SS Prem 2016/17 TV Games: CU v TW | Sun 19th Mar | 4.30pm | SS3

First Team Squad
1.2K
·
1.2K
·
over 9 years

A reminder of where we left off. Farewell to WaiBOP and hello Tasman, Hamilton Wanderers and Eastern Suburbs.

Marquee
3.3K
·
5.1K
·
almost 13 years

Has it been confirmed its going to be on Sky again this year, was awesome having all that coverage last year.

Phoenix Academy
170
·
290
·
almost 11 years

Looks as though the coverage has been confirmed.   I believe that each franchise is being charged $30k for television coverage in addition to the $65k entry fee.   Admittedly some of this money is "sponsored" but seems to me to be a bloody expensive exercise before you start on any other teams and costs.

I can't believe that NZF has to pay for TV coverage for what I keep being told is a sport with extremely high participation.

Tegal
·
Head Sleuth
3K
·
19K
·
almost 17 years

clubs could stream their games on the Internet for much cheaper than that. 

Groundskeeper Willie
700
·
7.5K
·
about 16 years
Participation gets you nothing. It's more about corporate exposure etc and who's watching. It's great that it's on the TV though, a wise investment from NZF. Football is not a lot in this country if they can't showcase something. The All Whites barely ever play here so that's never going to be it. Streaming it simply wouldn't reach anywhere near the same amount of people as SKY does so the cost comparison is irrelevant. Kids in houses with SKY can flick it on/record it and learn about who is who in NZ domestic football, support a team and aspire to play at that level.
Tegal
·
Head Sleuth
3K
·
19K
·
almost 17 years

is it worth $360,000 for 1-2 games per week to be televised, one of which is usually on a weeknight? 

While I agree with your points about exposure etc (although how many actually watched it who wouldn't watch a stream?), I wonder if it is worth such a large cost. 

It'd be interesting to know viewer figures. 

Groundskeeper Willie
700
·
7.5K
·
about 16 years
I was primarily talking about exposure to kids and that's exactly who I think won't stream it a lot.
Groundskeeper Willie
700
·
7.5K
·
about 16 years
Also I'm assuming the size of the naming rights sponsorship deal is relative to TV exposure so it probably (or might) pay for itself.
Listen here Fudgeface
3.7K
·
15K
·
about 14 years

Tegal wrote:

clubs could stream their games on the Internet for much cheaper than that. 

I've been interested in giving commentary a go for a while, maybe a radio commentary of the WeeNix games over the internet given they won't be televised? I've got no idea if that would be legal but worth exploring.
Tegal
·
Head Sleuth
3K
·
19K
·
almost 17 years

that could be fun. 

Tegal
·
Head Sleuth
3K
·
19K
·
almost 17 years

TopLeft07 wrote:
Also I'm assuming the size of the naming rights sponsorship deal is relative to TV exposure so it probably (or might) pay for itself.

That's a good point. Will be interesting to see what sponsorship they get for the competition. 

Phoenix Academy
270
·
400
·
over 9 years

have NZF confirmed dates and number or rounds etc?

The thing with SKY is its a pretty outdated medium for viewing sports now with the Internet etc however they have the sports board casting and producing market to themselves and NZF need to have a semi professonal product to show to the market and sky don't really need the content. 

So NZF need to decide if they want to take a step down  in production and reduce costs. If they are covering the costs either directly or indirectly through the actual clubs getting more local sponsors  from the TV coverage then it makes sense..

I thought NZF actually made some good calls last year about the ASB Prem in terms of expansion and getting TV coverage.

Cock
2.7K
·
16K
·
over 14 years

The word I have is they are going with NZFP because there is no sponsor...

Appiah without the pace
6.4K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

Interesting because I heard one was locked in.

Appiah without the pace
6.4K
·
19K
·
over 16 years

JasperNix wrote:

have NZF confirmed dates and number or rounds etc?

no, but I think that is because they needed to wait until the OCL draw was completed so they know when TW and ACFC need a bye.

Phoenix Academy
82
·
180
·
over 7 years

Tegal wrote:

clubs could stream their games on the Internet for much cheaper than that. 

Youtube Live Stream.... 

Facebook Live....

Just a few ideas

Marquee
2.1K
·
6.4K
·
over 14 years

Tegal wrote:

clubs could stream their games on the Internet for much cheaper than that. 

Youtube Live Stream.... 

Facebook Live....

