Declining participation and ARU plans for the future

[barbarian]

I posted this on the TV ratings thread, but I think it deserves a bit more analysis here as a lot of discussion has been devoted on this thread to Free to Air TV deals.

The A-League is trying to do what rugby has dreamed of - pick up a lucrative FTA deal while maintaining its ties to Fox Sports. Unfortunately it has been far from straight forward, even for the 'juggernaut of Australian sport'.

While they have settled on an outcome with the ABC, it seems, it's still a very interesting case study in how difficult the TV sporting landscape is at the moment.

http://www.afr.com/business/media-and-marketing/tv/abc-firms-for-freetoair-soccer-rights-20170419-gvnv3y#ixzz4ejWJHo5o

A few key paragraphs:

Football Federation Australia has failed to entice the three commercial free-to-air television networks into bidding for A-League and Socceroos matches, leaving the ABC in the box seat to gain the rights.

Seven West Media, Nine Entertainment, Network Ten and current FTA rights holder SBS are understood to have not lodged an official bid with the FFA by last Thursday's deadline, having baulked at some FFA requirements such as having to pay Fox Sports $2 million in annual production costs.
The big three broadcasters are understood to have tried to broker a deal with the FFA but not for the price or terms the body wanted.

So essentially the FFA were lowballed by the big networks, which has left them with only the ABC. A key sticking point was a $2m production fee that Fox Sports requires, which would no doubt be required in Rugby too.

The proposed free-to-air deal is said to be worth about $2 million to the FFA, but will also require an additional $2 million to be paid by the free-to-air rights holder to Fox Sports for production.

The deal is expected to have one Saturday evening A-League match, to be simulcast with Fox Sports, some Socceroos 2022 World Cup qualifiers and friendlies, Matildas, W-League, club friendly matches and an expansion clause, allowing for new teams to enter the A-League. It may also include exhibition matches played in Australia featuring international teams.

While Nine, Ten and Seven are all understood to have mulled bids, the challenge for the commercial networks was the A-League match was not exclusive, did not have catch-up or replay rights and there are questions over which matches are included.

So after all the prognostications of big FTA $$$ (7-10m was quoted), the FFA seem to be only going to get $2m a year from the ABC.

Don't get me wrong, I think rugby would do well to explore something like this. And a Saturday night game on the ABC is much better than what we have at the moment.

But the idea that we can earn millions from FTA, and sever our ties with Fox Sports is clearly flawed. Especially given the current state of the game.
.

 

[p.Tah]

Is the ABC paying Foxsports the $2m for production costs?

If so, that'll go down well given the cost cutting and redundancies.

 

[Joe King]

barbarian, what do you think about getting the NRC of FTA?

Would it be easier than Super Rugby?

I realise that it would actually cost the ARU to do so, but would it be worth it?

I know the ideal to have the NRC as another revenue stream to have a larger pool of players training full-time in Oz, but could this be a case of one step back, two steps forward in the long term.

We think of it as the 'third tier', but really, it's the tier below the Wallabies at that time of year.

Anyway, I'm just wondering how many casual TV watches there are, who might watch the league on Friday night, just because it's on, but then see there's rugby on another channel and check it out.

If channel 10 had it, they could advertise it along side the Wallabies.

It's not the ideal option, but it could at least make a fairly exciting brand of rugby, played on a national scale, more accessible.

Who knows? Might make it a bit more valuable in a few years.

 

[Braveheart81]

Is the ABC paying Foxsports the $2m for production costs?

If so, that'll go down well given the cost cutting and redundancies.

The asking price is reportedly $2m a year to FFA and $2m a year to Foxsports. I agree that there is likely to be a fair amount of public resistance to the ABC paying that amid huge cuts elsewhere.

 

[wamberal]

The ARC was on FTA, of course. ABC2 IIRC.


Cost a lot of money, I believe.


Getting the NRC or something similar on FTA is obviously essential. How, which channel might be interested, how much would it cost?


If only we had supported the ARC, and stuck with it, it might actually have built into some kind of product by now.

 

[kiap]

If they get the ABC to pay $4m (2+2) per year, it is still a pretty good result.

Soccer's current deal is $40m per year. One simulcast A-League match a week (non-exclusive and no replay rights or digital rights) and they refill 10 per cent of the bucket.

I think Rugby would love to be live on FTA and getting paid for it.

The main interest will be what FFA get for their subscription tv number.

 

[Braveheart81]

Getting one game a week of NRC (probably Sunday afternoon) on a secondary FTA channel simulcast with Foxsports would probably be a good deal.

