Broadcast options for Australian Rugby

[Lorenzo]

I reckon the big FTA push would better coincide with a revamped product that people might actually follow.

What good is putting Super, a competition that many fox subscribing rugby die hard don't even bother with anymore, on FTA if no one is going to watch it anyway? Seems to me it will just further alienate possible converts that are open to watching a decent product.

 

[Joe King]

That's the thing; the whole rugby boat has been sinking in very significant part because product quality and product relevance and code competitiveness (vs other winter codes) have all been sinking.

The Super Rugby format is a bust (here, anyway), the Aust Super teams are getting slowly worse and we win or get very close to winning Super Rugby all too rarely (and the NZ teams are getting further and further ahead of us), the Wallabies are a pale shadow of their last glory days, there are very few truly exciting players in the main teams, the mainline sports media is saying to millennials 'that code is dead man, why bother'.

Each of these decline ramps is now feeding all the others; the vibe of an emerging death spiral for pro rugby in Australia is starting to feel real.

Thinking that as crucial to all this is more FTA exposure is getting the whole strategic diagnostic terribly wrong - instead we have to heavily prioritise developing a product of sufficient quality that excites an identified market niches or niches, executing on that, and then and only then worry hard re what media channels such as FTA make the most sense to present it on.

What does that look like in your opinion?

 

[Dan54]

FTA helps grow the game. Yes we need to address the quality issues and start putting better performance out there but look at the growth the Melbourne Storm has has since their games have become accessible on FTA TV. Granted they have performed to a high level to help turn casual observers into fans. When the only NRL games were broadcast in Melbourne at 3am they use to come to the primary schools give away a shit load of free tickets and still struggle to get 10k to the games. Now they average over 15k.

True Rebel, I realise it certainly helps pick up the casual observer that maybe just channel surfing etc, and it all helps. When I meant it wasn't the silver bullet, I certainly didn't mean I didn't think it would be good for the game. I actually think maybe give the rugby boards in each area a good chance to get more advertising dollars too.
Perhaps to top it off we need some real good performances by Aus teams, that when we get big results!

 

[Braveheart81]

I played all my junior rugby and never watched it as it was never on TV. Didn’t really get into super rugby until I got Foxtel as an adult. I paid for a rebels membership and didn’t really go in the early years of being a member. I think there would be a fair few who get drawn into watching it.

Also with the timing of super rugby you would get blokes check it out in the early season as there is no AFL or NRL

It's a bit of a different situation in Victoria though with test matches generally being shown on delay on FTA historically (or potentially not at all) versus live in NSW/QLD/ACT.

So access was definitely more of an issue in Victoria (and other non-rugby heartland states) but I don't think the same exists on the east coast.

I just think that anyone thinking there will be a significant boost to the ratings purely by being on FTA is going to be left very disappointed.

 

[Rebel man]

It's a bit of a different situation in Victoria though with test matches generally being shown on delay on FTA historically (or potentially not at all) versus live in NSW/QLD/ACT.

So access was definitely more of an issue in Victoria (and other non-rugby heartland states) but I don't think the same exists on the east coast.

I just think that anyone thinking there will be a significant boost to the ratings purely by being on FTA is going to be left very disappointed.

The boost will come over time. They will pick up a few percent a year even now I have a mate who comes to the rugby with me but doesn’t have fox so just watches league on TV.

I don’t think going to FTA will see a massive spike in viewers but I do think we will see a gradual incline and hopefully if we get the World Cup we can invest the profits from that and the lions tour into grass roots rugby to help raise the standard of players coming through.

As someone has mentioned it before getting it on FTA is one thing but we also need to improve the standard of the product that is put out there

 

[Braveheart81]

The boost will come over time. They will pick up a few percent a year even now I have a mate who comes to the rugby with me but doesn’t have fox so just watches league on TV.

I don’t think going to FTA will see a massive spike in viewers but I do think we will see a gradual incline and hopefully if we get the World Cup we can invest the profits from that and the lions tour into grass roots rugby to help raise the standard of players coming through.

As someone has mentioned it before getting it on FTA is one thing but we also need to improve the standard of the product that is put out there

All of this comes back to dollars.

Previously there have been plenty who argue that those small incremental gains on FTA TV were worth sacrificing millions of dollars a year in revenue. I disagree strongly with that. They are worth something but not a lot (because sacrificing revenue will also decrease the quality of players we have producing the product).

We need to work out what the increased exposure is worth. We also need to make sure we don't overestimate it.

 

[Rob42]

All of this comes back to dollars.

Previously there have been plenty who argue that those small incremental gains on FTA TV were worth sacrificing millions of dollars a year in revenue. I disagree strongly with that. They are worth something but not a lot (because sacrificing revenue will also decrease the quality of players we have producing the product).

