Super 12 FTA TV Coverage - Non-Existent

Which is the best football code? Here you can have it out with other football fans.
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9890
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 231 times
Been liked: 51 times

Super 12 FTA TV Coverage - Non-Existent

Post by Beaussie »

SMH wrote:
It's super but you need Fox to see it

By Philip Derriman
Saturday, March 5, 2005
http://www.rugbyheaven.smh.com.au/artic ... 80481.html

Here is a sobering statistic for anyone who imagines Super 12 rugby is drawing a mass audience: of Australia's 7 million households, only 1.6 million are plugged into the Super 12 broadcaster, Fox Sports.

In other words, people in three-quarters of the nation's homes could not watch this weekend's Super 12 matches even if they wanted to.

This is a cause of great aggravation for the many rugby followers among them. It's also a pity for the game itself, since it means rugby is failing to reach the bulk of its potential audience in the first half of the season. You may be a rugby diehard, but unless you have pay TV or access to a pub, club or friend's home where Super 12 is screened - you go without.

By all accounts, the Australian Rugby Union receives more complaints about this issue than almost any other. People want to know how rugby authorities allowed such a situation to develop. Didn't they realise that by selling Super 12 lock, stock and barrel to a pay-TV operator they were making it all but impossible for a sizeable proportion of the game's followers to watch it? Why didn't they ensure that at least some of the games were screened free-to-air? The matter isn't as simple as that, of course. It's true that a decade ago Channel Seven did show some Super 10 matches.

But the times were different. The players weren't paid and the ARU could afford to accept the modest rights fee Seven was prepared to pay.

Everything changed after 1995. Rugby went professional, Super 12 was created and pay TV had arrived. The ARU had to fund three fully professional Super 12 teams, and it found it could do this only with pay-TV money, which, in turn, meant giving the operator exclusive rights.

It wasn't a case of the ARU having a valuable new product, Super 12, and deciding where it would be screened. Without the pay-TV deal, it wouldn't have had the product in the first place. So the ARU can be excused on the basis that, financially, it had no alternative - it had to accept the pay-TV money, with all the limitations this entailed. Yet the fact remains that a significant proportion of rugby followers cannot watch Super 12, clearly an unsatisfactory situation.

The ARU agrees. Last year, while a new broadcast deal was being negotiated with News Ltd, it explored the idea of combining some free-to-air coverage with the Fox coverage. One plan was to have Waratahs' match replays screened free-to-air in NSW, Brumbies' replays in Canberra and Reds' replays in Queensland.

But the figures didn't add up. The ARU is understood to have been told that unless it gave exclusive rights it would have to take a 30 per cent cut in pay-TV revenue, and it could see no prospect of recovering this from free-to-air broadcasts. Is all hope gone? Might some kind of a deal allowing even limited free-to-air coverage still be possible? After all, it would arguably be in Fox's own interest to attract more people to Super 12 by broadening the exposure with some free-to-air replays. According to someone who has stitched up several big TV sports deals, a deal on Super 12 would need to have something in it for all parties.

"Free-to-air stations don't want networks," he said. "Queenslanders want to see the Reds and so on. You're talking about a replay in one territory - and that's not worth a lot of money."

So should a deal be possible? "Of course. Think outside the square. Maybe the ABC replays it and therefore there's no damage to commercial interests. Maybe SBS replays it, and there's some sort of barter deal with Fox over sponsorship. Somebody should be sweet-talking somebody in Fox. If two sides both want the deal, the deal can be done."


Kind of puts into perspective the popularity of Rugby's Super 12 comp in Australia.

Also those leaguies out there who claim rugby league on Fox is a wonderful success, think again. Only 1.6 million Australians are actually able to view Fox Sports and its rugby or rugby league coverage, and that is of course assuming they are actually tuning in.

