I reckon the only network that would want to deal with Cricket Australia come contract negotiation time would be Fox anyway. Even if Seven continues with this deal there is no chance they will renew it.
Plus I don’t think Seven (for a lack of better word) deserves to lose money and become bankrupt as a network. They would’ve (and could’ve tried) liked to get an exclusive deal but Cricket Australia wouldn’t bulge. If they didn’t get cricket then they would rate poorly over Summer. It really was a case of damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
If CA deliver a worse product, then Seven should be able to go and negotiate a reduction on the amount they paid. Emphasis on past tense. If CA can deliver a good summer of cricket, they deserve to be paid as per their contract.
What reason is there for Seven to get an upfront discount? There’s no reduction in matches, there’s no 3 month season delay. If there’s no/capped crowds, that’s more cricket fans who need to watch on TV rather than in person.
I couldn’t believe with the CA this year. They’ve totally stuffed up the dreadful cricket broadcasting rights. Seven wanted to have exclusive matches but CA awarded the principal broadcasting to Fox. Seriously, Cricket Australia has done extensive amount of damage to the sport with Men’s ODIs and T20Is shown exclusively to a Pay TV. To have the ODIs and T20Is behind a paywall is an absolute disgrace! Look what happened when Nine lost the ODI and T20 rights to Fox Sports.
Channel Seven have paid way too much to televise the cricket - Men’s Tests, WOmen’s Cricket, Women’s BBL and Men’s BBL (43 out of 59 matches). THey simply couldn’t believe with the greed coming from Cricket Australia and Fox!
I’d say it’s because everything isn’t guaranteed to go to plan at this stage. If it is able to be delivered with desirable results then there should be no problem. If there is any disruptions then Seven has the right to ask for a discount (but again, only IF there is anything that happens between now and the season as well as during the season).
Then, how about discounts are given postseason if this happens? At present, CA is expecting all matches to go ahead and if they do deliver, no need to provide a partial refund. If they are unable to get all the games played, they will then refund some of the money?
Whatever is going on needs to be sorted quick fast because Seven are due to broadcast the first match for the summer in two weeks time. The first WT20 is due to be held on September 26 (which looks to be a standalone without any AFL that Sunday)
Huh?? Channel 7 knew exactly what they were signing in terms of Fox exclusives. It didn’t stop them bidding $2 mill more a year than channel 10 offered for the same rights.
Yep. The eyes of CA executives would’ve lit up at the words “$1 Billion” and “dedicated channel on Foxtel” in 2018, even though that wasn’t necessarily the best outcome for the viewer or the game in the long run.
Ratings wise it’d probably be extremely concerning if the 2020-21 Summer of Cricket (presuming that it’s able to go ahead as normal and that the quality of matches played is half decent) didn’t have an increase in ratings on 2019-20, particularly in Melbourne & Sydney where there’s likely to be even more people at home than last year when about half the country was burning and choking.
Yes but normally (as I explained earlier in this thread) players who get called up for national team duties but then aren’t playing can generally go back to their BBL sides. Likewise, players normally can go back-and-forth between their BBL side and playing in international ODIs which occur in January.
If the only way cricket can be played this summer is through hubs, the things I just outlined will either be harder or impossible to do. If that happens (or if marquee international players opt-out from their teams for one reason or another) then Seven might have an argument that the quality of the BBL has been ‘diminished’ as a result of players who would normally be involved not playing.
Technically both parties are at fault - Seven are reportedly trying to get out of a contract they signed while Cricket Australia has seemingly done a bad job keeping their TV rightsholders informed about how they plan to ensure that a ‘typical’ summer of cricket will be able to occur.
Exactly. 10, who were offering $960 million, would have become ‘The Cricket Network’. They would have broadcast, on FTA (10 or multichannel), all Men’s and Women’s Internationals (Tests sub-licensed to 9), all BBL and WBBL matches, one WNCL match per day (plus all finals), one One-Day Cup match per day (plus all finals), one Sheffield Shield match per round (plus any others if they don’t overlap), all Australia A matches (Men’s and Women’s), all Cricket Australia XI matches (Men’s and Women’s), all Governor General’s XI matches, all Prime Minister’s XI matches, the finals of the National T20 Championships (Men’s and Women’s), plus most other tour and CA organised matches.
CA rejected it because they wanted $1 Billion and a Pay-TV partner.
Last season had an India tour in the middle of it - making it much harder for them to go back and forth. But that’s just part of the BBL.
What’s the huge cost to Seven of perhaps 8 or 9 players who are on the fringe of the Australia team not being in BBL teams for a fortnight? A few million as a one off this year? Seven aren’t in court for that - they’ll want millions off the contract each season until the end, like they managed on the AFL deal.
Think of what that would have done for the game of cricket having EVERYTHING on the one FTA network for everyone to watch not to mention what it would have done for Channel 10 having a full summer jam packed full of cricket
That’s not correct. The deal 10 thought they had was for the simulcast deal with Fox. 7 came in late with the $2 mil per year extra. Channel 10 couldn’t get on the phone with CBS executives in US to up the offer.
To be fair though, being able to plan anything more then a few weeks in advance at the moment with any certainty is extremely difficult and Seven know this, they’ve faced similar with the AFL.
I’m not convinced Seven want to walk away - they were promoting their upcoming cricket coverage during the AFL over the weekend, rather I think Seven are using the Coronavirus as a trojan horse to negotiate themselves a better position on a deal that they clearly regret signing.
Perhaps CA promised things that haven’t eventuated, especially around the BBL where the current issues appear to be - but the first two international seasons of the deal were always going to be of limited quality, the end of the deal had the better matchups and the quality of the BBL hasnt dramatically changed in the 9 years that its been going - its never really attracted current internationals, thanks in part to its timing and limitations in the salary cap
Seven Network stumped by its summer cricket crisis
The Seven Network stands to lose the equivalent of almost half the value of its station if it broadcasts cricket this summer.
It is understood Seven lost more than $60m on cricket last summer and it has been forecast the damage will be much greater in a COVID-challenged summer if it proceeds with the third year of a six-year deal.
Seven, valued at $177m at close of business on Friday, has informed Cricket Australia of its intention to terminate the deal in a letter delivered last week.
What did they expect? Nine were losing money when they had exclusive rights.
Seven paid more and thought jumping into cricket with Fox showing all the same games and not having any exclusive content was smart? Really what planet where they on.
1/ simple maths says you can’t make as much money as pervious rights holder when you share content. Advertisers aren’t going to pay the same money to one organisation knowing that they are going to have a 1/3 less watching.
2/ over the last two summer, the rating numbers have been the same as they were for Nine/ten - which says no more new viewers watched cricket and I refer to point 1.
3/ BBL isn’t based on international stars, this is where CA stuffed up, they sold a product that actually wasn’t what it’s base was.
It’s base was quick, fun and over the summer holidays not for 2mths, (too long).
Also prior to Ten, BBL wasn’t that hot, it was a fringe sport, that had small crowds. The exposer that Ten/Nine gave the BBL on FTA was what built the game.
For seven to even think they could get the ratings ten did, is laughable and I refer you back to point one.
