Page 109 of 112
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 6:43 am
by Xman
pussycat wrote:Xman wrote:
Grants comments were about the future contract
''Broadcast funding [including New Zealand television
and a new media rights deal with Telstra]
is just over $1.2 billion, and commercial revenue is about $800 million......"
Note the word is???? It's not a word you use when your talking about the past.
A new deal with Telsta - but not a new deal with NZ.
There's no shame in finishing second. You beat home the ARU, the A League, Womens' athletics , aswell as the lawn bowlers and there walking frames.
youre kidding right? John grant was explaining the NRLs revenue for the next 5 years. He even said that included the entire TV rights deal including NZ and media...
Wow, playing on words to try and climb your way put of this hole, hey desperate.
Grants comments are the only concrete evidence we have of the entire NRL deal. They've refused to disclose the NZ or media deal. Until these are known grants latest comments is the only proof we have
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:18 am
by piesman2011
I think he is just upset that he will have to change his signature. Just have to change one word to "enjoying".
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:54 am
by pussycat
Xman wrote:pussycat wrote:Xman wrote:
Grants comments were about the future contract
''Broadcast funding [including New Zealand television
and a new media rights deal with Telstra]
is just over $1.2 billion, and commercial revenue is about $800 million......"
Note the word is???? It's not a word you use when your talking about the past.
A new deal with Telsta - but not a new deal with NZ.
There's no shame in finishing second. You beat home the ARU, the A League, Womens' athletics , aswell as the lawn bowlers and there walking frames.
youre kidding right? John grant was explaining the NRLs revenue for the next 5 years. He even said that included the entire TV rights deal including NZ and media...
Wow, playing on words to try and climb your way put of this hole, hey desperate.
Grants comments are the only concrete evidence we have of the entire NRL deal. They've refused to disclose the NZ or media deal. Until these are known grants latest comments is the only proof we have
The ones we're interested in are broadcast funding - 2012!
''Broadcast funding [including New Zealand television and a new media rights deal with Telstra] is just over $1.2 billion......"
Thats gold
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 12:21 pm
by Xman
Except he is using that figure to outline revenue until 2017, which includes the new nz deal
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 12:28 pm
by piesman2011
pussycat wrote:
''Broadcast funding [including New Zealand television and a new media rights deal with Telstra] is just over $1.2 billion......"
Thats gold
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 1:49 pm
by pussycat
What he is saying is, broadcast funding in total is $1.2b . And what its made up of is the money from the AusTV deal, The new Telstra deal and the current NZTV deal.
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:20 pm
by piesman2011
pussycat wrote:What he is saying is, broadcast funding in total is $1.2b . And what its made up of is the money from the AusTV deal, The new Telstra deal and the current NZTV deal.
I dont think that NZ deal was current. It would have ended on GF day. Keep grasping.
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 4:14 pm
by pussycat
The only thing I'm clutching at is this gold medal I'm wearing around my neck. All us NRL fans are proudly displaying them. The NRL report came out on the 22nd of February . Why would they be using NZ TV figures in that report for something that wasn't signed off on until a week ago?
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 4:59 pm
by Xman
pussycat wrote:The only thing I'm clutching at is this gold medal I'm wearing around my neck. All us NRL fans are proudly displaying them. The NRL report came out on the 22nd of February . Why would they be using NZ TV figures in that report for something that wasn't signed off on until a week ago?
So in an article where Grant discusses the revenue expected in the next 5 years he used the previous 5 years data.....
Seriously, why bother? Assuming the above hilarious comment is true, if you include another 50k for double NZs deal you would still be behind 1.3b anyway!
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:15 pm
by piesman2011
pussycat wrote:The only thing I'm clutching at is this gold medal I'm wearing around my neck. All us NRL fans are proudly displaying them. The NRL report came out on the 22nd of February . Why would they be using NZ TV figures in that report for something that wasn't signed off on until a week ago?
