miron mercedes
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 0
|
...and in a history making first ...Channel Nine News in Brisbane have just aired an interview with John Aloisi and Lopez ,our new signing, at the Roar headquarters at Logan . A little clip of players training and discussion of facing Tommy Oar in tomorrows season opener......I am guessing it will get a few more airings in later news bulletins......wonders will never cease .David Pourre must have some dirt on someone at Channel Nine !!!
|
|
|
|
aok
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Ten have some money behind them now that CBS owns them. It iwll be interested to see if they make a concerted effort with the HAL
|
|
|
Melbcityguy
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
TheSelectFew
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xTEN's first tweet about the A-League since August  Had to wait for "clean air" :laugh:
|
|
|
StiflersMom
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
that's one question answered this year
|
|
|
aufc_ole
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7K,
Visits: 0
|
+xTEN's first tweet about the A-League since August  Had to wait for "clean air"
|
|
|
P&R will fix it 2.0
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.8K,
Visits: 0
|
TEN's first tweet about the A-League since August
|
|
|
Oblivious Troll
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 737,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xEveryone say "Thank you Pauline" p and r will fix dat too "Pand R"? Please explain. Look you can't come out here to Straya and expect to have everything the same as the civil war racked, ethnically fractured country you left behind with a football comp that only one or possibly two clubs can ever hope to win can you? Next you'll be wanting to have women playing sport in burqas and getting compulsorily married to each other.
Its a game for everyone. Its not pale, male, or stale. It transcends race, gender, economic status. Its for everyone. - Tal Karp
|
|
|
StiflersMom
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xi think there wont be any FTA coverage this season just a normal day at the FFA and another SNAFU Snafu is a great word. I think the under-use of the word snafu, is actually a snafu. Wait and see, you never know, if the deal is already done it could still happen, could even be , with the new CBS streaming service, you might see a tussle for the rights , let's throw Optus in there also. Pigs also fly, but hey you got to be positive
|
|
|
Razor Ramon
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 884,
Visits: 0
|
+xEveryone say "Thank you Pauline" p and r will fix dat too
|
|
|
sanchez
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.2K,
Visits: 0
|
+xi think there wont be any FTA coverage this season just a normal day at the FFA and another SNAFU Snafu is a great word. I think the under-use of the word snafu, is actually a snafu.
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
+xSo Gallop got stooged by Murdoch into thinking he had CH 10 in the bag? Thoughts now that CBS have 10? looooooooooooooooooool -PB
|
|
|
FullBack4
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 697,
Visits: 0
|
i think there wont be any FTA coverage this season just a normal day at the FFA and another SNAFU
|
|
|
New_Dawn_Kiwi_Fan
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 0
|
So Gallop got stooged by Murdoch into thinking he had CH 10 in the bag? Thoughts now that CBS have 10?
|
|
|
And Everyone Blamed Clive
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.3K,
Visits: 0
|
Everyone say "Thank you Pauline"
Winner of Official 442 Comment of the day Award - 10th April 2017
|
|
|
Razor Ramon
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 884,
Visits: 0
|
+xFoxtel's $30m budget funding questioned after FOI reveals documents on sport deal 'don't exist' Federal communications department has refused to release details about $30 million in sports broadcasting funding given to Foxtel, because it says documents about the deal "do not exist".This year's Federal Budget includes a measure worth $30 million over four years to "support the broadcast of underrepresented sports on subscription television, including women's sports, niche sports, and sports with a high level of community involvement and participation".A freedom of information request filed by ABC Radio Melbourne's Mornings program, seeking correspondence and documents relating to the formulation of the measure, was declined on the basis of no such documents existing.In declining access, the Legal Director for the Department of Communications and the Arts "refuse(d) access to the requested documents under subsection 24A(1) of the FOI Act, as I am satisfied that documents falling within the scope of your request do not exist".Foxtel is owned by communications behemoths Telstra and News Corporation.The ABC has sought comment from Communications Minister Mitch Fifield.Foxtel has declined to comment.  Shareholder activist and journalist Stephen Mayne described the deal and lack of available documents as a "remarkable situation". "My best guess would be that because the free-to-air networks were all getting a licence fee cut in the budget and the Government wants to keep sweet with all of the media, that they didn't want to have an enemy in the Murdochs," he said. "So they just gave them $30 million and then had to come up with a reason so they've come up with this particular reason."In May, Mr Fifield was questioned about the deal during a Senate hearing.Labor Senator Anthony Chisholm ask why the money was not given to free-to-air broadcasters, given the aim was to increase the reach of such sports.Senator Fifield remarked the initiative could in fact increase the number of subscriptions, and he insisted there was not a direct correlation between access to free-to-air and viewership."Will you review this, what is a disgraceful decision, to enable more Australians to see these niche and women's sports?" Senator Chisholm asked."The Government has made its decision," Senator Fifield responded.Foxtel was available in 2.42 million homes at the end of last year, according to Roy Morgan Research.Their quarterly results, released in May, revealed their subscriber numbers had dropped 1 per cent from the same period a year ago. As you said, P and R will fix this.
