With 59 matches scheduled, I would expect that the 16 exclusive matches will clash with a game that Seven are already airing. The 43 games that have matches exactly with the 43 games they had in the 2017/18 season.
CA said itâs the âlast 16â that are exclusive to Foxtel.
Meaning itâs convenient for Sevenâs Aus Open next year.
The finals are exclusive to Fox Sports?
No, Seven and Fox Sports will both show the BBL semi-finals and final.
Thanks.
Unpopular as the view may be, this is a decent deal for Seven. Only $15 million per year more than Nineâs paying for the tennis, and for more content too.
Crap deal for regular FTA viewers. Those of us complaining about Nineâs blokely commentary may have something new to complain about.
I read an article that claims that the anti-siphoning rules arenât anything to do with him, its up to CA, Foxtel and Seven to sort out.
In other words, he has no interest in helping the general public, just his business mate⌠to be that smells an air of corruption.
One can hope the ALP and Greens refers it over a possible breach.
It is claimed that Seven didnt want the ODIs, my guess would be Seven didnt want to pay more to get the ODIs
Why canât BBL be on 7, and tennis on 7Two and 7mate?
I am just saying if there isnt enough space in the schedule like when the Sydney International etc is on.
One event they wonât sacrifice is the Australian Open - especially the finals
There was an SMH article linked to here last night which explained how the deal was structured to âget aroundâ the anti-siphoning list - even though itâs extremely questionable:
The Australian today has basically a âplay-by-playâ on how the negotiations happened - some of the main points from it:
- When CA met with CBS in March, the Ten delegation made a âgood impressionâ and James Sunderland felt the rights were âtheres to loseâ
- Last week when it was reported that Foxtel âwalked awayâ from the negotiations, it was because they believed they were in exclusive negotiations but found out CA were also talking to Ten
- By Thursday, Foxtel and CA agreed on in principle terms for the Pay TV component of the deal. At 9pm that night, CA began an auction for the FTA component - Seven made an initial bid before increasing it to $75 million per year
^ âCBS made an 11th-hour Âattempt to save the deal, but stepped up too late in the game.â
So English is not a strong point for The Australian?
So Nine had already given up by this stage?
I believe that CA only agreed to it as they probably think that it will bring more people back to the ground for ODIs.
The fact is, at best an 1000 people trough the gates at each game, last season there were 5 ODIs - lets assume each patron spends $100 at the game (including ticket price). That would only be an extra $500,000 per season assuming 5 games are played each of the 6 years.
$3 million increase. My guess would be Sutherland is thinking larger crowd increases though
With Peever around, they were never âin the gameâ
If that statement is true, then there is all the proof that is needed to show that News Corp went to set about to intentionally breach the anti-siphoning legislation. Someone needs to take this to the High Court and have this contract set aside
Why is everyone saying the T20 format will die in these new rights? There is this competition called the BBL you realise so it will only be the ODI format that could die outâŚ
Insights into foxtel and news Corp negotiating tactics⌠they donât get it their way they walk away. Woeful business practice is evidenced there.
Ten clearly wanted something for their money to differentiate themselves so wouldnât pay what seven would. Sevens deal has no streaming and no exclusivity. So in essence itâs shit. Their arrogance is astounding. Pathetic really.
With 16 exclusive games to foxtel âŚthe bbl will be overall shit.
Because T20 is separate to BBL and will not be on free to air any more.
At least Seven will show the womenâs T20 internationals, itâs only menâs matches fans should be worried about.
Of course theyâll be 7:30 on Sunday night, on 7HDâŚ