Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

ALM/W TV deal

HappyGuus said:
Geez the unhinged anger on the socials is something else, and 90% don't even follow A-League! It's just people with no idea who like to shit on easy targets. Stan waaaa, Optus waaaa, Foxtel waaaa... well did anyone else actually bid??

I've said previously that we should reduce to one match pw on FTA because we don't have enough big matches to advertise (a second FTA can do more harm than good). And the rights are increasing. It sounds like good news to me. 3 years allows the league to first see where the national teams end up on their next deal, then decide the next move.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but it is a very poor outcome. It says no more than "we will continue to be hidden away and the clubs will do their best to tread water for 3 years as it all goes to s*&t".

I am sorry, but the clubs acquired independence on a platform of more investment and we have not seen it. Now may be a good time to dig deeper into their pockets and cover the increased short term losses that is required to gain exposure. There is no (and I mean no) coverage of Paramount in pubs and clubs. I was at a local bar in Newcastle before the Jets v Syd FC semi and not one TV had the A-League women final on it. Further, there is no cross-promotion with newspapers nor cross-promotion with the extensive European football following. The deal is pointless.

In no way can anyone sit back over the period of APL independence and the 10/Paramount rights and say it is working out well for the A-League.
 
HappyGuus said:
What were the alternatives?
Click to expand...
Great question, IMO a $nil TV deal with either Foxtel or Nine (even if it includes covering production costs) to get increased eye-balls on the game. It is what the A-League did at the start with Foxtel and once it got the exposure it paid off with larger subsequent deals. Whilst the aim remains to get the most out of the short-term dollar, and minimise short-term losses, there is no future. It will continue to slowly die off.

Given the owners stole the A-League from the grassroots for nothing, on the platform of investing in it, they need to make a proper investment into actually trying to grow the league (not just covering losses) and making something from it.
 
Song said:
Great question, IMO a $nil TV deal with either Foxtel or Nine (even if it includes covering production costs) to get increased eye-balls on the game.
Click to expand...
It's a great thought to pose to the clubs, would they give up $500k a season to be with Stan/9/Fox/Optus etc.? I think they would make that back and more in sponsorships, advertising and coverage. Although, Fox did screw them mid contract. So there's also the matter of trust.
 
HappyGuus said:
Three more years. One men's FTA match a week.

aleagues.com.au

APL announces new partnership with Paramount ANZ

The Australian Professional Leagues (APL) and Paramount Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) have today announced the extension of their media partnership for a further three years.
aleagues.com.au aleagues.com.au
Click to expand...

There are 2 ways to look at this…

You can either be critical by saying 1 game on FTA isn’t enough.

Or you can say it doesn’t make any difference because the AL target demographic doesn’t watch FTA.

I can see both arguments but lean towards the former as the more exposure we can get, the better.

I just hope the money received has increased significantly.

Song said:
Great question, IMO a $nil TV deal with either Foxtel or Nine (even if it includes covering production costs) to get increased eye-balls on the game. It is what the A-League did at the start with Foxtel and once it got the exposure it paid off with larger subsequent deals. Whilst the aim remains to get the most out of the short-term dollar, and minimise short-term losses, there is no future. It will continue to slowly die off.
Click to expand...

I stated this recently (not sure which thread… maybe this one), but Paramount Plus has more subscriptions in 2026 than what Foxtel had when the A-league has its highest audience peak in 2012-13. Paramount Plus also has about 300,000 more subscriptions than Kayo atm.

Stan Sport numbers are not released to the public, but I’d be very surprised if its more than half a million.

But clearly the key issue when it comes to streaming is getting our game into pubs and clubs.
 
Sutherlandbear said:
FTA is a dying platform, and it would just encourage more people not to go to the games. (The tight arses)
Click to expand...
wouldn't say tight arse's more so lazy or time poor.
I differ talking generally - many people at home channel surf who doesn't, especially us sporting types.
On FTA it would pick up some strays and who knows what that % is.
All the FTA's advertise their other channels during broadcasts as well.
Widens the net.
 
Auckland FC CEO dropped an interview where he stated that the local and main broadcast revenue has continued to drop lower and lower.
This is what he said after the TV rights signing.

“Of course there’s been problems and there’s also been things that we’ve done completely wrong and lessons learned and that side of things. But I think for us, how do you actually create a club that’s financially sustainable is always going to be the biggest challenge in an environment where… the global football labour market has just been going up and up and up. The local broadcast rights and sort of media rights have just been going down, down, down.
 
NoMates said:
Auckland FC CEO dropped an interview where he stated that the local and main broadcast revenue has continued to drop lower and lower.
This is what he said after the TV rights signing.

“Of course there’s been problems and there’s also been things that we’ve done completely wrong and lessons learned and that side of things. But I think for us, how do you actually create a club that’s financially sustainable is always going to be the biggest challenge in an environment where… the global football labour market has just been going up and up and up. The local broadcast rights and sort of media rights have just been going down, down, down.
Click to expand...
Did you even read the article? Though it doesn’t state how much, it says that it has gone up.
 
Robbie Slater said on the radio that he has been told the New TV is only around $30-36mil a year and the extra game removed from FTA was due to lack of bring in subs to Paramount plus and poor ratings. He also said he doubts anyone will pick up the A-League once the 3 years are up.
 
NoMates said:
Robbie Slater said on the radio that he has been told the New TV is only around $30-36mil a year and the extra game removed from FTA was due to lack of bring in subs to Paramount plus and poor ratings. He also said he doubts anyone will pick up the A-League once the 3 years are up.
Click to expand...
Typical Robbie. 😲😳🤣
 
NoMates said:
Robbie Slater said on the radio that he has been told the New TV is only around $30-36mil a year and the extra game removed from FTA was due to lack of bring in subs to Paramount plus and poor ratings. He also said he doubts anyone will pick up the A-League once the 3 years are up.
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t that be a reduction in value though? Initial reporting was that the amount per game increased.
 
Toebash said:
Wouldn’t that be a reduction in value though? Initial reporting was that the amount per game increased.
Click to expand...
Back in 2005 the first ALM TV deal with foxtel was $40m a year. Its now 2026 ands its $30-36mil a year. We have had only two conformations its lower and that's by the Auckland CEO and Robbie Slater. Although the Auckland CEO didn't mention numbers just said the media deal is lower.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top