qwerty51
Stirling Mortlock (74)
Ummm Fox never had ads during a game? Unless you mean HT but you said injury breaks.
Broadcast options for Australian Rugby
- Thread starter WorkingClassRugger
- Start date
yes, you're probably right but so long as the world has guys like you to set it right then we're all in a good place. Apologies to anyone who wasted 5 seconds of their lives reading my hasty post.
RebelYell
Arch Winning (36)
There's a growing sense of apathy within NZ in regards to Rugby. Their viewer numbers will have declined massively over the last decade, the key difference there is that there's a newly competiive broadcast market with Spark Sport coming in to compete with Sky. But the broadcast deal should be less about what country it is negotiated in, and more about rewarding the participants of the competition (all teams, nations).
Rebel man
John Thornett (49)
They are still Aus comps though. 16 Aus sides in the NRL 1 kiwi side, a GF in Sydney every year with a guarantee that an Aus side will be in that GF. As opposed to 5 Aus sides in a 12 team comp with no GF here and no guarantee of a side being in the GF
PhilClinton
Mark Loane (55)
I watched State of Origin on Channel 9 the other week and I watch league from time to time on Fox and their broadcasts are ad free (aside from halftime). Couldn't believe how many advertisements there were on Channel 9 during SOO, they even cut in the middle of a few try replays to head to an ad break. I know it sounds privileged but geez I found it almost unwatchable.
I am dreading the forecasted move to advertising on streaming services in order to keep the costs down, Amazon have already started putting their own trailers before shows etc.
Wallaby Man
Nev Cottrell (35)
Hamish was just interviewed on SEN.
confirmed a few things.
- ratings drop with kiwi teams involved (so we can settle this argument)
- one of the options they would look at is increasing the amount of teams
- referenced broadcasters and Australian content leading to more money available
- also mentioned that private equity could be a driving force for change in structure because it’s potentially more appealing to them
- mentioned Fiji and Japan potential opportunities
Critically he said, they are just doing their due diligence in exploring their options because what’s currently on offer isn’t necessarily in Aus interests.
Interviewer also reconfirmed that Brums boss has clarified that all Aus stakeholders are united in exploring potential options, contrary to what Highlanders boss said.
confirmed a few things.
- ratings drop with kiwi teams involved (so we can settle this argument)
- one of the options they would look at is increasing the amount of teams
- referenced broadcasters and Australian content leading to more money available
- also mentioned that private equity could be a driving force for change in structure because it’s potentially more appealing to them
- mentioned Fiji and Japan potential opportunities
Critically he said, they are just doing their due diligence in exploring their options because what’s currently on offer isn’t necessarily in Aus interests.
Interviewer also reconfirmed that Brums boss has clarified that all Aus stakeholders are united in exploring potential options, contrary to what Highlanders boss said.
Ignoto
Peter Sullivan (51)
The fact they had to implement a change in 2015/16 (?) and ad campaign introducing a "No-Ads" means it was a problem before, yeah?
LeCheese
Greg Davis (50)
Yeah by my recollection they've never run ads during play - this campaign was likely just to highlight their key point of difference over FTA, aside from actually having the games in the first place
Set piece magic
John Solomon (38)
It's good to see a bit of finger pointing and moaning from over the ditch. Shows our fans that our administration is strong.
I agree with McLennan on several points too.
I reckon doing stuff like this is a great way to shut up the people here that dunk on the administration too, it builds base support. People like Alan Jones can't complain when we have an administration with a bit more aggro. It's smart, and you know it's smart because our adversaries don't like it
I agree with McLennan on several points too.
I reckon doing stuff like this is a great way to shut up the people here that dunk on the administration too, it builds base support. People like Alan Jones can't complain when we have an administration with a bit more aggro. It's smart, and you know it's smart because our adversaries don't like it
Rebel man
John Thornett (49)
I really hope we go our own way. Also do you have a link to the interview? In Melbourne I am to scared to turn SEN on. You just know it will be more relentless bashing of JDG
half
Dick Tooth (41)
Been away for a while. Can't help but cheer nay scream support for the going it alone.
Been saying it for soooooooooooo long actually got tied of saying it. Hope it happens.
The results will be amazingly good, far better than those that argued for years against it and are slowly coming across.
Been saying it for soooooooooooo long actually got tied of saying it. Hope it happens.
The results will be amazingly good, far better than those that argued for years against it and are slowly coming across.
hoggy
Nev Cottrell (35)
So if I am reading between the lines what RA are saying is. The current Super rugby competition while acceptabe is no longer enough of a financial neccessity. So they maybe getting $30M from Stan, walk away from Super rugby and they may still get a similar figure (with a domestic component) and potentially more given PE interest.
What benefit was last weekends final in NZ (epecially financially) to Australian rugby given a domestic competition would guarantee you a final every year, and all the other added benefits a domestic presence would give you.
Last edited:
The final gets a lot less viewers but there's also a lot more games to broadcast across a season with 12 teams.
They would certainly get more money from Stan if they had a larger domestic comp of sufficient quality but then they have to find a way to fund those additional teams.
My prediction is that RA's preferred option would still be continuing with the existing comp for another couple of years just with a better financial split from New Zealand. I also predict that NZ will come to the party on that to some degree because they don't want to be left going it alone.
RA should be in a far better position financially in a couple of years' time once the funds from the Lions Tour and RWC start to flow in.
Pfitzy
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Loving the independence march. Takes you back to the glory days of losing to Tonga, because our club system wasn't good enough to produce anything better than a mostly 2nd-tier Test side that could spring the occasional surprise.
Competition? Never helped anyone.
Competition? Never helped anyone.
hoggy
Nev Cottrell (35)
But why would it be ther prefered option to continue the status quo, which is delivering limited benefit to the game here. Yes maybe steady as she goes considering the Lions Tour & World Cup, but how do you really deliver growth to the game here domestically.
To me what McLennan is saying is walking away from Super Rugby is no longer diving into the abyss, as the financial returns are longer compelling.
If the game is going to be in a better postion after the World cup & Lions, why not put in place now a domestic structure capable of taking advantage of that.
If we assumed that a domestic comp wasn't just going to revert to 5 teams (or 6 teams including the Drua) then I expect we would want more lead time and better funding arrangements than would be available in 2024.
I am saying it would be the preferred option if the financial return was better.
The issue will always be money.
I am saying it would be the preferred option if the financial return was better.
The issue will always be money.
That's why they're asking NZ for a bigger piece of the pie.
This is just my prediction. I think they're expecting NZRU to make some sort of offer of compromise because NZRU wants to maintain SRP (Super Rugby Pacific) rather than saying no and forcing RA to walk away.
Pfitzy
Nathan Sharpe (72)
10 point head start?