First thought was whether this was bait to get the reform vote through and owners might want to have some sort of confidence in it being for real before they commit.

Fox will undoubtedly want changes to suit them - timing of the season, number of games, etc. But for this price, so be it - $7m a year for the league might reduce potential financial input from owners.

I'm not a huge fan of Fox - I'm not a subscriber and don't plan on changing that in a hurry (could consider it with a bunch of NBL games though) - but while a FTA deal might provide more exposure to potential fans, $5m or so worth of advertising (leaving some aside for the NBL office, etc) can do that too.

Would've preferred to see the same from a FTA channel to boost exposure, but anyone willing to take a gamble and support the reform like this deserves support.

Just some quick numbers, ignoring their production costs: let's say the average subscription is about $90/mo(?), 12 months, 500 fans stay on that might've otherwise been lost or new fans sign up per each of 10 clubs. That's $5.4m.

I'd like to think all the people that threatened to or did pull the pin on Fox due to their NBL coverage helped gauge the numbers for this.

As you say Isaac its pretty easy numbers although you have not factored in the production costs.

All in all though it is a good sign for the nbl.

fox getting in early b4 10HD jump on to buy some sports.....

think best idea would be for Fox and Ten to link up on the idea with ten getting replays or something along those lines where they chip in an extra 1-2 million a year. Could be an idea. They should also find a radio station to get involved for national coverage or local coverage (like AFL). If Fox does jump onboard, I think NBL with all the new changes we all hope for could be back on top of things in next 2 years

i would like to see it split too...Friday Saturday and Sunday games all live...piss off Wednesday games and lets see the game on....

Yep - CH10 are showing signs of interest hence the FoxSports move.

$35 million dollars is the clincher. No way will 10HD be able to match anywhere close to that and would only be able live free to air TV. As we (those over 25 year of age and been lifelong basketball fans) saw the first time channel 10 decided to show the NBL live if advertisers don't come to the party  live NBL will get pulled real quick.

Every game shown and the majority live will be awesome.

I would have to seriously think about getting foxtel if this happened.

I'm still waiting for the reply from Foxtel saying they know nothing about any such deal.

wow, this has the potential to be amazing! All away games televised too ...

Would consider getting foxtel if this happens. We are getting a new 55in Samsung series 9 LCD soon also. Could be very intersting. Like others I was not bothered with any form of pay tv. But this would make us rethink.

This would really be great im like excited and im emo..... not man i cant sleep this would be huge, especially if ten hd can maybe get some replays pump up interest

Free To Air

Free to Air

Where is the outcry

Let's not under-estimate how important this news is. It's not every day that this offer coms along and it gives the new NBL 5 years to establish a new base of fans and establish the sport in the same vein as what the A-League has done.
This may potentially be Fox Sports trying to sure up content as OneHD seem intent on fighting them for key sporting rights. Yes it would be nice to have FTA coverage but the most likely scenario would be OneHD. It would be nice to see wat OneHD would offer the NBL in terms of coverage and dollars and this mut be looked at.
Although it seems the NBL MUST take this opportunity presented by Fox or we may end up in this exact position once again.

Isaac, I'm afraid your numbers only come to 540k, they would need an extra 5000 fans to reach the 5.4m figure (sorry, I used to be an auditor).

Might be rusty, or you missed the 10 clubs multiplying out at the end. ;)

I didn't say I was a good auditor, indeed I did miss the 10 club multiplication factor!

Yeah its ok if you have and/or prepared to get Fox. The league should have explored the FTA interest more if it was genuinely there. Basketball in Australia will go nowhere un til FTA coverage. Plain and simple.

Billo, creative auditing. I like it....

Billo did you used to work for ABC?

Could it be that Fox are getting desperate after loosing the NBA to Ditigal 10
Free to Air?

One hopes the new proposed business model has not precluded Channel 10 also bidding for the NBL.

According to an article today's west it says that a meeting took place yesterday between representatives from Perth, South Dragons and Townsville. The clubs are uniting to vote AGAINST the amalgamation of the NBL and BA. They support it in principle but are against key elements such as TV rights distributions and relinquishing team identities, and the demand for a minimum of three owners per team.

http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=16&ContentID=106732

Play Fox and 10HD against each other.

Dicko how?

Channel 10 is running at a huge lost and had been for years now, how could they afford to spend $1 million let along $35 million over 5 year for a sport that has no real interest outside of the diehard supporters.

