History for mjp2

I'm not sure the arguments above are seeing it as FFA will be seeing it.

FFA would be opening negotiations with something like:

Every game other than Nix games brings two sets of Australian audiences, one from each side.  That's double the value to Australian advertisers on Fox and doubles the Fox subscription interest relative to a Phoenix game.  Fox gets no value from the NZ audience as Sky are playing their own adds and collecting their own subscription revenues.

Welnix, you can have the Sky A-League license payments, less a contribution to A-League overheads.  That gives you full value for the NZ advertising audience and pay TV subscriptions that you are adding to the League.  It's pitiful and not worth our time, you can haggle directly with Sky.  But we are reducing your share of the Fox revenues to half what the Australian based sides get, because your games are only worth half to our broadcaster.

I am pretty sure that FFA could drop the 'Nix, loose our 27 games, have less hassles with difficult time slots for Aussie viewing, not have the administrative overhead of dealing with the Asian Federation and FIFA and not loose much Fox revenue, after saving the payout to Nix from Fox revenues at present.  Unless we deliver better Sky revenues we must be marginal to them.  They loose 10% of the games but those games are only worth 5% of the audience for Fox so wouldn't reduce their payments to FFA much and FFA then save on their payments to us.  And other clubs reduce travel costs.

The Breakers and Warriors would face the same issue but I expect the Sky deals for those teams would be very much more lucrative to the NBL and NRL than 'Nix brings to FFA through Sky.  Both those teams have Auckland and wider national support.  Nix less so.

Of course it could be as simple as Sky's audience numbers are too low because most of you guys watch all the games on pirated streams ;)

I'm not suggesting that they are about to kick us out.  But I think it's not so much of a no-brainer that Nix stay in the competition as people think.  I'd at the very least expect them to be engaging strongly with Welnix on how to grow the NZ Sky TV revenues, and how to get greater NZ wide television audiences and revenues.  Particularly before they handed over a long term license agreement and agreed to continue the same level of payments to Welnix as the other clubs.

I'm not sure the arguments above are seeing it as FFA will be seeing it.

FFA would be opening negotiations with something like:

Every game other than Nix games brings two sets of Australian audiences, one from each side.  That's double the value to Australian advertisers on Fox and doubles the Fox subscription interest relative to a Phoenix game.  Fox gets no value from the NZ audience as Sky are playing their own adds and collecting their own subscription revenues.

Welnix, you can have the Sky A-League license payments, less a contribution to A-League overheads.  That gives you full value for the NZ advertising audience and pay TV subscriptions that you are adding to the League.  It's pitiful and not worth our time, you can haggle directly with Sky.  But we are reducing your share of the Fox revenues to half what the Australian based sides get, because your games are only worth half to our broadcaster.

I am pretty sure that FFA could drop the 'Nix, loose our 27 games, have less hassles with difficult time slots for Aussie viewing, not have the administrative overhead of dealing with the Asian Federation and FIFA and not loose much Fox revenue, after saving the payout to Nix from Fox revenues at present.  Unless we deliver better Sky revenues we must be marginal to them.  They loose 10% of the games but those games are only worth 5% of the audience for Fox so wouldn't reduce their payments to FFA much and FFA then save on their payments to us.

The Breakers and Warriors would face the same issue but I expect the Sky deals for those teams would be very much more lucrative to the NBL and NRL than 'Nix brings to FFA through Sky.  Both those teams have Auckland and wider national support.  Nix less so.

Of course it could be as simple as Sky's audience numbers are too low because most of you guys watch all the games on pirated streams ;)

I'm not sure the arguments above are seeing it as FFA will be seeing it.

FFA would be opening negotiations with something like:

Every game other than Nix games brings two sets of Australian audiences, one from each side.  That's double the value to Australian advertisers on Fox and doubles the Fox subscription interest relative to a Phoenix game.  Fox gets no value from the NZ audience as Sky are playing their own adds and collecting their own subscription revenues.

Welnix, you can have the Sky A-League license payments, less a contribution to A-League overheads.  That gives you full value for the NZ advertising audience and pay TV subscriptions that you are adding to the League.  It's pitiful and not worth our time, you can haggle directly with Sky.  But we are reducing your share of the Fox revenues to half what the Australian based sides get, because your games are only worth half to our broadcaster.

I am pretty sure that FFA could drop the 'Nix, loose our 27 games, have less hassles with difficult time slots for Aussie viewing, not have the administrative overhead of dealing with the Asian Federation and FIFA and not loose much Fox revenue, after saving the payout to Nix from Fox revenues at present.  Unless we deliver better Sky revenues we must be marginal to them.  They loose 10% of the games but those games are only worth 5% of the audience for Fox so wouldn't reduce their payments to FFA much and FFA then save on their payments to us.

The Breakers and Warriors would face the same issue but I expect the Sky deals for those teams would be very much more lucrative to the NBL and NRL than 'Nix brings to FFA through Sky.  Both those teams have Auckland and wider national support.  Nix less so.

Of course it could be as simple as Sky's audience numbers are too low because most of you guys watch all the games on pirated threads ;)