|
|
|
StiflersMom
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
Using 10 to market your pay TV businesses, the carrot for sport administration is some fta exposure, smart
|
|
|
williamn
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.1K,
Visits: 0
|
from how this is all turning, wouldnt expect any advertising from channel 10 at all this season
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
If nobody else wants to bid for the products like Cricket etc then what else can they do? -PB
|
|
|
Angus
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.5K,
Visits: 0
|
"with a resourced Ten escaping receivership and able to continue televising one A-League game a week" Continue? They haven't done one yet.
|
|
|
aussie scott21
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
Race is on to stop News Corp running a sports rights monolopyShould Federal Parliament pass the media reforms that allow Lachlan Murdoch and Bruce Gordon to own Channel Ten, the cashed-up network can use its powers under existing anti-siphoning legislation, to acquire sports properties, leaving some on free-to-air TV and shutting others behind a paywall. For example, Ten/Fox could buy the rights to cricket tests, leaving the most popular two on Ten and forcing consumers to subscribe to Foxtel to watch the remaining Tests. A similar strategy occurred with V8 Supercars. Lachlan Murdoch could soon be the most powerful man in Australian sport. Photo: James Alcock.Soccer lovers will be the immediate beneficiary of a possible merged Ten/Foxtel entity, with a resourced Ten escaping receivership and able to continue televising one A-League game a week. The remaining games are shown on Fox Sports. Cricket similarly gains, but only in the short-term. All domestic cricket rights expire at the end of the coming summer. Ten's Big Bash rates well and Channel Nine is keen to secure a new five-year deal locked away by the end of the year, meaning Cricket Australia could reap a bonzana in a bidding war between a cash-enriched Ten and traditional rights holder, Nine. AFL and NRL have locked in contracts with free-to-air networks, Seven and Nine respectively, until 2022 and are not immediately impacted. While Ten also televises some Wallabies matches, including the Bledisloe Cup, all SANZAAR games are on Fox. AFL and NRL will probably be beneficiaries of a final, desperate bidding war in 2022 between channels Seven and Nine on the one hand and ultimate winners, the powerful Ten/Foxtel combine, when rights expire. Ten's power, as a free-to-air network taking advantage of anti-siphoning legislation, together with access to News Corporation's balance sheet, means it can outbid Seven and Nine. Therefore, given the importance of live sport to free-to-air networks, Seven and Nine could cease to be competitive for key sports rights after 2022. The AFL, NRL and cricket would be forced to go cap in hand to the Fox/Ten duopoly thereafter. A merger of Ten and Fox would also mean having the same commentary team for a game seen on both Ten and Fox, a considerable saving under the current NRL Nine/Fox deal where Fox pays Nine for simulcasts and provides its own commentary crew. A race is now on between the major sports having the capacity to stream their own games to subscribers and News Corporation becoming an effective monopoly, a single buyer of broadcasting rights. AFL is well-advanced on providing their own digital service to subscribers and the NRL has allocated $150 million over the next five years to similarly produce an online product to subscribers. However, there are questions in both codes over how to monetise the service. Assuming the NRL secured between 1.5 million and 2 million subscribers and charged them $10 a month for eight months, there would not be much left over, after production costs were met. Many NRL clubs oppose the $30 million a year investment in a digital service, yet to surrender it now would be to hand the game back to News Corporation in 10 years. It's no surprise News Corporation publications are already questioning whether the NRL's own media outlet will be sufficiently brave to serve up "atrocity" stories. Australia risks following the same path as New Zealand and Britain where, without anti-siphoning legislation, minimal sport is shown on free-to-air TV. In New Zealand, the key sports are behind a paywall on either Sky or BT. Rugby league in Britain was initially on the BBC but switched to Sky. Ratings declined, meaning the next pay TV deal was considerably lower. Only 35 per cent of households in Australia have pay TV where News Corporation holds a monopoly.
