They would have had to pay more for the streaming rights. They weren’t willing to pay for that. That’s the point.
The streaming rights should have been part of the deal, not separate. While free-to-air Seven is showing cricket, the 7Plus stream will be showing tattoo show repeats or something.
Streaming rights are treated separately for all programs. That’s why a few programs hadn’t been appearing on streaming services until recently. Seven could have had them if they paid for them.
1 Like
We can say what we think could or should happen til we are blue in the face, but at the end of the day, its up to CA what they are willing to offer and the networks to accept what is being offered. In my opinion, the FTA could have withdrawn all offers and force CA to come grovelling - If CA only had the Foxtel deal at $115 million a year ($690 million over 6 years), it would have pulled up $310 million short of the magic billion dollar figure.
As it is, Seven are paying $75 million cash and $7 million in contra each year, taking it to $82 million a year ($492 million for 6 years - so roughly what Nine were paying for their 5 year agreement 5 years ago)
But again I said they could have, but didn’t, so viewers end up with a dud deal. So as @JBar said, Seven could have offered more money for more content and they didnt. In this case it was the streaming rights. My guess is they could have paid more for ODIs and T20 Internationals, but again it appears they didn’t so therefore even if it wasnt intended by Foxtel initially by CA, Foxtel now have exclusive rights
3 Likes
New trailer for the upcoming Fox Cricket channel.
I wonder if the cost and logistics in juggling two simultaneous major sports coverages might be prohibitive. And if they can get some $$$ by selling the AO to Nine that would be welcomed I’m sure 
1 Like
I know the networks want to get a leg up on their competitors, but Nine are the last network, I would sell AO to, given they outbid Seven. If I was in Seven’s position, if the cricket conflicted with AO, I would either scene it on a secondary channel or offer to screen parts/days of AO on SBS or ABC (the days where Cricket and AO were on at the same time).
The third and least likely alternative would be to offer it to Ten instead of Nine, as Nine have the rights after the next AO and by selling it to Nine you would be selling them a product that would advantage them
Jeez they haven’t mucked around promoting this.
Surely Seven could sell it to Foxtel, there seems to be no rule against it. 
1 Like
I’ve read all the articles in the press today and I’m perplexed as to why cricket Australia were so desperate for foxtel to be involved and why they kept pushing away ten. Perhaps if they sat down with $960m deal they would have worked thorough it and got a bit more money out of CBS. That would’ve forced seven and foxtel hands. But it seems all along foxtel were the preferred bidder even after they bitterly walked away like children the week before.
And wow wee they managed to get $2m more out of seven.
And the article about the scraps is true … because it’s a scrappy deal that has a simulcast arrangement and no free streaming and no Australian ODIs or T20s. It’s really weird.
7 Likes
It’s not just a matter of what channel to use but all the behind the scenes and logistics to mount the coverage. They’re going to be up to their necks with cricket so i can see why they might want to offload tennis. Whether it be to 9 or 10 whatever, if the headline is correct it seems that 7 has no issue wanting to send it off to 9 for a price.
3 Likes
You may be right in that they might feel that Ten won’t just want to do a one-off series, but from a competitors perspective, if they have the resources to do so, Seven may just bite the bullet and try and screen both.
One has to question, whether they may try and on-sell the other tennis tournaments they have from late December through to the AO - especially if they were worried about the logistics and the costing of producing Cricket and Tennis over the Summer. The lower profile events (such as the Hopman Cup, Brisbane International, Sydney International and Kooyong Classic), I would expect them to try and offload first over the AO
Without the Australian Open who would buy them? They rate poorly.
But why would you keep lower profile events without the jewel event?
They wouldn’t. They’d get rid of them all. It’s just that the Australian Open is the thing people actually cares about hence why it’s being mentioned.
They wouldn’t. But you indicated they would probably sell them separately to The Australian Open. I reckon they probably won’t.
Agreed.
The Boxing Day and New Years tests interferes with the first two weeks in the “Summer of Tennis” . Are all those included in the AO package or are they sold separately?
Hopman Cup and Brisbane International are in the first two weeks of summer of tennis and are included in the AO package sold to Nine. The 2019 Australian Open is scheduled for January 14-27, meaning the Sydney International should be held on the week of January 6, and Hopman Cup / Brisbane International on the week of December 30 this year.
Didn’t the Sydney International rate well (for multi channel standards) on 7Two this year? Alex De Minaur?
Isn’t this the cricket thread? Adam Gilchrist?
3 Likes