Im sure SCA, Prime & WIN execs know how the US network / affiliate model works by and large. However Not so convinced they’re aware of that when US affiliates take network programming, they share the ad revenue with the networks however when they are local programming (news) they keep 100% of it for themselves.
I worked in US TV 8 years until I leaned of this. It wasn’t until I was kn a role that was distribution of marketing between the network and affiliates that I learned this.
Maybe they do know. If so I wonder why SCA , Prime or WIN has not taken this to the networks. It seems to be something that would be viewed very fairly from both sides: for the 23.5 hours a day we game your programming, we share the revenue. For the 1/2 a day we find our own programming: we keep the revenue to fund the programming
It would seem hard to see how this could be not seen as fair. Especially when a strong local news also benefits the network.
Tell me if I’m being stupid here: WIN shares all of its ad revenue for rights to air 9’s schedule, whether or not it airs that schedule. If that’s the case, yeah no, costly local programming gets even costlier to make. That is dumb, dumb, dumb.
Correct. WIN, SCA & Prime7 pay 50% of ALL as revenue to the network, that includes ad revenue booked in their own local news programming. When WIN runs MasterChef and hands over 50% of revenue to 10 - they are basically paying 10 for the programming
When WIN runs WIN News, they are paying twice for the programming: their own costs then 50% of revenue to 10.
The system makes no sense.
The system effectively de-incentives local news
Which is not good for viewers, affiliate groups or networks
The industry should really sit down and talk about this. It would be a win situation for all parties, viewers affiliates and networks
Live shot from the 7, 9 and 10 headquarters after hearing that:
sad but true. The networks should be barred from taking any revenue from regional programs unless they make them themselves, and encouraging more regional programs. But the major parties won’t change the law to make that happen. Sad but fucking true.
WIN is paying a premium to be affiliated with the top rating network.
WIN was believed to have been paying slightly less than 40% to Ten for programming in their last deal. SCA would be mad to hand Ten anywhere close to the 50% of revenue they paid Nine considering Ten’s programming attracts far fewer eyeballs and they’ll now be required to produce their own local content.
If I understand it correctly, US affiliates usually only agree to take certain hours from the network like primetime, usually the breakfast show, and national sports rights.
The rest they fill with their own programming. Often cities will have their own news bookending the breakfast show, local/national news from 4 to 6.30, and a late evening bulletin.
Big cities will have a lot of local content in the mornings and afternoon. Here in NYC, there’s local everything, which you’d expect in a market that spans 10+ million people.
As a market’s population density decreases there’s more syndicated content and advertorials during the day.
In the U.S., affiliates pay a fee for a network’s programming. Networks make some ad inventory available to affiliates to let local ads to ride off national programming and their ratings.
Affiliates have the option of pre-empting primetime network programming for breaking news or specials. Otherwise, they fill up daytime and the early evening fringe with local programming (lifestyle shows with advertorials or more newscasts) or syndicated programming. All provide local ad space in some way.
And then there are political seasons where stations make big money. They charge the lowest rate on their cards per law, but the volume more than makes up for it. It’s why syndies get replaced with news during election years - they own 100% of the ad revenue.
Now apparently in TV Blackbox, it was said that WIN would carry the Nine branding, and keep the WIN branding for local news and local idents. Anyone know if this is true?
Sadly I suspect that story was wrong. I looked back at Nine’s affiliation announcement this year and from 2016; the SCA one they specifically said the channels would carry Nine branding, but no such wording this year.
I fear TVBB read too much into the promoting Nine assets bit which just sounds to me like allowing Nine to include 9News promos in the network feed instead of them being dropped by WIN, WIN showing some ads for 9Now, and maybe Stan.
as it should be. Just like the WIN Ten channel in SA pre-2016, with Ten promos, Ten watermarks, Ten idents etc. and the only mention of WIN was when there was an ad for a local event sponsored by WIN with the Ten logo next to the dotty-less WIN.
I know, WIN should allow the Nine News name to air, with 9Now and Stan promos. Transparent watermarks, updated classification and prgs would be my WIN Network.
P.S On programs like A Current Affair and 60 Minutes, just put the WIN logo on top of the Nine one, like they did in 2005. For example, like this…
then why keep the 30 min model, if they had a 15min bulletin staffed by 2 journos and 2 camos and did 10 mins of news and a quality weather, would people prefer that than have 3 mins of local news in a 30 min or 60 mins program? It could be an option to keep local news services
Interesting theory but could a 15 minute bulletin make as much money as a 30 minute bulletin due to less advertising time? Or perhaps intergrate advertising like “Good Evening, this bulletin is bought to you by Bob’s Car Wash… Now our top story”
… we tried a 15 minute news at Prime in Canberra and Wollongong when the 30 minute bulletins rated asterisks when we first started … but it was difficult to get an audience to fit in with a 5.45pm start …
Yes, a 15 mn bulletin might work but only if it was at 18:00 with a delayed (and edited down to 45 mn) national bulletin right after, but that editing of 9News Sydney/Melbourne/etc. is tricky & stressful work to get done in time to air at 18:15.
