Talking Footy

So, um, Raider, pussycat, Dogs, cooee and co... are you lot still confident the NRL will match or better the AFL tv rights deal?

Pay TV executives suggest NOT A CHANCE.

Let's get real on NRL rights, says ConsMedia
James Chessell
From:The Australian
August 24, 201112:00AM


CONSOLIDATED Media Holdings has raised questions about the value of some sports rights, warning that the pay-television industry will not overpay for the NRL rights amid market concerns about earnings growth at Fox Sports.

The value of televised sport was discussed during ConsMedia full-year results briefing yesterday, with the negotiations for the 2013-17 NRL broadcast rights likely to kick off once the code's new commission is formalised in November.

ConsMedia executive chairman John Alexander became the first media executive to refer to recent press reports suggesting the next rights deal could fetch up to $1.4 billion -- an optimistic figure that would dwarf the $1.25bn television, digital and mobile deal the AFL struck with Foxtel, Telstra and Seven in April.

"There are question marks about some of the sporting costs. Clearly there has been a lot of publicity about the NRL deal coming up and obviously Fox Sports already takes a large chunk of the NRL," Mr Alexander said.

"I don't think there is any appetite at Fox Sports to hand vast additional cheques for no extra value. Unless (incumbent broadcaster) Channel 9 has got much, much deeper pockets than we all believe, then I think the prices that have been talked about with NRL remain confusing."

ConsMedia owns 25 per cent of metropolitan pay-TV group Foxtel and 50 per cent of Premier Media Group, the producer of Fox Sports. Its biggest shareholders are James Packer (with 51 per cent) and Kerry Stokes's Seven Group (with 24 per cent).

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/busines ... 6120370890

Beaussie wrote:

So, um, Raider, pussycat, Dogs, cooee and co... are you lot still confident the NRL will match or better the AFL tv rights deal?

Pay TV executives suggest NOT A CHANCE.

Let's get real on NRL rights, says ConsMedia
James Chessell
From:The Australian
August 24, 201112:00AM


CONSOLIDATED Media Holdings has raised questions about the value of some sports rights, warning that the pay-television industry will not overpay for the NRL rights amid market concerns about earnings growth at Fox Sports.

The value of televised sport was discussed during ConsMedia full-year results briefing yesterday, with the negotiations for the 2013-17 NRL broadcast rights likely to kick off once the code's new commission is formalised in November.

ConsMedia executive chairman John Alexander became the first media executive to refer to recent press reports suggesting the next rights deal could fetch up to $1.4 billion -- an optimistic figure that would dwarf the $1.25bn television, digital and mobile deal the AFL struck with Foxtel, Telstra and Seven in April.

"There are question marks about some of the sporting costs. Clearly there has been a lot of publicity about the NRL deal coming up and obviously Fox Sports already takes a large chunk of the NRL," Mr Alexander said.

"I don't think there is any appetite at Fox Sports to hand vast additional cheques for no extra value. Unless (incumbent broadcaster) Channel 9 has got much, much deeper pockets than we all believe, then I think the prices that have been talked about with NRL remain confusing."

ConsMedia owns 25 per cent of metropolitan pay-TV group Foxtel and 50 per cent of Premier Media Group, the producer of Fox Sports. Its biggest shareholders are James Packer (with 51 per cent) and Kerry Stokes's Seven Group (with 24 per cent).

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/busines ... 6120370890

yes of course we will still get a billion plus deal .. this is the media trying the same cr@p they tried on the AFL .. contantly talking down the value of the rights
no ones gunna fall for it

Fox is in for the biggest shock they've ever got by playing chicken with their biggest rating program bar nothing

if the NRL calls their bluff .. & they will.. & fox don't pay up
then they don't broadcast .. they lose subscriptions .. they fold

in that order

And Fox will play bluff with the nrl and the nrl will squirm

Grim Reaper wrote:

And Fox will play bluff with the nrl and the nrl will squirm

because Fox didn't pay anywhere near enough for the last lot of TV rights for the NRL
mainly due to News Ltd owning a majority share in Fox & a half share in the NRL

if fox don't protect the NRL rights they currently hold by offering a lot more for them.... they could be easily taken away by an FTA broadcaster or a combo of FTA broadcasters looking for content they know will rate

the NRL couldn't do that last time as News wouldn't have allowed it
no such constraints this time round
we'll do what we have to , to get a motza .. a billion plus & nothing less
& this motza ..........we will get

Raiderdave wrote:

Grim Reaper wrote:

And Fox will play bluff with the nrl and the nrl will squirm

because Fox didn't pay anywhere near enough for the last lot of TV rights for the NRL
mainly due to News Ltd owning a majority share in Fox & a half share in the NRL

if fox don't protect the NRL rights they currently hold by offering a lot more for them.... they could be easily taken away by an FTA broadcaster or a combo of FTA broadcasters looking for content they know will rate

the NRL couldn't do that last time as News wouldn't have allowed it
no such constraints this time round
we'll do what we have to , to get a motza .. a billion plus & nothing less
& this motza ..........we will get

Wake up to yourself. If you don't accept the offer from Foxtel, you'll have no prescence on Pay TV. NO FTA TV network is interested in brodcasting more than 3-4 games of NRL per week. You ain't going to win this battle sunshine. Call the bluff from Foxtel. This is going to be hilarious. More whinging and whining from NRL fans about how no one in the tv industry appreciates a game confined to some parts of two states of Australia. Hilarious.

Beaussie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Grim Reaper wrote:

And Fox will play bluff with the nrl and the nrl will squirm

because Fox didn't pay anywhere near enough for the last lot of TV rights for the NRL
mainly due to News Ltd owning a majority share in Fox & a half share in the NRL

if fox don't protect the NRL rights they currently hold by offering a lot more for them.... they could be easily taken away by an FTA broadcaster or a combo of FTA broadcasters looking for content they know will rate

the NRL couldn't do that last time as News wouldn't have allowed it
no such constraints this time round
we'll do what we have to , to get a motza .. a billion plus & nothing less
& this motza ..........we will get

Wake up to yourself. If you don't accept the offer from Foxtel, you'll have no prescence on Pay TV. NO FTA TV network is interested in brodcasting more than 3-4 games of NRL per week. You ain't going to win this battle sunshine. Call the bluff from Foxtel. This is going to be hilarious. More whinging and whining from NRL fans about how no one in the tv industry appreciates a game confined to some parts of two states of Australia. Hilarious.

all 3 FTA stations want the NRL/RL ... & why wouldn;t they ?
something the AFL can't claim .... if Foxtel don't offer a substantial amount more then they are currently paying .... they will get nothing

not a veiled threat ... a fact
the NRL had no say last time ... their half share partner owner News Ltd saw to that
no such probs this time
this time it'll be pay up ... or F off

FTA TV stations are not interested in all games each round and you know it. Mess with Foxtel and you will lose out big time.

Beaussie wrote:

FTA TV stations are not interested in all games each round and you know it. Mess with Foxtel and you will lose out big time.

ah ... you sure

9 want an extra 1
7 want 2
10 want 2 aswell

they all want our rep season

2 stations are completely uncommitted to any sport .. they brushed the AFL .. didn't want a bar of it
the other .. the richest (7) didn't pay anymore for the AFL then they did last time & want the NRL .. they've made no secret of this

foxtel want to muck around
let em

no NRL & they are up pooh creek with hand paddles

7 increased their offer dopey along with Foxtel for the AFL. Keep dreaming that all NRL will be split up on FTA. Not a chance with 10 cutting costs and Channel 7 alredy committed to the AFL. I guess you could go to the ABC or SBS.

Beaussie wrote:

7 increased their offer dopey along with Foxtel for the AFL. Keep dreaming that all NRL will be split up on FTA. Not a chance with 10 cutting costs and Channel 7 alredy committed to the AFL. I guess you could go to the ABC or SBS.

nah ... not a cent more
10 cleared their expenditure to be able to make a play for some NRL

Murdoch has said as much to insiders .... he wants NRL on ten
David Leckie has said over his dead body would 9 lose the NRL

Gyngall has said he wants NRL on 7, to push ratings in the Nthn Markets
the AFL can't do this
they need a tool for growth in NSW & QLD ... the NRL is it

foxtel will be left outside like the ugly cousin if they don't wake up

the competitive tension is going to go off
great days ahead
great days

Raiderdave wrote:

Beaussie wrote:

7 increased their offer dopey along with Foxtel for the AFL. Keep dreaming that all NRL will be split up on FTA. Not a chance with 10 cutting costs and Channel 7 alredy committed to the AFL. I guess you could go to the ABC or SBS.

nah ... not a cent more
10 cleared their expenditure to be able to make a play for some NRL

Murdoch has said as much to insiders .... he wants NRL on ten
David Leckie has said over his dead body would 9 lose the NRL

Gyngall has said he wants NRL on 7, to push ratings in the Nthn Markets
the AFL can't do this
they need a tool for growth in NSW & QLD ... the NRL is it

foxtel will be left outside like the ugly cousin if they don't wake up

the competitive tension is going to go off
great days ahead
great days

You game does not rate anywhere outside of some parts of NSW and QLD and is already at saturation point. Growth... hahaha

Channel 9 were desperate to get a piece of the AFL pie and put in a joint bid with Foxtel. They were desperate because they have not won a Friday night during the AFL season since losing the AFL tv rights. Channel 10 as you can read below will soon see the problems they have created for themselves with no future AFL content.

