Broadcast options for Australian Rugby

[Rob42]

How interesting that Foxtel announces that it's considering increasing its "free-to-air" footprint, just when RA shows that it's serious about FTA coverage. One might almost think Foxtel were interested in rugby.

I don't like the idea of just picking up some "Kayo Free" coverage of Super Rugby though. We would do much better with a Saturday night game on 9, especially if 9 agrees to providing contra in terms of promotion.

 

[dru]

How interesting that Foxtel announces that it's considering increasing its "free-to-air" footprint, just when RA shows that it's serious about FTA coverage. One might almost think Foxtel were interested in rugby.

I don't like the idea of just picking up some "Kayo Free" coverage of Super Rugby though. We would do much better with a Saturday night game on 9, especially if 9 agrees to providing contra in terms of promotion.

Agree. Free coverage on Kayo might be fine for a minority. But getting mainstream exposure on 9 is a thousand fold more beneficial.

I’m happy to see the end of albatross that has been Foxtel. You only stick if there is overwhelmingly commercial reasons to do so. The only relationship matters here are entirely one way and negative.

 

[spikhaza]

Surely the only possible reason Foxtel is even being considered as an option is the immediate cash injection it would bring. Just get on the phone to Twiggy and tell him to cough up

 

[Adam84]

My only concern with the 9 bid, is whether 9 will even broadcast Super Rugby on their main channel, or bump it onto one of the secondary channels which receive significantly less viewers.

 

[Penguin]

My only concern with the 9 bid, is whether 9 will even broadcast Super Rugby on their main channel, or bump it onto one of the secondary channels which receive significantly less viewers.

It'd be bumped for sure. Won't be in HD & will have some commentator that has no clue on the game, like Hadley ala 2011 World Cup.

 

[Adam84]

Comes as no surprise and it’s entirely in Ch 9s rights to bump it off the main channels, but it is a big consideration when assessing the value of the FTA component

However, no assurances have been given that each Saturday night match would be shown on Nine's main channel. While Nine currently has a hole in its Saturday night offering through the winter months, the industry sources said the broadcaster would decide whether the match is played on its main channel or one of its alternate options on a week-to-week basis based on the teams playing and the performance of the sport overall.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-...t-of-foxtel-s-rights-bid-20201022-p567p1.html

Nine want all rugby Union coverage exclusively, which is a positive IMO, the more content the likelihood of larger investment in things like commentators.

If Nine is the successful bidder, it wants to become the one-stop shop for all Wallabies matches in Australia - including their Spring Tour fixtures. Those matches are currently sold by the host unions such as England and France - not RA.
The Tests have in recent years been shown on beIN Sports and have been picked up by SBS, as incumbent free-to-air broadcaster Network Ten have shown little interest in the early morning matches.
Nine want RA to help broker the deal between the broadcaster and European unions to ensure all Wallabies Tests are run exclusively on the media and publishing company's platforms.

 

[footy1>31]

It'd be bumped for sure. Won't be in HD & will have some commentator that has no clue on the game, like Hadley ala 2011 World Cup.

It'd be in HD surely on the digital platform 9Now (or Stan)

 

[Rugbynutter39]

My only concern with the 9 bid, is whether 9 will even broadcast Super Rugby on their main channel, or bump it onto one of the secondary channels which receive significantly less viewers.

This concern is not only valid but likely. Chicken and egg - super rugby does not have viewer numbers to get on prime time on main channel (which means would need arvo game at best to get on main channel) but if don’t get on main channel don’t get exposure to grow interest - the vicious circle.

To me we need a game changer like massive private equity investment and big bash style competition where get big names, marketing spend etc so nine prepared to give more exposure - I know - but it’s nice to dream

 

[Rob42]

I think we need to back Super Rugby to make its case to be on the main channel. This Saturday night, if it was on 9Gem, it would be up against "Kinky Boots" on the main channel. If it can't beat that level of programming, then we should probably gratefully accept the offerings of the Foxtel overlords.

 

[Derpus]

Agree. Free coverage on Kayo might be fine for a minority. But getting mainstream exposure on 9 is a thousand fold more beneficial.

I’m happy to see the end of albatross that has been Foxtel. You only stick if there is overwhelmingly commercial reasons to do so. The only relationship matters here are entirely one way and negative.

The more I think about it, the more skeptical I am of the benefits of some minimal free to air time from either Kayo or 9 (unless 9 go all in with the marketing and pump it up for prime-time main channel TV which i very much doubt).

The main thing is just to get away from Fox who are bastards.

 

[Derpus]

I think we need to back Super Rugby to make its case to be on the main channel. This Saturday night, if it was on 9Gem, it would be up against "Kinky Boots" on the main channel. If it can't beat that level of programming, then we should probably gratefully accept the offerings of the Foxtel overlords.