As soon as advertiser don't sign up  channel 10 will pull the plug even if it is on their HD channel

With Isaac & DICKO.
My concern is that the clubs haven't been kept in the picture about the reform, & they're nervous about it. I don't like the smell of it either. Rewind: Poxtel instigated Wednesday games & we all know how great that's been for the league. They've consistently voiced (on OzHoops) the logistical problems of lugging their (1 rig apparently) gear around Australia & I don't see that changing after PAYING $7Mill for the 1st year deal.
I don't know about you guys, but I suspect that the reform's all about getting the Sydney Kings back into the league, & my guess is that Poxtel's behind it. Poxtel's made a living out of airing Kings games (huge market for them with cashed up fairweather fans), who happen to be on their front doorstep. Do you really think they'll move their gear to Perth for example, to show EVERY game? BTW, Perth has NEVER had Poxtel come to town, & I can see why they'd be sceptical.
But guys, sign up for Poxtel if you think it's the future for basketball in Australia.

*** Ferrari importer goes bust *** ; )

While the consensus seems to be 'Foxtel live coverage = decreased live crowds' I'm not convinced that'll be the case. If I can see my team (the last of my teams passed away two years ago) every game, at home or on the road, am I not more likely to go to the home games and become more involved (I'm sure there's a much better marketing buzz word used in the report - I know - invested!) in the fortunes of my team. Particularly when the reality of Foxtel is that it is 2-3 airings of every game.

Wall to wall coverage on Foxtel 'in the hand' seems to be a much better option to me (particularly in the order of $35million) than the possibility of engaging oneHD in a potential bidding war for the sake of what - another $1 million per season?

As for handing over control of the league, I don't think the sport is in a place to be arguing they are the ideal custodians of the game. This is the world as it is. The players and owners don't have a gun to their heads. They can go their own way and run their own show but if they do, they risk more of the same. One might suggest that includes alternative employment.

Alternatively, they can deliver a product which Foxtel seems to believe still has commercial value, and take a chance on still being paid to be involved in the game we all love.

If I'm Kobe Bryant the free agent, I probably test the waters of the open market. If I'm the NBL, I'm thinking 'bird in the hand'.

True, but why would the Wollongong Hawks or Cairns Taipans vote for something that would all but guarantee their death in the league? Especially when they haven't seen the details of the offer to even know what conditions are attached?

They could vote for it only to have Fox say, "Well, that was if there were 8 teams in these cities, and for 10 home games per team. If you want more teams, then we offer $15m and $5m of that is advertising/contra and $5m goes straight to BA."

The NBL has issued a press release today preparing media for an announcement after the vote tomorrow. If three clubs are still openly iffy about details and at least one association will vote against it if not a few other clubs as well, I'm surprised they're setting things up in such a public fashion.

Only possibly because they are without a league either way? Democracy is a nice notion and certainly Rick Burton didn't do any favours for the idea of a Commissioner (wasn't the Commissioner supposed to take the owners' partisanship out of the decision-making process and avoid just such a situation as this) but it would nice to think some people will act for the greater good.

I know, I know, naive in the extreme, but maybe, just maybe, with Obama being elected in the US, Popovich admitting the NBA title isn't a 'World' Championship, the planets are sufficiently aligned to see people do the right thing.

Perhaps the teams/identity/regions issue is the bargaining we have to do, not the money.

To my mind, Fox would be after volume of content rather than limiting it so the more games from viable teams, the better. Isn't that why Rugby went to Super 14 from Super 12, the Tri Nations added 3 more games and the AFL gets a better deal than Rugby League (that and the fact that Rugby League is dying!).

No, Fox, AFAIK, want fewer teams and games and only big-city teams where possible.

According to Grantley Bernard the reform will be voted through: http://linky.com.au/eut55

So who's the 11th stakeholder, & why are they getting a vote, considering they aren't part of the current 10 team system?
Makes me nervous when they could have the deciding vote, in introducing Poxtel's 8 team league (pushing out 3 existing teams). Have all clubs scrutinised & agreed to this 11th stakeholder's submission?

Sorry for the double post, but just got the answer as to who the 11th stakeholder is.
Thanks go to OzHoops for the Herald Sun link:
"The reform ballot, which also includes a vote by BA as the 11th stakeholder, needs nine votes to pass the NBL back to BA's control, while the state and territory associations will vote on the overall reform process."
So there were 10 current teams (owners, whatever) looking to vote on THEIR future, & an 8 VOTE MAJORITY was all that was required for the reform to get the rubber stamp. 3 major OWNERS are wary of the car salesman's, once in a life-time GIFT. My maths aren't that bad, but I'll put it to open scrutiny.
10-3=7. 2 short of the NINE needed by the NewNBL. Lock that in.
11-3=8. Better odd$, & could be enough to knee-JERK a fence-$itter into giving the go ahead.

As mentioned in another thread, perhaps $1-2m p.a. of this money would actually make it near the NBL. The rest would include production and advertising costs for Fox.