Next AFL TV Rights deal

[one-eyed]

AFL rights could be block to Packer
Ben Butler and Adele Ferguson
October 23, 2010
 
JAMES Packer's $245 million raid on the Ten Network may be blocked because it would reduce competition for AFL broadcast rights.

And because two key shareholders have thrown their weight behind the casino king's plans to shake up the TV network, his 17.88 per cent stake will be treated as a controlling interest in a review by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.

ACCC chairman Graeme Samuel told The Age the commission had already begun looking into Mr Packer's raid and would write to him and the other two biggest shareholders, WIN TV owner Bruce Gordon and investment group Perpetual.

A major issue is the 25 per cent stake in Ten's rival Foxtel, controlled by Mr Packer's Consolidated Media.

''There is speculation this [the Packer raid] might reduce the competition for bidding for NRL, or not so much NRL as AFL, because Ten One HD is a participant in that exercise, as is Fox Sport. There's all sorts of things,'' said Mr Samuel, a former AFL commissioner.

TV rights are the AFL's main source of revenue. Current arrangements expire next year and the next deal is tipped to bring in more than $1 billion a year.

Mr Samuel said the ACCC would also consider the impending announcement by Communications Minister Stephen Conroy of a new anti-siphoning list of events that should be kept on free-to-air TV.

''They're all factors that we have to take into account, but we'll deal with that,'' Mr Samuel said.

If the ACCC decided Mr Packer's stake reduced competition it could ask a court to order the sale of the shares under section 50 of the Trade Practices Act.

Yesterday's intervention by one of Australia's most powerful regulators came as Mr Gordon spent more than $900,000 topping up his Ten stake from 11.96 per cent to 13 per cent.

Mr Gordon and Perpetual's head of Australian equities, John Sevior, have publicly supported Mr Packer's plunge into Ten and his cost-cutting plans for the broadcaster.

Those plans reportedly include canning sports channel One in favour of a Sky News feed from Foxtel and offloading outdoor advertising business Eye.

Mr Packer also would not go ahead with a recently announced nightly news and current affairs show fronted by veteran broadcaster George Negus, it has been reported.

In the past, Mr Samuel said, some people had regarded a stake of less than 20 per cent as ''only a minority interest''. ''We don't look at it that way because … 19.9 plus someone else's 12 plus someone else's 9 can take you up to close to 40-odd per cent and that gives you control of the board.

''It's controlling influence over a company's affairs that's far more important.''

The ACCC would conduct its review on the ''hypothetical assumption'' a combination of shareholders might vote together to control Ten, he said.

''Already there's speculation in this morning's paper - I think there's even comments from WIN Group, Bruce Gordon, and Perpetual … which says yes we support Packer.

''So already you've got, I think, if my calculations are correct, just under 20 plus about 9 per cent of Perpetual plus about 12 per cent of WIN. ''What's that give you? You've got control and you could change the whole board if you wanted.''

Mr Gordon's son, Andrew, who is executive chairman of WIN, could not be reached.

Mr Sevior said Perpetual was a passive investor in Ten and sold part of its shareholding to Mr Packer because it lacked operational expertise.

''We are interested in how Ten's profit and loss can be improved. The costs are too high, so if someone has a better idea than existing management and had some past success in the industry that represents an alternative game plan,'' he said.

http://www.theage.com.au/national/afl-rights-could-be-block-to-packer-20101022-16xw0.html

[Stripes]

This spells doom and gloom for our next TV rights.    Without the competition that Ten offers we can expect a lot less money coming into the game. It sounds to me that Packer is more about taking one player out of the bidding leaving Foxtel to gain a much larger slice for a bargain price. Lower operational costs of the network is just code for making it a budget network. Just seems dodgy for mine, like having two athletes running in a race of 5 but one of them just dropping out or getting in the way of the others to allow them to push through.

Is it legal - possibly, is it uncompeitive and bad news for us - probably.

I wonder if this is Packers way of elevating his fathers old station; 9 and the sport he passionate about; league over the AFL ???

Concerning news none the less

Stripes

[one-eyed]

Live TV games a step closer

    * Michael Warner
    * From: Herald Sun
    * November 17, 2010 5:16PM

PRESSURE is increasing on free-to-air networks to show all AFL matches live as the league moves to sell its next round of TV rights.

AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou said today a move to complusory live broadcasting was inevitable, but stopped short of saying it would be enshrined in the new arangement beginning in 2012.

Key Friday night and Saturday night matches have been shown on delays of up to one hour by networks Seven and Ten in the current rights deal to the growing anger of footy fans.