My bet is, it wouldn't be anywhere near those figures watching the rugby codes on Fox each weekend with the other Foxtel channels and FTA TV eating away at that 1.6 million potential viewers figure. A real sad state of affairs for both union and rugby league fans one would think.
User avatar
Dizzys_on_fire
Reserves
Reserves
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 2:11 pm
Team:
Location: Great Lakes
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Dizzys_on_fire »

I believe, Beaussie, that the article states that 1.6 million households have Fox at their fingertips, not 1.6 million people, as you suggest. The article states the ratio is 1.6 million out of 7 million households have the channel. So if the population of Australia is 20 million people then roughly 4.5 million Australians can watch Fox. Just thought i'd clear that up for you :wink:
Jason Gillespie - 54* (155)

Formerly Uppy80
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9890
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 231 times
Been liked: 51 times

Post by Beaussie »

Ahh Dizzy, where would we be without you always finding a fault in my posts. I do apologise to all for the misleading figure I posted above. Innoncent mistake I assure you. :oops:

That said, 4.5 million potential viewers aint all that much when you consider the variety of channels both Pay and FTA available to Fox subscribers. Leaguies in particular like to go on about how rugby league is a TV sport and it drives Pay TV subscriptions. Personally, I think it absolute crap. I for one wouldn't be signing up for Pay TV just for sport. Sure it would be good to see some sport but I'd be more interested in the other channels such as the movies and docos.
User avatar
Dizzys_on_fire
Reserves
Reserves
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 2:11 pm
Team:
Location: Great Lakes
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Dizzys_on_fire »

Beaussie wrote:
Ahh Dizzy, where would we be without you always finding a fault in my posts. I do apologise to all for the misleading figure I posted above. Innoncent mistake I assure you. :oops:

That said, 4.5 million potential viewers aint all that much when you consider the variety of channels both Pay and FTA available to Fox subscribers. Leaguies in particular like to go on about how rugby league is a TV sport and it drives Pay TV subscriptions. Personally, I think it absolute crap. I for one wouldn't be signing up for Pay TV just for sport. Sure it would be good to see some sport but I'd be more interested in the other channels such as the movies and docos.
True, 4.5 million certainly isn't alot compared to 20 million (or there abouts, minus all the obvious variables) which is the situation for Free-to-Air.

In response to your statements about League ratings: To be honest, I have no idea what claims have been thrown around, but I believe the general belief is that NRL club matches on Pay usually average around the 300,000 mark. Now obviously im only going on what documents and articles i've read to come to that conclusion, but i'd have to say that it may be a fairly accurate figure, as 300,000 of the potential PayTV audience is only 6.6%. So if those are the figures claimed then im inclined to believe it until proven otherwise. If there are figures claimed around the 600,00 to 1 million + mark per match, i'd seriously question it.

All that aside it's a dam shame that many League an Union watchers alike are forced to purchase Fox or find a decent club somewhere to go watch most of the games, and in Super12's case, ALL of the games. And referring back to the original article, it certainly isn't doing Union any favours in this country. There are only so many Wallaby matches a year, and if the ARU believe that's enough to keep them competitive for the long term well, they may as well give it up now.
Jason Gillespie - 54* (155)

Formerly Uppy80
User avatar
King-Eliagh
Coach
Coach
Posts: 13126
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 7:23 pm
Team: Parramatta
Location:
Has thanked: 16 times
Been liked: 11 times

Post by King-Eliagh »

Rugby Union is more popular than AFL in Australia
Image

xman wrote:
KE, why is an even comp important?
Rugga cactus slapper
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 4:10 pm
Team:
Location:
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Rugga cactus slapper »

Only reason it don't have FTA coverage is because no one gives a flying fluff about it, it's a minorty sport played by wankers and watched by even bigger wankers.

Yawnion ppl can moan all they like, they can bull s h i t about how popular it is until the cows come home, but the ppl who run the FTA networks know what ratings it gets, thus they don't want a bar of it.

It's crap.

& got the lowest rating eva during the UWC, if this is what it like, imagine if they put it up against RL or AR on a friday night :lol:
I love a hard prickly cactus, smack me baby, you piss in my sock and i'll piss in yours.
Rugby Union is full of FREAKS.

The game is crap.


RUGBY LEAGUE IS THE GREATEST GAME

TGG
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9890
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 231 times
Been liked: 51 times

Post by Beaussie »

Rugga cactus slapper wrote:
Only reason it don't have FTA coverage is because no one gives a flying fluff about it, it's a minorty sport played by wankers and watched by even bigger wankers.

Yawnion ppl can moan all they like, they can bull s h i t about how popular it is until the cows come home, but the ppl who run the FTA networks know what ratings it gets, thus they don't want a bar of it.

