This is nonsense. Streaming is easier to set up than foxtel boxes with all the cables. My elderly parents find streaming much better and easier than foxtel.
Foxtel is on a cable cutting agenda with the IQ5 and will be a completely streaming company in the future.
They have ruined sports broadcasting in this country with their ongoing demands for these pathetic simulcast deals. Exclusivity to platforms and one media company owning all the rights to use on all its outlets is much preferred overall.
while I note the sarcasm and I appreciate that high speed internet access can be limiting outside of the major cities (gosh, even inside some of the cities it is still problematic!), the thinking that older people canât navigate streaming services is not entirely fair and I think a bit of a stereotype. They can be more tech savvy then we give them credit for, especially since the pandemic which pushed them onto using online tools for communication/shopping/etc.
My Grandma who is 90 uses had uses a modern day mobile phone daily with perfect ease and also uses a computer regularly. Some old people can be very tech savvy.
Not to mention there would still be 4-5 games a week live on 10 if paramount+ had the rights.
Arguably having it under one roof will enable games to be interchangeable in various markets and the ratings would increase with exclusivity on one platform.
The second part of thatâs a really good point imo. Can tailor the games covered on FTA in each market more easily if everythingâs under the one umbrella company.
And I know youâre very much in the 10/P+ camp but the first point is baseless speculation.
The AFL have said theyâll maintain at least the same FTA as currently. Thatâs about 3.5 games a week on average across the home and away season. With Thursday Nights looking at becoming permanent I would speculate that it would be 4 games a week FTA in the new deal.
Thatâs good to know, didnât realise the AFL had said it.
Imo there needs to be the 4 games per week on FTA no matter who gets it, with a free stream available. Having 4 every second week with no streaming presence doesnât cut it.
I think there is a big risk with these âall-inâ (FTA & Sub with effectively one broadcaster) deals that the number of live FTA games could be reduced in some markets (if not nationally) to make the subscription side more attractive. I really doubt weâre going to see more games on FTA under these deals.
Meanwhile its exactly these deals that have forced the FTA broadcasters to lift their game and improve the quality and availablity of their broadcasts.
Agree. I raised this point on here previously. The more games being steamed on P+ means the higher they can charge subscription fees - like every other media organisation, all they care about is making as much $$ as possible. Streaming is the future so itâs time we move along with it.
I think weâll only see 3 games a week on FTA at the very most under a 10/P+ deal.
My understanding using encryption would breach their use of the spectrum they now occupy. More so now as spectrum leasing costs have been cut to next to nothing in recent years so as to prop up the FTA business model in Australia.
The current setup on P+ is rubbish, its ridiculously difficult to find which A League games are on, whereas on Foxtel I can go straight to a dedicated AFL channel.
This article is nothing more than attempt by News Corp to prop up foxtel in the negotiations. Itâs propaganda based on selected statistics. Expect this to ramp up over the next few months as fox seeks to destroy competitors through it itâs newspapers and scare the AFL. Nothing more than a fear campaign.