10 having both AFL and cricket will be huge for the network
Why?
Or, Foxtel exec seeing the writing on the wall of being booted for losing the key AFL deal to Paramount and jumping shipâŚ
Thereâs a question I think unanswered is that if the AFL consider subscription television as a separate and apart service to SVOD services.
If they do, then perhaps you have a situation where a Ten/Paramount deal exists, but alongside it Foxtel get a subscription TV rights package that is linear platforms only, so their Satellite, Cable and IPTV service, but not web/app based streaming.
The recent IPL deal, while in a very different media environment, raises interesting questions about the future of âPay TVâ as the lead platform in a deal compared to SVOD, and how separate those can be.
3 Likes
I reckon if 10 fail to get AFL rights off 7, they should try to get Cricket. 7 will not be able to pay for AFL, Olympics and Cricket, even with Foxtel as sport rights are going up into 10, if not 11 figures.
4 Likes
I believe 7 & Fox will continue with AFL rights
3 Likes
Sounds like their personal preference.
10 used to do a great job at broadcasting the AFL. However, I would have no confidence in them after some of their last sporting efforts. I would much rather the one I know than the one I know that is currently inadequate.
2 Likes
Will not happen. 10 wonât want simulcast deals. Neither will 9.
Only 7/fox are wanting the status quo. Severely inadequate.
Fox think thereâs some sense of entitlement at the rights. Theyâre atrocious at how they do their deals. That Delaney is so arrogant.
5 Likes
It would definitely take time for 10 to build themselves back up if they did win the AFL rights. But thereâs nothing to say it canât be done if they invest and hire the right people.
Maybe itâll come with a proper revival of Sports Tonight instead of the half-effort we got a few years ago?
1 Like
I swear Delaneyâs name came up for the NRL job as well - the naming of potential AFL CEOs really jumped the shark when someone mentioned Josh Frydenberg recently.
Fox has previously said that their change in strategy when it comes to sport (jettisoning some sports) was about being in a position to keep the top-tier sports that they have - their challenge will be for these top-tier sports is that they need a FTA partner (and those options are limited.
The financial squeeze of bidding high and retaining the rights is possibly a slightly more desirable position than losing the rights and having to try and fill the hole it will leave with alternate content, the AFL coverage is a reasonable contributor to the number of eyeballs both broadcasters get.
Youâd have to think much like Ten wouldnât do a deal that excluded rights for P+, Fox is unlikely to do a deal that would exclude Kayo given its become a significant contributor to the growth of subscriber numbers for the group as a whole, but also is a closer representation of what the future looks like.
A single-sourced contract isnât that dramatically different from the status quo - it will still be in effect a simulcast arrangement and a number of the issues that people have with the current arrangement will still exist.
Simply having the rights to a sport is no longer enough of a drawcard for viewers - you have to provide a compelling reason for people to watch it. Sports also need to take a greater role in ensuring the broadcasters improve their coverage
4 Likes
My thought is more - is that even a possible outcome? Do the AFL just take offers and then work out what they have to sell afterwards - or do they have packages in mind that then the various operators bid for?
Previously I think that they quite obviously just got the broadcasters to figure it out - but this time around they seem to want to at least somewhat pre-determine what âpackagesâ they are selling while they try and craft something that Netflix/Amazon would be interested in buying in the hope of bumping up the prices.
I suppose Ten/Paramount could buy a âsubscription TVâ package, and either just not use it or make their own linear channel and work out carriage with Foxtel/Fetch - a channel like that probably needs to exist eventually to solve their issues getting Paramount+ into pubs and clubs.
As a Sydneysider, i donât think anyone here really cares for which channel and/or streaming sites the AFL will go to in a few years time 
But in all seriousness, i have come onto the streaming sites late, so i dont know a huge deal about them. But donât Nine and Stan have a big enough following? Going from the few sports i watch on Nine (NRL, tennis, Sports Sunday) and them promoting a whole lot of sports for Stan. They could be a frontrunner for the rights of the AFL - if Nine is interested in the game, that is.
As for 10, when they had the rights, they did a good job. But agree that times have changed since then. They sadly didnt promote/do a good job with the A-League. As for Paramount+, a late runner in a streaming sites, i hope people are now finally aware that they exist. And could be beneficial for the AFL.
2 Likes
Unfortunately its not the same 10 that we remember from 10 years ago. They have had a chance to prove they can do things properly with A League. Although I donât follow it closely or watch every match, the few times I have watched it has been below standards.
My prediction is that Foxtel will go for the lot including the Grand Final to be telecast live on Fox Footy. Seven will only screen Friday and Saturday night, two finals in week 1, one in weeks 2 & 3 and the Grand Final (simulcast with Fox) just to comply with the absolute minimum of government anti-siphoning laws.
1 Like
It sounds like there may be at least two packages this time (to split out a series of games) - but it doesnt appear to be based on how the games are shown (to try and attract the likes of Amazon & maybe Netflix).
The AFL (and other sports for that matter) are a little bit between a rock and a hard place - a combination of the anti-syphoning list and this almost Australian-only desire to keep pally with everyone means that itâs become incredibly difficult to move to the sort of packages weâre seeing sold for sports rights in other countries - there needs to be a shift from the networks as well that sharing needs to be a larger part, be that with other FTA networks, or some kind of subscription service (regardless of delivery method) - thatâs not to say there canât be levels of exclusivity or premium options.
The current arrangements while they work, represent an outdated view of how sports rights work in a modern world and Iâm not convinced that having effectively a single-source broadcaster is the answer either. There is real potential for everyone who has expressed interest (at least publically) to be part of a more modern approach to the rights, but I donât think the game nor those interested in the rights are mature enough to want to have that sort of arrangement.
This is behavour that not only we shouldnât be encouraging, but Iâd also imagine might attract the attention of competition regulators. Having a linear channel as you alternately suggest is a better option, but I canât imagine it would be something that many of these bidders would want to have to do.
3 Likes
What do you think 10 has done so badly sporting wise? I think the A-league was ok and the Grand Prix and Melbourne Cup were fine. I never, ever watch 7 Sport. Watch AFL on Kayo and their commentators are becoming almost as bad as Sevenâs. In fact I rarely watch Channel 7 but that is showing my predjudice. Would love 10 and Paramount+ to get the AFL but I donât think they will. I donât get the 10 âbashingâ on here (didnât say by you), sport and other programming. I donât think theyâre any worse than the other two commercial channels and I watch more of their programs than the other two.
3 Likes
I havenât watched a lot of games but the one I did watch had so many quality issues. There were commentators that werenât even speaking at times.
The same with the Melbourne Cup. 7 were a lot more invested and professional in the event. Personally I hate the idea we are still seeing horses race anyway and I believe it goes against a lot of what 10 stand for.
1 Like
What do you mean by this? Do you think 10 are more progressive than 7 and 9?
Yes.
Isnât that quite obvious?