Channel 7 always said they had no problem broadcasting all 4 games of AFL each weekend and in fact went into the bidding process without Channel 10 due to other legal issues going on at the time between the two networks.

Why would Seven help Ten with AFL games?
by Glenn Dyer

So will Kerry Stokes and David Leckie give a hand to Ten next year and sell them two AFL games a week for a cheapish price? The money would be handy, it always is. But why would Seven, Stokes and Leckie do a favour for the former Seven sales chief, James Warburton, and his fledgling program director, Adam Boland, especially when both have sued their former employer?

Better to let Ten and Warburton swing in the air, with nothing to program on the One sports channel for five years from 2012 and programming holes on Saturdays that will have to be filled, and weaken Ten in AFL markets as well. Filling these gaps will chew up what ever savings Ten was looking for from not bidding with Seven for the two games.

Seven wants a permanent 40% share of free-to-air ad dollars and by keeping the two extra AFL games it achieves that and strengthens itself in the southern AFL markets. It also helps the already-solid 7mate digital channel, which Ten is targeting with its revamp of One next month.

And don’t let anyone tell you that Foxtel is the real winner. Kerry Stokes is because it brings his control of Premier Media Group and Foxtel that much closer.

He did nothing to rock the AFL boat in the negotiations and has allowed Foxtel to improve its position.

That helps his new best mate, James Packer, who did his bit by resigning from the Ten board after Lachlan Murdoch poached Warburton from Seven.

The end game for that poaching has yet to play out, but don’t think Murdoch and Packer are mates.

Stokes and Packer are mates and pals in Consolidated Media, which controls 25% of Foxtel and 50% of Premier Media (Fox Sports).

Control of Cons Media is the end game for Stokes, or at least a share of control with Packer on a 50-50 basis.

Stokes has his eye on a bigger say at Foxtel and at Fox Sports, so the AFL broadcasting advantage handed to the pay TV group and its CEO, Kim Williams (and the new CEO of Premier, Patrick Delaney, the former No.2 at Foxtel), will have to be converted into a significant boost to subscriber numbers by this time next year, otherwise Stokes and Packer will want changes.

Foxtel’s subscriber numbers as at December 31 were 1.55 million, excluding wholesale customers (or 1.63 million including them). That’s the base figure to use when assessing the success of the new AFL-driven sales push that will come from Foxtel in the next few months.

Of course, Foxtel and Austar will have to do a deal in the meantime. That will get the numbers up, sort of.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/04/29/why ... AFL-games/

Beaussie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Beaussie wrote:

7 increased their offer dopey along with Foxtel for the AFL. Keep dreaming that all NRL will be split up on FTA. Not a chance with 10 cutting costs and Channel 7 alredy committed to the AFL. I guess you could go to the ABC or SBS.

nah ... not a cent more
10 cleared their expenditure to be able to make a play for some NRL

Murdoch has said as much to insiders .... he wants NRL on ten
David Leckie has said over his dead body would 9 lose the NRL

Gyngall has said he wants NRL on 7, to push ratings in the Nthn Markets
the AFL can't do this
they need a tool for growth in NSW & QLD ... the NRL is it

foxtel will be left outside like the ugly cousin if they don't wake up

the competitive tension is going to go off
great days ahead
great days

You game does not rate anywhere outside of some parts of NSW and QLD and is already at saturation point. Growth... hahaha

Channel 9 were desperate to get a piece of the AFL pie and put in a joint bid with Foxtel. They were desperate because they have not won a Friday night during the AFL season since losing the AFL tv rights. Channel 10 as you can read below will soon see the problems they have created for themselves with no future AFL content.

Channel 7 always said they had no problem broadcasting all 4 games of AFL each weekend and in fact went into the bidding process without Channel 10 due to other legal issues going on at the time between the two networks.

Why would Seven help Ten with AFL games?
by Glenn Dyer

So will Kerry Stokes and David Leckie give a hand to Ten next year and sell them two AFL games a week for a cheapish price? The money would be handy, it always is. But why would Seven, Stokes and Leckie do a favour for the former Seven sales chief, James Warburton, and his fledgling program director, Adam Boland, especially when both have sued their former employer?

