NRL broadcast deal

 
Talk about NRL, State of Origin, Tests, Four Nations, World Cup, everything rugby league

Moderator: GH Moderators

User avatar
Laurie Daley
Posts: 15300
Joined: March 14, 2010, 4:00 pm

Favourite Player:
Josh Hodgson
PostPosted: August 26, 2015, 10:10 pm
Gerg wrote:I can't believe the ratings figures from a page back. Why do so many people watch the Block?


House Rules as well.

What on Earth is the appeal of Bogans doing shonky renovations with questionable OH&S?
Quote
User avatar
John Ferguson
Posts: 2816
Joined: July 20, 2008, 10:41 am
Location: Canberra - Raiders season ticket
PostPosted: August 26, 2015, 10:28 pm
Pigman wrote:I mean i dont think you need to have a business degree to figure out that most national companies like Harvey Norman or Woolworths, or Comm Bank (and that's who's advertising in these slots, it's not Uncy Steve's Metal Detector Emporium at Fyshwick) would rather pay for ads that are seen by 1 million people across the country, than they would to have 1 million see it across only 2 states.

I think you're wrong here. I don't claim intricate knowledge of the FTA networks, but I do know that channels like Channel 9 aren't a single entity across the entire country; each station has local affiliate networks that have their own advertising loop - which is why viewers in Canberra are constantly blasted with ads for Seears workwear in Fyshwick during NRL games, no way they could afford that nationally.

I'm sure you could push your ad through the entire affiliate network nationally if you had the money, but the point is that since ad blocks can be purchased per-region the amount of states the broadcast is in is largely irrelevant.

If you're a booze marketer for a national brand trying to reach the largest amount of potential drunkards possible, you buy ad time during NRL games in both NSW and QLD, AFL in VIC etc. etc., you're not tied to a single code because the advertising market is segmented.
:!: Warning: poster is incapable of humour, engage with at your own risk. Symptoms of engagement may include frustration, mental imbalance and temporary insanity.
Quote
User avatar
Don Furner
Posts: 114402
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm
PostPosted: August 26, 2015, 10:42 pm
Sterlk wrote:I don't see how this is such a big debate, if the question is "which code is worth more to the FTA networks?" the answer should be reasonably easy to quantify, and you could essentially put a $$$ figure on each 30 second ad break - if anybody could be assed to actually do the math, that is (and that person isn't me).

All you'd need to do is obtain the total value of each of the code's FTA deals, divide that total figure by how many years the deal is for, divide that result by the total amount of FTA games per code per year, then use an estimate of how much ad time there is per-game-per-code to get the final figure.

If anybody's going to be quoting stats and figures, it should be that one. Its pretty easy to find statistics on the Internet that will support just about any position you choose to take (unless you're being silly and trying to prove something ridiculous like cannibalism being a popular recreational activity in Tasmania).


We know the answer, Nine just paid more than Seven for four games each week.

I'm not just finding figures to suit my position. I'm quoting an AFL supporter website, which shows every single figure. There's nothing more comprehensive you can refer to in Australia, in terms of publicly available information.

The difference is, I'm actually reading the figures!
Image
Quote
User avatar
Mal Meninga
Posts: 47787
Joined: February 24, 2008, 7:47 am
Location: Gold Coast
Favourite Player:
Captain Croker
PostPosted: August 27, 2015, 6:20 am
Smith ‘will deliver’ NRL TV goods

The extraordinary growth in Australia of online streaming service Netflix, who have emerged as a key player in negotiations for the digital rights of rugby league, is a sure indication the NRL can double $925 million they have already banked under their new broadcast deal.

That is the opinion of a leading digital media expert, who predicts NRL boss Dave Smith will silence his critics and deliver the game a $1.85 million bounty to the game’s coffers.

Damian Damjanovski, lead strategist at strategic agency Common Ventures said sport is the “next huge step” for streaming services aiming to monetise the Australian market.

http://www.sportsnews.com.au/nrl/smith- ... ods/154176
Image
Quote
User avatar
Mal Meninga
Posts: 20915
Joined: June 18, 2013, 4:31 pm

Favourite Player:
Nick Cotric
PostPosted: August 27, 2015, 7:18 am
Sterlk wrote:I think you're wrong here. I don't claim intricate knowledge of the FTA networks, but I do know that channels like Channel 9 aren't a single entity across the entire country; each station has local affiliate networks that have their own advertising loop - which is why viewers in Canberra are constantly blasted with ads for Seears workwear in Fyshwick during NRL games, no way they could afford that nationally.

