VietNamNet Bridge – The answer of AVG to the Vietnam Professional Football (VPF) company after a week--is not handing over the broadcasting right, not paying royalty to VPF and only negotiating with VPF if this firm meets legal conditions.

AVG is willing to ‘concede’ telecast deal

AVG’s dispatch was sent to VPF yesterday, February 28. Accordingly, AVG did not agree with any request offered by VPF.

One week ago, the two sides met for the first time to settle disagreements on the broadcasting right of professional football leagues of Vietnam.

VPF put forward two principles for AVG: facilitating the Vietnam Television (VTV) to air live V-League to serve the audience and paying higher royalty than the fixed number of VND6 billion ($300,000)/year, which increases 10 percent annually, in the contract between AVG and the Vietnam Football Federation (VFF). AVG promised to answer in a week

Before the meeting with VPF, AVG held a press conference about the 20-year telecast deal, where AVG chairman Pham Nhat Vu told reporters that football fans would incur no damages from the deal between VFF and AVG.

He said AVG would set aside 100 percent of the profit earned from holding the TV rights of the country’s football leagues, to serve the development of sports in Vietnam throughout the next 20 years.

He added that it is the local TV stations’ fault if they do not broadcast V-League - the Vietnamese top-tier football league, since AVG has allowed the stations to broadcast the leagues free of charge.

He stated that AVG was willing to concede the telecast contract if VPF can sell the broadcasting right for over VND70 billion ($3.5 million) in three years, as Doan Nguyen Duoc had disclosed.

One week later, AVG had the answer for VPF. The firm said that it would negotiate with VPF if VPF satisfies two conditions: being authorized by VFF to exploit commercial rights of professional football tournaments in Vietnam, the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism approves the amended regulations on professional football and VPF commits to respect the deal between AVG and VFF.

AVG said “no” to all conditions proposed by VPF. However, it promised to consider paying higher royalty after discussing with two broadcasters VTV and VTC. It noted that VFF, not VPF, is the receiver of broadcasting royalty.

AVG said to VPF has the right to lodge a complaint--but in any case, both VPF and VFF have to respect the deal signed with AVG.

S. Tung