For the last several years I have been able to watch replays of all matches on the Telstra T-box 24 hours after the game.

Telstra have just announced changes to the T-box and it appears the only way to guarantee to see all Demons games this year on a TV is through Foxtel. Have I got this wrong, please someone tell me there are other options rather forking out even more money again.

1 minute ago, Flying Cloud said:

For the last several years I have been able to watch replays of all matches on the Telstra T-box 24 hours after the game.

Telstra have just announced changes to the T-box and it appears the only way to guarantee to see all Demons games this year on a TV is through Foxtel. Have I got this wrong, please someone tell me there are other options rather forking out even more money again.

Are you a Telstra mobile customer?

 

1 minute ago, Demonland said:

Are you a Telstra mobile customer?

 

Yes, but doesn't Live Pass only show on a laptop or tablet and not on the a TV. I do have Google Chrome, but I understand this doesn't work with Live Pass.

This could be a good revenue-raiser for the MFC. As we are all required to continue to lavish increasing monies upon the current providers for the honour of seeing the Demon replay elements, why don't we/the Club do the unexpected, film/tape our own HD for members and supporters - who might each pay, say, $10 for a season of available replays of our games, including recording rights to build a library of replay choices? Otherwise, the current system and its restrictions could only be classed as 'exploitation'.

13 minutes ago, Flying Cloud said:

Yes, but doesn't Live Pass only show on a laptop or tablet and not on the a TV. I do have Google Chrome, but I understand this doesn't work with Live Pass.

That is correct. You cannot use the AFL app anymore to stream or airplay or cable in to a TV. See this thread for more information.

Unfortunately your only option to watch replays on a TV is to subscribe to Foxtel and record the game.

8 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

This could be a good revenue-raiser for the MFC. As we are all required to continue to lavish increasing monies upon the current providers for the honour of seeing the Demon replay elements, why don't we/the Club do the unexpected, film/tape our own HD for members and supporters - who might each pay, say, $10 for a season of available replays of our games, including recording rights to build a library of replay choices? Otherwise, the current system and its restrictions could only be classed as 'exploitation'.

The networks pay for broadcast and rebroadcast rights. The MFC can't do what you are suggesting as they don't own the rights to resell them to their supporters.

Hopefully BF will have replays again this year

59 minutes ago, Demonland said:

That is correct. You cannot use the AFL app anymore to stream or airplay or cable in to a TV. See this thread for more information.

Unfortunately your only option to watch replays on a TV is to subscribe to Foxtel and record the game.

I found that I can cast replays to my TV, just not live streams.  So it may suffice for the OP.

 

10 minutes ago, sue said:

I found that I can cast replays to my TV, just not live streams.  So it may suffice for the OP.

 

Thanks that information. I'll test it out too tonight.

1 hour ago, Deemania since 56 said:

This could be a good revenue-raiser for the MFC. As we are all required to continue to lavish increasing monies upon the current providers for the honour of seeing the Demon replay elements, why don't we/the Club do the unexpected, film/tape our own HD for members and supporters - who might each pay, say, $10 for a season of available replays of our games, including recording rights to build a library of replay choices? Otherwise, the current system and its restrictions could only be classed as 'exploitation'.

The current system and its restrictions could only be classed as a good business model. The AFL is paid for the rights to show the games. The clubs already share the benefits. The broadcasters have paid for exclusivity so they can sell advertising and/or subscriptions. That is not exploitation it is business. At some point in the future I expect the AFL to keep all or some of the rights and  sell their own advertising - subscriptions services, perhaps create & run their own AFL channel. In one way or another we will have to pay.

31 minutes ago, sue said:

I found that I can cast replays to my TV, just not live streams.  So it may suffice for the OP.

 

Yes you can. Could last year as well. You can also cast the AFLW games

30 minutes ago, ManDee said:

The current system and its restrictions could only be classed as a good business model. The AFL is paid for the rights to show the games. The clubs already share the benefits. The broadcasters have paid for exclusivity so they can sell advertising and/or subscriptions. That is not exploitation it is business. At some point in the future I expect the AFL to keep all or some of the rights and  sell their own advertising - subscriptions services, perhaps create & run their own AFL channel. In one way or another we will have to pay.