Just a few ideas

One Sony Videocam shot by the bloke who usually cooks the BBQ , perched on Top of a ladder?, No Thanks, do two games and do them well. As it grows, grow the coverage. 40% of teams will be shown each week with two games shown
Marquee
2.1K
·
8.2K
·
about 17 years

TopLeft07 wrote:
Participation gets you nothing. It's more about corporate exposure etc and who's watching. It's great that it's on the TV though, a wise investment from NZF. Football is not a lot in this country if they can't showcase something. The All Whites barely ever play here so that's never going to be it. Streaming it simply wouldn't reach anywhere near the same amount of people as SKY does so the cost comparison is irrelevant. Kids in houses with SKY can flick it on/record it and learn about who is who in NZ domestic football, support a team and aspire to play at that level.

I was dubious but thought it was quite a good product last year.  Plus much easier to sell sponsorship if the games are on TV, probably also easier to get players in too

Stage Punch
2.1K
·
11K
·
over 16 years

ol'sole wrote:

Looks as though the coverage has been confirmed.   I believe that each franchise is being charged $30k for television coverage in addition to the $65k entry fee.   Admittedly some of this money is "sponsored" but seems to me to be a bloody expensive exercise before you start on any other teams and costs.

I can't believe that NZF has to pay for TV coverage for what I keep being told is a sport with extremely high participation.

 

In fairness to Sky (can't believe I just said that) the disinterest from the NZ viewership in football is well-established. There have been many local-football shows which have all rated poorly and failed. So you almost can't blame them for saying "not really interested unless you're going to underwrite it."

First Team Squad
1.2K
·
1.2K
·
over 9 years

I've also heard there's a sponsor. 

Trialist
3
·
45
·
about 11 years

Will the wee nix not be televised? From what I've heard there won't be many mid week games this year?

Marquee
1.1K
·
7.6K
·
over 12 years

Must be holding off Official launch until they can get draw, Coke, and BBQ in the one office so it can be steamed live on FB. 

Starting XI
880
·
2.5K
·
about 12 years

obviously I have a vested interest in this but for me the difference between popping it on a stream and having it on TV with production value and even a show (some people didn't like it ok but I watched every episode) increases the exposure of the league greatly.

If they have a sponsor who can cover that cost then awesome.

Tegal
·
Head Sleuth
3K
·
19K
·
almost 17 years

I agree. I was just wondering if it's worth $360,000 per year exposure. I think a lot of that hinges on what sponsorship they can get, and whether they got anything extra out of the deal because it's on tv. I also wonder how many more people actually watch it on tv who wouldn't watch it if it were streamed online. Personally it being on TV causes me to watch it more due to the ability to record it, whereas the stream you would have to watch live. 

First Team Squad
1.2K
·
1.2K
·
over 9 years

I've been doing some digging for a post over at ITBOTN. The highlights of last season were posted to the Sky Sports NZ twitter account (13156 subscribers) and the New Zealand Football account (779 subscribers).

New Zealand Football got more views of the highlights than Sky.

Sky's record views was Khair Jones' goal from the Hawkes Bay v WaiBOP game  - clocking 3681 views. They only broke 1000 views for one other video, the season promo.

3681 - Jones's goal

1309 - Season promo

525 - Lewis Tiller Pt 1

458 - Lewis Tiller Pt 2

398 - Nutmeg Game

NZF got 5,000 views of the Waitak v Auckland game, 4000 for the Round 1 highlights and scored over 1,000 views TWENTY TWO times, six of those going over 2,000,

5,000 - Waitak v Auckland

4049 - Round 1 Highlights

3390 - Hawkes Bay v WeeNix

2999 - Grand Final

2474 - Season Promo

Of course, it doesn't help that Sky didn't put the highlights of the Final on their Youtube account at all. 

NZF may have their issues, but they're doing a better job than the broadcaster of promoting the games. (Yes Chopah, I know Sky are doing a good job of creating the footage etc)

There's about three hours worth of highlights available online. Can only be a good thing aye.

Marquee
1.3K
·
5.3K
·
over 16 years

Tegal wrote:

clubs could stream their games on the Internet for much cheaper than that. 

Youtube Live Stream.... 

Facebook Live....

Just a few ideas

Twitch

NZF would have to set minimum standards. 

Starting XI
480
·
2.1K
·
over 14 years

chopah wrote:

obviously I have a vested interest in this but for me the difference between popping it on a stream and having it on TV with production value and even a show (some people didn't like it ok but I watched every episode) increases the exposure of the league greatly.

If they have a sponsor who can cover that cost then awesome.

I guess the question is what is the difference in cost between those production values + sky rebroadcast, versus those production values + youtube live(which would pay nzfootball based on views!).

Marquee
2.1K
·
6.4K
·
over 14 years

zonknz wrote:

chopah wrote:

obviously I have a vested interest in this but for me the difference between popping it on a stream and having it on TV with production value and even a show (some people didn't like it ok but I watched every episode) increases the exposure of the league greatly.

If they have a sponsor who can cover that cost then awesome.

