2 hours ago
1
July 10, 2026 — 5:00am
In this week’s On Background, Karl Stefanovic continues his love affair with London, why Foxtel says Kayo subscribers won’t be slugged under a big new NRL rights deal, and the courtroom fallout from the Bruce Lehrmann saga continues.
Keep Karl and carry on
It’s been a fortnight since Nine’s former golden boy Karl Stefanovic blew up his circa $2 million contract so he could pal it up with Britain’s far right while doing spon-con for energy supplement powders.
So how is everyone faring so soon after that acrimonious separation? Well, in the first full week of the post-Stefanovic era, Today averaged 255,400 viewers, still far behind Seven’s rival Sunrise, which averaged 446,000 over the same period. Ouch.
To be fair, the show from the Nine Network (this masthead is also owned by Nine) experiences similar numbers during every school holiday period. And the show’s cause hasn’t been helped by the FIFA World Cup drawing eyeballs away during the mornings.
As for the recently red-pilled Stefanovic, he appears to be living some version of a middle-aged opportunist’s best life. His eponymous podcast is No. 2 on Apple Podcasts’ Australian charts (beaten only by Mamamia Out Loud) and fourth on Spotify, where Stefanovic’s guru, Joe Rogan, still reigns supreme.
All of this must be very exciting for the newfound culture-wars enthusiast, but On Background remains sceptical about whether Stefanovic’s new empire will be able to rake in the millions he’s left behind at Nine. Low-end outback-wear chain Ringers Western is hardly a blue-chip advertiser.
Stefanovic’s YouTube numbers are also revealing.
His interview with British broadcaster Piers Morgan, the first we’d heard from him after he left Nine, got about 414,000 views, narrowly beaten only by his farewell message. But recent content has been less successful. An interview with Westminster City councillor and Nigel Farage friend Laila Cunningham drew just 17,000 views. Stefanovic has certainly maintained a fixation with British politics, launching the “UK brief”, a weekly episode focusing on matters from Britain and Europe.
Meanwhile, Tommy Robinson, the far-right anti-Islam agitator whose appearance on The Karl Stefanovic Show effectively nuked what was left of the broadcaster’s career with Nine, just recorded a podcast with One Nation leader Pauline Hanson, whom he called one of the “bravest lady’s [sic] on the planet”.
The senator, readers might recall, has been a regular guest on Stefanovic’s podcast, and was quick to upload his interview with Robinson after it was removed from various platforms. It’s a close-knit gaggle over there on the self-proclaimed free-thinking right.
Slugged at the browser
Rugby league head honcho Peter V’landys could scarcely hide his glee after announcing a seven-year, $5.3 billion broadcast deal with Nine and Foxtel, the largest such agreement in Australian sporting history, and most importantly, one which beat the AFL (or “FLA”, as V’landys insisted on calling the rival code).
For Nine, which locked in exclusive rights to the grand final and State of Origin, it was a good news day after weeks of the ongoing Karl Stefanovic soap opera. Things could have gone better for the network – it had pitched for the entire rights, putting every game on its streaming platform Stan. But with Foxtel threatening to work with Seven, even 10, to cut Nine out entirely, things could have also gone a lot worse.
For Foxtel, meanwhile, Vlandys’ victory lap will be an expensive one. The company, now owned by British billionaire Sir Leonard Blavatnik’s DAZN, will need to cough up about $520 million annually over the course of the seven-year deal, around double what it currently pays for the rights.
Much of that cost could be borne by Foxtel’s users, namely the 1.4 million Australians who subscribe to its sports streaming platform Kayo. At a press conference on Tuesday, Foxtel boss Patrick Delany pointed to the company’s record of keeping prices pretty stable.
“The entry-level price of Kayo has only risen once in nearly nine years. It is very well priced, and our goal is to keep it affordable,” he said.
That might come as a surprise to the long-suffering footy fan who has spent years paying through the wazoo for a product notorious for its glitches and bugs and ... price hikes. But Delany is technically correct.
Kayo’s cheapest option was increased from $25 to $29.99 a month in February, the first price rise since the streamer was launched back in 2018. But that doesn’t account for numerous price hikes and restructures across Kayo’s other tiers.
In 2018, users paying $25 a month for Kayo’s cheapest option (called “Basic”) could stream on two devices at once, with the more expensive tier offering $35 a month to watch on three screens. In 2022, the cheapest model was rebranded as Kayo One and while the price stayed the same, punters could only watch on one screen. The existing Basic tier became $27.50 a month. That Basic tier went up to $30 a month in 2023. A year later, it was $35 a month, while Kayo’s premium option was removed. Users could no longer watch on three separate devices.
In 2024, the Basic tier was rebranded as Kayo Premium, at a new premium monthly price point of $40. Kayo One became known as Kayo standard, and would soon be increased to its current monthly price of $29.99. This year, Kayo premium went up to a whopping $45.99-a-month.
So yes, it’s true that Kayo has only increased the price of its cheapest option once since 2018. But it’s also true that every user of the streamer is paying more money for a less generous offering than they were at launch.
Prices have gone up twice since DAZN acquired Foxtel, and with it, two hefty rights deals for the AFL ($4.5 billion) and cricket ($1.5 billion). That said, the company believes the relative affordability of its entry-level product is a sign it can still keep prices under control.
“It’s all about volume. The more people that watch it, the more subscriptions we have, the better we can go,” Delany said when asked whether Foxtel could afford the deal without upping prices.
“We’ve got a very big, strong, diverse business. We’re aligned on affordability.”
He never did quite answer the question.
Taylor’s version
We brought word last week about the never-ending courtroom sequels to the Bruce Lehrmann saga, driven primarily by a series of legal claims brought by former Seven producer Taylor Auerbach.
Auerbach, who rose to prominence during the Lehrmann trial when he gave evidence accusing Seven of paying for the former Liberal staffer’s sex workers and cocaine (a claim denied by the network), is suing his former employer, and News Corp, in separate defamation cases.
The latter claim, in which Auerbach accused News Corp of defamation and breaching racial discrimination laws, kicked off with a preliminary hearing before Federal Court judge Robert Bromwich last Friday.
But the matter was adjourned until October, when Auerbach, who is representing himself, will bring an application to stop lawyers from the firm Thomsons acting for News, on the basis that they also represented broadcaster Ten during the Lehrmann case.
Bromwich also appeared sceptical of Auerbach’s claim under the Racial Discrimination Act, telling the producer that such matters need to be brought to the Australian Human Rights Commission rather than the Federal Court. Auerbach admitted that claim was “a bit of creative thinking”. And yet, the matter continues.
The Business Briefing newsletter delivers major stories, exclusive coverage and expert opinion. Sign up to get it every weekday morning.
