★★★★★ 0/5

Government hints at ‘Use it or Lose it’ outcome

"I think there is a very valid case to be made for a use-it-or-lose-it style provision," Senator Conroy says of the Anti-Siphoning list review.

29
Leave a comment

The government is hinting at its options in regards to the Anti-Siphoning list review.

And Pay TV will probably be liking what they are hearing.

Senator Conroy has said free-to-air television operators had damaged their argument for retention of current arrangements by purchasing sporting rights and then not broadcasting them.

“That has led to an enormous backlash against commercial TV,” he told ABC Radio on Friday.

“I think there is a very valid case to be made for a use-it-or-lose-it style provision.”

So far this is in keeping with what the Pay TV sector has lobbied for.

It isn’t expecting big events like the Australian Open to be taken off the list. It is content for FTA networks to keep what it has, but it wants to get hold of content that they own but don’t use -the ‘Use It or Lose It’ campaign.

Of course if the government also allows networks to be able to show sports on their digital channels then Pay TV will find that pool diminishes. This is one of the reasons Seven set up 7TWO as a broad channel, to have the flexibility to accommodate a range of content. ONE would definitely get a boost.

The Pay TV sector has also been applying pressure to Conroy after the $250m rebate and the ‘loss’ of a fourth FTA network, with the minister reportedly golfing with James Packer, major Foxtel shareholder. It says its ready for some good news.

And so are viewers, Senator.

Source: Sydney Morning Herald

29 Responses

  1. This is what should actually happen.

    1) Scrap the list all together.
    2) FTA should bid for sports only to show on FTA.
    3) Pay TV SHould bid for sports only to show on Pay TV.
    That way the AFL can sell the FTA rights to a FTA station and the pay tv rights to Foxtel, Austar etc.
    For example say both 7 & Foxtel get a Richmond vs Collingwood game. If seven decides to show the event delayed then so be it. Like wise if Foxtel wanted to show the game live then that’s what it would do.

    I actually find it highly anti-competitive that FTA’s should be allowed to buy the FTA and pay tv rights. And that needs to be rectified sooner rather than later.
    By changing the way rights are awarded it will give a guarantee to both FTA and paytv that they can bid for any sporting events that they wish to show, without disadvantaging viewers.
    If you want to watch AFL, NRL etc on FTA or pay tv that should be your choice.

  2. They should let the free to air networks put sports on their mult-channels. I have been thinking of upgradung my pvr but until their is quality programming ( nothing against full house and alf ) then i won’t be upgrading as sports would be a major incentive to upgrade to a stb or pvr. Oh and why don’t we utilise a red button service here they have in the UK. I know were behind the times but including sports to be shown on digital channels will be a good start.

  3. You have got to remember that it’s highly unlikely in the future that the digital channels will cover these sorts of events,they are just bonus channels no more than that

  4. as i see it, ten would obviously use ONEHD, nine might use their multi-channels for sports, but i doubt seven would, seeing they have no interest in airing friday night games live anyway.

  5. the Olympics are a great opportunity to make use of digital channels, although even if the laws are changed nine might choose not to use their multi-channels for alf, Olympics etc. anyway.

  6. @ andru
    They couldn’t do that, that would be against the law. That is one of the things they are trying to change …

    ajf47
    Sure Foxtel are going to have better coverage when they have four dedicated channels to Nine’s one. If the laws were changed, and Nine had the motivation, they could have matched Foxtel’s coverage. They could have run three simultaneous channels (Nine, Nine HD and Go), each showing different events.

  7. the big question here is when. if it is whether the change occure before lodon 2012 or the original idea of 2013 will be a difference of millions of dollars to ch9.

    i personally thing the whole anti-siphoning law system should be thrown out the window. god did not tell moses to write in his commandments that all Australians should have FTA sports. The world revolves around money and businesses. Foxtel should have as much right to a sport as 7, 9, ten, SBS, ABC and even ch 31. just as a network should be able to buy right to a sport, call it their property, and do what they wish with it. even if it means not showing it. and don’t even get me started on the no digital rule, all that causes is an unnesesary lose-lose-lose situation for the viewer, network and event.

  9. I’d be wary of any changes in legislation, not to mention suspicious of the motivations behind them. It’s already looking like Comrade Conroy might be a little too pally with certain media moguls and other persons with vested interests.

    Furthermore, I’m not keen to see the elderly and those on lower (or fixed) incomes robbed of one of their few pleasures in life, just so that some Gen X’ers feel better about wasting their money on television subscriptions.

    Seems to me the first logical step is to remove impediments to broadcasting sports on the FTA digital channels, seems reasonable to assume that would have a flow on that cured many of the current ills in the system.

  10. Channel 7’s coverage of the Australian Open is laughable. Mostly highlights or Australian player matches. Why not show different matches on different digitals channels?

  11. I agree with the “use it or lose it” rules, but allow the networks to broadcast it on their digital channels. It will help increase digital uptake and allow them to put more sport on live.

  14. I hope this applies to sports like Rugby League where 9 don’t show it at a decent hour in states other than NSW or QLD and it means Fox Sports can show it live in those states.

  15. And apparently Torah Bright has just won gold for Australia….but how can this be since 9 are showing the qualifiers in Perth…

    @slam…at least foxtel show sport live!

  17. I don’t have Pay TV, and don’t ever intend on getting it. I don’t object to what is proposed, merely that Free to Air digital channels be given priority over Pay TV in the re-allocation of rights. No one except Foxtels major shareholders would benefit from Foxtel being handed events cart blanche. More flexibility from the government in the use of rights i.e to screen on digital channels would be a far better outcome from everyone

  19. “Use It Or Lose” should also apply to non sports shows, like the dozens of dramas and sitcoms the FTA networks hold on to only to show months/years later. I admit with the additional digital channels the tide has turned and many more shows now have access to time slots and gets a decent airing.

  21. quokka, i couldn’t agree more. If it’s not live, i don’t watch it and if enough people did the same it would show up in the ratings and then attitudes from the arrogant TV execs might start to change.

Leave a Reply