| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
I'm wondering if the $ from this deal to clubs makes the so called tax on the wealthier clubs redundant?
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
 |
John Wren 
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | | I'm wondering if the $ from this deal to clubs makes the so called tax on the wealthier clubs redundant? |
possibly. if the afl opts to buy eithad early then the current supposedly unenviable stadiums deals would be improved. this, in turn, might contribute to a lessening of the tax. does the afl wait until it gets the stadium for $1 or spend a few hundred million to change things now?
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Precarious
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Location: Sydney
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Lazza wrote: | | Can someone please tell me if the Saturday afternoon game (on whichever channel shows it) HAS to be delayed on TV? |
The game itself will be played at 3:20, so not delayed if shown FTA. In other words, sounds like the Saturday schedule will now be something like 1:45, 3:20, 4:40 ... rather than 1:45, 2:10, 4:40 ... |
|
|
|
|
Johnno75
Joined: 07 Oct 2010
Location: Wantirna
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I read it as Channel 7 will show 4 games a week in rounds that include a Thursday night game or public holiday game (could be up to 12 although a couple might include split rounds) and 3 games every other round.
Foxtel can offload the 3.20 Sat game to FTA TV for $30m a year. Nine has baulked at it. Well it's rumoured that Ch10 might pick it up, however they are a financial basket case, do they even have $30m to spend? SBS has more hope of buying the rights.
_________________
Human behavioural studies suggest people who use a lot of swear words tend to be more honest & trustworthy. |
|
|
|
|
Precarious
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Location: Sydney
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ Yep, that's how I read it too.
I think Fox on-selling to Ten will mainly be contingent on the ACCC permitting the News Corp buy-in into Ten.
If the buy-in is permitted, on-selling to Ten would give News a greater presence in FTA (which maybe they want considering the likely long term viability of pay TV?) and also a platform from which to plug Fox Footy and other Foxtel stuff in the meantime. |
|
|
|
|
Precarious
Joined: 20 Sep 2009
Location: Sydney
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Purely speculation, but the way things have played out in recent years, it looks like the big media players (and probably govt) are smoothing the transition away from as strong an emphasis on pay TV (which you'd think will struggle to compete long term given technological changes) in a way that enables NewsCorp, Telstra and others to get profits out of old investments before moving over to the new.
Ten was basically neutered by Packer and Murdoch, for instance, which had been building a free sports channel on One. This not only bought time for Foxtel, keeping its subscription model viable for a bit longer, but has made it cheaper to buy in to Ten. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
