air viewing threatened in WA

Four of Australia’s biggest media companies have entered a multi billion-dollar bidding war for the rights to broadcast and stream AFL games from 2025 in a contest that could change the way fans watch the game.

Currently, Channel 7 and Foxtel will retain their rights however uncertainty looms over whether WA footy fans will get Fremantle and West Coast matches free-to-air. Foxtel is now pushing for exclusive rights for Saturday and Saturday night football.

“In the last 24-48 hours, Foxtel and Channel 7 have made a bunch of concessions to one another that will see them able to retain it,” Zoe Samios, Sydney Morning Herald / WAtoday media reporter told Oliver Peterson Perth Live.

“If this bid is successful, every game that Channel 7 broadcasts on their free to air channels will also broadcast on their online app 7 Plus. However, Foxtel has not wanted to give up their exclusive digital rights to all AFL games as that is how they get their subscribers for their streaming platform Kayo.”

“The AFL will have to weigh up how much they want these two partners to go together or alternatively look at another bid if they want to make sure there are more games on free to air.”

“If it does go that way this will be a perfect example of what happens to a sport when there are loop holes in the anti-siphoning laws that haven’t been over-hauled since the 1990s,” Ms Samios told Oly.

https://www.6pr.com.au/afl-broadcast-ri ... ned-in-wa/

so exactly the same numb of bidders as yesterday


2...

also
TPGL

read that article you blithering ignoramus
& see the bit about the aflol being the party that ultimately decides wether the non vicderp states get their content on FTA or not

[TLPG]

And the federal government can over rule them via the anti siphoning laws - especially if FTA in WA wants it (and they do) - by striking out the deal if it's made.

And you can't count.

[Quolls2019]

And the federal government can over rule them via the anti siphoning laws - especially if FTA in WA wants it (and they do) - by striking out the deal if it's made.

And you can't count.

The FTA for AFL in WA is owned by the Seven Network and if the seven network does a deal with Foxtel not to broadcast WA home games in WA they will not be broadcast no matter what the locals say.
And the federal government cant do much about it unless they change the current law.
As long as there is agreement between the rights holders broadcasting for category B events is pretty much up to them.
This is why most victorian home games are not on fta and the federal government does not interfere.

There is an argument that attendance and/or membership could rise if home games are not broadcast live on fta.
A counter argument is sponsorship may reduce if the games are not live on fta.

[TLPG]

Seven WA always have Fremantle and West Coast on FTA - and that won't change. The federal government CAN do something about it if all the AFL games are not on FTA in any given state. It's compsulsory.

[Quolls2019]

Seven WA always have Fremantle and West Coast on FTA - and that won't change. The federal government CAN do something about it if all the AFL games are not on FTA in any given state. It's compsulsory.

At this time 7 WA broadcasts their state teams home games, that does not mean it will happen in the future broadcast agreement, and it looks like it may not.
If what you are saying is accurate why does Victoria generally only have an average of 3 games per week on fta.
This weekend 4 Victorian home games are not on FTA in Melbourne and 5 in regional Victoria.
Last weekend 3 Victorian Games were not on melbourne FTA and 3 victorian games were not on regional fta.
This weeks Richmond v Hawthorn game, a game with significant finals impact is not broadcast in Victoria on FTA or in any other state or territory on FTA.
A couple of other games are only on fta in 1 state.
I do not see or hear the federal government jumping up and down about the broadcasters breaking the law.
Its all about the agreements in place between the 3 parties involved, and the federal government is not one of those parties.

[WookieReturns]

Seven WA always have Fremantle and West Coast on FTA - and that won't change. The federal government CAN do something about it if all the AFL games are not on FTA in any given state. It's compsulsory.

It probably will change. It is NOT compulsory.

The Federal Government cant do anything unless it changes the law as it currently stands.

The Antisiphoning legislation merely requires that FTA gets first bite. If FTA doesnt want it, then Fox is free to have it.

[TLPG]

Seven WA always have Fremantle and West Coast on FTA - and that won't change. The federal government CAN do something about it if all the AFL games are not on FTA in any given state. It's compsulsory.

