$ 1 Billion TV deal Are they kidding themselves

H

happy_tiger

Well-known member
Saw the John Grant( New head of Independant Commission) interview about the $1 Billion in the TV rights deals , They can't be serious can they .
I thought these were just media figures .
My personal opinion is they will get about $800 million maximum Still an improvement but way short of the AFL figure
The IC have a lot of catching up to do if they want to market the game as well as AFL in my opinion and get the dollars that AFL generates through TV rights .What do you think??
 
Based on recent media reports, it looks like it will all depend on the FTA bids, and how the NRL will accommodate the need for more ads to be spliced into the game in order for the networks to pay that amount for the rights.

Clubs were saying the other day that they should aim for $1.4m.
 
I think they will get a Billion as all three channels want the rights & state of origin will be a seperate deal, then take into account Fox who need the footy as you would throw your fox subscription back @ them if they didnt have the league.
 
SOO is the biggest ratings juggernaut of any non Olympic year.

The NRL is a large reason behind the success of Foxtels subscription rate.

As long as 9 lose the rights I will be happy
 
@smeghead said:
SOO is the biggest ratings juggernaut of any non Olympic year.

The NRL is a large reason behind the success of Foxtels subscription rate.

As long as 9 lose the rights I will be happy
Click to expand...

Agree…and I cant wait for the Footy Show to end!!
 
@Cultured Bogan said:
Based on recent media reports, it looks like it will all depend on the FTA bids, and how the NRL will accommodate the need for more ads to be spliced into the game in order for the networks to pay that amount for the rights.

Clubs were saying the other day that they should aim for $1.4m.
Click to expand...

Hey Bogan Hope you meant Billion not million Salary caps might drop a lot on 1.4 million
 
Yeah HT, I meant billion mate :laughing:

Players would be going back to playing for meat pies and free schooners if that were the case!
 
The NRL should garner more money than the AFL, rugby league generates much higher TV ratings, plus the has the ability to sell SOO and test packages to help drive up the price (the AFL has no such representative juggernauts to support their TV deal).
 
This misconception is that more viewers automatically = more $ for the TV networks. It is not quite that simple.

Regardless I am confident the game can break $1 billion. If it more more commercials, so be it, fact of the matter is if, if the game is live, we are not missing any of the action in real time anyway.
 
If the AFL can get 1.2b we should be able to get 1b. The last rights deal was criminally undersold, so hopefully the IC do a much better job with this deal. Of course a lot of it is going to depend on expansion.
 
I'm biased and obviously prefer NRL to AFL (even though I've been to a few AFL games as well). That aside, Rugby League is not only a great game to watch live, it is also great to watch on TV. I find AFL loses a bit when watched on TV compared to live. Another reason why NRL should command at least $1B.
 
@Centaur said:
This misconception is that more viewers automatically = more $ for the TV networks. It is not quite that simple.

Regardless I am confident the game can break $1 billion. If it more more commercials, so be it, fact of the matter is if, if the game is live, we are not missing any of the action in real time anyway.
Click to expand...

It's close to that simple for PayTV. If Foxtel stopped airing NRL they would lose a massive amount of subscribers. Fact is, Foxtel have treated the NRL with the contempt that comes from knowing their half-owner also half-owns the NRL. In other words, they take it for granted. A quick check of their own figures would show what they have to lose if they don't have the NRL and underline the reasons for $uperleague being formed all that time ago.

FTA the issue of how many ads you can cram in is an issue… That's where the AFL has an edge at the moment since they take an ad every goal. League has to get smarter - split screen ads during breaks, more breezethroughs, shorter ads etc.
 
@Yossarian said:
@Centaur said:
This misconception is that more viewers automatically = more $ for the TV networks. It is not quite that simple.

Regardless I am confident the game can break $1 billion. If it more more commercials, so be it, fact of the matter is if, if the game is live, we are not missing any of the action in real time anyway.

It's close to that simple for PayTV. If Foxtel stopped airing NRL they would lose a massive amount of subscribers. Fact is, Foxtel have treated the NRL with the contempt that comes from knowing their half-owner also half-owns the NRL. In other words, they take it for granted. A quick check of their own figures would show what they have to lose if they don't have the NRL and underline the reasons for $uperleague being formed all that time ago.

FTA the issue of how many ads you can cram in is an issue… That's where the AFL has an edge at the moment since they take an ad every goal. League has to get smarter - split screen ads during breaks, more breezethroughs, shorter ads etc.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Tickertape ads would be ideal.
 
If the game gets handed over to the IC before the deal is renegotiated Foxtel will have no choice but to shell out the bikkies to get the rights.

As a Fox subscriber I wouldn't care if they got the lot for the right price, but it's not an ideal way to reach all of the viewing public when a minority have PayTV.

It's in the NRL's interest to award 100% rights to a FTA network, and if it happens I won't care either because it's the best way to promote the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 778 (members: 3, guests: 775)
Back
Top