Ziggy the God said:
or starting a riot...
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
AFL accepts Nine's tv bid...
- Thread starter Fred Phillis
- Start date
- Tagged users None
or starting a riot...
- Banned
- #378
compass said:
we are good at that
Residing in Sydney. That's not a life!Ziggy the God said:
- Banned
- #380
mediumsizered said:
So why are so many of you moving here? These are the people who are following the swans, not the locals.
Sydneysiders are all moving to Qld to find a life and to have a better chance of survival.Ziggy the God said:
- Banned
- #382
mediumsizered said:
Only the ones that can't cut it here (or the pensioners).
Can't beat taking the boat out on the harbour on a beautiful sunny day.
mcgarnacle
Norm Smith Medallist
- Dec 2, 2003
- 9,786
- 4,212
- AFL Club
- Sydney
oh dear, our insecurities about that code north of the border are coming to the fore again.acker said:
Hmmmm.. I agree with all of your points that you based in facts. The last part was a bit rich though, don't you think? Live with crappy coverage for a while, then tell me that it is just fine up here ok? (I already have foxtel, but i have never seen a live Brisbane game on it).Joffaboy said:I think the naysayers in the Northern states are looking for an easy excuse so the local admins up there have an easy out when things done go the way they should.
And if you want to see more than four AFL games on TV
a) get Foxtel
b) get a life, there is more tolife than sitting in front of the box watching endless football matches, especially with you blokes telling us how much warmer NSW and QLD is during the winter months compared to"down south"
OH please, I hear this everytime about THE IRON CHEF beat the AFL game in Sydney.Ziggy the God said:
Let seperate fact from fiction.
Firstly THE IRON CHEF has never beaten an Swans game as stated by some people, it was the fact that when the swans game was at a half time break that THE IRON CHEF nudge ahead of the AFL in a quarter hour only, as it did not beat the AFL game.
And that THE IRON CHEF has never beaten the swans on ch10 in any game it was just 1 quarter hour.
britishbulldog
Draftee
- Oct 8, 2004
- 6
- 0
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
- Other Teams
- westernbulldogs
My Take.Ten are in a very good position.Will pull out of seven alliance and make sure rights will go to nine.Ten will pick up saturday again and provide same coverage as this year into Northern states .Foxtel will provide earlier coverage on fridays into northern states thereby fulfilling AFL demands of enhanced coverage.Seven will be left standing like a shag on a rock but will sell Telstra dome at a profit probably to AFL which will appease their shareholders.Ten will just refuse to lift their proportion of the bid not allowing seven to go any higher.Nine and ten will strike an accord albeit not an overly friendly one,AFL will be to say they have enhanced coverage(although not by much) and money will be in the till.
- Banned
- #387
airpoe said:
To get beaten for 30 seconds by this joke of a show is enough. Read this.......
http://www.smh.com.au/news/AFL/Sydn...ef-roasts-Swans/2005/05/30/1117305560918.html
Anyway you want to look at it, Demetriou has done a fantastic job to sell your product for such a high price. No doubt that Ch 9 will not make any money out of it on a stand alone basis, but they will gain on shows around it, and that their opposition don't have it.
- Banned
- #389
acker said:
We have water restrictions here, so we can only use the sprinkler on Wednesday or Sunday. The beach is fine once you belt your way through the thugs, but we are lucky because we don't have to worry about walking on syringes like you do.
ChrisFooty
Premiership Player
The next AFL TV rights will depreciate in value because channel nine will probably be the only bidder and therefore they wouldn't have to bid as much.
Do channel seven have the right to bid last on every broadcast rights deal negoations ?
The AFL are money hungry......i think they did a good job 156 million a year is a lot of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
NSW and QLD qill be alright if SBS or channel 10 can buy a game of nine to show on saturday nights.
Do channel seven have the right to bid last on every broadcast rights deal negoations ?
The AFL are money hungry......i think they did a good job 156 million a year is a lot of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
NSW and QLD qill be alright if SBS or channel 10 can buy a game of nine to show on saturday nights.
