footballroos coming to free to air tv

[dru]

well eventually in 5 years time

smh article

 

[T]

Well at least we'll be able to watch some of the games on Free to Air TV by the 2014 WC

 

[Jesus]

Well at least we'll be able to watch some of the games on Free to Air TV by the 2014 WC

2010,2014 and 2018 world cups are all on sbs

 

[Blackadder]

Amazing how qualifying for the WC can change a profile, why weren't they classed in same category before?

 

[Jesus]

Amazing how qualifying for the WC can change a profile, why weren't they classed in same category before?

Beacause though howard was happy to claim he supported the sport, he didnt do it in any "actual" way. He never thought of the sport as important to the nation

 

[bulldogmariner]

Fox does a great Job of covering football and without them we would not be where we are today. When football does comeback to free to air i hope fox still has the controlling interest because they deserve it.

 

[Bear]

I hope whoever pays $500 million gets the a-league. Other than that, I dont give a shit.

 

[Jesus]

I hope whoever pays $500 million gets the a-league. Other than that, I dont give a shit.

Agree. Anyone who pays the cash for it will put in more money to make it even higher quality than fox or sbs world cup coverage.

As well as actually having people able to see it.

 

[Arabmariner]

As long as it's not on 7,9 or 10.

Any of that lot will drive us insane before half-time in their first broadcast imo.

 

[dibo]

Amazing how qualifying for the WC can change a profile, why weren't they classed in same category before?

because of channel 7's and optus c7's 'buy it and bury it' shenanigans (which in turn was because of the shithouse profile and image of the sport), which brings me to...

As long as it's not on 7,9 or 10.

Any of that lot will drive us insane before half-time in their first broadcast imo.

you can write conditions into broadcast deals you know - no ad breaks during play etc... if it's a broadcast deal worth (for arguments' sake) $100 million over 5 years, the commercial networks have every reason not just to put on good coverage but have it hosted by football people and pump the promotion of the coverage too.

why? because it's a significant investment. it's not spare change there, they can't afford to buy it and bury it the way they did in the NSL days.

which brings me to...

I hope whoever pays $500 million gets the a-league. Other than that, I dont give a shit.

Agree. Anyone who pays the cash for it will put in more money to make it even higher quality than fox or sbs world cup coverage.

As well as actually having people able to see it.

i agree with this.

i've got a soft spot for SBS and the years of hard work they did to sustain the game over decades in the wilderness, but i'm not sure that we owe them so much that we should not take the opportunity to build the game with a big broadcast deal.

i think that if the last 30 years has taught us anything, it's that we should be planning ahead for the future and making sensible decisions, not just looking after our mates with cheap deals on the side (especially mates who've behaved like spurned lovers for the last couple of years).

 

[curious]

Amazing how qualifying for the WC can change a profile, why weren't they classed in same category before?

because of channel 7's and optus c7's 'buy it and bury it' shenanigans (which in turn was because of the shithouse profile and image of the sport), which brings me to..

A little more political in my opinion dibo.
Murdoch knew the inclusion of Socceroo matches would make the commercial worth of his paytv deal much greater & lobbied very heavily to not have them included on the list. The Howard government was reviewing the list at the time & the Murdoch empire was a key supporter of the Howard government.

The Aleague alone has little commercial value with it's ratings being so very poor in comparison to competing FTA sports. Even in comparison to other competing paytv sports it remains poor. It's harsh but correct & has to improve dramitically in the next few years to force up the market value to buyers.

 

[Jesus]

Amazing how qualifying for the WC can change a profile, why weren't they classed in same category before?

because of channel 7's and optus c7's 'buy it and bury it' shenanigans (which in turn was because of the shithouse profile and image of the sport), which brings me to..

A little more political in my opinion dibo.
Murdoch knew the inclusion of Socceroo matches would make the commercial worth of his paytv deal much greater & lobbied very heavily to not have them included on the list. The Howard government was reviewing the list at the time & the Murdoch empire was a key supporter of the Howard government.

The Aleague alone has little commercial value with it's ratings being so very poor in comparison to competing FTA sports. Even in comparison to other competing paytv sports it remains poor. It's harsh but correct & has to improve dramitically in the next few years to force up the market value to buyers.

