How do you draw that conclusion?

I think it bodes well for the NRL in negotiations with Foxsports.

Fantastic figures for HAL ... NRL's highest ratings around 4x HAL's highest ratings (for a match featuring 2 teams nowhere near the top of the table).

If NRL is expecting $1b in TV revenue ... we can start forming good comparative data to forecast HAL's likely value.

Then we also add the National Team's value on top.

My figures suggest 60-$80m p.a. for HAL & 10-15m p.a. for all NT matches (men, u17, u20, u23, women, futsal, beach)

I'll be interested in knowing how many people across Asia (Including Australia) watched the game. Surely 1 Million+ is likely to have watched the game due to Tokyo's population being 30 Million + people.

Potential drawing audience. Perhaps I should have said good for the A-League and FFA in the upcoming negotiations, as opposed to WS specifically.

Did you factor in that the NRL has 50% more games in its season than the A-League? Then there is the fact that the NRL grand final is by far the biggest grand final audience when the 1m+ regional audience and 700k NZ audience is taken into account.

Edited by gyfox: 8/3/2012 10:03:49 PM

Best make it good then. Just get help from fig, put your two heads together and you never know what you can come up with.

Firstly, perhaps it would help if you didn't pick two random weekly top rating games from each. (BTW, the first weeks nrl ratings only had Saturday's 3 games)

Find the average weekly ratings and compare them. Choosing only the top of each leaves the 4 other live weekly games swinging in the air and out of calculations
along with the further 3 delayed telecast nrl games. And as Gyfox mentioned, include the higher amount of nrl games.

Don't forget to add to the calculation the fact the nrl contract includes both a Paytv and a prime time, primary FTA channel, contract sum.

Add the fact the nrl broadcast rights bidding is extremely competitive with several fta stations and paytv fighting it out in a sellers market.

The NRL had 74 of the top 100 rating paytv programmes last season. The nearest was afl with 14 of the top 100. (football had one) Weekly paytv average (mean) of 255k.

NRL had an average (mean) weekly fta rating of 900k. (metro only) Each SOO game are in the top 10 rated fta programmes annually. (last season averaging approx. 3.5 mill. metro only) The GF rated approx. 2 mill. (metro only)

(sources - Astra Tvtonight Mediaspy)

I hope that helps gather good comparative date. Putting an extra head together with your two can only be a positive.

So skeptic what would you believe the FFA's media deal will be, that would have to include HAL, National Teams & also the international broadcast right that fox gets to sell, last time they sold it all to WSG for $40m (from memory)

Just curious as you seem to have a good knowledge about the broadcast rights.

Edited by danp638: 9/3/2012 02:06:57 PM

No, i have an average knowledge of ratings and associated items that anyone can have, just by looking.

An upper limit in the vicinity of 40-45k per annum in total, from the present approx. 21 mill. total per annum. IMO, the bottom falling out of Socceroo ratings will hurt, as well as still not having any realistic market competition, giving Fox the upper hand in bargaining, once again. ect ect. A 'successful' transition to fta when and if it's ready is vital to not only exposure but more importantly providing market competition that others enjoy for broadcast rights. Kinda like being the lone bidder at an auction or hotly contested bidding for a desirable item.

If League are able to get $500 mill out of Fox over 5 years for games getting 300k a pop in ratings, then the FFA might get $100 mill over 5 years for games getting 60k a pop.

That would be a reasonable estimate I believe.

$500 million included FTA, with ratings well beyond 300K.
Furthermore, they weren't getting 300K 5 years ago - there weren't enough subscriptions for that
Not sure whether national team was included in the tv rights package

I'm talking about the NRL getting $500 mill from Fox for Fox content in the new deal (and getting extra from FTA for FTA content, but I've excluded that for the purpose of the exercise).

If the NRL are going to get $500 mill from Fox for average ratings of around 300k, then the FFA will get $100 mill from Fox for average ratings of around 60.

Nationals, SOO, semi finals and Gf weren't included in paytv deal.

I've been speaking to media analysts and they're putting a valuation on the HAL broadcast rights at $50-70m p.a. and NT games are being valued at $10-15m p.a.

The valuations have been derived from revenue potential from the FFA selling "pay-per view" games of HAL directly via a dedicated HAL.com.au broadcast channel that will stream games live to internet-enabled TVs, PCs, laptops & all hand-held devices.

The competitive tension for Foxtel will not be from FTA TV but from alternative subscription sports broadcasting platforms.

NOTE: If the anti-siphon laws force NT matches onto FTA TV, the media analysts are suggesting the NT matches alone will fetch in excess of $20m p.a. on FTA TV.

And as a savy, two brained man should be aware, the Smith report strongly recommended they remain on paytv. And I'll bet you one of your two heads to my $1, they do remain.

So, it's changed from,



To,



In less than 24 hours? Now that's a quick turnaround in double quick time.

