Even if they bought 10 in hindsight they have locked the league in for 6 years with Foxtel. Instead of signing a deal where Queensland would get BR games, WA PG games, SA AU games, Vic MV or MC games and NSW SFC or WSW games each week they choose "marquee showcase" games, as they like to say.

They are trying to create an army of Yoshis who support the A-League, instead of fans who support clubs. 

This isn't like the AFL where all the Local teams in SA, WA, QLD and NSW get all their home games on Free to air.

That's because they are greedy and put money first. Money that should go to the clubs anyway.

Saturday night games will still rate crap in Qld, WA & SA if their teams aren't playing.

Still waiting, 

although it does sound as though not much tax-payers money was wasted last night

But that could happen, especially during the Summer.

according to this, the ABC were never a realistic chance. warning: this is an article from a murdoch rag. 

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/football/a-league/teams/sydney/ffa-disappointed-with-abc2s-coverage-of-liverpool-v-sydney-fc-which-fans-deemed-disastrous/news-story/b05e2a0873c93bf3d8149868826812a3

So far no broadcaster has been signed for the two Arsenal games against Sydney FC and Western Sydney in July, with the value of such games having fallen from almost $1m paid by Channel Seven for Liverpool against Melbourne Victory in 2013 to effectively zero.

Maybe this is a sign that we are finally getting tired of these sorts of games.

A sign of maturity.

In one sense, given it's a fairly frivolous game, who cares how the ABC handled it?  It's not as if it was a serious game or anything.  I mean, LFC showed scant regard for the game, why should anyone else care?.

I guess we can conclude from the above that ch 7 isn't interested in broadcasting football.

So nobody (including Foxtel) wanted to pay a measly $80k for the rights to last night - perhaps 'fixture fatigue'? When Liverpool came out to play the Victory, it was special - now it's every off-season.

On the other hand, I'd be dismayed if ABC spent $1k on last night's production, let alone $80k....

Thinking about that DT article, if $80k in production costs is enough to put off an FTA covering Liverpool, a team likely to attract a bigger audience than your average A-League game, we start to get an inkling as to why all the commercial FTAs do not want to pay $2 mill in production costs to broadcast the A-League for one season.

In fact if the ABC, SBS, 7 and 9 are all out of contention, it's likely a broke 10 will be left broadcasting it, only because of its relationship with Foxtel - meaning no additional dollars are going back to the FFA.

A sign that even gullible Strayians are realising there's more to football than plastic and glitter

I think 72k at the ground says otherwise. More people than those who attended the derby. Very much a viable exercise

The networks are going to play hardball with the FFA who have become desperate. The TV component of these games might be dead. But the fixtures themselves are very much alive and a big event on the football calendar

I wouldn't mind seeing them go back to Fox

Free kick for Ten coverage as ABC likely to be booted

Alex Brosque raises the A-Laeague trophy in front of the Cove. Picture: Mark Evans
Ten Network is poised to snatch A-League and Socceroos matches from SBS if no more bidders come forward before a formal deadline this week, dealing a blow to the ABC’s hopes of gaining the television rights.

While Football Federation Australia and its adviser Adara Partner held talks with the ABC, it’s understood soccer administrators will knock back the public broadcaster’s bid.

It’s believed Seven West Media, Nine Entertainment Company, and SBS have not yet lodged an official bid with the FFA. The deadline falls on Wednesday.

The FFA is also set to reject other bids for rights. At least one telco is said to have expressed interest in buying streaming rights. The FFA declined to comment.

Pay-TV sports programming network Fox Sports has already signed a record six-year $346 million deal to broadcast matches on Foxtel from next season.

Under this deal, the free-to-air rights and Socceroos rights revert to Fox Sports for an extra $2m to $4m per year if the FFA does not sell the package to any other broadcaster. This allows Fox Sports to onsell the free-to-air rights to another broadcaster as it currently does with Nine and ­Socceroos matches.

It’s believed a deal is in place for Ten to pick up the rights in time for the 2017-18 season, which kicks off in October.