The problem is you can make that argument for anything the AFL or foxtel etc choose to do.  Doesn't make it right.  There is no competition  so we have no way of knowing what is reasonable and what is exploitation.  Seems  to me that the interests of Foxtel are being put above that of the humble AFL fan.

20 minutes ago, sue said:

The problem is you can make that argument for anything the AFL or foxtel etc choose to do.  Doesn't make it right.  There is no competition  so we have no way of knowing what is reasonable and what is exploitation.  Seems  to me that the interests of Foxtel are being put above that of the humble AFL fan.

From :-http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=597

Timeline of VFL/AFL Broadcast Rights

1960 – the VFL rejects an offer of 14,000 pounds to broadcast the last quarter and replays

• 1971 – Ch2 and Ch7 pay $200,000 a year for 5 years ($1 million) to 1975 (replays)
•  1976 – Ch2 and Ch7 pay $600,000 a year for 5 years (3 million) to 1980 (replays)
•  1977 – Ch7 pays $200,000 to broadcast the night series 1977 – First live grand final broadcast, Ch7 pays $100,000 for that and again for the following grand final
• 1982 – Vic government bans the playing of VFL on Sunday
• 1985 – Ch7 pay 3.5 million for 1986 tv rights
• 1986 – Ch7 offer 2.7 million for 1987 season, offer rejected by the VFL
• 1986 – Broadcoms offer is accepted after exceeding the 1985 amount, rights onsold to ABC for 1.5 million
• 1986 – Ch7 rating plummet, offers broadcom 9 million to win rights back
• 1987 – Ch7 pays $6 million a year ($30 million) for 5 years from 1988 – 1992
• 1992 – Ch7 pays $17 million a year for 1993 – 1998 (100 million)
• 1998 – Ch7 Pays $40 million a year for rights to 2001
• 2001 – Fox, Ch9 and Ch10 pays $500 million for rights for 5 years from 2002-2006, Radio nets the AFl 2 million
• 2006 – Ch7, Ch10 and Foxtel bid $750 million for 5 years from 2007-2011, Radio nets the AFl 8 million
• 2011 – Ch7, Foxtel and Telstra bid 1.25 billion for 5 years to 2017. Radio 23.2 million -$250 million per year
• ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• The current deal is $2.508 billion for 6 years - $418 million per year.
• This is a business and the AFL play this game well, the supporter is becoming less important as time goes on.

16 minutes ago, ManDee said:

From :-http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=597

Timeline of VFL/AFL Broadcast Rights

1960 – the VFL rejects an offer of 14,000 pounds to broadcast the last quarter and replays

• 1971 – Ch2 and Ch7 pay $200,000 a year for 5 years ($1 million) to 1975 (replays)
•  1976 – Ch2 and Ch7 pay $600,000 a year for 5 years (3 million) to 1980 (replays)
•  1977 – Ch7 pays $200,000 to broadcast the night series 1977 – First live grand final broadcast, Ch7 pays $100,000 for that and again for the following grand final
• 1982 – Vic government bans the playing of VFL on Sunday
• 1985 – Ch7 pay 3.5 million for 1986 tv rights
• 1986 – Ch7 offer 2.7 million for 1987 season, offer rejected by the VFL
• 1986 – Broadcoms offer is accepted after exceeding the 1985 amount, rights onsold to ABC for 1.5 million
• 1986 – Ch7 rating plummet, offers broadcom 9 million to win rights back
• 1987 – Ch7 pays $6 million a year ($30 million) for 5 years from 1988 – 1992
• 1992 – Ch7 pays $17 million a year for 1993 – 1998 (100 million)
• 1998 – Ch7 Pays $40 million a year for rights to 2001
• 2001 – Fox, Ch9 and Ch10 pays $500 million for rights for 5 years from 2002-2006, Radio nets the AFl 2 million
• 2006 – Ch7, Ch10 and Foxtel bid $750 million for 5 years from 2007-2011, Radio nets the AFl 8 million
• 2011 – Ch7, Foxtel and Telstra bid 1.25 billion for 5 years to 2017. Radio 23.2 million -$250 million per year
• ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• The current deal is $2.508 billion for 6 years - $418 million per year.
• This is a business and the AFL play this game well, the supporter is becoming less important as time goes on.

Hard to argue against the right of the afl and its media partners to protect their product when the are paying for it.

But without breaking the rules of DL, which i fully understand and respect, it is not that hard to find replays of our matches on the internet

51 minutes ago, ManDee said:

From :-http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=597

Timeline of VFL/AFL Broadcast Rights

1960 – the VFL rejects an offer of 14,000 pounds to broadcast the last quarter and replays

• 1971 – Ch2 and Ch7 pay $200,000 a year for 5 years ($1 million) to 1975 (replays)
•  1976 – Ch2 and Ch7 pay $600,000 a year for 5 years (3 million) to 1980 (replays)
•  1977 – Ch7 pays $200,000 to broadcast the night series 1977 – First live grand final broadcast, Ch7 pays $100,000 for that and again for the following grand final
• 1982 – Vic government bans the playing of VFL on Sunday
• 1985 – Ch7 pay 3.5 million for 1986 tv rights
• 1986 – Ch7 offer 2.7 million for 1987 season, offer rejected by the VFL
• 1986 – Broadcoms offer is accepted after exceeding the 1985 amount, rights onsold to ABC for 1.5 million
• 1986 – Ch7 rating plummet, offers broadcom 9 million to win rights back
• 1987 – Ch7 pays $6 million a year ($30 million) for 5 years from 1988 – 1992
• 1992 – Ch7 pays $17 million a year for 1993 – 1998 (100 million)
• 1998 – Ch7 Pays $40 million a year for rights to 2001
• 2001 – Fox, Ch9 and Ch10 pays $500 million for rights for 5 years from 2002-2006, Radio nets the AFl 2 million
• 2006 – Ch7, Ch10 and Foxtel bid $750 million for 5 years from 2007-2011, Radio nets the AFl 8 million
• 2011 – Ch7, Foxtel and Telstra bid 1.25 billion for 5 years to 2017. Radio 23.2 million -$250 million per year
• ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• The current deal is $2.508 billion for 6 years - $418 million per year.
• This is a business and the AFL play this game well, the supporter is becoming less important as time goes on.

not sure what your point is here

we all know that certain companies pay big money for the rights

we know they are in the business to make profits

but they have plenty of options......which greatly affect us mug punters

do they charge a thousand people $418,000 , a million people $418,  2 million people $230 or 3 million people $100....etc etc

do they sell packages i.e. all teams, all games all replays or something less like just your team....etc etc

and then there is all the advertising $s accruing as a result of the rights where the model with most subscribers delivers the most advertising $s

so just saying they are a business who bought the rights and can do what they like is just too simplistic

they can certainly get away with a lot just because they are a monopoly

I would happily pay a small fee, on par with what the AFL app charges, to be able to watch Melbourne games live on my TV.

But TV rights are apparently different to streaming rights, even though in my home there is no difference between an internet streaming device and my TV.

My TV is an internet enabled device and should be treated as such by the relevant stakeholders. I do not watch free to air and will not pay extortionate 'package' rates to foxtel for content I will not watch to view 2 hours a week of content I do watch (1 Melbourne game per week).

They're forcing an out-dated business model down the public's throat and frankly it makes me angry. I am a 32 year old male white collar worker with a family. I sit in a highly valued demographic for advertisers because of my disposable income and age. Their advertisers can't reach me because they're using this idiotic agreement that says internet streaming should be restricted to a 7 inch diagonal screen. In my house all screens are streaming devices.

I am literally sitting here saying I am willing to pay for the AFL's content. Real dollars. Right now. But I want to watch it in HD on my TV screen, not on my piddly little tablet/phone.