At this time 7 WA broadcasts their state teams home games, that does not mean it will happen in the future broadcast agreement, and it looks like it may not.
If what you are saying is accurate why does Victoria generally only have an average of 3 games per week on fta.
This weekend 4 Victorian home games are not on FTA in Melbourne and 5 in regional Victoria.
Last weekend 3 Victorian Games were not on melbourne FTA and 3 victorian games were not on regional fta.
This weeks Richmond v Hawthorn game, a game with significant finals impact is not broadcast in Victoria on FTA or in any other state or territory on FTA.
A couple of other games are only on fta in 1 state.
I do not see or hear the federal government jumping up and down about the broadcasters breaking the law.
Its all about the agreements in place between the 3 parties involved, and the federal government is not one of those parties.

First of all Richmond are playing Essendon, not Hawthorn. Hawthorn are playing the Bulldogs. That latter game is important because if the Bulldogs win they are in the eight and will stay there if Collingwood beat Carlton. Richmond v Essendon is meaningless as Richmond will stay in the eight no matter what.

I don't believe for one second that 7 WA will give away the Dockers or West Coast games. And under the laws they have the right to grab them. If Foxtel denies them that right, that's illegal.

Now while it is so that not all games are on FTA in all states - and that's out of practicality because of overlaps or clashes (Saturday, Saturday night and Sunday) - it is also so that all states must have games on free to air even if it's just one. It can't be zero. That's against the anti siphoning laws. That's the point I'm making. To insist that all games be on free to air would require a law change, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the federal government could do that - especially if a deal is mooted that threatens to do exactly that.

[WookieReturns]

I don't believe for one second that 7 WA will give away the Dockers or West Coast games. And under the laws they have the right to grab them. If Foxtel denies them that right, that's illegal.

Everything has a price. And that price is going to be permanent Thursday night national footy and finally being able to stream their broadcast matches on 7plus.

Now while it is so that not all games are on FTA in all states - and that's out of practicality because of overlaps or clashes (Saturday, Saturday night and Sunday) - it is also so that all states must have games on free to air even if it's just one. It can't be zero. That's against the anti siphoning laws. That's the point I'm making. To insist that all games be on free to air would require a law change, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the federal government could do that - especially if a deal is mooted that threatens to do exactly that.

Antisiphoning laws dont say jack shit about individual states having individual broadcasts. The only stipulation is that they musnt be wanted by a FTA network before Fox claim them - Seven can wheel away these deals all they like.

[Quolls2019]

Seven WA always have Fremantle and West Coast on FTA - and that won't change. The federal government CAN do something about it if all the AFL games are not on FTA in any given state. It's compsulsory.

At this time 7 WA broadcasts their state teams home games, that does not mean it will happen in the future broadcast agreement, and it looks like it may not.
If what you are saying is accurate why does Victoria generally only have an average of 3 games per week on fta.
This weekend 4 Victorian home games are not on FTA in Melbourne and 5 in regional Victoria.
Last weekend 3 Victorian Games were not on melbourne FTA and 3 victorian games were not on regional fta.
This weeks Richmond v Hawthorn game, a game with significant finals impact is not broadcast in Victoria on FTA or in any other state or territory on FTA.
A couple of other games are only on fta in 1 state.
I do not see or hear the federal government jumping up and down about the broadcasters breaking the law.
Its all about the agreements in place between the 3 parties involved, and the federal government is not one of those parties.

First of all Richmond are playing Essendon, not Hawthorn. Hawthorn are playing the Bulldogs. That latter game is important because if the Bulldogs win they are in the eight and will stay there if Collingwood beat Carlton. Richmond v Essendon is meaningless as Richmond will stay in the eight no matter what.

I don't believe for one second that 7 WA will give away the Dockers or West Coast games. And under the laws they have the right to grab them. If Foxtel denies them that right, that's illegal.

Now while it is so that not all games are on FTA in all states - and that's out of practicality because of overlaps or clashes (Saturday, Saturday night and Sunday) - it is also so that all states must have games on free to air even if it's just one. It can't be zero. That's against the anti siphoning laws. That's the point I'm making. To insist that all games be on free to air would require a law change, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the federal government could do that - especially if a deal is mooted that threatens to do exactly that.