We need to work out what the increased exposure is worth. We also need to make sure we don't overestimate it.

I think a commitment to FTA is only worthwhile if the network involved can commit to heavy promotion of the games, something similar to what we see for AFL, NRL, or the cricket - not just the occasional advert or billboard, but heavy cross-promotion in other programs, etc. That's the only way we will build interest through FTA. And live games in prime-time. It's a big ask, and only Ten could offer it, since 7 and 9 are committed to their main codes. Just taking a replay of one match a week, or even live games, without the heavy promotion, is simply not worth it, as the A-League has shown.

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

I think a commitment to FTA is only worthwhile if the network involved can commit to heavy promotion of the games, something similar to what we see for AFL, NRL, or the cricket - not just the occasional advert or billboard, but heavy cross-promotion in other programs, etc. That's the only way we will build interest through FTA. And live games in prime-time. It's a big ask, and only Ten could offer it, since 7 and 9 are committed to their main codes. Just taking a replay of one match a week, or even live games, without the heavy promotion, is simply not worth it, as the A-League has shown.

Yeah, I would hope that if the likes of 10 got the rights they go the full Big Bash on it in regards to promotion and packaging. A much overlooked aspect to the fall away in viewership and even attendance of the BBL since moving across to 7/Foxtel is the minimal marketing that has been done. Certainly in comparison to it's time on 10 where it saw increasing attendance a much, much stronger ratings.

 

[Braveheart81]

I think a commitment to FTA is only worthwhile if the network involved can commit to heavy promotion of the games, something similar to what we see for AFL, NRL, or the cricket - not just the occasional advert or billboard, but heavy cross-promotion in other programs, etc. That's the only way we will build interest through FTA. And live games in prime-time. It's a big ask, and only Ten could offer it, since 7 and 9 are committed to their main codes. Just taking a replay of one match a week, or even live games, without the heavy promotion, is simply not worth it, as the A-League has shown.

I think this is still a bit of an unrealistic goal.

If you look at those big sports, the broadcast deals are an order of magnitude larger and so are the audiences (and presumably the advertising revenue the channel receives for slots in those broadcasts).

They promote the shit out of it because it reaps them a financial reward and a return on their investment.

The Big Bash has been declining ratings wise but there are sill averaging around 550k viewers tuning into every game (across Foxtel and 7). There's a lot more in it for the networks to incrementally boost that viewership.

 

[Rebel man]

Yeah, I would hope that if the likes of 10 got the rights they go the full Big Bash on it in regards to promotion and packaging. A much overlooked aspect to the fall away in viewership and even attendance of the BBL since moving across to 7/Foxtel is the minimal marketing that has been done. Certainly in comparison to it's time on 10 where it saw increasing attendance a much, much stronger ratings.

10 would be good as the understand how to help grow a product, 9 and 7 only take sports to make money off them. 10 got the big bash for a low price when there was no other demand for it and turned it into what it is today

 

[Strewthcobber]

The Big Bash was getting 350k and up to 450k on Foxtel when , which inspired Ten to pay $100m for the rights. That's the level of popularity and investment you need to get "the full Big Bash promotion and packaging".

Super Rugby games are around 50k on Fox at the moment.

I reckon we would be lucky to get 1/7 to 1/9 of the promotional effort

 

[Rebel man]

I think with a TV deal we are all coming at it from different angles. From the NSW and Qld fans you seem to mainly want to prioritise improving the product to win back lost fans where those coming from non traditional states are wanting a FTA deal to help grow the game.

I look at the work being done in Melbourne and the growth of junior rugby in the western suburbs and I see that as a potential to grow the Rebels brand on the back of that but they need a TV presence to help foster the connection between the junior players and the clubs and the west of Melbourne isn’t a rich area so the rates of Fox subscription will be low a FTA deal would give kids in that region access to Super Rugby. You are never going to attract more fans if people can’t see the game


I do agree though that we need to also work to raise the standards of Australian rugby so existing fans in NSW and Qld stop turning off and the lost fans come back to the game. How do we achieve this I am not to sure. The promising sign is the school boys and 20s look to be on an upwards trend so hopefully that can translate.

I think it’s time to let the South African and Argentinian teams go. All the place names should come back I would look to add two teams in the pacific islands and bring the Force back with the 5 NZ sides that would make a 12 team comp everyone plays each other twice and go from there.

