AFL announces 4.5billion, 7 year media deal (2025-2031 inclusive)

[Bjo187]

Full time is achievable if the new TV/Media rights deal increase, pays for it. The 2030 option I'm not so sure about.

But the AFL has to do a shitload more work to get the structure of the comp right to offer a concrete program to media companies to pay for it.

Bottom line is the AFLW has to pay its way if it wants to be full time. If not then 2026 wont be achievable.

This is the problem I see, I cannot see it being profitable at all by 2026. 25 mill in player wages next year already, that's not including the cost of running the comp, umpires, coaches, flights, accom etc. My biggest concern is it takes away from other parts of the game that need financial support (ie. The expansion clubs, grassroots, player development etc).

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

You've actually got to double that amount, because if they bring in Tassie (the 19th team), they'll bring in a 20th team - either Darwin, Canberra or a third WA team.

The reason is, an odd number is no good to you. Creates a bye, and a team having a week off only costs money, it doesn't make it.

A 20th team means you have an extra game to sell each week to TV/Streaming and seats to fill at a ground.

Tassie comes in 2028 the 20th team comes in 2030 at the earliest.

The next media rights deal is either for 2025-29 or 2025-30 seasons, so not really relevant for that deal.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

This is the problem I see, I cannot see it being profitable at all by 2026. 25 mill in player wages next year already, that's not including the cost of running the comp, umpires, coaches, flights, accom etc. My biggest concern is it takes away from other parts of the game that need financial support (ie. The expansion clubs, grassroots, player development etc).

It does't have to make a profit, it has to break even or close enough to it.

The clubs want it. It expands their supporter base, and big corporates are jumping on to do the corporate social responsibility stuff.

HQ can slash lots of admin fat to support grassroots and if expansion clubs can't pay their way after 15 years, then maybe it's bye bye time. ie they get a $5m a year subsidy, not $10-$12-$15m a year subsidy.

 

[TWLS]

It does't have to make a profit, it has to break eve or close enough to it.

The clubs want it. It expands their supporter base, and big corporates are jumping on to do the corporate social responsibility stuff.

HQ can slash lots of admin fat to support grassroots and if expansion clus can't pay their way after 15 years, then maybe its bye bye time. ie they get a $5m a year subsidy, not $10-$12-$15m a year subsidy.

Good comments. The AFLW (Womens game overall) adds to our sport in spades and is venturing into new markets in NSW and QLD. Getting into new markets is a marketers/managements dream.
We can all sit back and watch to see how big it gets in those two States.

 

[Bjo187]

Good comments. The AFLW (Womens game overall) adds to our sport in spades and is venturing into new markets in NSW and QLD. Getting into new markets is a marketers/managements dream.
We can all sit back and watch to see how big it gets in those two States.

I personally don't think it will get big at all, the nrl women's is growing and aflw will get no media up there.

 

[ExpatAussie]

This is the problem I see, I cannot see it being profitable at all by 2026. 25 mill in player wages next year already, that's not including the cost of running the comp, umpires, coaches, flights, accom etc. My biggest concern is it takes away from other parts of the game that need financial support (ie. The expansion clubs, grassroots, player development etc).

Why not let clubs look after themselves?
Let Junior Clubs & associations look after grassroots development?
And let women start their own league?

Just saying.

 

[The_Wookie]

I personally don't think it will get big at all, the nrl women's is growing and aflw will get no media up there.

The the AFL will buy or subsidise coverage up there for it.

 

[RedV3x]

And let women start their own league?

That was my initial reaction - create a league that might more accurately reflect Australian Football in Australia
with new clubs, new uniforms and new logos - a fresh start.
But I'm glad to see that hanging off of the AFL's infrastructure and loyalties has been a runaway success.
I'm disappointed that the AFL didn't use the opportunity to right some historical wrongs by including a
Tasmanian and Canberran team before including all Victorian AFL teams.
I understand that the NRLW doesn't run a full complement of NRL-based teams and I think the AFLW
could have done the same.

And let women start their own league?

Yes, it seems ALL leagues are following the same thinking, not AFL-centric at all.

 

[Gigantor]

If people think AFLW is struggling now, you ought think about how a national competition would be going with brand new no-name clubs and without HQ support. [Today, the match of the round is the Albury Alligators vs the Bendigo Beanpoles, you can catch it live on Youtube!)
Would have failed to see out one full season.
Quite obviously, THE only solution was teams aligned with AFL clubs, the whole kit and kaboodle.
And once you go down that road, it became pretty obvious that it had to include all 18 clubs, sooner rather than later.
So clubs that distanced themselves from the concept in the first season, were falling over themselves to get in 3 seasons later - and that tells you that the concept has been an outstanding success.

 

[The_Wookie]

If people think AFLW is struggling now, you ought think about how a national competition would be going with brand new no-name clubs and without HQ support. [Today, the match of the round is the Albury Alligators vs the Bendigo Beanpoles, you can catch it live on Youtube!)
Would have failed to see out one full season.
Quite obviously, THE only solution was teams aligned with AFL clubs, the whole kit and kaboodle.
And once you go down that road, it became pretty obvious that it had to include all 18 clubs, sooner rather than later.
So clubs that distanced themselves from the concept in the first season, were falling over themselves to get in 3 seasons later - and that tells you that the concept has been an outstanding success.

Or you can look at SuperNetball. This doesnt have a mens national body supporting it, and its millions in debt at the moment and making questionable choices that are pissing off everyone else.

 

[ExpatAussie]

If women want equality, let them have it.

That means, no assistance and welfare from the men's league.

But we all know they can't and won't.

 

[The_Wookie]

If women want equality, let them have it.

That means, no assistance and welfare from the men's league.

But we all know they can't and won't.