You seem to be changing your point.

[WookieReturns]

AFL on verge of record broadcast deal
Mark Di Stefano and Patrick Durkin

The AFL is on the verge of signing a record television deal, with current broadcast partners Seven West Media and Foxtel claiming to be in the “box seat” to top the previous record of $2.5 billion ahead of the dramatic final round of the season.

Senior sources close to the high-level negotiations say Seven West Media and Foxtel (which owns streaming service Kayo) believe they are close to a deal which is being reviewed by the lawyers and could be announced as early as Monday.

Speculation remains whether Network Ten and streaming partner Paramount Plus and Nine Entertainment and streaming service Stan have topped the $500 million a year benchmark, which the AFL hoped would push the price closer to $600 million a year.

But the AFL denied any deal had been done, with sources suggesting the negotiations were still at the “high drama phase”, with Seven and Foxtel seeking to finalise between themselves how many games remain behind the paywall with a concession for Seven to stream key AFL matches.

Another source said that there was still a “small chance” that Ten and Paramount could counter with a last-minute higher bid with an AFL subcommittee led by AFL chairman Richard Goyder, AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan and Commissioners Paul Bassat and Robin Bishop discussing a final decision on the deal.

“Could a last-minute bid come in that’ll blow the AFL away? Yes, it could,” another source said, sworn to secrecy about the high stakes negotiations where each party is promoting their own interests.

Foxtel and Seven previously clinched a record $2.5 billion deal with the AFL for six years from 2017. A two-year extension was agreed in late 2020 to the end of the 2024 season for the publicly disclosed figure of $946 million – putting the current rights at a value of $473 million a year, a figure considered to a discount due to the cancellation of games during the pandemic and creating a benchmark of around $500 million a year.

Sources said the current bid was above the existing deal but only a “modest increase” with a five-year offer above $510 million a year putting a deal above $2.55 billion and allowing the AFL to legitimately claim a record agreement.

Nail-biting end to season

Executives look to have failed to stir significant interest among the US tech giants like Amazon and Apple to get involved in bidding for live broadcast or streaming rights.

Both companies have emerged as major players during broadcast rights negotiations in recent years, with Amazon nabbing the local rights for some English Premier League matches and the NFL’s prized “Thursday Night Football”, while Apple is picking up Major League Baseball and Major League Soccer in the US.



https://www.afr.com/companies/media-and-marketing/afl-on-verge-of-record-broadcast-deal-20220819-p5bb75

[TLPG]

At this time 7 WA broadcasts their state teams home games, that does not mean it will happen in the future broadcast agreement, and it looks like it may not.
If what you are saying is accurate why does Victoria generally only have an average of 3 games per week on fta.
This weekend 4 Victorian home games are not on FTA in Melbourne and 5 in regional Victoria.
Last weekend 3 Victorian Games were not on melbourne FTA and 3 victorian games were not on regional fta.
This weeks Richmond v Hawthorn game, a game with significant finals impact is not broadcast in Victoria on FTA or in any other state or territory on FTA.
A couple of other games are only on fta in 1 state.
I do not see or hear the federal government jumping up and down about the broadcasters breaking the law.
Its all about the agreements in place between the 3 parties involved, and the federal government is not one of those parties.

First of all Richmond are playing Essendon, not Hawthorn. Hawthorn are playing the Bulldogs. That latter game is important because if the Bulldogs win they are in the eight and will stay there if Collingwood beat Carlton. Richmond v Essendon is meaningless as Richmond will stay in the eight no matter what.

I don't believe for one second that 7 WA will give away the Dockers or West Coast games. And under the laws they have the right to grab them. If Foxtel denies them that right, that's illegal.

Now while it is so that not all games are on FTA in all states - and that's out of practicality because of overlaps or clashes (Saturday, Saturday night and Sunday) - it is also so that all states must have games on free to air even if it's just one. It can't be zero. That's against the anti siphoning laws. That's the point I'm making. To insist that all games be on free to air would require a law change, but it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the federal government could do that - especially if a deal is mooted that threatens to do exactly that.

You seem to be changing your point.

No, I'm clarifying it as it's clear that I wasn't getting my message across previously.