Race is on to stop News Corp running a sports rights monolopy
|
|
|
azzaMVFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.3K,
Visits: 0
|
I like that Bruce Gordon is involved. Hope to see another personal push for WIN Stadium to be hosting games. Bring in the Wolves.
|
|
|
walnuts
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
Ten takeover by Lachlan Murdoch and Bruce Gordon gets ACCC green lightThe competition watchdog has announced that it will not oppose a proposed bid for the Ten Network by current shareholders Bruce Gordon and Lachlan Murdoch. Mr Gordon, through his private company Birketu, and Lachlan Murdoch, through his investment vehicle Illyria, have proposed to jointly buy out Ten, taking a 50 per cent share each. Birketu currently owns about 15 per cent of Ten's shares, while Illyria owns 7.44 per cent. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) said it does not believe allowing the two men to completely take control of the network would substantially lessen competition in any particular media market. That is despite ACCC chairman Rod Sim's acknowledgement that it would lessen "competition via a greater alignment of Mr Murdoch's, Mr Gordon's and Ten's interests." The ACCC's relative ambivalence towards the deal is partly because Mr Gordon's WIN TV and Ten are broadcast within different geographic areas — the former is regional and the latter in large metro markets. However, the ACCC also addressed the issue of Lachlan Murdoch's involvement, given his position as co-chairman of News Corporation and executive chairman of 21st Century Fox, as well as his range of other media interests. "We considered whether the acquisition would significantly reduce competition, by causing a reduction in the quality and range of news content, or increasing the negotiation power of the combined Ten/Foxtel/News Corporation," the ACCC's chairman Rod Sims said in a statement. "On the issue of the effect on competition in the supply of news services, the ACCC took into consideration competition from news providers on other media platforms and in particular, the other free-to-air networks, given Seven and Nine have a stronger position in the market than Ten. "The ACCC also considered the effect on competition in the acquisition of sports rights and other types of content. "The parties will continue to face competition from the remaining free-to-air networks as well as streaming services for the acquisition of content." Regulator 'not oblivious' to Murdoch influence Other factors considered by the ACCC included Ten and Foxtel's existing joint venture to sell advertising on the networks, MCN. The regulator also considered the Murdoch family's large and growing dominance of the Australian media landscape. "The ACCC is not oblivious to the fact that significant influence can be exerted through partial shareholdings and family connections, however the ACCC did take into consideration that this is a proposed 50 per cent acquisition by Illyria," Mr Sims said. "Even though incentives to compete may be weakened if the proposed acquisition proceeds, Ten and Foxtel/News Corporation will remain competitors in a number of markets and will be subject to our competition laws which prevent them from making anti-competitive agreements." In the end, the ACCC said the language of its legislation sets a fairly high bar to reject mergers and acquisitions, but it also hinted that any further concentration in Australian media would face even tougher scrutiny. "While this transaction will result in some reduction in diversity across the Australian media landscape, we have concluded it would not substantially lessen competition, which is the test the ACCC is required to assess acquisitions against," said Mr Sims. "The Australian media market is becoming increasingly concentrated and we will continue to closely examine future media mergers in light of the impact any future loss of competition may have on both choice and quality of news and content produced for Australian audiences." While the proposed takeover has the ACCC's green light, it will still need a change in media ownership laws, which currently prevent the transaction taking place. Before Mr Murdoch and Mr Gordon can legally takeover Ten, certain media ownership laws will first need to be changed. The first law, being the "two out of three rule", prevents an individual or a company owning a newspaper, TV station and radio station in the same licence area. Mr Murdoch currently owns radio and newspaper assets in markets where Ten gets broadcast. While Ten's latest problems are contemporary, the network has faced many