That kind of ignores the fact that theyve been suppressed for most of the last hundred years or so. Bit like your club getting extra money for not being big and stuff.

 

[RedV3x]

THE only solution was teams aligned with AFL clubs.

No. Imagine a different model, based on state pride - Perth team, an Adelaide team, a Sydney team, a Brisbane team, a couple of Melbourne teams, a Tasmanian and a Celtic team.
That would make for concentrated football talent and sponsorship etc.
I'm very happy with the current outcome but don't say there weren't alternatives.

 

[RedV3x]

That means, no assistance and welfare from the men's league.

The AFL clubs are taking the money and setting the conditions.
A truly independent AFLW would be playing in a proper league season.

 

[Gigantor]

No. Imagine a different model, based on state pride - Perth team, an Adelaide team, a Sydney team, a Brisbane team, a couple of Melbourne teams, a Tasmanian and a Celtic team.
That would make for concentrated football talent and sponsorship etc.
I'm very happy with the current outcome but don't say there weren't alternatives.

Relying on state pride would be a road to nowhere.
No one buys memberships in state teams.
Not even national teams sell memberships.
People buy memberships in clubs.
People care for clubs far more than they care for some historic outdated body politic.
In the case of the AFLW, even when entry was for free, people were buying memberships in the womens team in the thousands.

 

[RedV3x]

People care for clubs far more than they care for some historic outdated body politic.

Yes, I've noticed nobody is supporting new clubs like WCE, Dockers, Adelaide etc.
Have you noticed that thew Crows are much more popular than the old club P.A.

 

[ExpatAussie]

There is so much wrong with this post I would not even know where to begin. I hope eventually people with your views disappear entirely.

Maybe you can sensor me.

*mod note: Its censor not sensor and he cant, but I can. These views are not welcome here. I hope youve enjoyed your stay here in this thread, but it is over now. Please note this for the future.

Wookie.

 

[Rob]

This is the problem I see, I cannot see it being profitable at all by 2026. 25 mill in player wages next year already, that's not including the cost of running the comp, umpires, coaches, flights, accom etc. My biggest concern is it takes away from other parts of the game that need financial support (ie. The expansion clubs, grassroots, player development etc).

I doubt even the most optimistic AFL exec thinks it will be genuinely profitable in 4 years. The TV audiences don't suggest the rights are worth anything at all, and crowds of 2-3000 paying $10 each are barely going to cover match day costs. I'd imagine the biggest revenue source by some distance is sponsorship, but I wouldn't think it's worth the $50m or so they need.

 

[Gigantor]

I doubt even the most optimistic AFL exec thinks it will be genuinely profitable in 4 years. The TV audiences don't suggest the rights are worth anything at all, and crowds of 2-3000 paying $10 each are barely going to cover match day costs. I'd imagine the biggest revenue source by some distance is sponsorship, but I wouldn't think it's worth the $50m or so they need.

I think that's all pretty close to the mark, and I say that as a supporter of womens footy.
Sponsorship does provide a glimmer of hope.
Each club probably can't make the $2.75M odd they need annually from sponsorship, but at a guess, I reckon most could make half that from sponsorship.
So the annual subsidy required is pretty small in the scheme of things.

 

[Rob]

I think that's all pretty close to the mark, and I say that as a supporter of womens footy.
Sponsorship does provide a glimmer of hope.
Each club probably can't make the $2.75M odd they need annually from sponsorship, but at a guess, I reckon most could make half that from sponsorship.
So the annual subsidy required is pretty small in the scheme of things.

I've got no idea what clubs make from sponsorship, but $1m seems like a lot. AFLW does have a halo effect that would attract a few sponsors, but if it's not a jumper sponsorship the bulk of exposure would have to be generated by the company itself.
Has any club announced the value of their jumper sponsorship? I'd guess $2-300k, but that's a stab in the dark.

 

[RUNVS]

The world economy is really going to start tanking soon thanks to sky rocketing inflation and interests rates going up a lot to try and cut it off. If the AFL want to sign a TV rights deal they better do it soon as I think the TV rights will be worth a lot less in 6 months time as companies will have less cash to throw around.

 

[Cleavy]

Patrick Dangerfield “very much in favour” of marquee timeslot

“I think it works really well.”

www.sen.com.au

more Thursday games will fix everything

 

[BigVic]

Channel 9 Meet With The AFL Over Streaming Rights
Tom Browne with the latest.

Channel 9 Meet With The AFL Over Streaming Rights

Tom Browne with the latest.

t.co

Article heading image for Channel 9 Meet With The AFL Over Streaming Rights
Tom Browne reported this afternoon on his footy news podcast that Channel 9 are in the running to be part of the next TV broadcast rights deal.

Browne told the Triple M Footy news podcast that Nine & the AFL met last Friday.

“I do understand that at this stage that in terms of the streaming rights, Stan & Nine are interested.”
There is a lot going on in that space. Gil McLachlan edging closer to a record TV deal."

Anyone but 7 and Fox. Their coverage has declined over the past few years. Nine/Stan or 10/P+ will be fine.

 

[RedV3x]

Anyone but 7 and Fox. Their coverage has declined over the past few years. Nine/Stan or 10/P+ will be fine.

As long as they do something new and not simply hire the incumbents.
Fox doesn't promote football, in fact it does nothing but post negative headlines about football
as if it doesn't want to embarrass itself in front of the rugby set.

 

[Bjo187]

As long as they do something new and not simply hire the incumbents.
Fox doesn't promote football, in fact it does nothing but post negative headlines about football
as if it doesn't want to embarrass itself in front of the rugby set.

Agree with this, news.com.au promote rugby more heavily which comes under the Murdoch banner as well. Strange considering AFL is the much bigger sport. I do generally like foxtel' s game coverage though.