It's crap.
Um, one could say the same about rugby league FTA TV coverage in Australia. Rugby League is only broadcast before midnight in 2 states of Australia. Seems the FTA TV networks in most parts of the country aren't interested in the NRL either. Oh well, you can always get Foxtel I suppose. :_<>
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9890
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 231 times
Been liked: 51 times

Post by Beaussie »

Dizzys_on_fire wrote:
In response to your statements about League ratings: To be honest, I have no idea what claims have been thrown around, but I believe the general belief is that NRL club matches on Pay usually average around the 300,000 mark. Now obviously im only going on what documents and articles i've read to come to that conclusion, but i'd have to say that it may be a fairly accurate figure, as 300,000 of the potential PayTV audience is only 6.6%.
300,000 on PayTV watching rugby league? Surely you jest Dizzy. I've never seen any articles that claim such figures. You got any sources?
User avatar
Dizzys_on_fire
Reserves
Reserves
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 2:11 pm
Team:
Location: Great Lakes
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Dizzys_on_fire »

Beaussie wrote:
Dizzys_on_fire wrote:
In response to your statements about League ratings: To be honest, I have no idea what claims have been thrown around, but I believe the general belief is that NRL club matches on Pay usually average around the 300,000 mark. Now obviously im only going on what documents and articles i've read to come to that conclusion, but i'd have to say that it may be a fairly accurate figure, as 300,000 of the potential PayTV audience is only 6.6%.
300,000 on PayTV watching rugby league? Surely you jest Dizzy. I've never seen any articles that claim such figures. You got any sources?
Not at the moment I don't, no. And as I said in a previous post, I don't claim it as fact, merely the usual figure I've seen when refering to Fox ratings. But going on the audience percentages, 300,000 is a gettable figure and in my opinion would be dissapointing for the NRL and Fox if it was anything less than that. When you consider that a Sunday afternoon match on Nine can rate anywhere from 150,000 to 400,000 in Sydney alone, it's not unreasonable to suggest the nationwide viewership for the main PayTV sports channel in Australia would rate somewhere in between for any of the 5 weekly matches. Remember it's only a touch over 6% of total viewership. So as I said, unless shown otherwise I can't se why I shouldn't accept those figures as just a rough estimate if anything for the time being.

Personally though, I couldn't really care for PayTV ratings. Hopefully when the next television deal for the NRL is completed, 5 exclusive matches on Fox will be dropped to at least 4 and Saturday arvo/night League will make a comeback now that the Superleague wounds are healing.
Jason Gillespie - 54* (155)

Formerly Uppy80
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9890
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 231 times
Been liked: 51 times

Post by Beaussie »

Dizzys_on_fire wrote:
Personally though, I couldn't really care for PayTV ratings. Hopefully when the next television deal for the NRL is completed, 5 exclusive matches on Fox will be dropped to at least 4 and Saturday arvo/night League will make a comeback now that the Superleague wounds are healing.
Doesn't the NRL still owe Mr Murdoch money from the Super League debacle? I was under the impression the game has to pay News Ltd a certain sum each year until the money he invested in Super League is paid back. Bearing that in mind, it would seem very unlikely that Fox will loose any of its exclusive current coverage. News Ltd do afterall run the game as well.
User avatar
King-Eliagh
Coach
Coach
Posts: 13126
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 7:23 pm
Team: Parramatta
Location:
Has thanked: 16 times
Been liked: 11 times

Post by King-Eliagh »

Beaussie wrote:
Rugga cactus slapper wrote:
Only reason it don't have FTA coverage is because no one gives a flying fluff about it, it's a minorty sport played by wankers and watched by even bigger wankers.

Yawnion ppl can moan all they like, they can bull s h i t about how popular it is until the cows come home, but the ppl who run the FTA networks know what ratings it gets, thus they don't want a bar of it.

It's crap.
Um, one could say the same about rugby league FTA TV coverage in Australia. Rugby League is only broadcast before midnight in 2 states of Australia. Seems the FTA TV networks in most parts of the country aren't interested in the NRL either. Oh well, you can always get Foxtel I suppose. :_<>
What about the territories beaussie? I know its on in N.T at 8:30pm friday night. And have you heard about A.C.T surely they have it on early too? Please explain which states dont have it on before midnight.
Image

xman wrote:
KE, why is an even comp important?
User avatar
Dizzys_on_fire
Reserves
Reserves
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 2:11 pm
Team:
Location: Great Lakes
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Dizzys_on_fire »

Beaussie wrote:
Dizzys_on_fire wrote:
Personally though, I couldn't really care for PayTV ratings. Hopefully when the next television deal for the NRL is completed, 5 exclusive matches on Fox will be dropped to at least 4 and Saturday arvo/night League will make a comeback now that the Superleague wounds are healing.
Doesn't the NRL still owe Mr Murdoch money from the Super League debacle? I was under the impression the game has to pay News Ltd a certain sum each year until the money he invested in Super League is paid back. Bearing that in mind, it would seem very unlikely that Fox will loose any of its exclusive current coverage. News Ltd do afterall run the game as well.
True in some ways.

