Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
- Beaussie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10011
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
- Team: Sydney Swans
- Location: Sydney
- Has thanked: 263 times
- Been liked: 52 times
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
Lions vs Demons on 7mate again tonight in Brisbane. No commitment to promoting and developing the game. Fuck Channel 7 off.
-
- Coach
- Posts: 4685
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 6:19 pm
- Team: Wests Tigers
- Location:
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been liked: 168 times
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
Ummmm beatup, it's because it don't rate in Qld pal. No one cares. Seven has got Better homes and gardens on instead.......because it'll rate higher. Like Pepper Pig does lololololololo!!! Hilarious stuff!!!!
- Quolls2019
- Coach
- Posts: 1914
- Joined: Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:20 pm
- Team: North Melbourne
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 45 times
- Been liked: 124 times
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
HmmmTLPG wrote: ↑Fri Aug 19, 2022 7:27 pmNo, I'm clarifying it as it's clear that I wasn't getting my message across previously.Quolls2019 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 19, 2022 4:02 pmYou seem to be changing your point.TLPG wrote: ↑Fri Aug 19, 2022 2:10 pm
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.
There are lies, damn lies and then there are ratings.
Rugby league, Australias most popular game in some of North Eastern Australia.
Rugby league, Australias most popular game in some of North Eastern Australia.
-
- Banned
- Posts: 2072
- Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2021 9:57 am
- Team: Cobar Roosters
- Location: The Ord river
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been liked: 57 times
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
was gunna say tez , there isn't much that ... wouldn't outrate the derps & bumbles in Brisbane on a Friday night
-
- Captain
- Posts: 626
- Joined: Sun May 10, 2020 8:00 pm
- Team: Easts
- Location: geelong
- Has thanked: 21 times
- Been liked: 36 times
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
Wasn't you saying similar about C10 when they showed the game? Face it you have a turd of a sport, all the polishing in the world wont make a difference
Australia's number 1 sport RUGBY LEAGUE. Preferred by more Australians than any other
- leeroy*NRL*
- Moderator
- Posts: 6519
- Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 2:54 pm
- Team: St George Illawarra Dragons
- Location: Gold Coast
- Has thanked: 249 times
- Been liked: 69 times
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
Sources (if true)
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.
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.
-
- Coach
- Posts: 4685
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 6:19 pm
- Team: Wests Tigers
- Location:
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been liked: 168 times
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
This will be correct. It's all been lies, BS and obfuscation as usual from Gilty and the boys thus far. They're now in panic mode. What they will do though is add in a massive increase in contra to claim a 'big' increase in the deal. But of course hey won't release the breakdown of contra V actual cash. One thing we know for sure is the lies will continue. I mean it is fumbling we're talking about lolololol!leeroy*NRL* wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 11:26 amSources (if true)
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.
-
- Captain
- Posts: 768
- Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 7:22 am
- Team: Carlton
- Location:
- Has thanked: 27 times
- Been liked: 117 times
- Contact:
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
What panic mode? All anyone has is anonymous sources saying one thing or another, and league fans latching on to the anonymous sources they like, and rubbishing the ones they dont and then carrying on like they've won something when the NEW rights deal they are on is likely LESS than the CURRENT AFL rights deal already - WITH NZ.Terry wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 11:47 amThis will be correct. It's all been lies, BS and obfuscation as usual from Gilty and the boys thus far. They're now in panic mode. What they will do though is add in a massive increase in contra to claim a 'big' increase in the deal. But of course hey won't release the breakdown of contra V actual cash. One thing we know for sure is the lies will continue. I mean it is fumbling we're talking about lolololol!leeroy*NRL* wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 11:26 amSources (if true)
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.
The total contra recieved is in every AFL report going back to 2005. Sooo....lol?
One thing we know, league fans will do anything they can to diminish whatever the AFL might get or actually does get, as they have done or tried to do since at least 2002.
- These users liked the author WookieReturns for the post:
- Beaussie (Sat Aug 20, 2022 1:01 pm)
-
- Coach
- Posts: 4685
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 6:19 pm
- Team: Wests Tigers
- Location:
- Has thanked: 5 times
- Been liked: 168 times
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
Gone wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 12:57 pmWhat panic mode? All anyone has is anonymous sources saying one thing or another, and league fans latching on to the anonymous sources they like, and rubbishing the ones they dont and then carrying on like they've won something when the NEW rights deal they are on is likely LESS than the CURRENT AFL rights deal already - WITH NZ.Terry wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 11:47 amThis will be correct. It's all been lies, BS and obfuscation as usual from Gilty and the boys thus far. They're now in panic mode. What they will do though is add in a massive increase in contra to claim a 'big' increase in the deal. But of course hey won't release the breakdown of contra V actual cash. One thing we know for sure is the lies will continue. I mean it is fumbling we're talking about lolololol!leeroy*NRL* wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 11:26 amSources (if true)
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.
The total contra recieved is in every AFL report going back to 2005. Sooo....lol?
One thing we know, league fans will do anything they can to diminish whatever the AFL might get or actually does get, as they have done or tried to do since at least 2002.
I just can't accept this drivel bummy...............as drivel it is. I report facts. Your opinions are interesting...........but that's what they are....opinions.
In the end we won't know the full details because Gilty will be too embarrassed to publish 'em. Suffice to say they ain't gonna get anywhere near the $600M they want. FACTS COUNT!
