In this op-ed, Gemba APAC managing director Andrew Condon questions whether the NRL’s desire to split its rights might backfire over time.
NRL kicks off pitch for record broadcast deal – with a twist. The NRL has begun negotiations for its 2028 TV deal, flagging an NFL‑style split of rights to maximise revenue.
At the heart of it is the oldest tension in sports media: reach versus revenue.
Splitting rights may drive competition and a bigger cheque in the short term, but it inevitably comes at the cost of reach and simplicity.
Across much of the commentary, there has been surprisingly little discussion of what this means for the game’s most important stakeholders: fans, followed closely by sponsors.
There is always a fan cost that rarely features in rights modelling. Asking supporters to juggle multiple subscriptions to follow one competition does not increase engagement. It creates friction, where fans inevitably end up watching less than when the product lived in one or two obvious places.
There is also a broader role broadcast partners play that often goes overlooked. The right partner doesn’t just distribute the product; they help build it.
Network 10’s often underappreciated early investment in the BBL is an example of how consistent free‑to‑air exposure, shoulder programming, and promotion can build a league, broaden audiences, and create relevance beyond the live window.
That kind of value is harder to generate when rights are fractured across multiple platforms with competing interests and little appetite for cross-promotion.
For sponsors, fragmentation starts to reshape the value proposition. One key driver of sponsorship value in highly competitive sponsor categories has been first rights to scarce, high‑value TV inventory through a primary broadcast partner.
When coverage is spread across multiple platforms, that value fragments too. Reach and frequency dilute, exclusivity becomes difficult to defend, and what was once a premium proposition becomes harder to activate.
The NRL may be in its healthiest position to go to market, but broadcasters do not have money burning a hole in their pocket.
As the league chases its most important payday, the risk is that fan accessibility and sponsor value quietly erode in parallel. Over time, both flow back into the sustainability of the commercial model.
The question isn’t whether the NRL can extract more money in the next cycle. It’s whether optimising revenue today, at any cost, delivers the best outcome for the game and all its stakeholders in the long term.
One final thought: this feels like an “extreme opening” rather than the NRL’s desired end state. My expectation is a broadly familiar outcome. Neither Nine nor DAZN (via Fox Sports/Kayo) can afford to wildly overpay, but neither can afford to be without the NRL.
