The $400 Million Sanzar TV Deal

[The Man]

Good deal or bad? Where the Free to Air coverage in this?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news...ectid=10616571

[AndyS]

Rumour is that the A-League is heading toward a $300M deal over 5 years. If true, then the Sanzar deal is very poor.

[beige]

I would say that SANZAR broadcast deals are kind of hamstrung by the original SANZAR deal in 1996 that, while considered massive for what was still an amateur code at the time, was considered to be a relative bargain for News Corp. I reckon this still hampers SANZAR whenever negotiation time comes around.

Of course reading history backwards is a wonderful thing: with the whole Super League vs ARL thing happening at the time the deal was considered by rugby's powerbrokers as the only option to stop losing the code's top players.

[TOCC]

There seems to be a little confusion, this is actually a very good deal in retrospect.

It equates to around AUD$450million over 5 years, which comparitively speaking is pretty good. NRL is currently on a AUD$500million contract for 6 years which includes SOG and Test games, AFL is on a massive AUD$780million for 5 years.

The SANZAR deal compares extremely favourably when compared to the NRL, it does pale in comparison to the AFL deal, but when you take into the account the actual viewer ratings rugby is getting more then its fair share.

[AndyS]

I would agree about the viewer numbers, but there certainly doesn't seem to be any apparent disturbing of the status quo on that front. Must be some other Sanzar master-plan in the works if FTA isn't on.

The article is a bit confused, but it appears that the $400M is on a like-for-like basis with the old contract and therefore includes the money SA gets for CC / NZ gets for the ANZC. The key number seems to be $200M split evenly between Aus and NZ => the actual deal from Australia's point of view is $100M over 5 years for all of the S15 and 3N. Not sure about inbound tours - if NZ is getting additional money for them, presumably so will Aus.

So call Australia's share $130M over 5 years - it may be better than we've had, but it still isn't that good. Puts us well clear at the bottom of the football code pecking order and there is something seriously wrong if the code it is getting touched up soccer of the extremely ordinary A-League standard/attendances.

[brokendown gunfighter]

the A league


what a load of rubbish

[TOCC]

ive read the article a couple of times now, and it doesnt seem to really make that much sense. As far as we were made aware the S15/Trinations was going to be split evenly, looks like that is US$100million each, then add in the $20million for the NPC, does that mean the leftover $80million is factoring in the Currie Cup(yes i know it has been sold already).

Aus: $100million
NZ : $120million
RSA: $180million

well thats how i read the article anyway, the rights for overseas broadcast will probaly net around another $30million going on past agreements.

[Burgs]

Imagine if we had an ARC to throw into the bargaining pot...

[beige]

Imagine if we had an ARC to throw into the bargaining pot...

Aus: $98million

[TOCC]

The NPC earned $20 million over 5 years, that's for a established competition with teams who have strong tribal followings, I'd hate th think what they would have offered for the ARC, prob nothing
Posted via Mobile Device

[beige]

I think that was my point - I dropped the figure from $100M to $98M cos the ARU had to pay to get it on last time.

[Burgs]

Last time it wasn't part of the Fox negotiations.

[AndyS]

The number I saw for the SuperSport deal for the CC and midyear Tests was R700M over 5 years, so about the US$80-90M mark.

I doubt Fox would be interested in any sort of ARC until there was revenue in it. In any case, the current deal is nothing if not a clear indication of the risk associated with having a single buyer with the ability to set the price - seriously, were Sanzar really in a position to say no and walk away from whatever News offered?

The ARU (in particular) really need to find something to get on another carrier. It is the only way they can break the cycle of poor demand or give themselves a chance to grow a market, as a monopoly never ends well if it is the buyer that controls supply. For whatever reason, where we are now is not good and something needs to change.

[beige]

I doubt Fox would be interested in any sort of ARC until there was revenue in it. In any case, the current deal is nothing if not a clear indication of the risk associated with having a single buyer with the ability to set the price - seriously, were Sanzar really in a position to say no and walk away from whatever News offered?

The ARU (in particular) really need to find something to get on another carrier. It is the only way they can break the cycle of poor demand or give themselves a chance to grow a market, as a monopoly never ends well if it is the buyer that controls supply. For whatever reason, where we are now is not good and something needs to change.

I'd pretty much agree with that.

However, while we always want more, I wouldn't say that where we are now (or more specifically where we'll be in 2011) is not good.

[AndyS]

I'd have to disagree when we can't afford the ARS or Aus A program, and when our nearest partner is having to look at shrinking it's domestic competition. Those are not symptoms of a healthy code.