-
- Captain
- Posts: 768
- Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 7:22 am
- Team: Carlton
- Location:
- Has thanked: 27 times
- Been liked: 117 times
- Contact:
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
I dont care what you can or cant accept. Reality is clearly not one of the things you do, whereas constant bleating about what i say and do and the worth thereof is a fairly constant obsession in your posts.
On this matter, no one is reporting facts - all source anonymously - EVERY SINGLE REPORT. Yet you'll treat them like they are, just like the folks over at LU fervently hoping to see the AFL fall flat on their arse.
Incidentally. What you are calling drivel in this case is in point of fact, what is known as fact. The NRLs new deal for "just over 400m" will likely be less than the AFLs 2017-2022 original deal for 418m per year - and that includes your NZ deal.
And the total contra for every AFL deal is free for anyone to access since 2007.
2007 $ 17,500,000
2008 $ 17,500,000
2009 $ 17,500,000
2010 $ 17,500,000
2011 $ 17,500,000
2012 $ 26,000,000
2013 $ 26,000,000
2014 $ 26,000,000
2015 $ 27,000,000
2016 $ 27,000,000
2017 $ 16,000,000
2018 $ 16,000,000
2019 $ 16,000,000
2020 $16,000,000
2021 $16,000,000
On this matter, no one is reporting facts - all source anonymously - EVERY SINGLE REPORT. Yet you'll treat them like they are, just like the folks over at LU fervently hoping to see the AFL fall flat on their arse.
Incidentally. What you are calling drivel in this case is in point of fact, what is known as fact. The NRLs new deal for "just over 400m" will likely be less than the AFLs 2017-2022 original deal for 418m per year - and that includes your NZ deal.
And the total contra for every AFL deal is free for anyone to access since 2007.
2007 $ 17,500,000
2008 $ 17,500,000
2009 $ 17,500,000
2010 $ 17,500,000
2011 $ 17,500,000
2012 $ 26,000,000
2013 $ 26,000,000
2014 $ 26,000,000
2015 $ 27,000,000
2016 $ 27,000,000
2017 $ 16,000,000
2018 $ 16,000,000
2019 $ 16,000,000
2020 $16,000,000
2021 $16,000,000
- These users liked the author WookieReturns for the post:
- Beaussie (Sat Aug 20, 2022 1:32 pm)
- Beaussie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 10011
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
- Team: Sydney Swans
- Location: Sydney
- Has thanked: 263 times
- Been liked: 52 times
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
Gone wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 12:57 pmTerry wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 11:47 amThis will be correct. It's all been lies, BS and obfuscation as usual from Gilty and the boys thus far. They're now in panic mode. What they will do though is add in a massive increase in contra to claim a 'big' increase in the deal. But of course hey won't release the breakdown of contra V actual cash. One thing we know for sure is the lies will continue. I mean it is fumbling we're talking about lolololol!leeroy*NRL* wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 11:26 amSources (if true)
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.
One thing we know, league fans will do anything they can to diminish whatever the AFL might get or actually does get, as they have done or tried to do since at least 2002.
Yep, they’ve been doing it every time the broadcast rights come up for negotiations and have always been proven very wrong with their ridiculous assumptions. It’s funny actually.
-
- Captain
- Posts: 768
- Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 7:22 am
- Team: Carlton
- Location:
- Has thanked: 27 times
- Been liked: 117 times
- Contact:
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
Well there was the time that Kerry overbid to screw over Seven, or the time that Kerry overbid to screw over Seven on his deathbed, or the time that Murdoch overbid for the AFl because he got upset with the NRL. Theres always a reason for it. And they'll have no problems telling you why forever.
But i mean thats fair, they STILL cry about superleague holding them back.....in 1997
- These users liked the author WookieReturns for the post:
- Beaussie (Sat Aug 20, 2022 1:45 pm)
- leeroy*NRL*
- Moderator
- Posts: 6519
- Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2015 2:54 pm
- Team: St George Illawarra Dragons
- Location: Gold Coast
- Has thanked: 249 times
- Been liked: 69 times
Re: Streaming companies want to broadcast AFL
interesting i thought AFL Contra was higher than this..Gone wrote: ↑Sat Aug 20, 2022 1:26 pmI dont care what you can or cant accept. Reality is clearly not one of the things you do, whereas constant bleating about what i say and do and the worth thereof is a fairly constant obsession in your posts.
On this matter, no one is reporting facts - all source anonymously - EVERY SINGLE REPORT. Yet you'll treat them like they are, just like the folks over at LU fervently hoping to see the AFL fall flat on their arse.
Incidentally. What you are calling drivel in this case is in point of fact, what is known as fact. The NRLs new deal for "just over 400m" will likely be less than the AFLs 2017-2022 original deal for 418m per year - and that includes your NZ deal.
And the total contra for every AFL deal is free for anyone to access since 2007.
2007 $ 17,500,000
2008 $ 17,500,000
2009 $ 17,500,000
2010 $ 17,500,000
2011 $ 17,500,000
2012 $ 26,000,000
2013 $ 26,000,000
2014 $ 26,000,000
2015 $ 27,000,000
2016 $ 27,000,000
2017 $ 16,000,000
2018 $ 16,000,000
2019 $ 16,000,000
2020 $16,000,000
2021 $16,000,000
I wonder what NRL got in Contra
Union and A League contra was quite high compared to the deal they received
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest