Australian Cricket Broadcast Rights 2018 - 2023

Remove this Banner Ad

010203 said:
A 7/fox deal for the big bash or anything else means we escape Howie but not Junior.
Click to expand...
Ehh I'd probably take Junior over half of Nine's team. He's a w***er but at least he can be entertaining, which is more than what I can say about Slater, Healy, KP and co.
 
Chaisa said:
Ehh I'd probably take Junior over half of Nine's team. He's a w***er but at least he can be entertaining, which is more than what I can say about Slater, Healy, KP and co.
Click to expand...
Yes, but in an ideal world you have neither.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Now Ch7 has lost the Tennis to Ch 9 watch them pay big bucks for the cricket. I think a 7/Fox deal like the AFL could work.
 
Carbine Chaos said:
Does tennis cost that much for broadcasters? Most people probably only tune in once (maybe twice) a year.
Click to expand...

Channel 9 has paid $60 million a year for it - up from the $38 million that 7 offered apparently.

To put that in perspective, it's been said that CA were hoping for $60 million for the Big Bash rights alone - this for a tournament that is nightly for a month and a half as opposed to the 2 weeks that people pay attention to the tennis to.
 
Kyptastic said:
Channel 9 has paid $60 million a year for it - up from the $38 million that 7 offered apparently.

To put that in perspective, it's been said that CA were hoping for $60 million for the Big Bash rights alone - this for a tournament that is nightly for a month and a half as opposed to the 2 weeks that people pay attention to the tennis to.
Click to expand...
Jeepers, I like the tennis well enough but that seems like overspending.
 
Carbine Chaos said:
Does tennis cost that much for broadcasters? Most people probably only tune in once (maybe twice) a year.
Click to expand...

Rubbish. Most sport fans I know have it as a consistent fixture on the TV over the course of the fortnight. Not saying they watch every second, nor watch in priority over the BBL but easy to see why Nine were keen to get hold of it.
 
Hellgood said:
Rubbish. Most sport fans I know have it as a consistent fixture on the TV over the course of the fortnight. Not saying they watch every second, nor watch in priority over the BBL but easy to see why Nine were keen to get hold of it.
Click to expand...
That’s what I mean it’s only relevant on TV for about a fortnight a year.
 
The big advantage the Aus open has is you are, by and large, getting content from 10 or 11 in the morning til potentially after midnight. Given that it’s so well placed on the calendar in that it occupies the two weeks leading into the tv ratings season, it’s essentially a two week ad for the networks to pump up their upcoming shows.

The big bash has that too but it’s not as concentrated or neat as the Aus Open. Conversely, it stretches over more dates which is to its advantage.

Marshland said:
Does Ch9 going for the tennis means there is absolutely no room for the cricket at all?
Click to expand...
Not with the way CA have divided up the content this time round. It’s possible they still try to acquire test matches imo, I just think 7 are more likely to than 9 now.
 
Carbine Chaos said:
That’s what I mean it’s only relevant on TV for about a fortnight a year.
Click to expand...

Ok I thought you referring to nights rather than in general. For the time of year it is, the Aus Open is brilliant for broadcasters. Wimbledon is pretty big news for the Australian public too.
 
Carbine Chaos said:
Jeepers, I like the tennis well enough but that seems like overspending.
Click to expand...
I can't find the numbers but I think women generally watch tennis more than cricket. Women control household spending.
Tennis may well be considerably more attractive to advertisers, for the same overall viewer numbers, for that reason. Viewing numbers also skew older, meaning more disposable income and advertiser appeal. If anything the BBL skews the other way.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Looks like CA's approach in a number of areas is coming back to bite them.

They've assumed that their position as Australia's national sport will get them a free ride from the tv companies, but their cultural position is irrelevant for broadcasters. They only care about what will get advertisers on board, and the product CA serves up is not exactly maximised for public interest. ODIs are put up against the tennis after the Tests are done, when it should be the other way around. The Big Bash is crammed in there instead of being given a free run. There's no rhyme or reason to the season.

They've been an active part of the ICC Board during a period where the international game has stalled at the behest of the biggest boards - including CA. Context is so important for international fixtures, and CA have been content for there to be no context as long as they can play India and England a lot. As a result, internationals held in Australia have lost their value, as the context used to be "watch Australia win".

Their complicitness in the cultural issues plaguing the team has been mentioned before, and has had an immediate consequence in the removal of Australia's two biggest drawcards from international cricket for at least a year.

These rights are worth less than they wanted, and its on their head.
 
The Speaker said:
Looks like CA's approach in a number of areas is coming back to bite them.

They've assumed that their position as Australia's national sport will get them a free ride from the tv companies, but their cultural position is irrelevant for broadcasters. They only care about what will get advertisers on board, and the product CA serves up is not exactly maximised for public interest. ODIs are put up against the tennis after the Tests are done, when it should be the other way around. The Big Bash is crammed in there instead of being given a free run. There's no rhyme or reason to the season.

They've been an active part of the ICC Board during a period where the international game has stalled at the behest of the biggest boards - including CA. Context is so important for international fixtures, and CA have been content for there to be no context as long as they can play India and England a lot. As a result, internationals held in Australia have lost their value, as the context used to be "watch Australia win".

Their complicitness in the cultural issues plaguing the team has been mentioned before, and has had an immediate consequence in the removal of Australia's two biggest drawcards from international cricket for at least a year.

These rights are worth less than they wanted, and its on their head.
Click to expand...
There’s no doubt the majority of that is correct, but it completely ignores the explosion in popularity and value of the BBL.

CA deserve credit for that, the same way they deserve to cop it for their mistakes. The BBL ratings are stronger than the tennis and when push comes to shove, ratings rule.

We also have no idea what 7 is offering and that to me, is a sign they are up to their necks in these negotiations.

I’m probably more optimistic than most in how much these rights’ll go for but we’ll see. There’s no doubt they’ve dropped in value in the last few weeks though and that is ultimately CA’s fault.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Australian Cricket Broadcast Rights 2018 - 2023

Similar threads

Bob Neil
Australian Test Cricket Captains
Replies
1
Views
267
samFFC
samFFC
A
Lack of Australian Test Cricket
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
cricketnut14
C
W
Australian Cricket Awards
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Around the Wicket
A
cats2rise
Sweet Cricket Assoc. Sweet Cricket Association - New simulated cricket league
Replies
1
Views
2K
cats2rise
cats2rise
Jeremias
Test Proposal to split test cricket into two divisions
2 3 4
Replies
85
Views
2K
cricketnut14
C
Lunchtime
Top 50 Australian Test Runscorers
Replies
15
Views
331
ioppolo
ioppolo
Drunkcat
  • Locked
Why is there so much women's cricket
Replies
8
Views
682
Gough
Gough

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top