Xman wrote:ParraEelsNRL wrote:9 haven't hardly said anything.
it was on their news. Multiple media outlets are saying the NRL will get $2b max after naming and international rights, leaving them about $17m short of the AFL per season
Now if the NRL do secure the deal you say then....
*the NRL secure a 2billion deal over 5 years or 400million a year.
Then Compare that to,
*The AFL have secured a 2.5 billion deal over 6 years or 416million a year
Then the following needs to be taken into consideration...
* it's more expensive to run an AFL team than an NRL team
* AFL has 18 teams, the NRL 16 teams.
* those two extra teams amount to 1 extra AFL game each round H&A than NRL.
*the NRL deal includes representative fixtures (SOO, test matches, internationals, world club and cup, 4 nations, 9s), AFL can not offer anything similar in their offers.
*the NRL has interest from overseas TV markets that AFL doesn't.
SO....
*the NRL Deal works out to be
$25.0million a year for each team , where
operational costs are cheaper than their AFL counterpart, in Australia the
NRL has yet to expand to all potential markets and internationally the NRL is yet to expand in acouple workable locations. The
NRL still has strong growth possibilities.
Whereas,
*The AFL deal works out to be
$23.1million a year for each team. An
AFL team is more expansive to run than a NRL team and the AFL deal means almost
2million less per team than NRL deal. The AFL has almost
reached absolute maximum in growth/expansion in Australia and internationally the game does not have any potential growth markets outside Australia. So the
AFL have more or less reached the peak in what the game can offer TV broadcasters.
Yeah tell me again which one is better lol?!?!