SANFL on Channel 9 in 2014?

[whufc]

So the SANFL has to come up with roughly 900k

[whufc]

Playing devils advocate for a bit.

Is the value of having SANFL football on channel 9 worth the extra 900K a year if we cant get sponsors to pay for it.

Will Channel 9 just broadcast the Saturday afternoon game as ABC have done if so...............

im presuming it will only be broadcast to South Australia, if so then will having it on main stream tv take away from attendances therefore taking away from clubs game day income.

Secondily is there a big enough market to broadcast too in SA, you would think if it was for example a full card of SANFL games on the Saturday you would think most of the 'potential viewers' would be at SANFL games, amatuer/country football/netball/ watching the AFL game etc etc

Thirdly would this require the SANFL fixtures to be revolved around the Saturday Arvo game, example being they would only ever have 1 Saturday Afternoon game a weekend in an attempt to maximise viewers. (would that be a bad thing or not)

Extra sponsorship would be great but thats only going to last provided Channel 9 get viewers watching.

Alot of interesting points to discuss imho.

[FlyingHigh]

Would be great to have it on Channel 9 again, as I think this would broaden the game to the masses a bit, as hopefully there'd be a little more advertising and perhaps Nine news segments.

Unfortunately, I think if we were able to find that kind of money, it would be better spent elsewhere on the league, including junior development, other promotion and player retention.

But who knows, perhaps without Ch 9 having other Saturday afternoon sport it might get shown into other states?

Oh, and it was 1992 that Ch 9 last broadcast the SANFL.

[am Bays]

Not sure it's going to happen but given it is with McGuire Media one of teh conditions I'd be asking for is it replayed on fox Footy during the week to further broaden our coverage

[FlyingHigh]

Good idea am

[Dutchy]

With the additional digital channels these days maybe they could be more flexible with times etc? Even cover a Friday night game on GEM or similar?

[heater31]

With the additional digital channels these days maybe they could be more flexible with times etc? Even cover a Friday night game on GEM or similar?

Already show NRL on there don't they into SA?

[The Dark Knight]

With the additional digital channels these days maybe they could be more flexible with times etc? Even cover a Friday night game on GEM or similar?

Already show NRL on there don't they into SA?

Yes.

[whufc]

Would be interesting to see what the ratings are like for the current SANFL coverage.

I would also be interested to hear how many viewers Channel 9 would expect to get to make it worthwhile.

Also would want to know what they expect from the SANFL to broadcast games, will they do it as it currently is or are they doing it on the expectation the SANFL has the power/crows reserves sides in the league and therefore each week will have one of these teams involved in their broadcast.

Personally i wouldnt think the SANFL would rate well in just SA, so i would be interested to hear why channel 9 are so interested.

If they are in it for the right reasons then i think it would be great.

[Big Phil]

How much does the SANFL pay for the ABC to cover the games?

$70k

I know that is what the article said, but I have heard it was closer to the $100K mark...

I've just had it confirmed, from someone who would know, that is only $70K and has been that amount for a while, now...

[mighty_tiger_79]

With the additional digital channels these days maybe they could be more flexible with times etc? Even cover a Friday night game on GEM or similar?

Already show NRL on there don't they into SA?

Yes.

so friday night is NRL, but they dont cover anything on a saturday night do they???

[BrekkyDJ]

How much does the SANFL pay for the ABC to cover the games?

$70k

I know that is what the article said, but I have heard it was closer to the $100K mark...

I've just had it confirmed, from someone who would know, that is only $70K and has been that amount for a while, now...

Pretty cheap.

I read that the ABC wanted $250k from AFL Tasmania to do their state league games in 2012.

AFL Tas said no and now have zero coverage.

[whufc]

Do you know if that has effected the Tasmanian League, are the attendances up or down, have clubs lost sponsors etc etc.

[CENTURION]

Spot on WHUFC its a ploy like you said wait till they start dangling the carrots quite a few clubs will be biting for sure.

EXACTLY!

[SimonH]

The NBL have created their own online channel NBL.TV which televises every game for around $50 a year for subscribers. The costs are off-set by advertisements and on-selling the games to betting agencies around the world. Not sure if that aspect could really work for the SANFL but I would assume pretty much every game is already taped for scouting purposes. It also reduces the production costs significantly for any network that might want to get involved broadcasting wise when the package is already dished up to them.

