$1B future AFL TV rights? - tell 'em they're dreamin'.....
David Clayton
negotiations..... not!
http://www.theage.com.au/business/seven-losses-total-19b-20091102-htjj.html
Seven losses total $1.9b
MICHAEL EVANS AND STUART WASHINGTON
November 3, 2009
SEVEN Media Group has slashed more than $1.5 billion from the value of its
television network, pushing it to a $1.9 billion loss in annual accounts
released yesterday.
In making the write-downs, the alliance between Kerry Stokes' Seven
Network and private equity firm KKR has plunged to ''negative equity'' of
$1.7 billion, as Seven's liabilities outstrip its assets by $1.7 billion.
The result reflects the debt-laden, private-equity ownership structure of
two of Australia's biggest media companies, Seven and Nine, owned by PBL
Media.
........
Woofdog
"David Clayton" <dcs...@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2009.11.02....@NOSPAM.myrealbox.com...
> Yep, the Australian TV market has cash to throw around for the next rights
> negotiations..... not!
>
Both 7 and 9 in same boat. Ch 10 not mentioned. Question is, would Ch 7 or
Ch 9 drop their bid for the footy, I suspect not. It is probably the biggest
earner 7 have looking at the total crap that they broadcast. Meanwhile,
sitting in the wings and not mentioned, is Ch 10, whom, I'm sure would love
to pick up footy as sole broadcaster for their ONE sports channel. The
current contract runs out in 2011 and thus at the end of next year,
negotiations will commence. Personally, I don't think the current situation
will make a skereth of diference to Ch 7, or Ch10 for 2011. Seven is
releived to have, what it considers is it's 'right', to once again have
footy. And, part of its deal for this contract, was $87 million in 'free'
advertising. This then can be written off as a 'loss', both for accounts and
taxation purposes, but it was not money it actually had to pay, and as they
control advertising it could indeed, be no actuall loss at all. All All
three will be in the mix for the footy, as will Fox, whom, I believe, should
NOT be given ANY exclusivity to broadcast our natioanl sport. Ten, I'm
certain, are even now arranging sponsors etc for financing the next
contract, as are the other channels, I suspect. It will probably be another
obscene figure, which does nothing for the sport, clubs, players or
supporters.
Eddie
Mister Biggus
arent the USA with the figures they splash out over there.
I still wanna know what happens if all the TV stations hold out and
offer 1/2 what they are paying now..
The AFL would shit their pants. They would have to accept it. The TV
Stations now really own the AFL, and have them by the balls. AFL has
no say in what happens, whats shown, when it is shown, how many ads
etc..
Woofdog
"Mister Biggus" <_b0...@gmale.kom> wrote in message
news:vbuve5telhdv07jru...@4ax.com...
Problem is, that all TV stations will not hold out and offer half as they
want to win over the opposition. Will be interesting though
Eddie
CDK
I suggest you look back in history and see that the VFL/AFL will play
ittheir way if the TV networks don't play their game
CDK
Mister Biggus
enough to play it against them.
CDK
> Yep, but the AFL NEEDS that cash... The TV stations should be smart
> enough to play it against them.
>
They do?
I would suggest that teh AFL could easily play chicken and win with the
networks. According to the 2008 Annual report the AFL had $50million in
cash and net assets of $104,000,000. That is a pretty comfortable
position for them to be in.
CDK
Power Mad
"CDK" <Michel...@SistineChapel.com> wrote...
>
> According to the 2008 Annual report the AFL had $50million in cash and net
> assets of $104,000,000. That is a pretty comfortable position for them to
> be in.
>
>
under way.
CDK
Maybe, maybe not
I suspect after the 2009 year the AFL would be in a much better position
than that mentioned above
CDK
Mister Biggus
effort, they wont be so happy.