Foxtel, jointly owned by News Corp and Telstra, owns 13.91 per cent of Ten. Fox Sports is wholly owned by News Corp, publisher of The Australian.

News of the development comes after the ABC came under heavy criticism last week thanks to its calamitous coverage of a friendly match between A-League champions Sydney FC and ­English Premier League club ­Liverpool. The ABC’s broadcast, described by viewers as excruciating and embarrassing, prompted the FFA to express its disappointment in a statement.

“Like many fans, FFA is disappointed with some aspects of the ABC’s broadcast of the Sydney FC v Liverpool FC match last night,” the governing body said via its Twitter account. “Pre-game, half-time & post-game coverage wasn’t to standard expected by @FFA & football fans. We’ve made that point to ABC management.”

Although the FFA’s administrators are angry about the broadcast, which included a tacky whiteboard with cut-outs of players instead of graphic overlays, peculiar interviews and sound problems, sources insisted administrators had already made up their minds about the future of the free-to-air rights. For Ten, winning the rights is a major boost for the network after a recent uptick in ratings was overshadowed by a high-profile refinancing of the company’s $200m loan and disappointing half-year results.
A-league matches on Saturday evening are likely to be aired on Ten’s multichannels, taking the game to a potential new audience.

The three main commercial networks will now focus on broadcast rights for cricket.

A formal tender process is ­expected to start in the coming months, with the Big Bash League set to attract strong interest from all the broadcasters.

It comes after the AFL signed a $2.508 billion agreement with Seven, Foxtel and Telstra for six years, and the NRL clinched a $1.8bn five-year TV agreement with Nine, Fox Sports and Telstra.

The boom in sports rights ­reflects shifts in the TV industry as viewers watch more programs on demand, skipping ads.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/free-kick-for-ten-coverage-as-abc-likely-to-be-booted/news-story/c2d43cf3e958b3e422cfb9e04d76a6c1

better than nothing

It's emerged that the ABC was never really in with a show, which is understandable, as that would have been a major backward step.

Ten's close alignment with Fox always made them the front runner, and it was always going to be shown on a secondary channel.

Once again, even in this update, there is confusion as to how much Fox is paying to own the FTA rights.  Other articles have intimated that it's $2 million, and that may not even be in cash, but the cost of the production, meaning the FFA doesn't see any extra money.  If that weren't bad enough, I have a feeling the $346 mill six year deal actually includes the cost of production.

Not surprised.

Why is there so much false news around these rights. Are the FFA struggling?

More like when aren't the FFA struggling?

Going on to one of Channel 10's secondary channels is better than nothing - if ONE was still a sports channel it would've been the logical home for the game, but I'd probably feel more inclined to putting in on ELEVEN if it's not going to be on the main channel. That said, if TEN lose the BBL rights, there is nothing to stop them having the A-League on the main channel other than Masterchef and Bachelor reruns. Wishful thinking on my my behalf perhaps, but they have a bloody big hole to fill if they lose the BBL.

The streaming rights are interesting, with the news that only one telco is interested at the moment - one of either Telstra or Optus as Vodafone is a shambles. One could think it could be Telstra, especially after todays news of Telstra inking a deal with Foxtel to centralise sports broadcasting into two locations (Melbourne and Sydney). One would assume that, with the coverage being beamed into a central location, this would make it very easy for Telstra to then distribute a streaming product. Not to mention they already own the rights to AFL and NRL streaming, so the A-League/Socceroos would be the logical next step. On the other hand, Optus have shown a keen interest in football specifically, and despite some teething problems have a decent product, with popular content such as the EPL and World Cup already in their stable.

Ahhh remember the days when One HD was purely sports...

-PB

Sadly it was undercapitalised from the start, due to TEN being much smaller than NINE and SEVEN. If One HD had the financial clout of the other two to buy up the marquee sporting events than I think it would've been a success, instead it was left with the scraps that nobody else wanted. Perhaps if Foxtel owned a chunk of TEN during the One HD days, perhaps they could've used it as a platform to fulfill anti-siphoning requirements, and thus providing more sports for One HD without breaking the bank.