"Everyone knows my views that live football is inevitable -- people want live sport and you should never take your supporters for granted," Demetriou said.

"We'll just have to wait and see what happens in the next broadcast rights."

Demetriou said he did not believe live against-the-gate broadcasts had any bearing on AFL attendances.

"I don't buy that -- we are in a world now where people want to watch things that are happening now," he said.

"When you are watching something that you know the outcome because it's on an hour-and-a-half delay, well that might have been fashionable before, but I think it's going out of fashion."

Channel 9 has already committed to live games should it return to AFL broadcasting, but Seven and Ten have preferred to cash in on high-rating lead-in shows since seizing control of the TV rights in 2007.

The league is awaiting the release of the Federal Government's crucial report into anti-siphoning, which will determine whether Foxtel can bid directly for AFL matches for the first time.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/live-tv-games-a-step-closer/story-e6frf9jf-1225955124304

[one-eyed]

$1b AFL TV rights deal could be just weeks away
Michael Warner
Herald Sun
January 26, 2011

THE AFL is closing in on its richest pay day, with hopes a new five-year TV rights deal will be struck within weeks.
 
Negotiations between league and station chiefs have intensified since Christmas and could be finalised before the start of the premiership season.

The next round of footy broadcast rights, running from 2012 to 2016, is tipped to fetch as much as $1 billion - up from the current mark of $780 million - but final bids are yet to be lodged.

Networks are conducting evaluations and coming to grips with how the fixture and scheduling would work in an expanded 18-team competition.

One scenario would see rival broadcasters Channels 7, 9, 10 and Foxtel all sharing a slice of the action, with Nine continuing its push to pioneer a new Monday night timeslot.

The AFL is also keen on live broadcasts from 2012, despite Seven's preference to air the top-rating Better Homes and Gardens on Friday nights.

Free-to-air television stations would be permitted to show AFL games on their secondary digital channels for the first time.

But the bulk of the extra windfall would come from pay TV giant Foxtel, which can bid directly for AFL matches under changes to federal anti-siphoning laws.

Foxtel pays about $50 million a season for four games a week, but will get an extra match with the introduction of the Gold Coast and Greater Western Sydney.

A sticking point in the negotiations has been a failure by Communications Minister Stephen Conroy to finalise an agreement with the AFL ensuring the best two home-and-away games of the week are protected for free-to-air networks.

The league's internet rights are also being sold, edging the full package towards the magical $1 billion mark.

"They're certainly going to get a healthy increase," one station boss said yesterday.

The current deal with Seven, Ten and Foxtel expires at the end of this year.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/b-afl-tv-rights-deal-could-be-just-weeks-away/story-e6frf9jf-1225994502803

[mightytiges]

One scenario would see rival broadcasters Channels 7, 9, 10 and Foxtel all sharing a slice of the action, with Nine continuing its push to pioneer a new Monday night timeslot.

The AFL's average crowd figure will fall already due to GWS and GC coming into the comp. It'll take a further knock with Monday night games as they won't attract crowds on a weeknight unless it's a one-off must see game.

The AFL is also keen on live broadcasts from 2012, despite Seven's preference to air the top-rating Better Homes and Gardens on Friday nights.

Free-to-air television stations would be permitted to show AFL games on their secondary digital channels for the first time.

The AFL has to demand live broadcasts as a given in any new tv deal. Ratings will go backwards if they accept anymore games on delay. More and more fans won't tolerate and wait to watch delayed games anymore. We saw that last year.

[WilliamPowell]

The AFL is also keen on live broadcasts from 2012, despite Seven's preference to air the top-rating Better Homes and Gardens on Friday nights.

I always find this Ch7/Better Homes and Gardens thing laughable

Channel 9 when they had the rights did the same thing on Friday nights - they never showed it live, what was it back then "Burke's Backyard"

Also, Channel 10 are allowed to show Saturday night games from Melb live but chose not to but it never gets mentioned

Bottom line is the AFL didn't demand live games this time because the $780mil on offer was more important to them than when the games were shown in AFL heartland

[Coach]

We get all games live in Tassie  

Missing the footy because of Better Homes & Gardens   that is unlucky fellas

[mightytiges]

The AFL is also keen on live broadcasts from 2012, despite Seven's preference to air the top-rating Better Homes and Gardens on Friday nights.