Obviously Ch 9/ABC would be better for exposure but good to see it is something they're considering.

At least on the front page, nbl.tv is a good-looking product. It's $79 pa, $19 per month or $9 for a one-weekend subscription. There are enough people prepared to pay to watch SANFL to make it worth a go (and to get out of the horse and buggy 'we'll send you a DVD of one game for $25, which will arrive in 7 days' model currently on the SANFL website), but there needs to be transparency so people don't feel ripped off:
a) there's no way that there are going to be more resources available in 2014 than currently, so presumably only one game per round could have multiple cameras and a dedicated commentary team— if you're asking for people's money upfront, you need to be able to guarantee that there will be a minimum number of matches-of-the-round featuring their club through the season,
b) will the other matches be synced to radio commentary (as with the SANFL's current YouTube highlights packages) or have nothing but crowd noise?

Obviously in terms of pricing you have to cut your cloth to the professionalism of the service you provide. That said, as a Sydneysider I would pay $79 pa in a heartbeat to have access to every Norwood game online, live or on demand.

And it's certainly true that once you have the content produced at a sufficiently professional level then you can flog it off anywhere (principally Australian FTA multi-channels or pay TV; I suppose international/betting agency sales are possible, but you'd hardly count on them) for rebroadcast, offsetting your production costs. The proliferation of digital multichannels on FTA all of which need to find stuff to show, and the ever-hungry Foxtel, means that there's certainly a market for the product. It speaks for itself that Foxtel was so keen to get their hands on more live footy product, that they invented their own competition!

[CUTTERMAN]

If as suggested in the article, costs per game were up to $40k, that's $160k per round. Lets say there's 20 rounds that comes to over $3 million to cover every game.
Assume that every club has about 2,000 paying members and are willing to pay for a full package of every game it would cost about $200 per supporter per year (going on 16,000 members). I reckon it'd be worth the SANFL & WAFL getting together and see if a one stop shop for both leagues is worthwhile and a way of cutting costs and gaining a wider exposure.
This is by no means anything to go by but I reckon if its going to be online all games need to be covered with the same production values.

[whufc]

Did I read right on adelaidenow that country viewers in SA get channel nine from Sydney not local content, so essentially they would miss out??

[heater31]

Did I read right on adelaidenow that country viewers in SA get channel nine from Sydney not local content, so essentially they would miss out??

Yes. Don't get the AFL footy shows until well after they have aired in Adelaide.

[Brodlach]

With Nine buying back Adelaide, that may change.

[purch]

Maybe I'm being a bit cynical but the following Rucci quote (the bit in bold) made me think about this thread:

An update from Rucci in the 'Tiser (Also on Adelaide Now):

******************************************************************
FIVE THINGS YOU WILL HEAR (in the "reserves" debate)

1. TOP-UP PLAYERS
ADELAIDE says it wants to offer "top-up" positions in its reserves team by borrowing under-age players from its SANFL rivals. When this thought was put forward for the NT entry to be the SANFL's 10th team, the SANFL clubs put up the roadblock to Darwin. What has changed?

2. CROWDS
AFL reserves teams will boost attendances in the SANFL (which is challenged to grow). So how do the Norwood, Glenelg, Sturt fans who are also Crows and Power supporters in the AFL decide which team carries their heart in the SANFL the AFL reserves teams or their original SANFL club? Such cannibalism of SANFL supporter bases is hardly likely to increase SANFL attendances. And how does the new generation of football fans ever choose a SANFL club if they grow up only thinking of the Crows and Power?

3. MODELS
IF having AFL reserves teams in the SANFL is such a great model why has it not worked for the VFL in a market with stronger commercial options and a larger population base? To refer back to the promise of improved crowds, check the VFL numbers since that competition was compromised by AFL clubs.

4. TELEVISION
IF -- and it is a mighty if -- commercial television is (after 20 years) to suddenly find interest in covering SANFL football, commercial reality will dictate the game of the week is always the Crows and Power reserves. How does that help the established SANFL clubs build their development profiles?