Talking Footy

What this? Acknowledgement that it is going to cost the AFL a fortune to sponsor a team going nowhere. Fine effort. How long will the Melbourne teams allow this?

enarelle wrote:

What this? Acknowledgement that it is going to cost the AFL a fortune to sponsor a team going nowhere. Fine effort. How long will the Melbourne teams allow this?

why wouldnt they allow it? National expansion is in the best interest of the league. The Suns are already financially viable due to excellent stadium arrangment and sponsorship. Once they start winning theyll be fine. The same could have been said for the Lions and Swans years ago.

As the Melbourne clubs come more and more financial pressure they will scream murder about putting lots of money into an entity that can only ever be a bit player.

enarelle wrote:

As the Melbourne clubs come more and more financial pressure they will scream murder about putting lots of money into an entity that can only ever be a bit player.

No, they will understand the league is better off being national. The only clubs that are really under pressure are smaller Melbourne clubs. It pretty clear both the NRL and AFL have too many clubs in their heartland cities of Sydney and Melbourne.

Clear to who?

pussycat wrote:

Clear to who?

9-10 teams in one city is too many. Theyd both be better off with a few less and a few more in other cities.

Channel 9 on the verge of bankruptcy. Has the NRL received their broadcast rights money yet?

Oh deary me.

Nine warns creditors on NRL if talks fail

by: Darren Davidson Richard Gluyas
From: The Australian
September 25, 2012 12:00AM

SENDING Nine Entertainment into receivership would put at risk vital sports contracts including the record $1.1 billion deal with the National Rugby League, Nine management warned creditors at the opening of crucial rescue talks for the second-placed broadcaster.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/n ... 6480582335

So it looks like we are going to receive our Number 1 TV deal in the coming 5 years.

http://www.news.com.au/business/compani ... z28sVEAQGm

CHANNEL Nine's junior lender Goldman Sachs has accepted a debt restructuring proposal, a move which boosts the broadcaster’s chances of staying out of receivership.

Goldman has agreed to accept a 7.5 per cent shareholding in the company, a further 12.5 per cent equity parcel if the broadcaster is sold for more than $2.3 billion, and up to $1 billion in debt.

Goldman, which had previously asked for a 30 per cent shareholding, said it was accepting the deal in order to keep Nine out of receivership.

The deal must also be signed off on by US hedge funds Apollo Capital and Oaktree Global Management, which hold more than $1 billion of senior debt in Nine.

Both have said Nine is not worth $2.3 billion and insist on taking full control of the company.

The latest development comes as CVC Capital managing partner Adrian MacKenzie steps down from the Nine board of Nine.

Private equity firm CVC bought Nine for $5.3 billion in 2007.

Mr MacKenzie's departure is a further indication CVC will lose its $1.8 billion in equity in Nine - the largest ever loss on a single private-equity deal in Australia.


Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/compani ... z28xDqEGau

eelofwest wrote:

So it looks like we are going to receive our Number 1 TV deal in the coming 5 years.

http://www.news.com.au/business/compani ... z28sVEAQGm

CHANNEL Nine's junior lender Goldman Sachs has accepted a debt restructuring proposal, a move which boosts the broadcaster’s chances of staying out of receivership.

Goldman has agreed to accept a 7.5 per cent shareholding in the company, a further 12.5 per cent equity parcel if the broadcaster is sold for more than $2.3 billion, and up to $1 billion in debt.

Goldman, which had previously asked for a 30 per cent shareholding, said it was accepting the deal in order to keep Nine out of receivership.

The deal must also be signed off on by US hedge funds Apollo Capital and Oaktree Global Management, which hold more than $1 billion of senior debt in Nine.

Both have said Nine is not worth $2.3 billion and insist on taking full control of the company.

The latest development comes as CVC Capital managing partner Adrian MacKenzie steps down from the Nine board of Nine.

Private equity firm CVC bought Nine for $5.3 billion in 2007.

Mr MacKenzie's departure is a further indication CVC will lose its $1.8 billion in equity in Nine - the largest ever loss on a single private-equity deal in Australia.


Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/compani ... z28xDqEGau

number 1 ?



at least youve got a sense of humour

Xman wrote:

eelofwest wrote:

So it looks like we are going to receive our Number 1 TV deal in the coming 5 years.

http://www.news.com.au/business/compani ... z28sVEAQGm

CHANNEL Nine's junior lender Goldman Sachs has accepted a debt restructuring proposal, a move which boosts the broadcaster’s chances of staying out of receivership.

Goldman has agreed to accept a 7.5 per cent shareholding in the company, a further 12.5 per cent equity parcel if the broadcaster is sold for more than $2.3 billion, and up to $1 billion in debt.

Goldman, which had previously asked for a 30 per cent shareholding, said it was accepting the deal in order to keep Nine out of receivership.

The deal must also be signed off on by US hedge funds Apollo Capital and Oaktree Global Management, which hold more than $1 billion of senior debt in Nine.

Both have said Nine is not worth $2.3 billion and insist on taking full control of the company.