Better to let Ten and Warburton swing in the air, with nothing to program on the One sports channel for five years from 2012 and programming holes on Saturdays that will have to be filled, and weaken Ten in AFL markets as well. Filling these gaps will chew up what ever savings Ten was looking for from not bidding with Seven for the two games.

Seven wants a permanent 40% share of free-to-air ad dollars and by keeping the two extra AFL games it achieves that and strengthens itself in the southern AFL markets. It also helps the already-solid 7mate digital channel, which Ten is targeting with its revamp of One next month.

And don’t let anyone tell you that Foxtel is the real winner. Kerry Stokes is because it brings his control of Premier Media Group and Foxtel that much closer.

He did nothing to rock the AFL boat in the negotiations and has allowed Foxtel to improve its position.

That helps his new best mate, James Packer, who did his bit by resigning from the Ten board after Lachlan Murdoch poached Warburton from Seven.

The end game for that poaching has yet to play out, but don’t think Murdoch and Packer are mates.

Stokes and Packer are mates and pals in Consolidated Media, which controls 25% of Foxtel and 50% of Premier Media (Fox Sports).

Control of Cons Media is the end game for Stokes, or at least a share of control with Packer on a 50-50 basis.

Stokes has his eye on a bigger say at Foxtel and at Fox Sports, so the AFL broadcasting advantage handed to the pay TV group and its CEO, Kim Williams (and the new CEO of Premier, Patrick Delaney, the former No.2 at Foxtel), will have to be converted into a significant boost to subscriber numbers by this time next year, otherwise Stokes and Packer will want changes.

Foxtel’s subscriber numbers as at December 31 were 1.55 million, excluding wholesale customers (or 1.63 million including them). That’s the base figure to use when assessing the success of the new AFL-driven sales push that will come from Foxtel in the next few months.

Of course, Foxtel and Austar will have to do a deal in the meantime. That will get the numbers up, sort of.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/04/29/why ... AFL-games/

they .. now.. have no problem broadcasting all 4 AFL games
because they have no bloody choice
they had all intentions of doing what they did last time with ten

& ten said .... .. yeah right :_<> .. pay how much for that rubbish ?

our game is the ONLY sport increasing its ratings in its core market
thats growth

our sport doesn't rate anywhere else because AFL merkins place pressure on their mates in broadcasting in the sthn states not to show it at a decent time ... they fear it getting a look in

would it outrate AFL ... of course not

would it rate better then AFL does in the Nthn States
you bloody bet it would
broadcasters won't have a choice from 2013 ... our game will be on TV in all states from 2013
& watch the lead the NRL has over the AFL in aggregate TV numbers ..which is increasing each year ... increase even more

THE code of the next 2 decades
the NRL
great stuff

Like I said beaussie
this time round the NRL is deadly serious

we don't need Foxtel
they in fact ... need us .& if they under estimate the NRL's resolve on this issue
they will pay a heavy price


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sp ... 6121548540


NRL boss David Gallop says Foxtel risks being frozen out of rugby league's next broadcast deal if it isn't prepared to pay full value for the rights to the competition.

Responding to a pay TV executive's comments that talk of a $1 billion-plus deal was "confusing", Gallop said every NRL game could end up on free-to-air TV.

"We need to receive value and recognition for the fact that over 70 per cent of the top hundred shows on Foxtel are rugby league games," Gallop said. "If we don't believe we're getting the appropriate value for that, we'll explore other options."

Consolidated Media Holdings executive chairman John Alexander said on Tuesday there were "question marks about some of the sporting costs". ConsMedia is a part owner of Foxtel and Premier Media Group, the producer of Fox Sports. "I don't think there is any appetite at Fox Sports to hand vast additional cheques for no extra value," Alexander said. "Unless Channel Nine has got much deeper pockets than we all believe, then I think the prices that have been talked about with the NRL remain confusing."


NRL clubs were recently told a five-year deal from 2013, worth $1.4bn -- more than the AFL's $1.25bn -- was a possibility.

Gallop said Alexander's comments were old-fashioned haggling. "It's not surprising that any buyer in any market is going to play down the price," he said.

Hahaha, David Gallop is an employee of News Ltd, owners of the NRL and Foxtel. This is hilarious.

Beaussie wrote:

Hahaha, David Gallop is an employee of News Ltd, owners of the NRL and Foxtel. This is hilarious.

hmmmm
as ignorant as ever

no news partnership in the NRL as of Nov 1st 2011
no shackles
so look out Foxtel