I guess the question is what is the difference in cost between those production values + sky rebroadcast, versus those production values + youtube live(which would pay nzfootball based on views!).

I maybe the minority, but I wouldn't bother watching some sharkty broadcast over Youtube. I can cope with 10 mins of highlights in that format (just) but 90 mins, no thanks

Marquee
1.3K
·
5.3K
·
over 16 years

sthn.jeff wrote:

zonknz wrote:

chopah wrote:

obviously I have a vested interest in this but for me the difference between popping it on a stream and having it on TV with production value and even a show (some people didn't like it ok but I watched every episode) increases the exposure of the league greatly.

If they have a sponsor who can cover that cost then awesome.

I guess the question is what is the difference in cost between those production values + sky rebroadcast, versus those production values + youtube live(which would pay nzfootball based on views!).

I maybe the minority, but I wouldn't bother watching some sharkty broadcast over Youtube. I can cope with 10 mins of highlights in that format (just) but 90 mins, no thanks

YouTube is only the medium - the quality of production can be no different from what would be produced for TV/any other medium.

WeeNix
300
·
570
·
over 10 years

Sports in NZ is at the mercy of SKY unless they want to do it EPL style and hire their own broadcasting teams and on sell the rights. I think of NZRU in particular that are selling their own product short of what it could be by giving it all up to SKY. I'm sure they have a pretty sweet deal still. Would be great if NZF could have its own broadcasting crew and then dictate who to sell the product to rather than asking someone else to do the job for them

Marquee
2.1K
·
6.4K
·
over 14 years

Bullion wrote:

sthn.jeff wrote:

zonknz wrote:

chopah wrote:

obviously I have a vested interest in this but for me the difference between popping it on a stream and having it on TV with production value and even a show (some people didn't like it ok but I watched every episode) increases the exposure of the league greatly.

If they have a sponsor who can cover that cost then awesome.

I guess the question is what is the difference in cost between those production values + sky rebroadcast, versus those production values + youtube live(which would pay nzfootball based on views!).

I maybe the minority, but I wouldn't bother watching some sharkty broadcast over Youtube. I can cope with 10 mins of highlights in that format (just) but 90 mins, no thanks

YouTube is only the medium - the quality of production can be no different from what would be produced for TV/any other medium.

correct and if NZF decided to go it alone broadcast 5 games a week it would be one camera with the BBQ bloke up a ladder. They simply could not afford to do a quality broadcast for each game let alone thae actual physical logistics of such an undertaking
Tegal
·
Head Sleuth
3K
·
19K
·
almost 17 years

well in theory they have a budget of $360,000 a year to draw from. You could probably do a bit better than a camera phone by the BBQ for that. 

But I agree, the quality would be lower than sky could manage to do. It's an interesting trade off. 

I can't really comment either way without knowing figures for how many watch on sky, and how many would watch on a stream (you could draw from the NBL in NZ as an example, they've been doing it for a few years now). 

Phoenix Academy
270
·
400
·
over 9 years

have they released the viewership figures for last years televised games? I thought it odd in NZFs annual report that they highlighted the TV deal but provided no facts re the audience. Guess it must have been in the 100's per game maybe.. 

WeeNix
300
·
570
·
over 10 years

Would love it if they put the games on Prime every now and then, more exposure the better. It's not like they have anything else to put on during the summer other than Cricket

Starting XI
1.5K
·
4.9K
·
over 15 years

sthn.jeff wrote:

Bullion wrote:

sthn.jeff wrote:

zonknz wrote:

chopah wrote:

obviously I have a vested interest in this but for me the difference between popping it on a stream and having it on TV with production value and even a show (some people didn't like it ok but I watched every episode) increases the exposure of the league greatly.

If they have a sponsor who can cover that cost then awesome.

I guess the question is what is the difference in cost between those production values + sky rebroadcast, versus those production values + youtube live(which would pay nzfootball based on views!).

I maybe the minority, but I wouldn't bother watching some sharkty broadcast over Youtube. I can cope with 10 mins of highlights in that format (just) but 90 mins, no thanks

YouTube is only the medium - the quality of production can be no different from what would be produced for TV/any other medium.

correct and if NZF decided to go it alone broadcast 5 games a week it would be one camera with the BBQ bloke up a ladder. They simply could not afford to do a quality broadcast for each game let alone thae actual physical logistics of such an undertaking

Regional TV is another option.

Canterbury United a few years ago had all their home games on CTV (not live though I think).

One camera but a pro TV camera operated by a pro cameraman so decent broadcast quality.

Commentary by former Canterbury and All Whites goalie Alan Stroud was popular.

In the seasons immediately before last season's Sky coverage, all Canterbury United home games were filmed and available in their entirety on You Tube  a day or two after the game.