Unlike Super Rugby, where simulcasting the prime time Saturday night game would represent a huge reduction in the value to Foxsports, one game of NRC wouldn't (a. because there's little value to begin with, and b. it will hopefully help attract viewers to Foxsports).

 

[wamberal]

If only Rupert would take over TEN. He wanted to at one stage.

 

[Strewthcobber]

The main interest will be what FFA get for their subscription tv number.

Announced late last year.....

FOOTBALL FEDERATION AUSTRALIA has announced a new $346 million, six-year TV deal that will accelerate growth of the game across the country.
FOX SPORTS, Foxtel and News Corp Australia will partner with the FFA to provide football fans with comprehensive coverage across all devices.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Getting one game a week of NRC (probably Sunday afternoon) on a secondary FTA channel simulcast with Foxsports would probably be a good deal.

Unlike Super Rugby, where simulcasting the prime time Saturday night game would represent a huge reduction in the value to Foxsports, one game of NRC wouldn't (a. because there's little value to begin with, and b. it will hopefully help attract viewers to Foxsports).

$2m a year from the taxpayer would make it pretty easy to convince Foxtel to allow a simulcast..................

 

[kiap]

Announced late last year...

Ah, thanks!

So adding the ABC (if it eventuates) should take them to around $60m a year.

I like it.

 

[Braveheart81]

$2m a year from the taxpayer would make it pretty easy to convince Foxtel to allow a simulcast......

Not for the Saturday night Super Rugby game though. From Foxsports perspective, that is where a huge amount of their value lies as it is on average the most watched game for them. The deal also wouldn't likely work like that for Super Rugby. Foxsports to my knowledge have no onsale rights so they wouldn't get to pocket $2m.

If the ABC paid some of broadcast costs to simulcast an NRC game however, that would be win/win for everyone I'd guess.

 

[kiap]

Saturday night Super Rugby game though. From Foxsports perspective, that is where a huge amount of their value lies as it is on average the most watched game for them.

Goes to show what an absolute abortion the Supe scheduling has been.

No prime time Saturday nite game on the Easter long weekend, <ignore me> or on Sunday.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Not for the Saturday night Super Rugby game though. From Foxsports perspective, that is where a huge amount of their value lies as it is on average the most watched game for them. The deal also wouldn't likely work like that for Super Rugby. Foxsports to my knowledge have no onsale rights so they wouldn't get to pocket $2m.

If the ABC paid some of broadcast costs to simulcast an NRC game however, that would be win/win for everyone I'd guess.

Foxtel onsell the rights to the Super Rugby replay on Ten and all of the Wallaby games so they could probably do it if the price was right and they wanted it to happen. Having said that I don't think there's any desire for just about anyone (commercially) to make a live simulcast of Super Rugby happen.

 

[Braveheart81]

Goes to show what an absolute abortion the Supe scheduling has been.

No prime time Saturday nite game on the Easter long weekend, <ignore me> or on Sunday.

A couple of weeks earlier people were complaining because there was no Friday night game because the Waratahs were playing on Sunday.

I think traditionally the Easter weekend rates poorly because so many people go away so maybe it wasn't a bad thing with two of the Aussie teams having a bye?

 

[barbarian]

Ah, thanks!

So adding the ABC (if it eventuates) should take them to around $60m a year.

I like it.

Worth noting that's about what the ARU gets right now. Think it was $65m in 2016.
.

 

[barbarian]

barbarian, what do you think about getting the NRC of FTA?

Would it be easier than Super Rugby?
.

I think Braveheart was on the money. One match a week on One/11/7Two or something would be a good start.

It might even get onto the main channel if the timing is right (like Sunday arvo).

The issue is it has no marketability for a FTA broadcaster. Shute Shield at least has tradition, NRC has no big names, no tradition. It's a tough sell but it's something we should try to do for sure.
.

 

[RugbyReg]

Why not SBS? They'll be looking for content now.

They've covered rugby in the past?

 

[kiap]

Why not SBS? They'll be looking for content now.

They've covered rugby in the past?

Cheika, Kepu, Latu, Sio, Timani, Kuridrani, Genia, Ala'alatoa, Naivalu … look at all these non-schkippy names.

But we need Adam Korczak to get a call-up to seal the deal.

 

[kiap]

Worth noting that's about what the ARU gets right now. Think it was $65m in 2016.
.

It's good given neither the A-League or Soup really rates.

While not apples with apples, even the Shute can get 100k on FTA after they pay their entry ticket.

What I'd like to know, in both deals, is how much attributes to the test matches.