Talking Footy

Beaussie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Beaussie wrote:

So don't expect any big increase in the NRL broadcast rights. There is no incentive for Foxtel to pay more for the NRL as you have alluded too.

there is if they lose the rights .. or are left with the scraps
a threat the NRL has already made

any subscriptions they gain in the Sthn states for AFL .. will be tripled by lost subsciptions in the Nthn states ..
the NRL has indicated they will negotiate a short term TV deal first up if they have to , giving Foxtel nothing to demonstrate who butters their bread
a hard lesson will be delivered if required
the NRL will get a massive increase in their pay deal because they are what keeps Foxtels doors open.

Threats against their owners. Too funny.

Even if what you said was true, with no Foxtel involved, how would all 8 games of the NRL be broadcast per week when only 3 games are desired by FTA TV?

on Nov 1st 2011
they will be their owners .. no longer

3 are desired by one FTA broadcaster Ch 9.. they will go to 4 in 2013
2 each for 10 & 7 ( both want League ... no secret there )

foxtel........ goooonnneeee
we won't muck around
if they only value potential " new " subcribers ... & don't care about loyal existing ones
they are doomed
foxtel is rubbish without a marquee sport ( seriously it is cr@p)
... they'll find out the hard way if they want to play chicken with the NRL

So from what you're saying, FTA TV is not interested in broadcasting all games of the NRL each week should Foxtel pull out. Hmm, can see a massive increase in the broadcast rights value there.

Not to distract from the current debate, But an interesting piece of information for all on this thread.

Good to see the Victorian Government has got broader vision than you individuals. State Of Origin 1 2012 - Etihad Stadium. Given the Melbourne audience that watched the game on TV and the guys from NSW, QLD and WA who generally fly in to see it, they better stretch the ground viewing capacity.

Onions, Truthslayer and Beaussie, you now have a choice to either watch it on TV or go to the game. Well done Victoria Government for supporting the locals who love the game of RL and having you 3 dumbarses help to foot the bill.

Also, there are some interesting blogs around about how AFL is pushing for SOO to come back in 2013. If that is the case than sure makes a mockery of everything you 3 have said in this thread.

Dogs wrote:

Not to distract from the current debate, But an interesting piece of information for all on this thread.

Good to see the Victorian Government has got broader vision than you individuals. State Of Origin 1 2012 - Etihad Stadium. Given the Melbourne audience that watched the game on TV and the guys from NSW, QLD and WA who generally fly in to see it, they better stretch the ground viewing capacity.

Onions, Truthslayer and Beaussie, you now have a choice to either watch it on TV or go to the game. Well done Victoria Government for supporting the locals who love the game of RL and having you 3 dumbarses help to foot the bill.

Also, there are some interesting blogs around about how AFL is pushing for SOO to come back in 2013. If that is the case than sure makes a mockery of everything you 3 have said in this thread.

Yes
I see beaussie is avoiding the thread where it was revealed last night that the Origin in Melbourne in 2012 IS being played at Etihad ...
Beaussie .. care to comment ?

Beaussie wrote:

And in turn increase their ratings.

Yes, it will. But for everyone that watches it on Fox ther will be one less that watches it on FTA.

Beaussie wrote:

So from what you're saying, FTA TV is not interested in broadcasting all games of the NRL each week should Foxtel pull out. Hmm, can see a massive increase in the broadcast rights value there.

the competitive tension will be there
Foxtel will NOT want to lose the NRL .... it is delivering them a huge % of their subscriptions & ratings with it

to turn their back on it would be a massive gamble
as it would for the NRL to take its product off them .... its a case of who's got the bigger Balls
ATM .. it is the NRL .. cocky , confident .. there product is in demand
the timing couldn't be any better for them

Beaussie wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Population figures are not hard to look up. Nor are regional rating figures!

There is only one vacancy in WA what do you expect???

As far as Foxtel goes there is a maximum subscription take up level that Pay Tv providers can expect. Fox has already reached that level in the Rugby League states. However, they feel the AFL states have fallen behind and there is more sighn ups to be gained in this area.

So don't expect any big increase in the NRL broadcast rights. There is no incentive for Foxtel to pay more for the NRL as you have alluded too.

We will get a substantial increase, becususe we will no longer be owned by News Ltd. But the majority will come from FTA.

Dogs wrote:

Not to distract from the current debate, But an interesting piece of information for all on this thread.

Good to see the Victorian Government has got broader vision than you individuals. State Of Origin 1 2012 - Etihad Stadium. Given the Melbourne audience that watched the game on TV and the guys from NSW, QLD and WA who generally fly in to see it, they better stretch the ground viewing capacity.

Do you know what you just fucking said? Lots of crowd coming in from I/S? That proves that locals DON'T GIVE A SHIT!! So you rely on interstaters to fucking prop up the crowd!! BRAVO!!

If they really had confidence in it, it'd be fucking played at the MCG!!

Onions wrote:

Dogs wrote:

Not to distract from the current debate, But an interesting piece of information for all on this thread.

Good to see the Victorian Government has got broader vision than you individuals. State Of Origin 1 2012 - Etihad Stadium. Given the Melbourne audience that watched the game on TV and the guys from NSW, QLD and WA who generally fly in to see it, they better stretch the ground viewing capacity.

Do you know what you just ******* said? Lots of crowd coming in from I/S? That proves that locals DON'T GIVE A ****!! So you rely on interstaters to ******* prop up the crowd!! BRAVO!!

If they really had confidence in it, it'd be ******* played at the MCG!![/quote]

2015 for the G .. another 90K eh ??
great Idea onions

thats what we'll do

Truthsayer wrote:

My understanding is that federal broadcast laws require Seven to show all nine games. So they will. And you are ignoring Austar as a player. Foxtel has reached it's maximum? Well that would apply everywhere except maybe Western Australia only because that's the only state they have access to the regional area. In all other states that's Austar territory. So I doubt your information is accurate.

http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2011/06/sev ... -2012.html

Seven was able to onsell some of the 4 Free to Air matches if it had a broadcast partner but has always said it would happily screen them all, by utilising its digital channels under the new anti-siphoning rules.

Do check before posting links that actually support what I say, Mr Pussycat.

Truthsayer wrote:

Seven was able to onsell some of the 4 Free to Air matches if it had a broadcast partner but has always said it would happily screen them all, by utilising its digital channels under the new anti-siphoning rules.

Do check before posting links that actually support what I say, Mr Pussycat.

did you not say 7 are required to cover all 9 AFL games in 2012 ?

& were totally wrong

again

Truthsayer wrote:

Seven was able to onsell some of the 4 Free to Air matches if it had a broadcast partner but has always said it would happily screen them all, by utilising its digital channels under the new anti-siphoning rules.

Do check before posting links that actually support what I say, Mr Pussycat.

They have 4 matches not 9.


C7. contract allows them to onsell some of there four matches - what this article doesn't tell you is when they tried to get rid of some matches nobody was interested.

The fucking article doesn't say that because they didn't fucking try! You just fucking wish they did, Kitten!

pussycat wrote:

Truthsayer wrote:

Seven was able to onsell some of the 4 Free to Air matches if it had a broadcast partner but has always said it would happily screen them all, by utilising its digital channels under the new anti-siphoning rules.

Do check before posting links that actually support what I say, Mr Pussycat.

They have 4 matches not 9.


C7. contract allows them to onsell some of there four matches - what this article doesn't tell you is when they tried to get rid of some matches nobody was interested.

this seems to be a theme developing where the AFL is concerned