I'm sure you could push your ad through the entire affiliate network nationally if you had the money, but the point is that since ad blocks can be purchased per-region the amount of states the broadcast is in is largely irrelevant.


Of course they can but my gut feel is they arent basing the 1.5-2 BILLION on the piss in your pocket money a mum and pop store like Seears workwear use to buy blocks during the telecast in canberra. ;)
They are shelling out that kind of money because of what they can get in return from those who CAN afford to push their ad through the entire network

I know it's all part of it, including these **** little regional ads but i guess what im suggesting is my gut feel is those **** little regional ads like Seears aren't a major contributor in the 1.whatever billion the NRL gets
The List - K.Love, Keno, Zippy's tennis angels, LA Lakers, Noah, Boozer, Lucy's horse tips, Colts, Lucy, Kevin Proctor, Dr Zaius, TR....
Quote
User avatar
Mal Meninga
Posts: 47787
Joined: February 24, 2008, 7:47 am
Location: Gold Coast
Favourite Player:
Captain Croker
PostPosted: August 27, 2015, 8:35 am
Why the NRL is looking for greater exposure instead of top dollar in TV rights strategy



Critics of the ARLC's broadcast dealings would have you believe chief executive Dave Smith has chosen the poorhouse over the countinghouse.

The decision by Smith to accept a $925 million five-year offer from Channel Nine to broadcast four free-to-air NRL games a week, potentially jeopardising more than a billion dollars he could receive from Fox Sports, is designed to project rugby league into as many Australian homes as possible.

While the AFL will receive $2.5 billion over six years, at least five of its weekly games will be shown on Rupert Murdoch's Fox Sports, which reaches only 30 per cent of Australian homes.

Largely unreported in the comparison between the AFL and NRL deals is the significant populations in regional and rural NSW and Queensland.

http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league ... al_twitter
Image
Quote
User avatar
Laurie Daley
Posts: 14209
Joined: January 13, 2005, 5:22 pm
PostPosted: August 27, 2015, 9:33 am
Pigman wrote:
Sterlk wrote:I think you're wrong here. I don't claim intricate knowledge of the FTA networks, but I do know that channels like Channel 9 aren't a single entity across the entire country; each station has local affiliate networks that have their own advertising loop - which is why viewers in Canberra are constantly blasted with ads for Seears workwear in Fyshwick during NRL games, no way they could afford that nationally.

I'm sure you could push your ad through the entire affiliate network nationally if you had the money, but the point is that since ad blocks can be purchased per-region the amount of states the broadcast is in is largely irrelevant.


Of course they can but my gut feel is they arent basing the 1.5-2 BILLION on the piss in your pocket money a mum and pop store like Seears workwear use to buy blocks during the telecast in canberra. ;)
They are shelling out that kind of money because of what they can get in return from those who CAN afford to push their ad through the entire network

I know it's all part of it, including these **** little regional ads but i guess what im suggesting is my gut feel is those **** little regional ads like Seears aren't a major contributor in the 1.whatever billion the NRL gets


There is more advertising revenue generated out of regional QLD & NSW than metro Perth & Adelaide combined. I think it contributes something.
Quote
User avatar
Mal Meninga
Posts: 39639
Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland
Favourite Player:
Croker, Vaughan and Fensom
PostPosted: August 27, 2015, 10:11 am
Gerg wrote:I can't believe the ratings figures from a page back. Why do so many people watch the Block?

It's got me absolutely stuffed, Gerg.
Image
2012 Golden Boogs Newbie of the Year
2013 'Nella Awards Best Punter
2013 Boogs Thread of the Year ~ The Betting Thread
2014 Boogs Matthew Elliott Award Winner
2014 Boogs some award with Hanbush
Quote
User avatar
Brett Mullins
Posts: 1399
Joined: May 30, 2014, 1:25 pm
Location: Sydney
Favourite Player:
Mal Meninga
PostPosted: August 27, 2015, 10:27 am
dubby wrote:
bonehead wrote:I'm just filthy on the 9 deal ruining the married man's super Saturday footy


Yeah same. I love super Saturday

This may save my relationship!!
Co-host of The Dad Zone Podcast http://bit.ly/thedadzone
Image
Quote
User avatar
Mal Meninga
Posts: 27267
Joined: July 2, 2007, 11:41 am
PostPosted: August 27, 2015, 12:46 pm
Raidersrawesome wrote:Why the NRL is looking for greater exposure instead of top dollar in TV rights strategy



Critics of the ARLC's broadcast dealings would have you believe chief executive Dave Smith has chosen the poorhouse over the countinghouse.