Let's have a little perspective here AFL. I pay $18 per month for a Netlix subscription, which provides 4 family members with countless hours of entertainment every week. Lets say, conservatively, 1 hour per day per person. 28 hours of TV per week for $18 a month.

All I'm asking is 2 hours a week, for 1 person (1 MFC game per week). I'd even pay the same rate as I pay Netflix - $18 per month.

The only way I can get this content is to pay Foxtel $50 a month. For one screen. For 2 hours a week, for content 1 person in the family will watch and a whole lot of crud mixed in. Or I can pay Telstra $100 ($12.50 per month for an 8 month season) to watch it on my goddamn phone.

These are not options. These are carefully curated business practices designed to make me pay more (Foxtel) for less (2 hours a week).

Foxtel use AFL as a loss leader to sell their subscriptions.

The sports package premium itself would go nowhere near what they pay for the rights.

So that begs the question. In an internet world selling just the sports package what would we mugs pay?

Hard to say to the last dollar but in simple terms the rights are now worth $418M per year. Let's assume there are 1 million people prepared to pay for an AFL subscription. At that fee we would need to each pay $418 per year plus a share of production costs.

As you can see if you only took foxtel for the six months of the AFL season you are getting line ball on what we would need to pay under an AFL internet model. Where I think we all have a very legitimate beef with Foxtel is that it is selling old school technology in the sense that its premium HD model only goes to one TV set etc. Foxtel Go is a much better product but it lacks HD and a lot of the other bells and whistles that we have come to expect.

For the sake of my argument I have ignored what the FTA network contributes to the rights deal as increasingly they will desert the field as the rights prices increase.

Is there a case for saying an AFL Premiership Flag is enough, and walking away to continue your B list, then more important things.......

The world of internet streaming is complicated.

Just noticed that my ABC apps had disappeared from my phone. I downloaded new ones and cannot find the links to radio that used to be there. Just news in text form.

Google ABC and find out that now their App has disabled radio streaming while overseas. I can understand that they need to do this for some content such as cricket etc but to completely shut off their app to overseas streaming is weird. Strangely enough I can still stream by going through web sites.

This is from their FAQ page:

I downloaded the App in Australia and when I am travelling overseas I can’t see all of the features

Yes. Outside of Australia some features are limited. These include streaming content, weather, and notifications. Rest assured, as soon as you arrive back in Australia, your ABC App will restore full functionality.

3 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

The world of internet streaming is complicated.

Just noticed that my ABC apps had disappeared from my phone. I downloaded new ones and cannot find the links to radio that used to be there. Just news in text form.

Google ABC and find out that now their App has disabled radio streaming while overseas. I can understand that they need to do this for some content such as cricket etc but to completely shut off their app to overseas streaming is weird. Strangely enough I can still stream by going through web sites.

This is from their FAQ page:

I downloaded the App in Australia and when I am travelling overseas I can’t see all of the features

Yes. Outside of Australia some features are limited. These include streaming content, weather, and notifications. Rest assured, as soon as you arrive back in Australia, your ABC App will restore full functionality.

Miss Guthrie is working hard

2 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Miss Guthrie is working hard

but why .... please do not tell me that they are intending to sell their streaming rights a la the AFL overseas listening app.

58 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Foxtel use AFL as a loss leader to sell their subscriptions.

The sports package premium itself would go nowhere near what they pay for the rights.

So that begs the question. In an internet world selling just the sports package what would we mugs pay?

Hard to say to the last dollar but in simple terms the rights are now worth $418M per year. Let's assume there are 1 million people prepared to pay for an AFL subscription. At that fee we would need to each pay $418 per year plus a share of production costs.

As you can see if you only took foxtel for the six months of the AFL season you are getting line ball on what we would need to pay under an AFL internet model. Where I think we all have a very legitimate beef with Foxtel is that it is selling old school technology in the sense that its premium HD model only goes to one TV set etc. Foxtel Go is a much better product but it lacks HD and a lot of the other bells and whistles that we have come to expect.