Still likely has a broader target demographic, tbh.

 

[Rob42]

Can anyone provide a few example Saturday evening ratings results for 9? It seems to always be second or third run movies. What sort of numbers would Super Rugby need to compete there?

 

[Braveheart81]

This Saturday night, if it was on 9Gem, it would be up against "Kinky Boots" on the main channel. If it can't beat that level of programming, then we should probably gratefully accept the offerings of the Foxtel overlords.

It probably wouldn't.

I think that it would be almost a certainty that Nine would put Super Rugby on a secondary channel. I don't really think that's a significant issue. The concept that you're going to draw in a meaningful number of viewers who were just flicking channels is a furphy in my view. Likewise, if you're scrolling through channels, they don't go in order of the main channels then secondary channels.

 

[Braveheart81]

Can anyone provide a few example Saturday evening ratings results for 9? It seems to always be second or third run movies. What sort of numbers would Super Rugby need to compete there?

Going back to before Saturday night NRL finals, Channel 9 had the movie Downsizing on Saturday night and it got a capital cities rating of 243k. https://tvtonight.com.au/2020/09/saturday-5-September-2020.html

 

[hoggy]

I think we need to back Super Rugby to make its case to be on the main channel. This Saturday night, if it was on 9Gem, it would be up against "Kinky Boots" on the main channel. If it can't beat that level of programming, then we should probably gratefully accept the offerings of the Foxtel overlords.

The game needs to define what product it is presenting first before making its case. What is Super Rugby? because they are selling something that actually doesn't exist, is this a TT comp or domestic league followed by champions league, a tad more than minor details.

 

[Derpus]

Nah - they need to secure funding before they can determine the specifics of what the product will look like. 9 are buying what was already pitched by RA, which was basically just 'whatever Super Rugby ends up looking like'.

The main product with value is always the test matches.

 

[Bandar]

I still much prefer the 9/Stan offer, I know it is a bit less but someone at home with nothing to do a a Saturday will turn on the TV and scroll through the options and may tune in - on the other hand even free Kayo needs someone to know it's on and how to stream it before they will tune in.

 

[Braveheart81]

I know it is a bit less but someone at home with nothing to do a a Saturday will turn on the TV and scroll through the options and may tune in.

Trying to quantify this is a big part of the equation in my view.

What is the dollar difference and is it worth that? If we're talking about a couple of thousand viewers nationally each week between a FTA game on a Nine Channel vs a free game on Kayo and also Fox Sports then it's probably not worth $5m a year. If it's a smaller dollar value and more viewers then maybe it is.

The game needs to define what product it is presenting first before making its case. What is Super Rugby? because they are selling something that actually doesn't exist, is this a TT comp or domestic league followed by champions league, a tad more than minor details.

The majority of the purchase price is for test rugby which is what rates significantly higher. I don't think the parties bidding really care that much about what exactly the product is below because it isn't going to shift the cost significantly.

I would guess they are factoring in 2021 being the same format as 2020 with uncertainty after that.

 

[Rob42]

Trying to quantify this is a big part of the equation in my view.

What is the dollar difference and is it worth that? If we're talking about a couple of thousand viewers nationally each week between a FTA game on a Nine Channel vs a free game on Kayo and also Fox Sports then it's probably not worth $5m a year. If it's a smaller dollar value and more viewers then maybe it is.




The majority of the purchase price is for test rugby which is what rates significantly higher. I don't think the parties bidding really care that much about what exactly the product is below because it isn't going to shift the cost significantly.

I would guess they are factoring in 2021 being the same format as 2020 with uncertainty after that.

Thanks for the ratings BH, so yes, it's going to be secondary channel for the foreseeable future. But what I like about the Nine option is the room for growth - if current non-supporters find a reason to become interested in rugby, for whatever reason, it's easy to put a game in front of them to watch, it's already there on 9. Whereas Foxtel has always been that blockage to easy access for casual viewers.

I thought 2021 was almost certainly going to be SRAU followed by trans-tasman matches? I thought that was what NZR agreed to in order to get the All Blacks out of quarantine by Christmas. Topic for another forum.

 

[Derpus]

Trying to quantify this is a big part of the equation in my view.

What is the dollar difference and is it worth that? If we're talking about a couple of thousand viewers nationally each week between a FTA game on a Nine Channel vs a free game on Kayo and also Fox Sports then it's probably not worth $5m a year. If it's a smaller dollar value and more viewers then maybe it is.

A better measure would be the theoretical rate of growth in those viewers on an FTA channel - given the primary reason for shifting to FTA is growth in viewership.

It would be acceptable - even expected - to start from a relatively low base among FTA viewers.