The decision by Smith to accept a $925 million five-year offer from Channel Nine to broadcast four free-to-air NRL games a week, potentially jeopardising more than a billion dollars he could receive from Fox Sports, is designed to project rugby league into as many Australian homes as possible.

While the AFL will receive $2.5 billion over six years, at least five of its weekly games will be shown on Rupert Murdoch's Fox Sports, which reaches only 30 per cent of Australian homes.

Largely unreported in the comparison between the AFL and NRL deals is the significant populations in regional and rural NSW and Queensland.

http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league ... al_twitter


So why the **** don't they how the raiders games live on GEM into canberra if that's the case
Quote
User avatar
Ruben Wiki
Posts: 5716
Joined: August 27, 2007, 2:26 pm
Location: redfern
PostPosted: August 27, 2015, 2:03 pm
Lenny Leonard wrote:
Raidersrawesome wrote:Why the NRL is looking for greater exposure instead of top dollar in TV rights strategy



Critics of the ARLC's broadcast dealings would have you believe chief executive Dave Smith has chosen the poorhouse over the countinghouse.

The decision by Smith to accept a $925 million five-year offer from Channel Nine to broadcast four free-to-air NRL games a week, potentially jeopardising more than a billion dollars he could receive from Fox Sports, is designed to project rugby league into as many Australian homes as possible.

While the AFL will receive $2.5 billion over six years, at least five of its weekly games will be shown on Rupert Murdoch's Fox Sports, which reaches only 30 per cent of Australian homes.

Largely unreported in the comparison between the AFL and NRL deals is the significant populations in regional and rural NSW and Queensland.

http://m.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league ... al_twitter


So why the **** don't they how the raiders games live on GEM into canberra if that's the case

They probably should, but tbh they dont give a **** about the raiders.
Quote
User avatar
Don Furner
Posts: 9004
Joined: January 8, 2005, 9:35 pm

Favourite Player:
The Veloci-Rapana
PostPosted: August 27, 2015, 2:15 pm
A significant difference too about the AFL deal is that Seven broadcasts the "local" teams into each market outside of Melbourne, swapping the 7-produced games for the ones produced by Fox Footy. Viewers in Adelaide get to see all the Crows and Power games, Perth gets to see the Eagles and Dockers, Sydney gets to see the Swans and Giants and Brisbane gets to see the Lions and Suns. That means the non-Melbourne markets get much higher ratings than they would otherwise get if only the 4 games that 7 produced each week were shown nationally.

The NRL's ratings on FTA would increase if they showed every Storm game into Melbourne, every Knights game on NBN, every Raiders game on Win Canberra, every Dragons game on Win Wollongong, every Broncos game in Brisbane and so on.
Image

I still Believe

ImageImage

Proud 2012 member
Quote
User avatar
John Ferguson
Posts: 2580
Joined: February 2, 2007, 12:14 pm
PostPosted: August 27, 2015, 2:59 pm
The local games shown on delay via GEM is a no brainier in my opinion. I have seen first hand my nephew and father lose interest in the raiders and go to AFL because they don't have Foxtel.

Does the NRL think these people in Canberra without fox are going to become Rabbitohs or Broncos fans because that's the only teams they get to see on TV.

It amazes me that we had raiders games on free to air in Canberra through the 80s and early 90s. Now we have 2 games a year.
Quote
User avatar
Laurie Daley
Posts: 12413
Joined: January 25, 2005, 9:24 pm
Location: Brisbane
Favourite Player:
Josh Hodgson
PostPosted: August 27, 2015, 3:20 pm
Bipolar Bear wrote:A significant difference too about the AFL deal is that Seven broadcasts the "local" teams into each market outside of Melbourne, swapping the 7-produced games for the ones produced by Fox Footy. Viewers in Adelaide get to see all the Crows and Power games, Perth gets to see the Eagles and Dockers, Sydney gets to see the Swans and Giants and Brisbane gets to see the Lions and Suns. That means the non-Melbourne markets get much higher ratings than they would otherwise get if only the 4 games that 7 produced each week were shown nationally.

The NRL's ratings on FTA would increase if they showed every Storm game into Melbourne, every Knights game on NBN, every Raiders game on Win Canberra, every Dragons game on Win Wollongong, every Broncos game in Brisbane and so on.