The latest development comes as CVC Capital managing partner Adrian MacKenzie steps down from the Nine board of Nine.

Private equity firm CVC bought Nine for $5.3 billion in 2007.

Mr MacKenzie's departure is a further indication CVC will lose its $1.8 billion in equity in Nine - the largest ever loss on a single private-equity deal in Australia.


Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/compani ... z28xDqEGau

number 1 ?



at least youve got a sense of humour

Oh yeah i forgot the NRL has 2 TV contracts.......add those together and we get more TV money then the AFL....... =D> =D>

eelofwest wrote:

Xman wrote:

eelofwest wrote:

So it looks like we are going to receive our Number 1 TV deal in the coming 5 years.

http://www.news.com.au/business/compani ... z28sVEAQGm

CHANNEL Nine's junior lender Goldman Sachs has accepted a debt restructuring proposal, a move which boosts the broadcaster’s chances of staying out of receivership.

Goldman has agreed to accept a 7.5 per cent shareholding in the company, a further 12.5 per cent equity parcel if the broadcaster is sold for more than $2.3 billion, and up to $1 billion in debt.

Goldman, which had previously asked for a 30 per cent shareholding, said it was accepting the deal in order to keep Nine out of receivership.

The deal must also be signed off on by US hedge funds Apollo Capital and Oaktree Global Management, which hold more than $1 billion of senior debt in Nine.

Both have said Nine is not worth $2.3 billion and insist on taking full control of the company.

The latest development comes as CVC Capital managing partner Adrian MacKenzie steps down from the Nine board of Nine.

Private equity firm CVC bought Nine for $5.3 billion in 2007.

Mr MacKenzie's departure is a further indication CVC will lose its $1.8 billion in equity in Nine - the largest ever loss on a single private-equity deal in Australia.


Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/compani ... z28xDqEGau

number 1 ?



at least youve got a sense of humour

Oh yeah i forgot the NRL has 2 TV contracts.......add those together and we get more TV money then the AFL....... =D> =D>

cool, show us the details of these contracts

Oh and since when is 5 payTV games and 3 FTA games with 1 live better than 4 live FTA games and every game on payTV and live? >

C9 wont fall over , but if it did the NRL has already recieved 90m and 10 & 7 would still knocking the door down .

pussycat wrote:

C9 wont fall over , but if it did the NRL has already recieved 90m and 10 & 7 would still knocking the door down .

Well lets see, ch7 have a major sport, leaving ch10 to pick up the NRL with no other network around to make it a bidding war. I can't see how this will help you get big $

pussycat wrote:

C9 wont fall over , but if it did the NRL has already recieved 90m and 10 & 7 would still knocking the door down .

From the reports that I have read the NRL has not recieved the 90m yet. Ive seen different reports saying it will be payed from any date between Dec-Feb near the end of this year.

eelofwest wrote:

Xman wrote:

eelofwest wrote:

So it looks like we are going to receive our Number 1 TV deal in the coming 5 years.

http://www.news.com.au/business/compani ... z28sVEAQGm

CHANNEL Nine's junior lender Goldman Sachs has accepted a debt restructuring proposal, a move which boosts the broadcaster’s chances of staying out of receivership.

Goldman has agreed to accept a 7.5 per cent shareholding in the company, a further 12.5 per cent equity parcel if the broadcaster is sold for more than $2.3 billion, and up to $1 billion in debt.

Goldman, which had previously asked for a 30 per cent shareholding, said it was accepting the deal in order to keep Nine out of receivership.

The deal must also be signed off on by US hedge funds Apollo Capital and Oaktree Global Management, which hold more than $1 billion of senior debt in Nine.

Both have said Nine is not worth $2.3 billion and insist on taking full control of the company.

The latest development comes as CVC Capital managing partner Adrian MacKenzie steps down from the Nine board of Nine.

Private equity firm CVC bought Nine for $5.3 billion in 2007.

Mr MacKenzie's departure is a further indication CVC will lose its $1.8 billion in equity in Nine - the largest ever loss on a single private-equity deal in Australia.


Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/compani ... z28xDqEGau

number 1 ?



at least youve got a sense of humour

Oh yeah i forgot the NRL has 2 TV contracts.......add those together and we get more TV money then the AFL....... =D> =D>

So if you add your Australian agreement - which is smaller than the AFL's - to an imaginary NZ agreement that doesn't exist yet, you somehow come up with a bigger figure? What's the maths formula look like on that?

$925m + Unicorns = moral victory?

I wonder what (if anything) has changed in NZ since last year, when Roy Masters wrote the following:

Sky New Zealand, a monopoly pay-TV company part-owned by News Ltd, holds NRL rights across the Tasman.

Unlike the Nine, Fox Sports and Telstra contracts, which expire at the end of next season, the Sky NZ deal has already concluded. Sky has made it clear it wants to pay less than the current $14 million a year, and has cited depressed ratings figures in this Rugby World Cup year.

However, ratings in the previous three years were positive and this year's finals, based on the exciting form of the Warriors, registered a big lift. Sky is offering less because it can.

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... 1mzyj.html