Much better than no coverage but the one camera job didn't cut it when compared to Sky's coverage last season.

Nelson Suburbs in the 1990's had all their national league home games on regional TV - the Nelson regional channel was really together, with broadcasts of the Nelson Giants NBL games as well. Former national league players John and Paul Brydon did the commentaries for both the football and the basketball (Paul was a talented basketballer as well as an All White).

Marquee
690
·
7.3K
·
over 14 years

Does New Zealand football receive money from FIFA?  They could make a good case to ask for more money from FIFA to minimise costs to the clubs.

Stage Punch
2.1K
·
11K
·
over 16 years

Does New Zealand football receive money from FIFA?  They could make a good case to ask for more money from FIFA to minimise costs to the clubs.

 

Eh?

First Team Squad
1.2K
·
1.2K
·
over 9 years

Probably start date for October 16th, a week after the A League begins, according to Chris Millicich on twitter.

Trialist
9
·
72
·
over 7 years

Seems an awful lot of cash for games that are watched by very few (I would imagine) on Sky.

I wonder if TW get any form of discount/compensation given Sky do not visit Dave Farrington Park?

Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
about 17 years

Stirling Sports Premiership announced for 2016 - 17

New Zealand Football is pleased to announce Stirling Sports as the naming rights sponsor for the Stirling Sports Premiership in 2016 – 2017.

Stirling Sports is excited to partner with New Zealand Football and position themselves as the leading sports retailer for football equipment in New Zealand.

New Zealand Football Chief Executive Andy Martin said as the Stirling Sports Premiership is the premier football competition in New Zealand and a vital pathway for New Zealand’s local football talent to progress onto the international stage, it is important for NZ Football to align with the right partner.

“Stirling Sports is an iconic New Zealand brand,” said Martin. “There is a lot of synergy between our target of becoming the nation’s favourite game and what they are trying to achieve as New Zealand’s favourite sports retailer. They have been around for more than 50 years and Kiwis have grown up going to Stirling Sports for their football gear. I am sure that will only increase during our partnership.”

Dan Adams, Head of Marketing and Merchandise at Stirling Sports, said they have been long-time supporters of football, noting that there is a huge football presence at their 54 stores around New Zealand already.

“In becoming the naming rights sponsor for the Stirling Sports Premiership we are excited to build on that association further with football which is the No 1 participation sport in New Zealand,” said Adams.

He regards the Premiership as a unique property in the New Zealand sports market.

“It has a great presence on SKY Sport and as a former player I know that people around New Zealand are hugely passionate about their team playing in this competition and how much it means to win the trophy,” he said. “We feel the competition is going from strength to strength and we are excited to be part of that and help take it to the next level.”

Martin said New Zealand Football is looking to build on the success of last year’s competition where the governing body secured unprecedented coverage of the Premiership games live each week on SKY Sport. There will be 23 games live on SKY this season plus a ‘Match of the Day’ highlights show covering all matches of the round.

In 2016 - 17 the Stirling Sports Premiership includes three new teams in Eastern Suburbs, Hamilton Wanderers and Tasman United. It will begin on October 16 and conclude with a final on 2 April, 2017.

The competition begins with the Auckland derby between Auckland City and Waitakere United at the renowned Kiwitea Street. The first broadcast match is a repeat of 2015-16 Final between Auckland City FC and Team Wellington and other feature matches of that round are Hawkes Bay United hosting Waitakere United and the local derby between Canterbury United and new-boys Tasman United.

Team Wellington will look to defend their title after they defeated Auckland City FC 4-2 in the final of the Premiership this year at QBE Stadium in Albany.

Meanwhile Trillian Trust – a New Zealand based charitable trust – returns as a major Funding Partner to support the Stirling Sports Premiership and play a vital role in the competition’s financial sustainability.

“We know that the premiership is an important pathway for football in New Zealand and we are proud to support its development,” said Dean Agnew, the CEO of Trillian Trust.

“We want to ensure this competition stays at a high level and delivers on its goal to create opportunities for future All Whites and we know local football benefits from having a strong national premiership. Our contribution is to ensure it is cost effective and sustainable.”

Martin said New Zealand Football are most appreciative of the significant contribution made by Trillian Trust.

New Zealand Football would also like to thank ACC who continue as a partner of the Premiership to promote their Sportsmart Injury Prevention Programme.

Martin is excited about seeing the Stirling Sport Premiership begin in October.

“The Stirling Sports Premiership is ‘Where All Whites are made’ and we are looking forward to seeing many of our best up and coming international players compete around New Zealand,” he said

SS Prem 2016/17 TV Games: CU v TW | Sun 19th Mar | 4.30pm | SS3

You’ll need an account to join the conversation!

Sign in Sign up