Yes they are struggling....

However the question needs to be asked ... why ... 

IMO all networks have shown a reluctance to bid for the rights and I don't think its because of FFA management... its far more risk adverse and anti Football folk at the networks... as for the ABC  you get the feelings its the marketing arm of the AFL & Netball ... consider womens Basketball huge international sport, mega stars, has had a national domestic competition for a while... Netball on the ABC gets so so so so much media and womens Basketball never gets a word...

Almost every story the ABC do on sport somehow they involve AFL & Netball... as for 7 & 9 they are so close to their existing sports IMO it would be a huge risk to go there...

What hurt most IMO was Optus pulling out of the bidding process ... it left only Fox and 10 .... as the relationship between FFA & SBS seems to be at a all time low ..

Yer FFA need the boot being sunk in for lots of things but IMO not over this as whoever was involved would have the same issues...  

Yes and No

Don't forget. The FFA didn't accept their own ratings on SBS so they pretty much stormed away from the network with 2 years left. They begged the main networks to pick them up and improve their ratings (apparently not knowing how TV ratings worked)

What we have learnt from all of this is that the SBS TV deal was bloody good. Twice what networks with money were willing to pay (despite reasoning to the contrary), no ads, predictable home of football, and Friday content to boot. The commentary is questionable but this changes over time and with any good negotiation

Instead a few egos had a tantrum and here we are. Perhaps when working with the NRL they were used to getting what they demanded because of the product, not the egos demanding it

With different people in charge we would have at least seen our TV deal out. And who knows, after 4 years of growth the ratings by now may have been 175k-200k instead of 150k-175k. We may well have been in a position to join a ratings battle

Agree

Was a mess from the start FFA gave the wrong games in season 1.... SBS refused change their broadcast style... 

I think FFA from season two provided decent games, but never the best ...always saved for Saturday night.

There was a complete break down between the two sides ... neither IMO come out looking good .... SBS spitting the dummy at the half way point was on their part childish ... as in all such things its no one single thing its management on both sides.

 Having said all this, it does not alter how the ABC, 7 & 9 operate ... as I posted imagine Basketball Australia, has had a womens league and plays major internationals go to the Olympics and 2 only talk about netball... 

Can't help but agree if FFA & SBS  hhhmmmmm had a different relationship ratings would have been better.... 

agreed

I love reading Midfielder rewrite history as though the rest of us live in bizarro world.

It wasn't SBS that spat the dummy.  It was David Gallop publicly bagging our FTA broadcast partner and telling everyone "we're looking elsewhere because all the FTA networks are practically banging down our door".

--crickets--

Then the SBS CEO returned fire by pointing out that SBS was actually losing money with every single game it broadcast. SBS was also given fairly crap games as well with all derbies etc locked away on Sat nights.  But don't tell MidF, he blames David Basheer.

Good points, it is worth recalling how it panned out.  SBS paid overs, Gallop bagged them out publicly and then started looking for another FTA, doing so publicly again, basically destroying a 35 year relationship football had had with SBS.

It's also worth reminding ourselves at one point SBS tried to give away the rights at a massive discount but there were no takers.

If channel 10 do what they did for the Big Bash then we will be in a fantastic position next tv rights deal. They should have marketing included as part of the deal

I'm not sure 10 did anything for the BBL.

The BBL was already averaging 300k ratings on Fox.  Ten was the only FTA to take a punt on BBL for a measly $20 mill per annum and were immediately onto a winner.

They didn't really need to do anything apart from taking a very low risk punt on it.

I saw billboards and advertising from 10 about it everywhere

This.

To say they 'should include advertising' you must be blind or willfully ignorant. Don't be dumb mister football.

Fox didn't need billboards to attract 300k ratings when they had the BBL, and the  jump from that to 1 mill for Ten on commercial FTA would not have relied on billboards either.

Yes they did. Thats why they paid for the advertising to be swamped everywhere. Do you thing they felt like splashing millions to advertising companies?

Idiot.