Foxtel wants the sports free-to-airs reject

Foxtel wants the sports free-to-airs reject

14th November 2008, 10:30 WST

Pay TV provider Foxtel wants the right to transmit sports events that free-to-air TV broadcasters are failing to bring to the public.

Chief executive Kim Williams again lashed out at free-to-air TV broadcasters at a breakfast briefing in Perth today in the long running battle over sports rights regulation, or the so-called anti-siphoning rules.

Free-to-air TV broadcasters were given privileged access to sports rights in 1994, using the argument that they provide sports free as a community service.

But Mr Williams said free-to-air broadcasters did not transmit enough sport.

They should therefore be subject to a “use it or lose it” principle, whereby they lose the right to privileged access to sports events that they have so far failed to broadcast.

http://www.thewest.com.au/default.as...ntentID=108121

I always thought the agreement was that Foxtel "could" broadcast if it was not being shown live somewhere .. obviously not lol

FTA gets first crack at the rights for various sports, whatever they dont buy Fox Sports basicly gets. But in this case I think Foxtell are saying that they want to able to show sport that FTA initially bought, but they then dont show. Could change with the introduction of digital TV, channel 10 already gearing up for a dedicated sports channe. But then the trap is still there, if the sport is on the anti-siphoning list it has to be shown on a regular FTA channel before it can be shown on a digital channel (when are they switching to digital signal only?)

2012 I think

Agree with Foxtel, if Free to Air have the rights and do not show the event live, they need to pass it on, otherwise sporst like ours that our not on the "High" profile list like AFL, get the raw end ofr their supporters.

In the great rugby tradition "Use or lose it"

Foxtel wants to lock up all sports..inc Eastern European wife-carrying championships, which they will show on ESPN.

When I'm a millionaire I'm buying one of the free-to-air stations and playing every god damn rugby game televised at a decent time...

only problem is that Super 14 is effectively a made for Pay TV sport

Then I'll buy all the television stations....paid tv included.. :) And then, i'll remove the paid part so everyone can watch it

Come the revolution...

I would have thought the argument could be made that digital is still FTA - it is not subscription and, while not everyone has ready access to it, the same could often be said of FTA in the bush. FFS, you can get a set-top box for $30 these days!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jargan83

FTA gets first crack at the rights for various sports, whatever they dont buy Fox Sports basicly gets. But in this case I think Foxtell are saying that they want to able to show sport that FTA initially bought, but they then dont show. Could change with the introduction of digital TV, channel 10 already gearing up for a dedicated sports channe. But then the trap is still there, if the sport is on the anti-siphoning list it has to be shown on a regular FTA channel before it can be shown on a digital channel (when are they switching to digital signal only?)

---

Bugger the anti syphoning. It is not working. If TEN does not want to show it live, then fox should get it and we would get it LIVE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jehna

When I'm a millionaire I'm buying one of the free-to-air stations and playing every god damn rugby game televised at a decent time...

---

some lucky countries have it already, its called the rugby channel.........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blueandblack

Foxtel wants to lock up all sports..inc Eastern European wife-carrying championships, which they will show on ESPN.

---

Estonia are the world champs in that sport