Pay TV Deal completed - to be announced Monday...?

[Damien]

According to this article, the deadline is tomorrow.

Seven have to book their broadcast vans etc tomorrow. So I guess it will be confirmed by the weekend.

[Mike_B]

Originally posted by Damien
Seven have to book their broadcast vans etc tomorrow. So I guess it will be confirmed by the weekend.

Not according to this article. Looks like things are just as far away as ever.

I have the funny feeling that 7/10 will be forced to back down and accept Foxtel's bid. If they don't, they won't get any money for it, and will either have to cop a pasting in the ratings, or not get any money and have other channels broadcast on FTA. The money on offer from Fox, plus the losses they will have to cop if they go head to head on FTA will mean they accept the Fox bid IMHO.

[Triple B]

Pay TV Deal completed - to be announced Monday...?

Is it Monday yet ??

[goswannie14]

Originally posted by BBB
Is it Monday yet ??

Did it say which Monday?

[Damien]

Foxtel lift bid, Seven/Ten reduce asking price

[swantastic]

Originally posted by Damien
Foxtel lift bid, Seven/Ten reduce asking price

Foxtel are only changing there tune because other wise too many subscribers would have left.

[AnnieH]

Originally posted by swantastic
Foxtel are only changing there tune because other wise too many subscribers would have left.

Foxtel want to pay $45 mil, but "secretly" are prepared to pay $50m.
Ch7/10 wants $60m, but will only go as low as $55m.

Should we start up a collection for the difference?

[Triple B]

Originally posted by Annie Haddad
Foxtel want to pay $45 mil, but "secretly" are prepared to pay $50m.
Ch7/10 wants $60m, but will only go as low as $55m.

Should we start up a collection for the difference?

The AFL should fund the difference.

[AnnieH]

Originally posted by BBB
The AFL should fund the difference.

Why? They sold the broadcast rights. Why give them a refund or discount? It's a business, and a big one at that.

Foxtel should just cough up $55m and get on with it.

If Foxtel don't come to the party, they will find that many people will not actually PAY to watch their TV and they will lose money. Bad business decision.
They will lose considerably more than $5m?

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Annie Haddad
Foxtel should just cough up $55m and get on with it.

Why shouldn't 7/10 drop their price and get on with it?

[wheels27]

Originally posted by Annie Haddad
They will lose considerably more than $5m?

I don't know if they are as worried as they used to be about losing subscribers, they make a bit from all the ads they now run.

[AnnieH]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Why shouldn't 7/10 drop their price and get on with it?

Ahem ...

Foxtel want to pay $45 mil, but "secretly" are prepared to pay $50m.
Ch7/10 wants $60m, but will only go as low as $55m.

.... and fair enough too. This is a business Bloods.

They paid quite a bit of money for the right to broadcast. If Foxtel don't come to the party, the two channels will play all eight games per week (albeit not live), which will probably mean that the southern and western cities have to wait till midnight for their footy just like Syd & Brisvegas do.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Annie Haddad
Foxtel want to pay $45 mil, but "secretly" are prepared to pay $50m.
Ch7/10 wants $60m, but will only go as low as $55m.

So then why should

Foxtel should just cough up $55m and get on with it.

?

Foxtel are prepared to go to $50m.
7/10 are prepared to accept as low as $55m.

Saying that Foxtel should make the final step is not a compromise.

[Triple B]

Originally posted by Annie Haddad
Why? They sold the broadcast rights. Why give them a refund or discount? It's a business, and a big one at that.

Why, because as usual, the AFL stuffed up when they just grabbed the highest bidder without them setting the boundaries.

They would have been much better off insisting that the 7/10 bid include a clause that Pay TV are allowed to pick up the slack if they decide it is not in their best interests ratings wise to broadcast games live, eg. Friday nights into Syd/Bris.

Unfortunately the ridiculous anti-siphoning laws do not allow the AFL to sell games to free-to-air and keep some for Pay-TV, so they must have it written in the contract that games not shown live by the winning bidder must be given to Pay TV to be broadcast live, not leave it up to the winning bidder to decide what to do, such as let Ch31 show them.

Obviously the selling price to 7/10, whoever, would be lower, but this slack is picked up by Pay-TV paying for games they show live.

The bottom line is the AFL has more money than they know what to do with and if they are serious about fostering the game in the non-AFL states they must bear the cost of a reduced TV rights contract to have some sort of control over broadcasting into those markets.

[hammo]

The AFL may just kick in the final $5m to make it happen.