hurdles during its lifespan of little over 50 years. If he were to take control of Ten, Mr Murdoch would then control all three forms of media - therefore breaching the "two-out-of-three rule". As for the "reach rule", it prohibits a single TV broadcaster from reaching more than 75 per cent of the population. This rule is a problem for Mr Gordon as he owns WIN Television, which broadcasts in regional areas. If Mr Gordon were to control Ten, his reach would extend to metropolitan areas which would put him in breach of the "reach rule". The Turnbull Government is seeking to overturn these rules with its media law reform bill, but it is currently stalled in the Senate, opposed by Labor, The Greens and much of the crossbench. The Government recently appeared to make some progress towards getting its media laws through the Senate, striking a deal with One Nation, but this deal antagonised a number of the other crossbenchers. As a temporary measure, the Government waived broadcasting licence fees for commercial free-to-air television and radio broadcasters last financial year. source
First hurdle overcome.
|
|
|
Crusader
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.8K,
Visits: 0
|
Still blaming everything on Abbott? Get with the times, blame it all on the Russians.
|
|
|
Oblivious Troll
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 737,
Visits: 0
|
+xFoxtel's $30m budget funding questioned after FOI reveals documents on sport deal 'don't exist' Federal communications department has refused to release details about $30 million in sports broadcasting funding given to Foxtel, because it says documents about the deal "do not exist".This year's Federal Budget includes a measure worth $30 million over four years to "support the broadcast of underrepresented sports on subscription television, including women's sports, niche sports, and sports with a high level of community involvement and participation".A freedom of information request filed by ABC Radio Melbourne's Mornings program, seeking correspondence and documents relating to the formulation of the measure, was declined on the basis of no such documents existing.In declining access, the Legal Director for the Department of Communications and the Arts "refuse(d) access to the requested documents under subsection 24A(1) of the FOI Act, as I am satisfied that documents falling within the scope of your request do not exist".Foxtel is owned by communications behemoths Telstra and News Corporation.The ABC has sought comment from Communications Minister Mitch Fifield.Foxtel has declined to comment.  Shareholder activist and journalist Stephen Mayne described the deal and lack of available documents as a "remarkable situation". "My best guess would be that because the free-to-air networks were all getting a licence fee cut in the budget and the Government wants to keep sweet with all of the media, that they didn't want to have an enemy in the Murdochs," he said. "So they just gave them $30 million and then had to come up with a reason so they've come up with this particular reason."In May, Mr Fifield was questioned about the deal during a Senate hearing.Labor Senator Anthony Chisholm ask why the money was not given to free-to-air broadcasters, given the aim was to increase the reach of such sports.Senator Fifield remarked the initiative could in fact increase the number of subscriptions, and he insisted there was not a direct correlation between access to free-to-air and viewership."Will you review this, what is a disgraceful decision, to enable more Australians to see these niche and women's sports?" Senator Chisholm asked."The Government has made its decision," Senator Fifield responded.Foxtel was available in 2.42 million homes at the end of last year, according to Roy Morgan Research.Their quarterly results, released in May, revealed their subscriber numbers had dropped 1 per cent from the same period a year ago. It's $30 million over four years ie. $7.5 million pa to broadcast underrepresented sports to the relatively small proportion of the population that both subscribes to Foxtel and is interested in such sports. This is bad enough. If they wanted to support these sports then the money should have gone to the ABC or SBS but of course the budget cuts imposed by Abbott forced the public broadcasters to sell of their OB units and make the crews redundant. The failure to provide any rational explanation and denial of the FOI request smacks of corruption on a Bjelke-Petersen scale. Save
Its a game for everyone. Its not pale, male, or stale. It transcends race, gender, economic status. Its for everyone. - Tal Karp