I always find this Ch7/Better Homes and Gardens thing laughable

Channel 9 when they had the rights did the same thing on Friday nights - they never showed it live, what was it back then "Burke's Backyard"

Also, Channel 10 are allowed to show Saturday night games from Melb live but chose not to but it never gets mentioned

Bottom line is the AFL didn't demand live games this time because the $780mil on offer was more important to them than when the games were shown in AFL heartland

True WP. Plus both the AFL and the networks took for granted that the public would wait to 8.30pm and watch the delayed coverage. However now more and more of the public are voting with their remotes and demanding live coverage of matches or they won't bother watching. It'll also help if they show less St Kilda and Essendon games on a Friday night boring people to death.

[wayne]

After finally getting a nice big full HD telly, and seeing the beauty of NBA and NFL in 1080i, part of the next deal should be that all games are shown in full HD.

[mightytiges]

After finally getting a nice big full HD telly, and seeing the beauty of NBA and NFL in 1080i, part of the next deal should be that all games are shown in full HD.

Usually Ch 10 shows their games both on TEN and ONE HD simultaneously.

[one-eyed]

TV rights deal appears close to being finalised
Jon Pierik
February 9, 2011

THE finish line in negotiations for the new AFL broadcasting rights appears in sight, with television executives hopeful a deal will be finalised by the start of the home-and-away season.

TV industry executives last night said negotiations were expected to intensify within a fortnight, with the view to signing off on a new five-year deal, beginning next year, by the time Carlton and Richmond clash on Thursday, March 24.

Contractually bound partners Seven and Ten are believed to be keen on retaining the status quo, with Seven to keep Friday-night and Sunday-afternoon matches, and Ten having back-to-back games on a Saturday.

However, it's unclear if all Friday-night matches will be shown live in Melbourne by Seven.

Nine is also in negotiations to reclaim the rights for the first time since 2006, although there has been speculation the network is only interested in ensuring Seven and Ten pay the maximum price.

Nine has previously said it was interested in broadcasting Monday-night matches, but rival executives have questioned the economics of this, particularly as Nine will soon be heavily involved in the renegotiation of rights for the National Rugby League.

Foxtel will have five matches per weekend under the new AFL deal from 2012 when a ninth game is held once Greater Western Sydney joins the competition.

Under the revamped anti-siphoning list, Foxtel can bid directly for matches and will set its sights on better quality fixtures. Under the previous rights, it had to buy the rights from the free-to-air networks.

''I would be surprised if something hasn't occurred by the start of the season,'' one TV executive said last night.

However, AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou told The Australian Financial Review this week: ''I've been hearing [a deal is] going to be done this week or next for some time now, but I don't think we've got to that stage,'' he said. ''I'd even say we haven't even got to the heavy-lifting stage yet.''

Demetriou's comments prompted Fusion Media strategist Steve Allen to suggest the AFL wanted discussions to continue because it ''seems like the networks might have the upper hand'' and the league may be struggling to secure the price it wants.

''When somebody wants negotiations to go on and on, they would want them to gerry up the price while the networks say this could be finished in a minute,'' Allen said.

''They [networks] are standing pretty firm, the way I read it. Demetriou wants to engineer extra competitive tension.''

The AFL is keen to pocket $1 billion for the new deal, up from $780 million. Discussions have been more complex this time for several reasons.

Where Seven had the first and last rights in 2006, this time that does not exist, meaning its first bid would appear to have to be spot on.

The new anti-siphoning list has also caused problems, with the Communications Minister Stephen Conroy yet to disclose the ''mechanism'' guaranteeing the best matches will be seen on free-to-air on Friday and Saturday nights.

This mechanism will also allow matches involving West Australian and South Australian teams to be shown live on free-to-air in their home states, perhaps on the new digital channels.

The revamped Ten board, now featuring media moguls James Packer and Lachlan Murdoch, and mining magnate Gina Rinehart, along with the private equity involvement in Seven and Nine has also meant that, as one executive put it, decisions were more ''highly processed''.

Allen said securing the rights could be difficult for Nine. ''The problem for Nine is they can't go back to the way it was 10 or 12 years ago when they used to play AFL in the south and NRL in the north. Neither code will accept that any more because both are trying to get into each other's territory. By our calculations Nine is making a killing on the NRL but we doubt whether AFL is that profitable to Seven, Ten or pay-TV.''

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/tv-rights-deal-appears-close-to-being-finalised-20110208-1alm8.html

[one-eyed]

Friday footy set to remain on delay with Channel 7 screening Better Homes and Gardens
Michael Warner
Herald Sun
February 24, 2011

FOOTY fans face another five years of delayed Friday night TV broadcasts.