What pay tv sports significantly beat the a-league? excluding national teams? I am interested.


There is no doubt that in the current deal the money is basically paid for the roos, with the rest being very cheap to make sure they are shown.

In the next deal the a-league will add value to the pakage. The roos will be more valuable. As well the ACL may have made significant inroads.

 

[Jesus]

Amazing how qualifying for the WC can change a profile, why weren't they classed in same category before?

because of channel 7's and optus c7's 'buy it and bury it' shenanigans (which in turn was because of the shithouse profile and image of the sport), which brings me to...

As long as it's not on 7,9 or 10.

Any of that lot will drive us insane before half-time in their first broadcast imo.

you can write conditions into broadcast deals you know - no ad breaks during play etc... if it's a broadcast deal worth (for arguments' sake) $100 million over 5 years, the commercial networks have every reason not just to put on good coverage but have it hosted by football people and pump the promotion of the coverage too.

why? because it's a significant investment. it's not spare change there, they can't afford to buy it and bury it the way they did in the NSL days.

which brings me to...

Agree. It is one thing to pay 3mil to bury something. But something else all together to pay hundreds of mil. As well the fact that there will likely be competition will mean that the ffa can have all the things wrote into the contract they currently enjoy with fox

 

[curious]

What pay tv sports significantly beat the a-league? excluding national teams? I am interested.

AFL & NRL significantly. On average around 3 to 4x To a lesser extent Super 14. EPL more often than not rates better also. The Aleague was about on par with the NRL U20's Toyota Cup ratings.

They can be found in the links below, including archives of both Pay & FTA.
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2008/01/2008-tv-ratings-archive.html
http://www.ebroadcast.com.au/enews/paytv/index.html
http://www.oztam.com.au/

 

[dibo]

What pay tv sports significantly beat the a-league? excluding national teams? I am interested.

AFL & NRL significantly. On average around 3 to 4x To a lesser extent Super 14. EPL more often than not rates better also. The Aleague was about on par with the NRL U20's Toyota Cup ratings.

They can be found in the links below, including archives of both Pay & FTA.
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2008/01/2008-tv-ratings-archive.html
http://www.ebroadcast.com.au/enews/paytv/index.html
http://www.oztam.com.au/

I thought we now outrate the Super 14, basically because bugger all people actually follow rugby (and those that do are too busy slamming each others' parts in drawers and using each other as toast racks to watch).

 

[Jesus]

What pay tv sports significantly beat the a-league? excluding national teams? I am interested.

AFL & NRL significantly. On average around 3 to 4x To a lesser extent Super 14. EPL more often than not rates better also. The Aleague was about on par with the NRL U20's Toyota Cup ratings.

They can be found in the links below, including archives of both Pay & FTA.
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2008/01/2008-tv-ratings-archive.html
http://www.ebroadcast.com.au/enews/paytv/index.html
http://www.oztam.com.au/

Afl and league are no brainers. Was assuming they would not be included in a comparision due to the fact that they have such much blanket media coverage

Expansion will diminish those distance though. If eventually a west sydney team gets up especially.

 

[curious]

That's a popular furphy that grew legs dibo. We have a lot of work to do before we get to their level. Even the CC/jets Aleague GF was outrated by S14 H'LANDERS/W'TAH.

 

[curious]

Afl and league are no brainers. Was assuming they would not be included in a comparision due to the fact that they have such much blanket media coverage

Expansion will diminish those distance though. If eventually a west sydney team gets up especially.

Afl and league are no brainers. Was assuming they would not be included in a comparision due to the fact that they have such much blanket media coverage

Expansion will diminish those distance though. If eventually a west sydney team gets up especially.

Paytv is the only apples for apples comparison for ratings.
The only thing that will diminish the distance gap in ratings is for the aleague to have the advantags given by the same blanket media coverage you speak of. And there is only one way for that to happen.

 

[RADINHO]

YAY!!

 

[dibo]

That's a popular furphy that grew legs dibo. We have a lot of work to do before we get to their level. Even the CC/jets Aleague GF was outrated by S14 H'LANDERS/W'TAH.

last a-league GF is pretty well the nightmare scenario - the two markets that between them are smaller than all others bar wellington.

have you got any numbers to hand? i'd love to see what the average viewing audiences are for S14 compared to HAL.