Adrian Portelli’s My Reno Rules has been thrown into chaos as builder issues derail production the Channel 7 show.

Adrian Portelli’s LMCT+ backs My Reno Rules as principal sponsor, with the flashy entrepreneur buying prime-time presence on Seven (image – supplied)

Welcome to Media McKnight, bringing you over 30+ years of media experience. A video version of this column is available in the player below.

Seven is facing a major headache with the production of the Adrian Portelli series My Reno Rules.

Sources tell me filming has been pushed back due to an issue with builders, which is likely to affect the planned completion of the renovations and delivery of the show.

It’s been a bad week for the guy who does not like to be known as ‘Lambo Guy’. Just last week he faced court in Adelaide contesting charges of conducting unlawful lotteries.

The show is set to air in 2026 with Dr. Chris Brown serving as host. The series will see four teams renovate two houses with the renovated houses given to two home viewers and the winning team receiving a massive cash prize.

A spokesperson from Seven told Media McKnight:

As part of the pre-production phase, there are continuing conversations with several builders. Construction will commence later this year, with My Reno Rules premiering on Seven and 7plus in 2026.

DO TV NETWORKS DESERVE A HANDOUT FROM THE GOVERNMENT?

Last week executives and stars went to Canberra with the begging bowl out, hoping to convince the Prime Minister and others to legislate in their favour.

I took a deep dive with Tim Burrowes from UnMADE and Mumbrella on McKnight Tonight last week, which you can watch in the player below.

I’ll include some commentary from Tim here as I take you through each point presented in a leaflet handed out at the event and pass my verdict (yes, Judge Rob is back!):

Abolish the outdated Commercial Broadcasting Tax. Broadcasters pay $50 million annually on top of significant Australian content investments and regulatory compliance costs.

“The free to air broadcasters are able to write somewhere between $3 and $4 billion a year in advertising. That’s via what they’re doing over the public airwaves” Tim Burrowes points out.

“So you know, my question is, these are public airwaves. If these broadcasters didn’t have access to them, other people potentially would”.

And I agree.

While I have sympathy for the commercial hardship being faced by the broadcasters, the fact is they occupy very valuable spectrum that allows them to broadcast into every home in Australia (albeit through an arial which many people are choosing not to install these days)

Judge Rob VERDICT: NO DEAL.

Close the digital rights loophole in the anti-siphoning rules to stop global streamers putting iconic sporting events exclusively behind a paywall.

On this point Tim and I have a very different take on what is – and isn’t – allowed under the anti-siphoning legislation.

It’s my understanding that while streamers can gobble up the digital rights, the sports on that list still have to be shown on free to air TV. Tim believes there is a loophole here that would allow streamers to take the sports altogether.

Now, are the free to air rights as valuable without the digital rights? Absolutely not. The Federal Government has stitched up broadcasters by not putting digital rights on the anti-siphoning list.

At the very least my take on what is being planned would allow Netflix etc to buy digital rights and on sell free to air rights, meaning the 30%+ Aussies without an TV ariel would be forced to pay for sport, which has traditionally been free.

“Let’s use the example of NRL,” explains Tim.

“it cost you a billion dollars a year. Now if you’re Netflix you arguably can’t monetize that even with your advertising tier. So it only works with on selling those rights to or partnering on those rights with a TV broadcaster”.

True, but that broadcaster wouldn’t be able to show it on their digital services (i.e. 9NOW, 7PLUS and 10PLAY).

Judge Rob Verdict: DEAL (the Government must clear up confusion about the anti-siphoning list and include digital rights for free to air broadcasters)

Urgent support for regional television which faces unique challenges requiring targeted policy interventions for transmission and infrastructure costs.

Hard to disagree with this one.

“You know, there’s less advertising available. The infrastructure costs are as big. And just because some of the quirks around how the licenses work can make that really impractical. So that one absolutely feels like a really reasonable ask if we do want to have this policy of Australia being a country where we work hard not to disadvantage, those of us who don’t live in, you know, in the five capital states” says Tim.

Judge Rob Verdict: DEAL

Advertising restrictions must be balanced and impact broadcasters mitigated.

We’re not in the ‘80s any more when banning tobacco advertising didn’t kill the bottom line of the free to air broadcasters. In this tough environment, banning gambling ads will have a major impact on the viability of the local industry.

And let’s remember – it’s legal!

Personally, I don’t understand the concept of banning legal products from being advertised.

“NRL is probably looking for maybe a billion dollars a year or something approaching that from the TV networks” explains Tim.

“Now, one of the calculations that all of the people bidding, and as well as the TV networks, it will probably be at least some of the streamers, is what they can bring in in advertising against them. And that includes betting advertising.”

It’s a very good point. A gambling advertising ban will have a major flow-on affect for our sporting codes.

Judge Rob Verdict: DEAL

Introduce a News Production Offset to support investment in and delivery of this vital service for all Australians.

This makes sense to me. The news is a service and if want Australian news to be covered at current levels, then we should treat it like Australian drama. The Government helps fund Australian stories, how is this any different?

Tim seems to agree, saying “One of the reasons I think it might just get a little bit of traction is because politically, you’re not actually giving money to these networks. They’re just not having to pay as much. And politically also avoids the potential alternative, which is what the government has called the news bargaining incentive”.

Tim and I end up having a big discussion about the News Bargaining Incentive, it’s best you watch that one rather than read a transcript!

RADIO PRESENTERS TO BE PUNTED FOR AI?

Some big claims in the Media Diary section of The Australian this week with Steve Jackson reporting ARN is looking at axing presenters in favour of AI-generated hosts.

The evidence of a survey sent out by ARN is compelling and gives credibility to the report, despite comments from the company suggesting AI was not the future.

“We’re trying to understand what’s real and what’s not,” ARN CEO Ciaran Davis told the Financial Review. “What we’ve learned is the power of the announcers we have.”

Apparently not powerful enough.

ICONIC STUDIOS TO BE DESTROYED

Nunawading Studios, the long time home of Neighbours, and countless other Australian television staples, has officially closed its doors after six decades of production.

TV tonight reports The Melbourne studio, which housed shows such as Prisoner, Young Talent Time, Rove Live, and The Box, has been formally decommissioned, marking the end of a significant broadcasting era.

The site is expected to turn the site into a distribution centre as part of its new townhouse development