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.
is your name RaiderDave. Your grasping here. All media inc NZ and Telstra 1.2 billion. That's a good bit of money. No shame that it was a bit less then the AFL deal.
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.
is your name RaiderDave. Your grasping here. All media inc NZ and Telstra 1.2 billion. That's a good bit of money. No shame that it was a bit less then the AFL deal.
Broadcast funding [including New Zealand television] and a new [media rights deal with Telstra] is just over $1.2 billion.
Rugby League, the dominant force in Australian sport!
"I do like annoying the Victorians; they are so easy to get, At times I've looked at them and had a giggle." Peter V'Landys
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
King-Eliagh: ...I believe [RL] is popular in all the other states and territories, bar tasmania.
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
Rugby League, the dominant force in Australian sport!
"I do like annoying the Victorians; they are so easy to get, At times I've looked at them and had a giggle." Peter V'Landys
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.
Rugby League, the dominant force in Australian sport!
"I do like annoying the Victorians; they are so easy to get, At times I've looked at them and had a giggle." Peter V'Landys
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.
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?
Rugby League, the dominant force in Australian sport!
"I do like annoying the Victorians; they are so easy to get, At times I've looked at them and had a giggle." Peter V'Landys
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!
King-Eliagh: ...I believe [RL] is popular in all the other states and territories, bar tasmania.
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.
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.
King-Eliagh: ...I believe [RL] is popular in all the other states and territories, bar tasmania.
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!
Rugby League, the dominant force in Australian sport!
"I do like annoying the Victorians; they are so easy to get, At times I've looked at them and had a giggle." Peter V'Landys
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!
Rugby League, the dominant force in Australian sport!
"I do like annoying the Victorians; they are so easy to get, At times I've looked at them and had a giggle." Peter V'Landys