Because they had agreed to a deal and just had to put pen to paper. I would say they signed off about 2-3 weeks ago because the season started 2 weeks a ago. this article is about 3 and a half weeks a go so by that stage they had agreed on money. Why talk about future revenue at all unless you can estimate how much you are getting from all major sources. It's as plain as day when you read it. I know you want to claim that the NRL got more money and if they had I would be the first to say well done. However this is simply not the case.
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:25 pm
by Xman
piesman2011 wrote:pussycat wrote:The only thing I'm clutching at is this gold medal I'm wearing around my neck. All us NRL fans are proudly displaying them. The NRL report came out on the 22nd of February . Why would they be using NZ TV figures in that report for something that wasn't signed off on until a week ago?
Because they had agreed to a deal and just had to put pen to paper. I would say they signed off about 2-3 weeks ago because the season started 2 weeks a ago. this article is about 3 and a half weeks a go so by that stage they had agreed on money. Why talk about future revenue at all unless you can estimate how much you are getting from all major sources. It's as plain as day when you read it. I know you want to claim that the NRL got more money and if they had I would be the first to say well done. However this is simply not the case.
Especially because they had been negotiating for some time and the expected amount would have been pretty clear. NZ played hardball. Its more than likely they didnt get much more than last time which sort of explains why they didnt announce the final figure.
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:35 pm
by pussycat
Xman wrote:pussycat wrote:The only thing I'm clutching at is this gold medal I'm wearing around my neck. All us NRL fans are proudly displaying them. The NRL report came out on the 22nd of February . Why would they be using NZ TV figures in that report for something that wasn't signed off on until a week ago?
So in an article where Grant discusses the revenue expected in the next 5 years he used the previous 5 years data.....
Seriously, why bother? Assuming the above hilarious comment is true, if you include another 50k for double NZs deal you would still be behind 1.3b anyway!
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 5:58 pm
by pussycat
It's not that hard - Broadcast funding is :Broadcast funding is :Broadcast funding is :Broadcast funding is :
It has nothing to do with revenue , Nothing to do with projected - nothing to do with the next 5 years, and XMan it has nothing to do with sponsorship : Broadcast Funding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
The AFL(silver medalist's) broadcast funding was $1.23b, The NRL(gold medalist) Broadcast funding was $1.2b +(or minus) the increase in the SKYNZ TV contract.
Gold! , Gold! , Gold! to the NRL!
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 6:32 pm
by Xman
pussycat wrote:It's not that hard - Broadcast funding is :Broadcast funding is :Broadcast funding is :Broadcast funding is :
It has nothing to do with revenue , Nothing to do with projected - nothing to do with the next 5 years, and XMan it has nothing to do with sponsorship : Broadcast Funding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
The AFL(silver medalist's) broadcast funding was $1.23b, The NRL(gold medalist) Broadcast funding was $1.2b +(or minus) the increase in the SKYNZ TV contract.
Gold! , Gold! , Gold! to the NRL!
broadcast funding is revenue for the league.
in 2017 the broadcast funding will be 1/5th of 1.2b which is exactly what grant said
this year the broadcast funding is 1/5th of 1.2b which includes NZ deal and media rights
The AFLs rights including media is 1.33b (1.253b plus 100k)
Re: NRL to reap $1.2b from TV rights
Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 6:56 pm
by piesman2011
pussycat wrote:It's not that hard - Broadcast funding is :Broadcast funding is :Broadcast funding is :Broadcast funding is :
It has nothing to do with revenue , Nothing to do with projected - nothing to do with the next 5 years, and XMan it has nothing to do with sponsorship : Broadcast Funding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
The AFL(silver medalist's) broadcast funding was $1.23b, The NRL(gold medalist) Broadcast funding was $1.2b +(or minus) the increase in the SKYNZ TV contract.
Gold! , Gold! , Gold! to the NRL!
Are you ok mate. You sound like this is really getting to you. I know you thought you had the gold medal, but you have just looked at the big screen and seen your name second in line. Right now your in denial and you are starting to get frustrated that no one else believes you when you say you won. But if you just look back at the replay you will see what really happened. Silver looks better on you anyway.