As the AFL closes in on a new TV rights deal expected to top $1 billion, Channel 7 is refusing to give in to pressure to sacrifice top-rating Better Homes & Gardens and show footy live.

Final bid documents are yet to be lodged, but the AFL has stopped short of making live broadcasts compulsory in the next contract, which runs from 2012-16.

Seven and the AFL were tight-lipped last night, but a source close to the deal said: "They (Seven) want to be able to decide whether to go live or on delay. They want that right."

AFL boss Andrew Demetriou has made no secret of his anger at Seven's decision not to go live in recent seasons.

He said in November: "I don't think people want replays or delays ... hopefully Channel 7 will get into the 21st century."

But any non-negotiable demand from the AFL to Seven could cost the league a hefty slice of its windfall.

The AFL is eyeing a payday of more than $1 billion - up from $780 million under the existing deal.

Blue-chip Friday and Saturday night matches have been shown on delays of up to an hour by Seven and Ten to the anger of fans.

Seven's coverage of last Friday night's NAB Cup triple-header between Essendon, St Kilda and Brisbane at Etihad Stadium was shown on a 70-minute delay.

Better Homes & Gardens, which aired as the footy began, is one of Australia's most successful TV shows.

It has won eight Logies and has an average national audience of 1.2 million.

New federal anti-siphoning laws announced late last year will allow broadcasters to air AFL games on secondary digital channels.

However, it is doubtful that Seven would be willing to screen the football and Better Homes & Gardens at the same time.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/friday-footy-set-to-remain-on-delay/story-e6frf9jf-1226011034385

[one-eyed]

AFL needs to sweeten next TV deal if it wants to go live on Friday night
Mike Sheahan
Herald Sun
February 24, 2011

OF course the Seven network wants to preserve and extend the status quo.

Why would a network, any network, want to tamper in any way with an arrangement that guarantees fours hours of high-rating, prime-time television on Friday nights for the best part of 30 weeks?

That's what the traditional Better Homes & Gardens-Friday night football package gives Seven for at least one more season, with an ever-so-gentle leaning towards the notion of live coverage of two or three blockbuster fixtures.

No, if we are finally to get live football on Friday night every week, the AFL is going to have to concede a slice of the rights generated by the Friday night component.

The AFL is aiming at $200m a year for the five years 2012-16. Friday night live might mean it has to settle for $950m over the journey.

While the Andrew Demetriou administration hardly has a history of passing up money-making opportunities, the main man has offered some hope of a meaningful compromise.

"The world is demanding to see sport live, that's just what's happening," Demetriou told the Herald Sun.

"My view hasn't changed ... you can't stop the tide coming in."

In November last year, Demetriou had made his view clear.

"I don't think people want replays or delays. Everything in the world is instantaneous. You can get it online, you can get it on your phone, so hopefully Channel 7 will get into the 21st century," Demetriou said.

In that mock self-effacing way of his, he said last night: "Given I'm not that persuasive, I'll just do my best."

Actually, he has the power to drag Seven into the 21st century on live football.

In simple terms, the AFL is offering the television networks the rights to show its product: eight games most weekends this year and nine next year when the league expands to 18 teams.

It sets the terms and conditions. If it deems certain conditions non-negotiable, such as live coverage, and there's a price to pay, so be it.

It was farcical last Friday night to see the triple-header between Essendon, St Kilda and the Brisbane Lions in the NAB Cup shown on Seven on a 70-minute delay.

The AFL knows the majority of its constituents want live coverage of games, particularly Friday nights.

There is no issue that inflames emotions on a regular basis as live coverage does.

Despite the Nine network's cheeky expression of interest in the next round of media rights, the present arrangement is expected to continue in the agreement currently being negotiated - two games for the Seven and 10 networks, five games for Fox Sports.

The rights are expected to be decided within 4-6 weeks.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-needs-to-sweeten-next-tv-deal-if-it-wants-to-go-live-on-friday-night/story-e6frf9jf-1226010959915

[Penelope]

Whats wrong with their second station?

surely the ratings for reruns of Bewitched are not good 

[one-eyed]

Foxtel could end up with 6 games a week according to Caro...

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/pay-tv-push-for-more-matches-20110224-1b755.html


$1b TV goal hinges on Nine making a play for the tv rights as the new head of Ch 9 in Sydney, Jeff Browne,  is a former AFL lawyer and unlike so many other suits at Nine's Sydney headquarters, Browne will not turn up his nose at the "southern game".

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/b-tv-goal-hinges-on-nine/story-e6frf9jf-1226011650222