Current version

Posted February 20, 2016 22:00 · last edited March 18, 2021 07:34

Royal wrote:
Ryan wrote:

The Phoenix asked to be in control of negotiating the next lot of TV rights on behalf of the FFA as they think they can get a better deal late last year. It used to be the FFAs problem but now it's the nix problem.

Sorry, but call me a dummy as I don't get it. Sky are the only channel interested in the rights. No free to air tv company that is run to make a profit, is interested in the slightest - nor should they be. So Sky bid against no one and get the best deal for themselves, as they should and are perfectly entitled to do. 

They are running a business here and must think their own "metrics" as well. Very few people watch A-League in NZ so we are lucky to have all matches shown. I doubt if any profit is made at all by Sky tv to show Nix games. 

So if the price to Sky goes up for whatever reason, if I was running the show at Sky, I'd probably have to say no. 

I don't get it when there are comments about making them pay more, or the crazy comments about putting the Nix on Free to Air TV. They aren't thought out. 

So the new deal says we are to improve tv ratings and bring in more revenue from TV rights. Short of tying people down and putting toothpicks in their eyelids, what sort of magic can possibly be weaved?

I see one answer - more games away from home, which builds up a wider fan base. Any others?

Edit: I have another - win the league, possibly more than once. We have 4 years

Sources required for your claims.

How do you know sky is the only interested party?

Why are comments about free to air not thought out?
Have you thought out why it works in Aus?  Why wouldn't that potentially work here?
Why do online services not offer a good alternative?  Or good option in conjunction?
Sky has the worst paid content streaming I have experienced so if they went online elsewhere I'd sub in a heartbeat

Of course sky is running a business.  You claim if they asked for more you would say no if you ran sky.
Does that mean you know how much sky makes from the Nix and what they pay?
How do those numbers stack up against other sports? Be specific please.

You're one question about what can they do?
Make the brand more appealing.
The NRL, warriors and Sky all worked together to make it the juggernaut it is today.  The Nix may never match league but if done right they can still be huge

How would more games elsewhere help?  Please use specifics based on how it has worked in the past

Previous versions

1 version
Unknown editor edited March 18, 2021 07:34
Royal wrote:
Ryan wrote:

The Phoenix asked to be in control of negotiating the next lot of TV rights on behalf of the FFA as they think they can get a better deal late last year. It used to be the FFAs problem but now it's the nix problem.

Sorry, but call me a dummy as I don't get it. Sky are the only channel interested in the rights. No free to air tv company that is run to make a profit, is interested in the slightest - nor should they be. So Sky bid against no one and get the best deal for themselves, as they should and are perfectly entitled to do. 

They are running a business here and must think their own "metrics" as well. Very few people watch A-League in NZ so we are lucky to have all matches shown. I doubt if any profit is made at all by Sky tv to show Nix games. 

So if the price to Sky goes up for whatever reason, if I was running the show at Sky, I'd probably have to say no. 

I don't get it when there are comments about making them pay more, or the crazy comments about putting the Nix on Free to Air TV. They aren't thought out. 

So the new deal says we are to improve tv ratings and bring in more revenue from TV rights. Short of tying people down and putting toothpicks in their eyelids, what sort of magic can possibly be weaved?

I see one answer - more games away from home, which builds up a wider fan base. Any others?

Edit: I have another - win the league, possibly more than once. We have 4 years

Sources required for your claims.

How do you know sky is the only interested party?

Why are comments about free to air not thought out?
Have you thought out why it works in Aus?  Why wouldn't that potentially work here?
Why do online services not offer a good alternative?  Or good option in conjunction?
Sky has the worst paid content streaming I have experienced so if they went online elsewhere I'd sub in a heartbeat

Of course sky is running a business.  You claim if they asked for more you would say no if you ran sky.
Does that mean you know how much sky makes from the Nix and what they pay?
How do those numbers stack up against other sports? Be specific please.

You're one question about what can they do?
Make the brand more appealing.
The NRL, warriors and Sky all worked together to make it the juggernaut it is today.  The Nix may never match league but if done right they can still be huge

How would more games elsewhere help?  Please use specifics based on how it has worked in the past