They already do show every Broncos game in Brisbane.
Gina Riley: Oh, come on, John. That’s a bit old hat, the corrupt IOC delegate.
John Clarke: Old hat? Gina, in the scientific world when they see that something is happening again and again and again, repeatedly, they don’t call it old hat. They call it a pattern.
Quote
User avatar
Mal Meninga
Posts: 47787
Joined: February 24, 2008, 7:47 am
Location: Gold Coast
Favourite Player:
Captain Croker
PostPosted: August 28, 2015, 6:56 am
Andrew Johns poised to defect from Channel Nine to Fox Sports

FOX Sports has made an audacious bid to snatch Andrew Johns from Channel Nine with a view of making him and brother Matt the new face of the network's rugby league coverage. Now, fans, does that sound like Fox Sports is about to turn its back on the NRL to you?

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... z3k3EKVrUg
Image
Quote
User avatar
Laurie Daley
Posts: 18614
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Location: Greener pastures
Favourite Player:
Luke Turner
PostPosted: August 28, 2015, 10:31 am
Thats one way of improving the Ch9 coverage.
Head to Head
Luke Turner - 1
Blake Ferguson - 0
Quote
User avatar
Glenn Lazarus
Posts: 322
Joined: August 25, 2013, 5:01 pm

Favourite Player:
Josh Hodgson
PostPosted: August 28, 2015, 11:03 am
The reason why any channel for that matter can't show local team games into local markets is because the current deal doesn't allow a simulcast or a delayed broadcast from a private feed (which in this case is Fox Sports) unlike the AFL's current deal which does allow this.
Image
Quote
User avatar
Laurie Daley
Posts: 12413
Joined: January 25, 2005, 9:24 pm
Location: Brisbane
Favourite Player:
Josh Hodgson
PostPosted: August 28, 2015, 2:42 pm
Why the **** would having MORE Johns on Fox Sports improve the coverage?!?
Gina Riley: Oh, come on, John. That’s a bit old hat, the corrupt IOC delegate.
John Clarke: Old hat? Gina, in the scientific world when they see that something is happening again and again and again, repeatedly, they don’t call it old hat. They call it a pattern.
Quote
User avatar
Mal Meninga
Posts: 27267
Joined: July 2, 2007, 11:41 am
PostPosted: August 28, 2015, 2:53 pm
Imagine the johns brothers big weekend...
Quote
User avatar
John Ferguson
Posts: 2580
Joined: February 2, 2007, 12:14 pm
PostPosted: August 28, 2015, 2:59 pm
Arnie wrote:The reason why any channel for that matter can't show local team games into local markets is because the current deal doesn't allow a simulcast or a delayed broadcast from a private feed (which in this case is Fox Sports) unlike the AFL's current deal which does allow this.


Yes something that was going to be rectified in the last TV deal. After formerly complaining about this issue in 2008, I got a letter from the NRL stating how important better free to air coverage of the raiders was for the NRL and that I could 'rest assured ' that the next TV deal would improve things. I must have misunderstood what rest assured meant.

When that next TV deal was about to be announced, Philip rothfield claimed inside knowledge that the raiders would only be getting three channel 9 games in the first year of the contract. For those who remember that following complaints from raiders fans the NRL said that claim by phil was wrong, little did we know that the NRL were of course proved correct when we only got two games that year!
Quote
User avatar
Ruben Wiki
Posts: 5438
Joined: April 7, 2007, 1:45 am
Location: Sydney
Favourite Player:
Jersh McCrerne
PostPosted: August 28, 2015, 3:50 pm
Reading the last few pages it seems that people are too fixated on the importance of the value of in-game advertising for the respective broadcast rights. The networks aren't primarily purchasing these rights for ad income - they more or less act as loss leaders in fact. Of course ads will help the recoup their huge outlay, but the value put on the halo effect it puts on the rest of the network and its programming is far greater.

If it were based primarily on advertising then the value of the rights theoretically shouldn't rise very much at all, given the yield from FTA advertising has barely grown in the last few years (certainly not in line with the explosion in the value of the rights).
Quote
User avatar
John Ferguson
Posts: 2580
Joined: February 2, 2007, 12:14 pm
PostPosted: August 28, 2015, 3:58 pm
Agree 100% afgtnk. It's the after match flow on to the news or a league fan seeing an interesting mini series or reality show that the TV network is really keen on.
Quote
User avatar
Laurie Daley
Posts: 18614
Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
Location: Greener pastures
Favourite Player:
Luke Turner
PostPosted: August 28, 2015, 5:13 pm
BJ wrote:Agree 100% afgtnk. It's the after match flow on to the news or a league fan seeing an interesting mini series or reality show that the TV network is really keen on.

One has to wonder how critical it is to watch the news at 6pm once 2018 comes around. The general population will be pretty well versed in news on demand by that stage.
Head to Head
Luke Turner - 1
Blake Ferguson - 0
Quote
User avatar
Don Furner
Posts: 22032
Joined: February 10, 2007, 10:58 pm
Location: ACT
Favourite Player:
Mal Meninga, Terry Campese, Blake Austin
PostPosted: August 31, 2015, 1:55 pm
Lenny Leonard wrote:Imagine the johns brothers big weekend...


That's a reality show right there!
Quote
User avatar
Mal Meninga
Posts: 47787
Joined: February 24, 2008, 7:47 am
Location: Gold Coast
Favourite Player:
Captain Croker
PostPosted: September 2, 2015, 9:10 pm
NRL tells clubs Fox Sports can be replaced by ‘new players’

The NRL’s battle with Fox Sports over the next broadcast rights deal could intensify after club chief executives were told yesterday the code could go with a non-traditional partner for its digital media rights in a worst-case scenario.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/n ... d10d327664
Image
Quote
User avatar
Don Furner
Posts: 27483
Joined: May 16, 2006, 12:14 pm
Location: The Ponds.
Favourite Player:
Mal Meninga
PostPosted: September 2, 2015, 9:49 pm
Puh lease..... Get rid of Nein before fox
Image
Quote
User avatar
Gary Belcher
Posts: 6787
Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
PostPosted: September 2, 2015, 9:52 pm
Amen dubby.

Although fox have bought Johns right? If they buy Rabs, Gould, Lewis, etc. then we could ditch fox and win
Quote
User avatar
Ruben Wiki
Posts: 5716
Joined: August 27, 2007, 2:26 pm
Location: redfern
PostPosted: September 3, 2015, 12:02 pm
TBH we are on a bias side of the fence because the raiders get treated like **** from nine.

but to be fair rupert murdoch and news limited has been way worse to RL then nine.
Quote
User avatar
Laurie Daley
Posts: 14209
Joined: January 13, 2005, 5:22 pm
PostPosted: September 4, 2015, 10:39 am
76k watched the Storm game in Melbourne last night. I believe that is higher than any Swans rating in Sydney this year.
Quote
User avatar
Mal Meninga
Posts: 27267
Joined: July 2, 2007, 11:41 am
PostPosted: September 4, 2015, 10:57 am
In a time slot where it wasn't competing with afl... Let's be realistic here
Quote
User avatar
Laurie Daley
Posts: 14209
Joined: January 13, 2005, 5:22 pm
PostPosted: September 4, 2015, 11:06 am
Lenny Leonard wrote:In a time slot where it wasn't competing with afl... Let's be realistic here


It beat many Swans games that don't go H2H with NRL on FTA. Not to mention a Thursday night Swans game with no H2H NRL got 44k in Sydney this year.
Quote
User avatar
Don Furner
Posts: 114402
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm
PostPosted: October 16, 2015, 7:21 pm
Why a second Brisbane team could be the key to the NRL's pay TV negotiations

A second Brisbane team could add up to $200 million to the value of the overall broadcast rights and enable the NRL to do a deal with Fox Sports that rivals the AFL's.

That is the view of those involved in negotiating sports rights, broadcasting and consortiums preparing to enter a team in the NRL if the competition is expanded beyond 16 teams in coming years.

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-l ... z3oild7qc9
Image
Quote
User avatar
Don Furner
Posts: 114402
Joined: January 7, 2005, 4:21 pm
PostPosted: November 2, 2015, 6:49 pm
Fox Sports tipped to pay more in NRL deal after Optus returns to pay-TV market

Optus has emerged as a genuine bidder for the NRL's digital rights after paying $50 million to snatch English Premier League from Fox Sports in a move that is also expected to drive up the price of the next pay-tv deal between the NRL and News Corp.

The manner in which the telco succeeded in gaining the EPL rights supports claims Fox Sports had been complacent and was caught by the speed in which Channel Nine tabled an offer too good to refuse for four NRL games per week on free-to-air television.

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-l ... z3qK2HFQUO
Image
Quote
User avatar
Mal Meninga
Posts: 20797
Joined: March 17, 2007, 12:24 pm

Favourite Player:
Bay56
PostPosted: November 2, 2015, 7:28 pm
Eat that Rupert.
Quote
User avatar
John Ferguson
Posts: 2580
Joined: February 2, 2007, 12:14 pm
PostPosted: November 2, 2015, 7:50 pm
Rupert has too many powerful people in the games and key clubs hierarchy. I am sure he will be calling in a few favours.
Quote
PreviousNext

Return to Rugby League


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Sid and 14 guests