Nine CEO David Gyngell concedes Nine went too far with Tom Waterhouse
David Gyngell speaking to John Steedman at Mumbrella360
Channel Nine CEO David Gyngell has conceded mistakes made by allowing Tom Waterhouse to spruik live odds with commentators during NRL matches.
Waterhouse had become the lightning rod for the debate, Gyngell told the audience, however he also argued that it was not the network’s place to be “wowsers” when it came to legal activities such as gambling, smoking and alcohol.
“We believe we have got a moral compass to provide to the community, but at the same time we don’t have a wowser barometer either to tell you all to suck eggs, it is a free world you should be able to smoke, drink and gamble whenever you want to or do whatever you think, within the laws,” Gyngell told GroupM’s chairman and CEO John Steedman during a discussion at the Mumbrella360 conference this morning.
However he admitted Channel Nine might have overstepped the mark by featuring Waterhouse among the commentators.
“I probably got too driven on sport, you know what your watching, you want the information, without the thought that there are a lot of kids watching they’re absorbing this and this is not good information for them so we’ve pulled back from that now and I think that’s the right balance,” he said.
Although Waterhouse’s rate of advertising was not much more than TAB or other betting organizations, it was the way he is and his advertising that made him the lightning rod for the debate said the Nine Entertainment CEO.
“I think we over-egged it and I think we’ve pulled back from it. And personally and emotionally, being the father of a new child, I don’t want my child to saying all the odds either, but at the same time, it’s the way you do it. People are allowed to receive information. It’s legal if it’s done properly. I think we pushed it too far, I respect that. But I think equally we all go jumping on the bandwagon of something that has been around for a while, if you don’t like it its still horrific to you as far as the people are concerned.”
Gyngell also spoke about the network’s recent success in securing a $400 million cricket sports deal arguing the deal was something the network had to do.
“It’s good business to do it. It’s passionate and emotional for Channel Nine to do it. We’re as much cricket as cricket is Nine the two of us are combined,” he said.
“Sports a must have. When you pay the most at an auction I don’t call that winning I say that’s doing what you have to do to maintain and keep something. But sport and free to air sport news and current affairs and local production is what defines it.”
He said cricket has a bigger impact than the ratings always give it, and said it’s like a “wallpaper” on in the background throughout the summer, and has significant advertising impact.
Gyngell also spoke about how this was the first time Nine had secured the digital rights to a major sporting event and in a partnership with Cricket Australia and said the network would put significant investment into sales, marketing and integration to give advertisers digital links and interactions with the consumer.
He also committed to local content telling the audience it will be the next big push for Channel Nine.
“We’re at a crossroads in Australia at the moment, it’s all about local content. They want to see local content and sport news and those things, and my next big push is going to be making more local product,” Gyngell said.
Gyngell said his passion for Nine motivated him during the difficulties faced last year as the business was almost pushed into insolvency.
“To contemplate letting a company that was making great money, that has a history of our brand in Channel Nine be put into bankruptcy because two parties that didn’t give a shit about it really on a long term basis, I wouldn’t do that to my staff to start with. There’s a lot of proud people that tried for those gates. At the various stations around the country are proud to say they have worked there,” he said.
“So sometimes you don’t let go and if youre playing against the hand of people who don’t know the game that you know. You have opportunities to push them and in (Atrium and Apollo’s) defense they could clearly see I wasn’t going to just roll over and do a deal into a ‘light-touch insolvency’ because it’s not a light touch as far as I’m concerned its an embarrassment and embarrassments are not what you want to put your staff through.”
Megan Reynolds
What about how virtually every sports caster on Chan9 would throw to Tom as the “expert” on whatever sport was playing? He was never an expert, he was the guy who was paying 9 to talk us out of our money. Horses I may believe but League and Union? It’s insulting that David thinks we are dumb enough to buy this.
I agree that within limits most of us SHOULD be able to gamble etc but we recognise gambling as an addiction so does that mean people who might have a gambling problem simply shouldnt watch sport on TV?
It’s not just about children, its about good governance and not grabbing at cash no matter what the cost for the community as a whole. But broadcasters wouldn’t understand that.
User ID not verified.
Gyngell is on the wrong tram regarding the astronomical amount he (and TEN) paid for the cricket. Cricket is a summer sport played during the non-ratings period, a time when there are no reliable figures for ad reach and impact.
I found the comments by the Cricket Australia CEO to be telling. He said his kids would like the Big Bash League being on free-to-air (TEN) rather than Foxtel because now his kids would be able to watch it on holiday at the beach. And that’s the problem. It’s the silly season, everybody is lying on the beach and TV takes a back seat. For a TV network which regularly comes in fourth behind the ABC to throw money (and hours of prime time viewing space) at a second-string cricket contest which nobody is interested in is symptomatic of the current malaise at Network TEN and why you should avoid them like the plague when allocating ad spend.
User ID not verified.
So why if Tom is pulling back was he all over origin last night? That matched with trying to spruik No Direction tickets to avid origin fans. Channel 9 what are you thinking.? Sorry Channel 9 and Thinking in one sentence. Oxymoron!!
User ID not verified.