For the sake of my argument I have ignored what the FTA network contributes to the rights deal as increasingly they will desert the field as the rights prices increase.

Good point on the viability, but I think you're very light on the number of people who'd sign up.

According to this:

http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/more-people-are-signing-up-to-streaming-services-than-ever--but-foxtel-numbers-are-still-growing/news-story/4057ef1f490b118fd6b85db46f0af3a9

Foxtel had 5.3 million subscribers in 2016.

$418 million / 5.3 million = $78.87 each per annum.

Of course that's assuming every single Foxtel subscriber switches to the new theoretical internet alternative. But it also assumes zero takeup of non-fox customers to the new system. I would certainly do so at that price, as would many others I think.

The truth is probably somewhere between your 1 million and my 5.3 million guestimates. We also assumed they make zero dollars on advertising/sponsorship and that the assumed subscription cost must cover the entire $418 million. I reckon they'd generate some pretty good advertising dollars on just banner adds within the app before/after the game or between quarters (not even between goals).

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

not sure what your point is here

we all know that certain companies pay big money for the rights

we know they are in the business to make profits

but they have plenty of options......which greatly affect us mug punters

do they charge a thousand people $418,000 , a million people $418,  2 million people $230 or 3 million people $100....etc etc

do they sell packages i.e. all teams, all games all replays or something less like just your team....etc etc

and then there is all the advertising $s accruing as a result of the rights where the model with most subscribers delivers the most advertising $s

so just saying they are a business who bought the rights and can do what they like is just too simplistic

they can certainly get away with a lot just because they are a monopoly

DC, what I am suggesting is that the AFL are probably getting overs for the current rights, Foxtel-7  are paying a huge amount to have big screen HD exclusivity, Telstra for on-line, they are all going to defend that exclusivity.  Some are annoyed that they cannot circumvent the rights deals which is a bit precious. Posters suggesting that they cannot steal something as they have in the past is silly. It is big business and it is user pays. We have options, we can go to the match, watch it on FTA (suffer with ads for payment), watch it on your Telstra phone or pay Foxtel. We may not like it but they are the options. You are right that the $418 million plus a profit can be broken up many ways, my guess is that those complaining would not pay a fair share. Try 418 million + profit say 500 million divide by 1 million viewers (prepared to pay) that's $500ea for a season. 

19 minutes ago, Choke said:

Good point on the viability, but I think you're very light on the number of people who'd sign up.

According to this:

http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/more-people-are-signing-up-to-streaming-services-than-ever--but-foxtel-numbers-are-still-growing/news-story/4057ef1f490b118fd6b85db46f0af3a9

Foxtel had 5.3 million subscribers in 2016.

$418 million / 5.3 million = $78.87 each per annum.

Of course that's assuming every single Foxtel subscriber switches to the new theoretical internet alternative. But it also assumes zero takeup of non-fox customers to the new system. I would certainly do so at that price, as would many others I think.

The truth is probably somewhere between your 1 million and my 5.3 million guestimates. We also assumed they make zero dollars on advertising/sponsorship and that the assumed subscription cost must cover the entire $418 million. I reckon they'd generate some pretty good advertising dollars on just banner adds within the app before/after the game or between quarters (not even between goals).

That is the total number of foxtel subscribers .... the number who sign up because of the AFL package would be far fewer.

Total membership of all clubs is a tad under 1 million but that is often 2-3 persons per household. My figure of 1 million is reasonable but even at say 1.5 million the amounts are around the same. Remember under the internet package you are getting nothing but the AFL.... no movies.. no Game of Thrones etc etc

As to advertising who would pay for a service with ads especially a lot of ads. Foxtel advertising revenue would not be that great. In many cases it's just promos for other shows. I agree banner advertising might get you a few dollars

The idea of being able to purchase just your teams' matches as a package, or even being able to purchase single matches as a pay per view arrangement would be gold.  I would gladly be extorted for that.