Jump to content

world cup


Recommended Posts


1 hour ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

Said something like league has a more diverse fan base 

Anyone from NZ expand on this? I think I have it in my head that NZ league fans are mostly Pacific Island heritage or Maori? 

 

Not sure about the fans but the overwhelming majority of NZ RL players are Maori or pacific island origin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

This is just in New Zealand. I mean, we already have it in UK with BBC. 

Surely someone was going to get these rights in New Zealand so is this announcement so new or surprising? 

Let’s not bother trying to get publicity for anything!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago sport was shown on free to air channels. Then along came SkyTV and by paying more took all the sport they wanted. It meant that the NRL and SL was now only available to subscribers. Sky does own a free to air channel (Prime) and delayed Warriors coverage was shown there. 

Now Spark is taking on Sky and by getting the WC RL (it's first foray in to the code), is surely hoping to widen its subscription base to a new segment of sports fans. If successful, it may bid for the NRL rights which are coming up for negotiation. Sky got the NRL coverage relatively cheaply because free to air channels couldn't compete. The NRL may get more if a bidding war commences. I wonder how many customers Sky would lose if they lost the NRL? 

Having said all that, I'm not an expert on the subject but that's a personal perspective. 

My blog: https://rugbyl.blogspot.co.nz/

It takes wisdom to know when a discussion has run its course.

It takes reasonableness to end that discussion. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Mark S said:

Let’s not bother trying to get publicity for anything!

The fact that someone has bought the rights for the WC in the UK for New Zealand is hardly ground-breaking publicity.  Now if NO ONE had bought the Aussie rights, well as Crocodile Dundee would say, "Now that's what I call publicity!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, RayCee said:

Years ago sport was shown on free to air channels. Then along came SkyTV and by paying more took all the sport they wanted. It meant that the NRL and SL was now only available to subscribers. Sky does own a free to air channel (Prime) and delayed Warriors coverage was shown there. 

Now Spark is taking on Sky and by getting the WC RL (it's first foray in to the code), is surely hoping to widen its subscription base to a new segment of sports fans. If successful, it may bid for the NRL rights which are coming up for negotiation. Sky got the NRL coverage relatively cheaply because free to air channels couldn't compete. The NRL may get more if a bidding war commences. I wonder how many customers Sky would lose if they lost the NRL? 

Having said all that, I'm not an expert on the subject but that's a personal perspective. 

 I get the impression they would lose quite a few considering they pay so much for it. Would I be correct in saying that Sky pay the NRL $30m per year.

It was interesting to read the comments in response to that article, there was complaints about Sparks reach and service quality. There was one particular post from someone in rural NZ who said they are unable to stream live sport because they can`t get sufficient internet speed where they live. You have to really feel for fans like that.  It sounds like a case where the rights have been sold with money rather reach in mind

'Yet another nail in the coffin for Sky! 
I’m not sure who to feel more angry about: Sky for not bidding enough, Rugby league NZ for knowingly cutting out a huge number of fans, or Spark Sport for continuing to bid for coverage they are unable to provide effectively.
Their coverage of the Black Caps v England test series was another bumbling unprofessional effort."
 
 
"Go away spark sport. What about all the rural people who don't have sufficient internet speed to watch? They just miss out again like the cricket and rugby World Cup? It's a rubbish service, make it available to watch to the whole country not just a select few with good internet. Poor form spark "
 
I have seen figures before on the number of New Zealanders that watch the different sports. Interestingly League held up very well, way behind the number of Kiwis that tune into All-Blacks matches, but not that far behind provincial union.
Seems the WC may be a test run for Spark to see whether it will make a bid for the NRL rights.
I`d love to know how much they are paying for the WC rights , if the WC is going to make a decent profit, broadcast rights are essential.
 
 
 
 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 minutes ago, Rupert Prince said:

The fact that someone has bought the rights for the WC in the UK for New Zealand is hardly ground-breaking publicity.  Now if NO ONE had bought the Aussie rights, well as Crocodile Dundee would say, "Now that's what I call publicity!"

Just on that point I actually don't believe an Australian broadcast partner has been announced yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, UTK said:

 

Just on that point I actually don't believe an Australian broadcast partner has been announced yet. 

Good point.  The word 'international' is not on their lexicon.

However the words 'Origin Player' has kudos.

You have prompted me, and on looking - a company called RDA were brought in to manage the international distribution rights... except GB.   But it was just back in February.  That was just 4 months ago.

 

So maybe Crocodile may yet be right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.