Major sports want anti-siphoning rules eased, eye more paywalled matches

It does not support obligations on how much content should be aired on free-to-air, or disclosing the terms of the deals. It also believes the list should be narrowed to cover events that are “genuinely” nationally important and culturally significant. Currently, all AFL and NRL matches are on the anti-siphoning list, which COMMPS says is “unreasonable and inappropriate”. It says a requirement for the Australian Open to remain free is “inappropriate and unnecessarily restrictive”.

“The focus of any scheme should remain around the process for the acquisition of rights to listed events and which events are listed rather than prescribing where and when listed events can or must be broadcast,” it added.

Industry body Free TV, which represents Nine, Seven West Media and Network Ten, wants the current laws to apply to streaming providers like Amazon Prime Video (currently Foxtel is the only streaming provider prevented from putting events such as the AFL and NRL finals behind a paywall). It also wants sporting codes to sell the traditional TV and streaming rights together and is against any watering down of the list of sports and events covered.

Free TV referenced modelling by consultancy Deloitte Access Economics which found millions of Australians did not have strong internet connections that would allow them to stream sports. It says “general online content service providers” should be covered by the scheme to avoid platforms like Disney or Optus Sport exclusively acquiring rights of major events on the anti-siphoning list.

Charles River Associates economist Dr Geoff Edwards ran research on behalf of Foxtel to support its submission to the review of the scheme. Like the sporting bodies, he said the current laws would limit the revenue that sporting bodies can earn.

“Greater revenue for sports bodies would increase the amounts that sports clubs can afford to spend on players, coaches and programs,” Edwards told this masthead. “Greater revenue would also increase the investments sports bodies would be able to make in new competitions (including women’s competitions), sports facilities (including stadiums), grassroots development of their sports and inclusivity programs.”

In its own submission, Foxtel – which wants the scheme’s list to be reduced – also argues the current scheme should be replaced by a “technology-neutral” approach, which would ensure listed events are made freely available regardless of which media company acquires the rights.

The Australian Premier League, which currently benefits from a five-year $200 million deal with Paramount and its free-to-air network Ten is asking for caution to be taken in the review, so it doesn’t affect flexibility in broadcast agreements. A-League and League matches are not currently on the anti-siphoning list (the APL said it does not want them added).

The Business Briefing newsletter delivers major stories, exclusive coverage and expert opinion. Sign up to get it every weekday morning.