Edited by skeptic: 9/3/2012 05:13:58 PM

Election year to coincide with the new NT deal and, from my experience, people's voices resonate a bit louder in the halls of Canberra during an election year.

With Mark Abib likely to be involved in discussions on behalf of the FFA & Australia's biggest media buyer, Howard Mitchell assisting the FFA with its broadcast rights negotiations ... all looking good if you're a football fan.

Of course, if you're not a football fan .. .who gives a stuff what you think?

Oh, figjoe, how you clutch at straws in double quick time has me doubling over in multiple fits of laughter.

@ skeptic

Yesterday's figures for HAL are my estimations; today's figures are just a repeat of what I've been told.

I think the analysts are underestimating the revenue potential from HAL being sold on pay-per view ... to the whole world.

Where did you hear these guys will be helping the FFA?
On your TV deal estimates, I hope your right, we need the money badly.
And the quicker the better, hopefully they wrap up these negotiations quick smart.

Yes, Figjoe, my double dear lads, i believe you. Twice, in fact.

Rumours about Mark Abib's assisting the FFA have been flying through Twitter-space since Abib's resignation from Federal Parliament was announced.

And, the rumours gained traction with this article in the SMH early this week.

It was mentioned at the MVFC Members' forum that Harold Mitchell was assisting the FFA with its TV rights negotiations and the MVFC delegates seemed extremely confident we'll get a very good deal (a FTA TV component was unanimously supported by Members & MVFC reps seemed to agree)

He wasn't too upbeat less than 12 months ago.

http://www.smh.com.au/sport/a-league/aleague-rights-facing-relegation-mitchell-20110504-1e8kz.html

He is on record stating, if things are done correctly: "The soccer rights should be a $100 million a year sport by 2013".

I'm willing to concede $100m p.a. may be excessive ... but, Harold Mitchell is Australia's media expert.

Edited by Joe Davola: 9/3/2012 06:45:22 PM

And followed by, also on record



And it's really set the paytv world on fire since those comments in 2008.

Edited by skeptic: 9/3/2012 07:06:45 PM

Those comments are outdated & he might have made those statements out of self-interest.
FFA should be aiming for $50m/year. I think at a stretch we might get $60m/year.
It is clear as day that Foxtel got the rights for an absolute steal in 2006 & they are worth alot more than $20m/year.

Harold Mitchell was wrong, and he has admitted as much since he made those outlandish predictions.

People just need to follow these numbers very carefully.

League will get $500 mill from Fox for 5 games per round, which will rate 300k per match.

If A-League is rating 60k per match, that will translate to $100 mill over 5 years - even less if the A-League go to 9 teams.

The rights for teams below the Socceroos are worth nothing, and even for the Socceroos, you might be able to squeeze an extra $10 mill over 5 years, but how could they possibly squeeze more? We're talking about occasional socceroo games that get 80k to 150k - it's hardly setting the world on fire. In other words, one round of NRL would get the equivalent ratings of 12 Socceroo games.

The socceroos games that get the valuable ratings, like WC and Asian Cup games, the rights are NOT owned by the FFA.

fuck off Barkly

@ Mister Football

You are so far off the mark it's not funny.

Right now, the FFA could broadcast all HAL matches LIVE to 90% of Aussie households on a pay-per view basis for about 1/3 the cost that Foxtel charges for annual subscriptions.

By dealing directly with their customers, the HAL will generate revenues right now of $30-50m p.a.

And, most importantly, the HAL game streamed directly to the customers can be viewed anywhere in the world.

By contrast, Foxtel can only be viewed in one room of the one house that owns the Foxtel licence. Too bad if you have Foxtel but are at a friend's house for a dinner; or at your holiday house; or overseas on business, etc. etc.

In the next five years (or 10 years for that matter) I don't think anything will surpass what TV will pay for broadcasting rights.

I can't accept that you could generate $50 mill per annum on a pay per view business model, certainly not in the next decade.

Clubs are currently generating, in total, about $20 mill in membership revenue per annum - hard to see the league generate more than that on a pay per view basis.



Edited by Mister Football: 10/3/2012 09:45:06 AM

? They could, they do, they will or they won't? Doing away with paytv? What do or will fox think of removing their exclusivity?



Explain please. Right now? When did they start, have fox commented? What happened/happens to the fox contract?



What are you talking about in all your comments? Possible, probable or rhetorical? Plans by the ffa?

A complete altering of the football broadcast landscape? Removal of all or exclusive paytv rights with web streaming as the principle broadcaster and earner?

Paytv subscribers will do away with subscriptions and only use football web streaming? Or will they pay for web streaming over and above their paytv subscription if they want to watch other sports and programming? Aleague/football viewers only use paytv to watch aleague/football, so they'll naturally want to get rid of it and watch streaming for a lesser price?

Good point, and one that gets lost very easily when people talk about TV rights and the massive ratings of the other codes.
It'd be good to know what ratings NRL games were getting on Fox 5 years ago, when they got their $500m deal!!!
I'll see if I can dig up some figures.