Could they end up packaging 9 and WIN in a sale/part sale, once Stan becomes their main income?
I doubt it. Broadcast TV is still a massive revenue gainer - the key is to be sourcing revenue from both platforms. Broadcast - the declining masses. Streaming - the growing business
2 Likes
Yeah, that’s what I would have thought. WIN is the biggest network in Australia, plus Nine it becomes a formidable force. Having full nationwide coverage (i.e. Nine everywhere, not different names), plus the advertising that comes with it (truly national ad selling, also have any Stan ads etc. free of charge).
Does (for example) Nine pay WIN for affiliation, or is it the other way around?
1 Like
Depends what kind of deal they get and how much they pay.
2 Likes
Nine already gets 50% of all revenue booked though an affiliate deal. I guess it depends if getting 100% of that revenue for the next decade is worth the up front cost of buying WIN’s stations. $50-$100 million??
3 Likes
Affiliate groups pay the networks a set % of their revenue booked in exchange for programming
3 Likes
How much would the stations cost?
So e.g. WIN ‘pays’ Nine?
2 Likes
Here’s one from left field. Bill Caralis. He owns a lot of radio stations in Northern NSW and as a Ten affiliate would be an excellent marketing tool for his FM stations. But yes highly unlikely.
5 Likes
Could SCA sell its 7 stations to Prime?
2 Likes
If Nine does gain Crawfords, does it mean it will (indirectly) own copyright to shows Crawfords made for other networks?
2 Likes
That’s a Bruce Gordon myth. SCA television covers a bigger area than WIN Television. WIN made it up based primarily on the large WA remote and regional licence area. But the SCA and Imparja remote central & eastern Australia licence area is substantially larger, covering most of Qld, SA, NT, about half of NSW, and bits of Vic and Tas.
Based on WIN’s definition using land area, SCA is bigger than WIN, and so is Imparja.
5 Likes
Do you mean copyright or do you mean broadcast rights? I’m not sure they’re the same thing. In any case a lot of the broadcast agreements for the old Crawford shows have probably lapsed or expired by now.
and much of it is desert and sparsely populated anyway, so it’s a moot point.
2 Likes
Exactly.
2 Likes
I mean copyright. For example, Crawfords made four seasons of Acropolis Now for Seven from 1989 to 1992. Could it be streaming on 9Now down the track?
1 Like
Bruce’s proposal is for a merger rather than a buy out. This means that Nine don’t actually have to find the cash - Bruce essentially gives WIN to Nine in exchange for them giving him some shares.
If WIN isn’t making money, then this devalues everyone’s shares so that’s a bad deal, but if WIN is making money, then it could be a win/win (excuse the pun).
There will definitely be benefits of merging - some functions of WIN can be completely removed, and others significantly reduced as they won’t need to be done multiple times. Nine also get the benefit of controlling their own product and not having to deal with difficult affiliates (ironic considering that WIN is viewed as being the most difficult) - and WIN do have brand loyalty in a lot of regional areas too.
Nine have recently demonstrated that they want to bring things in house - they cut radio deals with Crocmedia that they had inherited, as well as traffic reports.
6 Likes
But that means nothing if Nine take over WIN and ditch the WIN branding.
(I’d be surprised if the WIN brand persisted at all under Nine ownership, beyond the expiry of the current affiliation agreements, and shocked if it was still present 3 months after that, even with the old 9-dotted logo).
3 Likes
They’ll be hoping WIN viewers transition over to the Nine branding (assuming that’s what they have in mind).
1 Like
They kept NBN for a long time and continue to use NBN for news. I think a similar thing would happen with WIN - although on a fast timeline. And even once they have rebranded, sales reps would still be able to say that WIN is part of their network when required to get a local business over the line.
I also find it interesting that the report values WIN at $50-100 million. WIN paid SCA $55 million for NRN only 4 years ago and it accounts for just under 30% of WIN’s total potential audience. Even at the top end valuation that’s a big decline in value in 4 years, and that’s assuming WIN’s other assets are worth nothing.
3 Likes