The advantages would be every team plays each week all in a workable timezone for tv as you need consistency of content. Something the current model doesn’t offer. Everyone playing each other twice makes the competition fair you won’t end up with a scenario like you did a few years ago when they undefeated lions hosted the crusaders and got smoked. I would also look to bring back place names it helps create rivalries. If you market a game the the Waratahs v Reds or NSW v Queensland the second is going to get a more emotive response and draw more casual observers in

 

[Rebel man]

I think a commitment to FTA is only worthwhile if the network involved can commit to heavy promotion of the games, something similar to what we see for AFL, NRL, or the cricket - not just the occasional advert or billboard, but heavy cross-promotion in other programs, etc. That's the only way we will build interest through FTA. And live games in prime-time. It's a big ask, and only Ten could offer it, since 7 and 9 are committed to their main codes. Just taking a replay of one match a week, or even live games, without the heavy promotion, is simply not worth it, as the A-League has shown.

The Aleague is a very different beast for starters it’s everyone’s secondary competition. Everyone I know who supports it use to go because of the good match day experience but when it came following a side they were all a lot more invested in their EPL sides

 

[Rebel man]

All of this comes back to dollars.

Previously there have been plenty who argue that those small incremental gains on FTA TV were worth sacrificing millions of dollars a year in revenue. I disagree strongly with that. They are worth something but not a lot (because sacrificing revenue will also decrease the quality of players we have producing the product).

We need to work out what the increased exposure is worth. We also need to make sure we don't overestimate it.

I get what you are saying but I don’t agree if we keep it exclusive on pay the game will continue to lose viewers and the money will dry up with that

 

[Derpus]

I get what you are saying but I don’t agree if we keep it exclusive on pay the game will continue to lose viewers and the money will dry up with that

You are both right. If we keep it on pay the viewership is too small to maintain. If we sell to FTA the revenue is too small to maintain.

Fucked if you do - fucked if you don't.

 

[Braveheart81]

I definitely think you want that FTA exposure. You just can't overvalue it because I think the impact it will have will be slow and incremental.

If you take too much of a haircut financially the product you will have to sell will also diminish. It's a really hard balance.

What you certainly can't do is drastically reduce the broadcast revenue thinking that FTA exposure is going to increase the TV audience by a hundred thousand people a game and bring 5k more through the turnstiles to watch live.

 

[qwerty51]

I'm surprised this hasn't be suggested yet but what about a club game on Friday nights at 7:30 on FTA. Compete with the AFL/NRL big Friday night ratings on 9 and 7. Issue is only some grounds do appropriate lighting I think so would get similar teams every week

 

[mst]

I'm surprised this hasn't be suggested yet but what about a club game on Friday nights at 7:30 on FTA. Compete with the AFL/NRL big Friday night ratings on 9 and 7. Issue is only some grounds do appropriate lighting I think so would get similar teams every week

Compete? Lighting an issue?

You may wish to read the article at the below link. I doubt clubs games would even cover the cost of the getting the camera out to the games.

Last season [Shute Shield] attracted an average audience of 13,000 people on the free-to-air network's digital channel,

• During the season, the NRL on Nine has averaged 578,000 viewers per match
• On the Seven Network during the season, the AFL has an average match audience of 336,000 and an average broadcast audience of 511,000. (The difference being games show in 1 or 2 cities or shown in multiple cities at the same time). Over on Fox Footy and Fox Sports, the average match rating is 169,000.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-union/ratings-in-free-fall-the-truth-behind-shute-shield-tv-rights-deal-20200214-
p540x2.html

https://tvblackbox.com.au/page/2019...-as-afl-and-nrl-move-towards-thrilling-finals

 

[Lorenzo]

I'm not convinced that the current product is even worth putting on FTA, or that there will be a material benefit from doing so. Hell, it might even set Rugby back.

For all the hype about increased access, what is super rugby's current ratings amongst people that already have access to it at no marginal cost? There's circa 375k kayo subscribers and they can all watch it, and what, another million cable/Sat subscribers at least? My limited understanding of the current ratings are that the proportion of those people that bother to watch Super Rugby is in the region of 'fuck all.

Frankly I'd say we'd be better off getting the maximum cash, giving Rennie the resources he needs to maximise our chances of having a wallaby team that performs (for that is the best marketing strategy for the provincial comp) and spending the next 3 or 4 years neck deep in negotiations to build a product people will watch.

 

[Mr Wobbly]

The draw is going to be a massive issue for any FTA broadcaster. They are going to want consistency of product and they're not going to get it. They'll want to schedule a rugby show from say 7:00-9:30pm every Friday and/or Saturday night.

How can you build an audience if you don't have a game to show?

"Sorry, Channel 10 we don't have anything for you to televise for the next couple of weeks. Couldn't you just pop on a few re-runs of Friends for the next fortnight?"