• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

The TV Broadcasting of Australian Rugby

Status
Not open for further replies.

p.Tah

John Thornett (49)
Don't worry, Nine are in deep trouble. They sold ACP for $500m yesterday. From an analyst quoted by the ABC:

"Nine was asking $600 million and they were adamant that they weren't going to sell if they didn't get their price. Well the word around the traps, what we're hearing is that it was $500 million," he observed.
"I think that indicates that Nine was pretty desperate to sell because they went into this deal carrying $2.8 billion in debt. They'll pay this $500 million or thereabouts to pay off the debt. Well they've still got $2.3 billion which has to be refinanced by February next year.
"The US hedge funds, who control about a billion dollars of it which will be about half of their debt, they will have the right to convert that into equity and they could well become the controllers of Australia's Nine Network."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-05/acp-magazine-sale-to-bauer/4243814
 

It is what it is

John Solomon (38)
For any of you watching the rugby league finals on Ch 9, note how poor a caller Ray Hadley is on television.
It's OK to call the play late on radio because there are no pictures, but he is regularly caught out on TV as he's so slow to keep up with player's names.
For further proof, catch Andrew Voss calling a game and it will be even more evident.
We forgive Rabbits Warren losing his skills as he's been so good, but notice how often Sterlo and Gould now come in with comments to help him through his errors.
Hadley has seen the end of Rabbits coming for some time and made his big play to be the No 1 caller at Voss' expense.
He has a long way to go.
 

Roundawhile

Billy Sheehan (19)
It wasn't just the decision to give it to nein, it was the TOTAL lack of conditions attached.
Why would you sell the rights knowing that even major test matches would not be shown live?
Why would you not have clauses to ensure that we could watch our game?

Simple answer - ARU absolute incompetence.
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
It wasn't just the decision to give it to nein, it was the TOTAL lack of conditions attached.
Why would you sell the rights knowing that even major test matches would not be shown live?
Why would you not have clauses to ensure that we could watch our game?

Simple answer - ARU absolute incompetence.



What conditions would you suggest? And which channel would buy the rights, under those conditions?


Let us hear your specific suggestions.



The ARU is pushing shite uphill with a pointed stick, just getting the internationals onto FTA. I hate to make the point here, I have made it elsewhere, fewer and fewer care about watching the game. It is a buyers' market, and the buyers can dictate terms. We have to take what we can get, which is not much. If you believe otherwise, please explain why. With examples.
 

matty_k

Peter Johnson (47)
Staff member
The only condition the ARU had to standby was if there is a conflict with prior commitments (i.e. League) then put it on Gem or Go.
 

Badger

Bill McLean (32)
FFS, should have expected Nein to show the NRL ahead of the rugby.

RE: granting of FTA rights to Nein - did the ARU have any say in this at all? I remember reading that both pay TV and FTA rights were sold to Foxtel and Foxtel then onsold FTA to Nein. If this is the case, then it doesn't surprise that Foxtel sold the FTA rights to Nein. So if you wanted to watch rugby guaranteed live then you would need Foxtel otherwise you are at the mercy of the Nein programmers.
 

kronic

John Solomon (38)
Conroy can provide exceptions to the laws at his discretion. As has been the case for the NRL, RWC and June tests.
 

Pedrolicus

Dick Tooth (41)
The anti siphoning laws just need to be scrapped. What were they thinking really. They're just used by networks as a smokescreen to show sport when it suits them and their thinly veiled collusion with pay tv. The law should just say that they can show live sport on whatever channel they choose but also replay it on their main channel within a certain time frame.

At the moment they can still show sports on their other channels they just need permission from the communications minister. I don't think anything's ever been knocked back so just scrap the law and cut out the red tape.
 

wamberal

Phil Kearns (64)
Channel Nein will do whatever is in their commercial interests. As would any other rational organisation.

If rugby internationals were rating well on FTA, there would be no problem.
 

Pedrolicus

Dick Tooth (41)
Channel Nein will do whatever is in their commercial interests. As would any other rational organisation.

They will try, then when they've pissed off enough people, they will come crying to the federal government for more money, because people become jaded with tv and resort to streaming. Ratings aren't everything. Time will tell what is in channel nine's "commercial interests".
 

qwerty51

Stirling Mortlock (74)
Channel Nein will do whatever is in their commercial interests. As would any other rational organisation.

If rugby internationals were rating well on FTA, there would be no problem.

You're right and this is probably the downside to having excellent coverage by Fox Sports. The NRL finals aren't live on Fox Sports so Nine gets those exclusive rights and has massive ratings. I'm sure it would be the same for internationals if Fox Sports didn't show them live either.
 
T

TOCC

Guest
If anything the ARU should have pushed for the game to kick off at 740 local so it was live to the eastern states at 940 and could have got a bump of viewers following on from the league.

would have appealed to the South African market more as well
 
T

TOCC

Guest
We can probably expect Ch9 to push the Wallabies v Argentina game on the Gold Coast back as well... Kickoff for that game is supposed to be 8pm AEST but i believe that will clash with the NRL semi's
 

Dan54

Tim Horan (67)
To be fair to nine, Foxtel may well have sold them the rights on condition they did have delayed coverage, helps keep their subsciptions up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top