|
|
|
And Everyone Blamed Clive
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.3K,
Visits: 0
|
Foxtel's $30m budget funding questioned after FOI reveals documents on sport deal 'don't exist' Federal communications department has refused to release details about $30 million in sports broadcasting funding given to Foxtel, because it says documents about the deal "do not exist".This year's Federal Budget includes a measure worth $30 million over four years to "support the broadcast of underrepresented sports on subscription television, including women's sports, niche sports, and sports with a high level of community involvement and participation".A freedom of information request filed by ABC Radio Melbourne's Mornings program, seeking correspondence and documents relating to the formulation of the measure, was declined on the basis of no such documents existing.In declining access, the Legal Director for the Department of Communications and the Arts "refuse(d) access to the requested documents under subsection 24A(1) of the FOI Act, as I am satisfied that documents falling within the scope of your request do not exist".Foxtel is owned by communications behemoths Telstra and News Corporation.The ABC has sought comment from Communications Minister Mitch Fifield.Foxtel has declined to comment.  Shareholder activist and journalist Stephen Mayne described the deal and lack of available documents as a "remarkable situation". "My best guess would be that because the free-to-air networks were all getting a licence fee cut in the budget and the Government wants to keep sweet with all of the media, that they didn't want to have an enemy in the Murdochs," he said. "So they just gave them $30 million and then had to come up with a reason so they've come up with this particular reason."In May, Mr Fifield was questioned about the deal during a Senate hearing.Labor Senator Anthony Chisholm ask why the money was not given to free-to-air broadcasters, given the aim was to increase the reach of such sports.Senator Fifield remarked the initiative could in fact increase the number of subscriptions, and he insisted there was not a direct correlation between access to free-to-air and viewership."Will you review this, what is a disgraceful decision, to enable more Australians to see these niche and women's sports?" Senator Chisholm asked."The Government has made its decision," Senator Fifield responded.Foxtel was available in 2.42 million homes at the end of last year, according to Roy Morgan Research.Their quarterly results, released in May, revealed their subscriber numbers had dropped 1 per cent from the same period a year ago.
Winner of Official 442 Comment of the day Award - 10th April 2017
|
|
|
walnuts
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xFFA have sold off the international rights to a firm called IMG - sourceNo mention of streaming so I presume that is still in the pipeline - hopefully it gets announced soon. I do kinda worry about the length of the deals however, 6 years is a long time. Thanks for the heads up Walnuts. Six year is a very long time and our television rights' worth can vary heavily year to year on an international stage depending on what marquees we have. You would think that it would be a better a idea to sell them year to year. I don't think it has to be as drastic as every year, but certainly the time period should be halved to 3 years imo. But, the FFA have form have locking the game into long, onerous contracts, why should this be any different? lol
|
|
|
JoyfulPenguin
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 798,
Visits: 0
|
+xFFA have sold off the international rights to a firm called IMG - sourceNo mention of streaming so I presume that is still in the pipeline - hopefully it gets announced soon. I do kinda worry about the length of the deals however, 6 years is a long time. Thanks for the heads up Walnuts. Six year is a very long time and our television rights' worth can vary heavily year to year on an international stage depending on what marquees we have. You would think that it would be a better a idea to sell them year to year.
|
|
|
walnuts
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 10K,
Visits: 0
|
FFA have sold off the international rights to a firm called IMG - sourceNo mention of streaming so I presume that is still in the pipeline - hopefully it gets announced soon. I do kinda worry about the length of the deals however, 6 years is a long time.
|
|
|
milan_7
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.4K,
Visits: 0
|
With football now on ten please can we have Santo, Sam and Ed on FTA.
|
|
|