Tas
Premium Platinum
Veteran
10k Posts
30k Posts
North Melbourne - 2022 Kaitlyn Ashmore and Aileen Gilroy Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2022 Aaron Hall and Flynn Perez Player Sponsor
North Melbourne AFLW - 2021 Aileen Gilroy and Kaitlyn Ashmore Player Sponsor
North Melbourne - 2021 Taylor Garner and Flynn Perez Player Sponsor
TheBrownDog
- Dec 23, 2002
- 62,676
- 62,324
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- There can be only one...
ChrisFooty said:
No, it will not. The AFL will get an independant valuation of its worth based on how much advertisers want to pay to have their products on TV when the football is on.
The channels will pay the market value for it. Eddie was whining in March that 9 may not even make a bid and the AFL would lose out because of the 7/10 partnership. Smoke and mirrors, that is all it is. At the end of the day, if they know they can make money out of it due to advertising income then they make a competitive bid.
The end result is they would have to buy expensive american garbage shows to fill in the rest of the time and have less interest from companies wanting to advertise for those shows. These companies are not stupid, they know how much they can afford to bid and how it affects their profitability.
Current independant valuation said $700 million minimum. Channel 9 has come up with $780 million and that is still with giving coverage into NSW/QLD priority to Rugby. Channel 9 will pay a premium to ensure their competitors do not have a major product over the ratings period that will affect their own ratings, if their ratings drop then they will lose out on not only advertising income but what they can charge for their other shows will decline if the station does not perform well compared to the opposition.
It is a very complex situation and you can't just look at afl advertising income vs broadcasting rights expense because there are many other factors that affect the stations in their overall profitability.
Sorry if it has already been mentioned but I cant help but think of one thing.
That is if 7/10 first made an offer, reported to be 75 million short of the 9 offer, surely that wasn't their roof as far as how high they can go?
In this example of negotiation 7 hold the box seat by being able to come back over the top of 9's bid. It would be folly of 7 to have first offered their absolute limit as they must know Ch9 would come over the top of them.
15 million more per year. Im just wondering if 9 may have offered too little to totally see 7/10 out of the picture.
That is if 7/10 first made an offer, reported to be 75 million short of the 9 offer, surely that wasn't their roof as far as how high they can go?
In this example of negotiation 7 hold the box seat by being able to come back over the top of 9's bid. It would be folly of 7 to have first offered their absolute limit as they must know Ch9 would come over the top of them.
15 million more per year. Im just wondering if 9 may have offered too little to totally see 7/10 out of the picture.
The Dice Man said:
I think why it would seem that 7 and 10 are out of the picture is that they turned down $740 million offer. Now to win they have to pay $40 million more and obviously share holders won't be happy with that when they could have saved $40 million. The assumption is that 7 & 10 thought that 9 couldn't come up with $740 million let alone come up with more and that $740 million would have been worst case scenario.
The players, through the players association, have already put their hands out for even more. There's more money than ever floating around yet club supporters will still be lectured on how they need to tip more money into the club, game entry prices will go up, memberships go up. A far better investment of the windfall would be to decrease the cost of entry and memberships.
H Dolphin said:
Well put dolphin. the sad thing is that even more hangers on in the afl indusrty will have their snouts in the trough.
The players want more but it aint the bottom half of each list and the rookies seeing much of it. Each club's fat cats will get most of it.
BrownDog2 said:
I think you'll find the Kangas and Bullies sponsors are after free to air exposure as fre to air coverage delivers far more viewers than Foxtel coverage..
All in all at a time when the AFL has a chance to kick on in NSW and Qld it is I think a poor decision. I like Ch 9's coverage but its unwillingness to telecast live into the northern states because of its Rugby league commitments makes it very hard to say that it can serve the best long term interests of the game.
With union stumbling as the Wallabies return to their pre 80s mediocrity, league struggling to expand outside of NSW and the A League still in its infancy the chance to win the hearts and minds battle with NSW and Qld kids is a once in a lifetime opportunity. Free to air coverage is key.
deck said:
So how are the PBL shareholders feeling as they know that their Ch 9 has offered $40 mil more than Ch 7 and 10.
7/10 were always going to lowball withtheir intitial offer given their right to match an offer.
