S15 TV Deal

[RugbyReg]

THE Australian Rugby Union's rationale for introducing private equity into its Super rugby teams could be undermined if rumours of it gaining a significant boost from its cut of the sale of SANZAR broadcast rights prove correct.

Informed sources have told The Australian that the ARU's income from television rights could increase by anywhere from 25-50 per cent on what it took away from the 2005 broadcast deal.

The bullish estimates arise not just as a result of SANZAR's decision to expand Super rugby to a 15-team competition in 2011, which will mean not just 33 per cent more product but more product of a highly desirable nature, with two derbies to be played each weekend of the conference phase of the tournament.

But, for the first time, Fox Sports could be facing a serious challenge from a free-to-air network, with Ten apparently keen to grab the Super 15 rights for its high definition sports channel.

The channel is aggressively pursuing top-line sport, having already secured the rights to the 2010 Delhi and 2014 Glasgow Commonwealth Games, Formula One motor racing, the Indian Premier League

Twenty20cricket as well as to swimming and netball.

At the end of June, the SANZAR partners, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand, submitted their broadcast proposal to News Corporation (publisher of The Australian), which has 60 days in which to respond. The deadline is less than a fortnight away.

It is understood that if News significantly increases its offer from the $US323million it paid under the last broadcast deal, the ARU - which received 28 per cent of the total then but stands to take one-third of the new agreement after South Africa struck a separate deal for the sale of its Currie Cup and June inbound Tests - will stick with its current broadcast partners.

But if the offer at the end of the month falls short of expectations, the ARU now has the option of going to the market and exploiting the competitive tension between Fox and One HD.

Neither Fox spokesman Tony Sinclair nor his Ten/One counterpart, Jeanette McLoughlin, would discuss the Super rugby TV rights issue.

If the broadcast deal does deliver a windfall to the ARU, the union's argument for introducing private equity would lose much of its strength. Certainly, it would encounter real resistance from the states if it attempts to force them down the private equity route by cutting off entirely or even scaling down its current annual $4.3m allocations to the Waratahs, Reds, Brumbies and Western Force.

Reportedly, the ARU's cut of TV rights last year amounted to $22.8m, with a further $2.2m earned by hedging on the exchange rates, the contract having been settled in US dollars.

Even a modest 20 per cent rise in broadcast income would amount to an extra $5m, which would allow the ARU to pay its annual allocations to the existing Super teams as well as to the new Melbourne franchise and still have $3.5m in reserve.

The more revenue generated by the sale of broadcast rights, the less sway the ARU would have as it attempts to sell the private equity idea to the already reluctant states.

GO TO TEN (ONE)! GO TO TEN (ONE)!!

It would be great to get Super Rugby on free to air.

 

[cyclopath]

It would be geat, as long as they show it "properly", and not just the Aus games then the others whenever they have time. Or on delay like they did on 7 in the past.

 

[Moses]

It'd be nice to have it on FTA, provided they show all the games and no ads during play.

Unfortunately it means I'd have to get a set top box to see One, but that's ok.. currently I can watch it through the PC which is fine cause there's rarely anything on it that interests me..

 

[Blue]

Just invested in a very nice small flat screen with HD for my office. The retailers are desperate. The same unit was easily 25% dearer when I last looked.Set up boxes are dirt cheap anyways and you can pick up a steal on ebay.

Go Ten.

As long as they invest in proper commentary, analysis and get a couple of good magazine programs to go with it.

Rugby is the poor third cousin on Fox so as long as it's not an ad fest and we see all the games it can only be good.

Let's face it, anything beats listening to Greg Clarke. I'd hope Kafer moves though.

 

[Aussie D]

I remember ten's coverage before super rugby began and they did a tremendous job lifting the profile of rugby. I'd be very happy if ten wins the coverage as they won't go about it in a half0arsed fashion as seven have done.

 

[Moses]

Didn't 10 have RWC 2007?
That was pretty ordinary, every time the ball was kicked out or a try was scored they went to a cheeky commercial, then when they returned the ball was up the other end of the field.

 

[TOCC]

whilst 10 did a pretty poor job on the 2007 RWC, i wouldnt worry to much about it, especially with the One channel they have changed it quite significantly how they deal with sport.

 

[Pfitzy]

Or on delay like they did on 7 in the past.

:lmao: Loved that - the idiots at 7 would show a game on delay at like 11PM on a Friday or Saturday night, then whinge because no-one watched it :lmao: That said, they weren't allowed to broadcast it simultaneous to the Fox coverage due to anti-competition laws I believe. In any case, fuck off 7 you useless shower of bastards!

GO ONE! GO ONE! GO ONE! GO ONE! No issues with delayed coverage there unless the competitor agreements still stand, but better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

 

[Lindommer]

The delayed coverage on FTA television was due to a contractual arrangement between Foxtel and SANZAR: Foxtel stipulated there was to be no broadcast of rugby in the 90 minutes following its broadcast. Seven got the shits with sending a complete broadcast crew (Gordon, Handy et al and their massive appetites) for very little return as few people were inclined to stay up and watch Super rugby at 11:00pm. So they stopped it.

We can only hope and pray the ARU and/or SANZAR stand up to Fox and insist on a modicum of rugby on FTA television. Funnily enough, it's been proved a bit of play on FTA television whets viewers' appetites to go for more on pay TV.

 

[RugbyReg]

We can only hope and pray the ARU and/or SANZAR stand up to Fox and insist on a modicum of rugby on FTA television. Funnily enough, it's been proved a bit of play on FTA television whets viewers' appetites to go for more on pay TV.

thats only relevant if Fox win the rights. If they don't, and ten snag them, then there's nothing them from playing them whenever they want. Which I would think would be life on ONE.

 

[cheezel]

My problem with One getting getting it is that each state will have different programming. Down here in Victoria the pricks are more likely to play reruns of AFL or even the TAC at peak times leaving me to wait up till after midnight to see a game that was on hours earlier.