They sold eye media to reduce their massive debt. Whether they have enough to afford the NRL rights is another question.justanotherleaguefan wrote:Just depends on how desperate 9 are willing to get. Either way nine is going to pay big time. Ten are doing everything thing in there power to get the rights. They sold Eye media specifically to raise revenue for the rights.
No it was for the rightsAgain, the NRL only offers 2 hours per game, or 8 hrs for 4 games, and this content only appeals to two states, rating dismally in the other 4. Their combined Friday night live games rate well. Their Sunday is average and their 9.30pm Friday game rates also rates abysmally. So 2 hours of good ratings a week is worth 500-600M over 5 years is it? (FTA component). That aint much content to replace poorly rating shows.enarelle wrote:Channel 10 will be able to afford the NRL by cancelling low rating/poor media buying shows and replacing it with surefire ratings winner that will drag in significantly bigger advertising dollars. Standard business practice is replace bad product with good.
justanotherleaguefan wrote:
Xman wrote:They sold eye media to reduce their massive debt. Whether they have enough to afford the NRL rights is another question.justanotherleaguefan wrote:Just depends on how desperate 9 are willing to get. Either way nine is going to pay big time. Ten are doing everything thing in there power to get the rights. They sold Eye media specifically to raise revenue for the rights.
Who says any of them are willing to pay up big for what amounts to 8 hrs of ratings a week (for 4 games)?
enarelle wrote:The improvement in quality content will be thru the roof if they go to 4 games a week including Monday night football. They will have lead in shows and post show productions that will give them high rating TV for at least 15 hours per week for 8 months of the year. What content gives them that now? Throw in bonanzas like SOO/Tests and finals series and away they go.
66% of the Advertising dollars spent in this country are spent in NSW/QLD. Channel 10 wants more of those dollars.
Ch 10 has also just completed are revenue raising float that neted close to $200m.piesman2011 wrote:justanotherleaguefan wrote:
C10 are saying to sure up debt, while some journalists are saying for the rights. I could understand that this may help them to make a bid for the NRL rights (currently they only get 120 million from it but it is a very good start). However C10 officially have not said this according to information have are read.
Ten said it would use the proceeds of the sale to pay off some of its debt, strengthen its balance sheet, and provide financing flexibilit
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs. ... nt&src=rss
More bs from you. Ch10 couldnt afford the AFL. I'm sure they would have bid for it if they had the cash. They'd be regretting it now. They've plummeted in the ratings race while the AFL ratings have risen substantially.pussycat wrote:Xman wrote:They sold eye media to reduce their massive debt. Whether they have enough to afford the NRL rights is another question.justanotherleaguefan wrote:Just depends on how desperate 9 are willing to get. Either way nine is going to pay big time. Ten are doing everything thing in there power to get the rights. They sold Eye media specifically to raise revenue for the rights.
Who says any of them are willing to pay up big for what amounts to 8 hrs of ratings a week (for 4 games)?
Exactly,
Xman , I must say I agree with you on this one.
How do we know CH 10 are prepared to spend up big on the NRL? After all they wer'nt prepared to part with 1cent for the AFL
well put. The NRL heavily rely on a regional audience to compete. This bodes poorly for them when combined with the fact an NRL game runs for 33% less than an AFL game, and can only fit in about 1/3rdthe ad breaks.piesman2011 wrote:enarelle wrote:The improvement in quality content will be thru the roof if they go to 4 games a week including Monday night football. They will have lead in shows and post show productions that will give them high rating TV for at least 15 hours per week for 8 months of the year. What content gives them that now? Throw in bonanzas like SOO/Tests and finals series and away they go.
66% of the Advertising dollars spent in this country are spent in NSW/QLD. Channel 10 wants more of those dollars.
Unfortunately 9, 7 and 10 are all metro only stations and only recieve between 29-34% of the money from regional TVs revenue. Because WIN etc need to make money as well. A lot of Qld/NSWs 57% of TV revenue(not 66% see link below) is regional (27%). Which in the end makes the money generated by Qld/NSW not that big for stations like 9, 7 and 10 as many think. This is what in the end will cost the NRL a huge pay day with 40% of its viewership being regional. This does not make it inferior to AFL it will just earn less money in my opinion.
http://www.freetv.com.au/Media/News-Med ... n_2011.pdf
In addition to programming fees, additional stations carry a fair degree of the main networks advertisingpiesman2011 wrote:enarelle wrote:The improvement in quality content will be thru the roof if they go to 4 games a week including Monday night football. They will have lead in shows and post show productions that will give them high rating TV for at least 15 hours per week for 8 months of the year. What content gives them that now? Throw in bonanzas like SOO/Tests and finals series and away they go.
66% of the Advertising dollars spent in this country are spent in NSW/QLD. Channel 10 wants more of those dollars.
Unfortunately 9, 7 and 10 are all metro only stations and only recieve between 29-34% of the money from regional TVs revenue. Because WIN etc need to make money as well. A lot of Qld/NSWs 57% of TV revenue(not 66% see link below) is regional (27%). Which in the end makes the money generated by Qld/NSW not that big for stations like 9, 7 and 10 as many think. This is what in the end will cost the NRL a huge pay day with 40% of its viewership being regional. This does not make it inferior to AFL it will just earn less money in my opinion.
http://www.freetv.com.au/Media/News-Med ... n_2011.pdf
Pussy,pussycat wrote:piesman2011 wrote:enarelle wrote:The improvement in quality content will be thru the roof if they go to 4 games a week including Monday night football. They will have lead in shows and post show productions that will give them high rating TV for at least 15 hours per week for 8 months of the year. What content gives them that now? Throw in bonanzas like SOO/Tests and finals series and away they go.
66% of the Advertising dollars spent in this country are spent in NSW/QLD. Channel 10 wants more of those dollars.
Unfortunately 9, 7 and 10 are all metro only stations and only recieve between 29-34% of the money from regional TVs revenue. Because WIN etc need to make money as well. A lot of Qld/NSWs 57% of TV revenue(not 66% see link below) is regional (27%). Which in the end makes the money generated by Qld/NSW not that big for stations like 9, 7 and 10 as many think. This is what in the end will cost the NRL a huge pay day with 40% of its viewership being regional. This does not make it inferior to AFL it will just earn less money in my opinion.
http://www.freetv.com.au/Media/News-Med ... n_2011.pdf
You're forgetting Tasmania, and the fact that the AFL rates near 100k in Brisbane and Sydney where as the NRL rates 30k or less AFL cities.pussycat wrote:The value of a regional fan, revenue rise, is nearer 2 to 1 maybe 2.2 to 1
Regional NSW/Qld = 294m almost Trebles Adelaide = 106m
So I think its fair to say regional NSW/Qld councils out all S A.
Sydneys revenue is greater than all Victoria and Brisbane's is greater than all WA.
Figure were shown online by one of the media outlets(maybe the roar) earlier this year for the money generated on FTA by the football code. The AFL were only about 20% ahead despite having 1 extra match.