I'm not sure of the exact figure, but I believe that Murdoch lost somewhere between 200 and 400 million dollars (if anyone can confirm or deny that, please do so) with Superleague altogther. What portion of that is payable by the NRL I am not aware of, however it is obvious that it would be a substantial amount.

Aussie Rugby League has now had 7-8 years to pay Murdoch what he is owed, so that burden shouldn't last too much longer I would think.

And if Fox do happen to retain exclusive rights to the matches they currently do, im hoping that they wont regain them for the absolute bargain of the century they got it for last time as part of the Superleague peace agreement.

The TV rights deal will certainly show us what balls Mr Gallop has, if any. If the status quo remains, he may need his title changed to Mrs Gallop.
Jason Gillespie - 54* (155)

Formerly Uppy80
crocodileman
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by crocodileman »

King-Eliagh wrote:
Beaussie wrote:
Rugga cactus slapper wrote:
Only reason it don't have FTA coverage is because no one gives a flying fluff about it, it's a minorty sport played by wankers and watched by even bigger wankers.

Yawnion ppl can moan all they like, they can bull s h i t about how popular it is until the cows come home, but the ppl who run the FTA networks know what ratings it gets, thus they don't want a bar of it.

It's crap.
Um, one could say the same about rugby league FTA TV coverage in Australia. Rugby League is only broadcast before midnight in 2 states of Australia. Seems the FTA TV networks in most parts of the country aren't interested in the NRL either. Oh well, you can always get Foxtel I suppose. :_<>
What about the territories beaussie? I know its on in N.T at 8:30pm friday night. And have you heard about A.C.T surely they have it on early too? Please explain which states dont have it on before midnight.
Sorry KE, but I can categorically tell you that RL is NOT on Friday night's at 8.30pm. They have an AFL game and the Rugby League comes on about 11.30pm.
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9890
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 231 times
Been liked: 51 times

Post by Beaussie »

Dizzys_on_fire wrote:
And if Fox do happen to retain exclusive rights to the matches they currently do, im hoping that they wont regain them for the absolute bargain of the century they got it for last time as part of the Superleague peace agreement.

The TV rights deal will certainly show us what balls Mr Gallop has, if any. If the status quo remains, he may need his title changed to Mrs Gallop.
I think there will be an increase in the amount paid for the NRL TV rights, however I don't think it'll be all that substantial considering in reality only one PayTV (Foxtel) and FTA TV (Channel 9) network are realistic about bidding. Sure there is talk of Channel 7 having a go, but one must remember, they are desperate to get a slice of the AFL TV rights. If they do indeed bid for the NRL, it will only be as a result of loosing out on the AFL rights.

Don't expect too much more from Fox, they do afterall run the NRL. Why would they pay more for a product they already have a controlling interest in? And lets not forget News Ltd is still owed money from their investment in Super League.
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9890
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 231 times
Been liked: 51 times

Post by Beaussie »

crocodileman wrote:
King-Eliagh wrote:
Beaussie wrote:
Um, one could say the same about rugby league FTA TV coverage in Australia. Rugby League is only broadcast before midnight in 2 states of Australia. Seems the FTA TV networks in most parts of the country aren't interested in the NRL either. Oh well, you can always get Foxtel I suppose. :_<>
What about the territories beaussie? I know its on in N.T at 8:30pm friday night. And have you heard about A.C.T surely they have it on early too? Please explain which states dont have it on before midnight.
Sorry KE, but I can categorically tell you that RL is NOT on Friday night's at 8.30pm. They have an AFL game and the Rugby League comes on about 11.30pm.
Ahhh, KE firing off again without facts to support his ridiculous statements. What's new? Firstly junior, the NT and the ACT are not states. Merely leeching territories reliant on the other states of Australia for funds and capital investment.

In addition, as Croc has pointed out. NRL is shown at what, 1/2 before midnight in the NT. :(/

Think before you post KE. #-o
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 28 guests