Nine and Fox Sports to retain NRL rights

[Bucking Beads]

No I didn't miss that, but do any of us know how much the offer from channel 10 was? imo you can't show live league without compromising the amount of advertising revenue you can make from it, and in turn the amount you can afford to pay for it.

What's to say the channel 10 offer was even in the ball park of channel 9s? Sure if it was close to what 9 was willing to pay, then I would say they should have based it on the quality of the TV coverage (which it sounds on face value that 10 would have been better), but if it wasn't even in the ballpark, then the NRL really had very little choice but to go with the highest bidder. The NRL was stuck between a rock and a hard place. There has been so much talk about this "billion dollar" TV deal that if they failed to negotiate it, they would be seen as failing.

It was $200 million less from what I have seen. I still think regardless of what 9 are paying the NRL should have stipulated no delayed coverage and more FTA games otherwise no deal. It isn't all about the money it is about the quality of the deal.

 

[Jeba]

This is such a First World Problems thread.

 

[dukey]

Getting a billion dollars is all fine and dandy, as long as the money is used correctly. In five years time, if the salary cap has been increased, if bush and junior footy is well funded and healthy, and if the clubs are all financially sound, I'll be happy to have only had three FTA games per week and a prime time grand final. But if we're still in the same boat we're in now despite the cash, I'll be pissed.

 

[Coxy]

Probably because we live in the first world :P

 

[Kimlo]

A live game at 4pm wouldn't work though would it? Unless it's a 4.15PM kick off but how would they make up the extra 15 minutes at the end of the game? The reason it works now is because they go straight from fulltime into the news which works well, playing a live game they can't control the timing so the game finishes at 6pm, e.g if it's too close and there's extra time there's no chance they will delay the news, if it finishes 10 minutes early many will get up an go before the news starts.

 

[noisetheory]

A live game at 4pm wouldn't work though would it? Unless it's a 4.15PM kick off but how would they make up the extra 15 minutes at the end of the game? The reason it works now is because they go straight from fulltime into the news which works well, playing a live game they can't control the timing so the game finishes at 6pm, e.g if it's too close and there's extra time there's no chance they will delay the news, if it finishes 10 minutes early many will get up an go before the news starts.

yep, you're right, and its a shame that our great game is left to the mercy of channel 9.

 

[Kimlo]

yep, you're right, and its a shame that our great game is left to the mercy of channel 9.

TBH we get $1 billion+ thanks to Nine and Fox Sports, I know they have conditions but I guess if any of us were in that position and paying $1b/n we'd want a big say too.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...s-from-next-year/story-e6frep5x-1226456073713

This all but confirms we're going to get official live streaming next year, very excited about that.

 

[Coxy]

Don't get why they don't start the telecast at 3.30, kick off at 3.45, game over, even with golden point by 5:45. Short wrap and then news. Hell, that's an extra 30 minutes of padding to put more ads in...

 

[Big Pete]

How did 9 handle Lockyer's last regular season game?

 

[Kaz]

This all but confirms we're going to get official live streaming next year, very excited about that.

They will charge an arm & a leg for it.

Something like pay per view.

 

[gUt]

This is such a First World Problems thread.

:thumbup1::thumbup:

 

[Kimlo]

How did 9 handle Lockyer's last regular season game?

Good question actually, don't remember 100%.

I do remember they had post game celebrations though to make up for the gap between end of game and transfer to news.

 

[Kimlo]

Don't get why they don't start the telecast at 3.30, kick off at 3.45, game over, even with golden point by 5:45. Short wrap and then news. Hell, that's an extra 30 minutes of padding to put more ads in...

But if no golden point then the game will finish about 5.30, the key point for channel 9 is to have ratings at a peak when transferring to the news telecast. I don't think a 30 minute post-game review will achieve that. I can just imagine, once the post game starts as soon as the ads starts many will give up and stop watching.

 

[Coxy]

But if no golden point then the game will finish about 5.30, the key point for channel 9 is to have ratings at a peak when transferring to the news telecast. I don't think a 30 minute post-game review will achieve that.

So the solution is ditch golden point :-)

 

[Kimlo]

So the solution is ditch golden point :-)

Good point (pun not intended). If they ditch golden point then you know for certain that the game will basically always finish at the same time.

But I'm personally a supporter of golden point, well I'd much prefer golden try, but yeah.

 

[Kimlo]

Just a few things I thought was worth nothing.

With a deal worth over $200m p/y NRL has roughly 200 games per year (26x8 + 3 origins + finals - byes) so that's essentially $1 million per game the NRL is getting. Huge if you think about it. For arguments sake if every dollar the game earnt went to the players we could be paying players 30k per game, which is about 900k per year per player. That doesn't include other revenue like gate takings and so on.

At one million per game, CH 9 essentially has to earn one million $ in value for the two hours they host a league game, insane when you think of it that way.

To compare, the English Premier League (soccer for those who don't know :P) secured a TV rights deal from 2013-2016(3 seasons) for $3 billion. Soccer is played over 38 rounds and 10 matches per round, so there's 380 rounds, basically double.

To compare $ figures from TV rights, the EPL is getting about 2.5m per game with the NRL getting 1m per game, although the player wages in the EPL are huge compared to even the highest paid players in the NRL. I guess the main difference there is the clubs themselves are hugely profitable due to massive crowds, international following which means big merchandise sales as well as huge international TV contracts. I have no idea how much they get from international TV contracts but that would probably push the EPL figure to possibly 5m per game.

 

[Bucking Beads]

How good is it that the Broncos will be on live every Friday night. Probably the biggest positive I can find. No need to invest in a membership when games are live on my tv each Friday night.

 

[Dexter]

Ah, a true supporter :D