Did it say which Monday?Originally posted by BBB
Is it Monday yet ??
Did it say which Monday?Originally posted by BBB
Is it Monday yet ??
Does God believe in Atheists?
Foxtel are only changing there tune because other wise too many subscribers would have left.Originally posted by Damien
Foxtel lift bid, Seven/Ten reduce asking price
MADNow this is a thread that i would expect on the ego -centric, wank session that is redandwhiteonline.com...
Pushin Limits
Foxtel want to pay $45 mil, but "secretly" are prepared to pay $50m.Originally posted by swantastic
Foxtel are only changing there tune because other wise too many subscribers would have left.
Ch7/10 wants $60m, but will only go as low as $55m.
Should we start up a collection for the difference?
Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.
The AFL should fund the difference.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?
Why? They sold the broadcast rights. Why give them a refund or discount? It's a business, and a big one at that.Originally posted by BBB
The AFL should fund the difference.
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?
Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.
Why shouldn't 7/10 drop their price and get on with it?Originally posted by Annie Haddad
Foxtel should just cough up $55m and get on with it.
Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.
"[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."
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.Originally posted by Annie Haddad
They will lose considerably more than $5m?
I hear not what you say, for the thunder of who you are.
Ahem ...Originally posted by NMWBloods
Why shouldn't 7/10 drop their price and get on with it?
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.
Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.
So then why shouldOriginally 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.
?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.
Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.
"[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."
Why, because as usual, the AFL stuffed up when they just grabbed the highest bidder without them setting the boundaries.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.
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.
The AFL may just kick in the final $5m to make it happen.
"As everyone knows our style of football is defensive and unattractive, and as such I have completely forgotten how to mark or kick over the years" - Brett Kirk
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks