With the Broncos and Cowboys in the Top 8 (Broncos on top) and the Lions languishing down the bottom of the AFL ladder with consecutive losses, it is to be expected that the rugby leage games telecast would fair better. Interestingly, despite the ladder position and performance of the Lions in recent weeks, they didn't fair to badly.
The Lions still have more fans going through the turnstyles when compared with the Broncos and Cowboys. Why don't the people of Brisbane embrace their rugby league team? They certainly have embraced their AFL team. The AFL is certainly making massive gains at rugby league's expense in QLD.
People of Brisbane Prefer AFL
-
Beaussie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9664
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
- Team: Sydney Swans
- Location: Sydney
In Weeks 28 and 29 of the ratings period, again Saturday Night AFL on Channel 10 has easily outrated Friday Night NRL on Channel 9 in Brisbane.
Week 28:
Channel 10 - Saturday Night AFL - 211,000
Channel 9 - Friday Night NRL - 177,000
http://www.pbl.com.au/media/pdf/2005/Au ... k%2028.pdf
Week 29:
Channel 10 - Saturday Night AFL - 218,000
Channel 9 - Friday Night NRL - 167,000
http://www.pbl.com.au/media/pdf/2005/Au ... k%2029.pdf
Channel 10's AFL telecasts made the Top 50 programs in Brisbane in both weeks, whilst the NRL on Channel 9 did not. Channel 10's AFL telecasts also outrated Channel 9's Sunday Afternoon NRL. Crowds and tv ratings prove the people of Brisbane do in fact prefer AFL.
Oh and before I forget, Channel 7's Rugby Union telecast between the Wallabies and the Springboks was also easily outrated by the AFL in Brisbane. The Rugby test match, unlike the AFL, did not even make the Top 50 programs.
Week 28:
Channel 10 - Saturday Night AFL - 211,000
Channel 9 - Friday Night NRL - 177,000
http://www.pbl.com.au/media/pdf/2005/Au ... k%2028.pdf
Week 29:
Channel 10 - Saturday Night AFL - 218,000
Channel 9 - Friday Night NRL - 167,000
http://www.pbl.com.au/media/pdf/2005/Au ... k%2029.pdf
Channel 10's AFL telecasts made the Top 50 programs in Brisbane in both weeks, whilst the NRL on Channel 9 did not. Channel 10's AFL telecasts also outrated Channel 9's Sunday Afternoon NRL. Crowds and tv ratings prove the people of Brisbane do in fact prefer AFL.
Oh and before I forget, Channel 7's Rugby Union telecast between the Wallabies and the Springboks was also easily outrated by the AFL in Brisbane. The Rugby test match, unlike the AFL, did not even make the Top 50 programs.
-
Beaussie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9664
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
- Team: Sydney Swans
- Location: Sydney
With this weeks official ratings now released, it is yet another victory for the AFL in Brisbane:
Channel 10 - Saturday Night AFL - 169,000
Channel 9 - Friday Night NRL - 166,000
Channel 9 - Sunday Afternoon NRL - 141,000
http://www.pbl.com.au/media/pdf/2005/Au ... k%2031.pdf
Consistent victories for the AFL and Channel 10 in Brisbane must have both parties very happy in a market that was once regarded as rugby league heartland. Watch for the AFL broadcast rights to increase again.
Channel 10 - Saturday Night AFL - 169,000
Channel 9 - Friday Night NRL - 166,000
Channel 9 - Sunday Afternoon NRL - 141,000
http://www.pbl.com.au/media/pdf/2005/Au ... k%2031.pdf
Consistent victories for the AFL and Channel 10 in Brisbane must have both parties very happy in a market that was once regarded as rugby league heartland. Watch for the AFL broadcast rights to increase again.
-
crocodileman
And these figures for the AFL weren't even for the match of the round. Can you imagine how many people would have tuned in to watch the Swans kick 6 goals in 3 hours?Beaussie wrote:With this weeks official ratings now released, it is yet another victory for the AFL in Brisbane:
Channel 10 - Saturday Night AFL - 169,000
Channel 9 - Friday Night NRL - 166,000
Channel 9 - Sunday Afternoon NRL - 141,000
http://www.pbl.com.au/media/pdf/2005/Au ... k%2031.pdf
Consistent victories for the AFL and Channel 10 in Brisbane must have both parties very happy in a market that was once regarded as rugby league heartland. Watch for the AFL broadcast rights to increase again.
A lot of people, they get back the crowd figures where the Lions slaughter the Broncos (every Lions home game this year has sold out), yet they will argue that the Broncos are trouncing them based on casual tv viewers flicking over on Friday Nights.
Has anyone got a breakdown on the revenue the Lions rake in each year, or what their yearly expenditure is compared to the Brisbane Broncos? I suspect that NRL teams would look like small fry stacked up against revenue generated by AFL clubs, or the AFL in general... and total revenue would account for things like crowds, tv income, merchandise, sponsorships etc.
Has anyone got a breakdown on the revenue the Lions rake in each year, or what their yearly expenditure is compared to the Brisbane Broncos? I suspect that NRL teams would look like small fry stacked up against revenue generated by AFL clubs, or the AFL in general... and total revenue would account for things like crowds, tv income, merchandise, sponsorships etc.
-
Beaussie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9664
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
- Team: Sydney Swans
- Location: Sydney
I tend to think those attending football games demonstrate much more passion and commitment to their team. The Lions having a sellout for every single home game in 2005 demonstrates such passion and commitment I would of thought.dr nick wrote:A lot of people, they get back the crowd figures where the Lions slaughter the Broncos (every Lions home game this year has sold out), yet they will argue that the Broncos are trouncing them based on casual tv viewers flicking over on Friday Nights.
If you check out PBL's website of late you'll notice that Friday night NRL has had some absolute shockers in terms of viewer numbers in recent weeks. And leaguies will tell you the Swans struggle against the Iron Chef.
Have a look at some of the figures for FNF in Brisbane. Laughable for a city that is apparently rugby league heartland. Saturday Night AFL has had numerous TV ratings victories.
Have not got the info you're seeking on hand, but would be very interested to see it nevertheless. Whilst I haven't got the info atm, I'm pretty sure it costs over $22 million in operation costs for AFL clubs whilst it is something like $14 million for an NRL club. The NRL is definately small fry when compared to the AFL. Look no further than the TV rights money. The NRL has only just caught up with the AFL's last broadcasting rights agreement. Endless game of catch up for the NRL with no hope of ever matching the AFL. You gotta have a national competion to achieve that. By that I mean, a competition that is actually national, not just for names sake.dr nick wrote:Has anyone got a breakdown on the revenue the Lions rake in each year, or what their yearly expenditure is compared to the Brisbane Broncos? I suspect that NRL teams would look like small fry stacked up against revenue generated by AFL clubs, or the AFL in general... and total revenue would account for things like crowds, tv income, merchandise, sponsorships etc.
Oh and think about this, when was the last time you saw an NRL advertisement on FTA TV? Costs way too much for the cash strapped NRL it seems.
-
crocodileman
It's amazing what 41 minutes has done for your sobriety Beaussie!Beaussie wrote:I tend to think those attending football games demonstrate much more passion and commitment to their team. The Lions having a sellout for every single home game in 2005 demonstrates such passion and commitment I would of thought.dr nick wrote:A lot of people, they get back the crowd figures where the Lions slaughter the Broncos (every Lions home game this year has sold out), yet they will argue that the Broncos are trouncing them based on casual tv viewers flicking over on Friday Nights.
If you check out PBL's website of late you'll notice that Friday night NRL has had some absolute shockers in terms of viewer numbers in recent weeks. And leaguies will tell you the Swans struggle against the Iron Chef.
Have a look at some of the figures for FNF in Brisbane. Laughable for a city that is apparently rugby league heartland. Saturday Night AFL has had numerous TV ratings victories.
Have not got the info you're seeking on hand, but would be very interested to see it nevertheless. Whilst I haven't got the info atm, I'm pretty sure it costs over $22 million in operation costs for AFL clubs whilst it is something like $14 million for an NRL club. The NRL is definately small fry when compared to the AFL. Look no further than the TV rights money. The NRL has only just caught up with the AFL's last broadcasting rights agreement. Endless game of catch up for the NRL with no hope of ever matching the AFL. You gotta have a national competion to achieve that. By that I mean, a competition that is actually national, not just for names sake.dr nick wrote:Has anyone got a breakdown on the revenue the Lions rake in each year, or what their yearly expenditure is compared to the Brisbane Broncos? I suspect that NRL teams would look like small fry stacked up against revenue generated by AFL clubs, or the AFL in general... and total revenue would account for things like crowds, tv income, merchandise, sponsorships etc.
Oh and think about this, when was the last time you saw an NRL advertisement on FTA TV? Costs way too much for the cash strapped NRL it seems.
I think it was one of those kiddy pissed episodes he was having. You know, when you were 17 and you had about 5 sips of wine or beer and you carried on for an hour swaying and telling everyone that you were so pissed!
Shortly after you're more sober than a judge.
Shortly after you're more sober than a judge.
The Mighty Lions will Come Back to Life in 2006
I tend to think, as a rule, you should halve any AFL figures you come across to get an approximate NRL figure. Things like crowds, merchandise sales, revenue generated, sponsorships, salary caps, how much it costs to run a club etc are roughly half the AFL across the board.Beaussie wrote:Have not got the info you're seeking on hand, but would be very interested to see it nevertheless. Whilst I haven't got the info atm, I'm pretty sure it costs over $22 million in operation costs for AFL clubs whilst it is something like $14 million for an NRL club. The NRL is definately small fry when compared to the AFL.
The exception of course is tv, where fringe armchair supporters can just flick the channel to support their team rather than buy a membership, get to the game or buy any club merchandise, so tv numbers are a bit closer.
As you might have realised though, the NRL is not transparent at all with any of their financials, whereas the AFL figures are freely available.
It's because the NRL doesnt come close to raking in the kinds of money it wants us to think it does. They are nearly broke, and it explains why they aren't able to deal with the Rugby League Players Association.
You'll also notice how the NRL beats their chest over this 400 million dollar deal with foxsports. Well this is all smoke and mirrors, and is currently the subject of legal proceedings regarding Channel 7 vs the NRL.
Truth is, News Ltd owns half the NRL. So by "paying" the NRL some $400 million for tv rights, it's all going back into the same company. Channel 7 are proceeding with legal action because they are aware of this sham, and were outbid because of it.
The AFL TV rights went for half a billion dollars, ALL of that money going to the AFL. The NRL get roughly 40 million a year, as claimed by channel 7.
You'll also notice how the NRL beats their chest over this 400 million dollar deal with foxsports. Well this is all smoke and mirrors, and is currently the subject of legal proceedings regarding Channel 7 vs the NRL.
Truth is, News Ltd owns half the NRL. So by "paying" the NRL some $400 million for tv rights, it's all going back into the same company. Channel 7 are proceeding with legal action because they are aware of this sham, and were outbid because of it.
The AFL TV rights went for half a billion dollars, ALL of that money going to the AFL. The NRL get roughly 40 million a year, as claimed by channel 7.
-
Beaussie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9664
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
- Team: Sydney Swans
- Location: Sydney
Isn't it also the case that the NRL has to pay News Ltd each and every year for their failed investment in Super League? May go some way to explaining why the NRL doesn't release publicly financial information.
Would look embarrassing one would think when you hear the NRL is actually paying money back to the company that supposedly provided a new financial bonanza in terms of the new tv rights deal. I wonder how much the NRL is really getting once the News Ltd repayments are taken out?
Would look embarrassing one would think when you hear the NRL is actually paying money back to the company that supposedly provided a new financial bonanza in terms of the new tv rights deal. I wonder how much the NRL is really getting once the News Ltd repayments are taken out?
That's fairly common knowledge though. Half of NRL revenue goes to News Ltd, and half goes to the ARL. On top of that, the NRL has to repay in the vacinity of some $8000000 a year in interest to News Ltd for the failed days of super league.Beaussie wrote:Isn't it also the case that the NRL has to pay News Ltd each and every year for their failed investment in Super League? May go some way to explaining why the NRL doesn't release publicly financial information.
Would look embarrassing one would think when you hear the NRL is actually paying money back to the company that supposedly provided a new financial bonanza in terms of the new tv rights deal. I wonder how much the NRL is really getting once the News Ltd repayments are taken out?
The stuff that's hard to get figured on are merchandise revenue, gate takings (suspicions?), club profits and losses etc etc.
Last edited by dr nick on Wed Aug 31, 2005 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lachlan’s legacy: $560m lost on Super League
Australian Financial Review.
As Lachlan Murdoch heads back to Australia his role in the war that split rugby league still dogs News Ltd. Neil Chenoweth investigates.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ten years after Rupert Murdoch set out to conquer rugby league News Corporation has finally revealed the bill for its unhappy Super League adventure - a staggering $560 million.
It’s a figure that News has never wanted to talk about, but today rugby league is run by numbers, and most of them are red.
The working man’s game now reserved for those with strong nerves and deep pockets. And no pockets are deeper than those at News Corp.
While the company that controls rugby league now operates out of New York, News Corp’s fixation with the game has always been a personal affair, beginning with Lachlan Murdoch, the man credited - or blamed - with driving the media group’s investment since the days of Super League.
But if Lachlan Murdoch’s passion for the game has driven the News commitment, what will happen now that he is gone? News insiders are openly speculating on what New York bean counters will make of the greatest game of all.
Murdoch’s involvement dates back to the night a decade ago when Super League was launched as a breakaway competition to the Australian Rugby League. It was supposed to cost only $60 million.
The true cost came to light only when News Corp shuffled its Australian companies for tax purposes after the group moved to the United States last November. A series of filings tallied up the $560 million in accumulated costs, although even this total doesn’t include other direct losses by News Ltd.
It’s the final indignity for the game. A decade of passion, intrigue and backroom deals that has tied successful clubs to big-money interests and left the last independents, like the Rabbitohs and the Newcastle Knights battling to stay solvent, is finally reduced to a tax strategy.
NRL chief executive David Gallop says that Nine and Premier Media, which provides programming for Foxtel, have offered more than $500 million for a five-year escalating contract to maintain that coverage from 2008 - a deal that includes a substantial upfront payment in 2007.
How does such a staggering sum begin to make sense, given the losses that Foxtel makes already on its NRL coverage? The answer lies in the history of Super League and the NRL, and in understanding just where the money goes.
Super League broke the NSWRL. When the war began, the NSWRL had net assets of $16.4 million. When the smoke cleared, that figure was down to $2 million, barely enough to run the game for a week.
News Corporation had to be hurting badly from its Super League adventure, but there were few clues in its accounts. For 10 years, on its company filings at least, Super League Pty Ltd remained a $2 company.
News Corp group accounts show it has a $160 million investment in NRL, a figure that has not changed since 1998.
An American News Corp executive, Bill Sorenson, told analysts in 1998 that the group had written down $100 million from Super League, including tax benefits. However, the true position was much worse than this.
Last November, a week after reincorporating in the US, News began the process of converting $560.2 million in loans to Super League Pty Ltd into shares – this finally was a more realistic measure of how much the rugby league wars had cost News.
He denied the moves were related to News Corp’s move to the US. The Super League investment included $130 million that News agreed to pay into the NRL as part of the 1997 peace agreement, through a News subsidiary, NRL Investments Pty Ltd.
However, this total is an understatement, because it doesn’t include ongoing direct payments that News continues to make to former Super League clubs, which are channelled separately, and which take total costs for News well over $700 million.
Even after the 1998 write-off, News appears to have more than half a billion dollars in undisclosed losses from rugby league, an accounting treatment that puts it on a collision course with the game - that is, the News accountants believe the company can extract this money back from the NRL, in one form or another.
After the 1997 peace deal, News imposed a blackout on financial details for the NRL, the ARL and NSWRL.
What can be said, however, is that in the NRL era, money has flowed in a series of neat circles, each of which is dominated by News.
The media group owns half of the NRL partnership, which reports some but not all of its finances through its operating company, National Rugby League Pty Ltd.
The NRL partnership currently receives more than half its budget from Premier Media Group (formerly called Fox Sports), which is owned by News and Nine. In addition, Nine pays about $18 million a year for free-to-air rights and Telstra $7 million a year for naming rights to the Telstra Cup and for internet rights.
Other sponsors reportedly provide another $9 million.
Premier Media Group is a highly profitable operation that provides NRL programming to Foxtel, which is owned by Telstra, News and PBL.
Even back in 1998, when the league was doing it tough as it faced the need to reduce players’ salaries, News was selling Fox Sports programming to Foxtel for $62 million a year - that is, for more than the NRL’s total income.
News also has the right under the peace deal to take $8 million in dividends each year from the NRL partnership for 20 years, to recover its start-up costs.
In 2000, the NRL announced a huge new programming contract with Fox Sports worth $65 million a year. It was a bonanza that unfortunately didn’t go to rugby league.
The real cash figure paid to the NRL was approximately $34 million, and that included GST. The rest was contra in various forms, including the cost of producing the programs, and a series of two-minute “Stories of Leagueâ€
Australian Financial Review.
As Lachlan Murdoch heads back to Australia his role in the war that split rugby league still dogs News Ltd. Neil Chenoweth investigates.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ten years after Rupert Murdoch set out to conquer rugby league News Corporation has finally revealed the bill for its unhappy Super League adventure - a staggering $560 million.
It’s a figure that News has never wanted to talk about, but today rugby league is run by numbers, and most of them are red.
The working man’s game now reserved for those with strong nerves and deep pockets. And no pockets are deeper than those at News Corp.
While the company that controls rugby league now operates out of New York, News Corp’s fixation with the game has always been a personal affair, beginning with Lachlan Murdoch, the man credited - or blamed - with driving the media group’s investment since the days of Super League.
But if Lachlan Murdoch’s passion for the game has driven the News commitment, what will happen now that he is gone? News insiders are openly speculating on what New York bean counters will make of the greatest game of all.
Murdoch’s involvement dates back to the night a decade ago when Super League was launched as a breakaway competition to the Australian Rugby League. It was supposed to cost only $60 million.
The true cost came to light only when News Corp shuffled its Australian companies for tax purposes after the group moved to the United States last November. A series of filings tallied up the $560 million in accumulated costs, although even this total doesn’t include other direct losses by News Ltd.
It’s the final indignity for the game. A decade of passion, intrigue and backroom deals that has tied successful clubs to big-money interests and left the last independents, like the Rabbitohs and the Newcastle Knights battling to stay solvent, is finally reduced to a tax strategy.
NRL chief executive David Gallop says that Nine and Premier Media, which provides programming for Foxtel, have offered more than $500 million for a five-year escalating contract to maintain that coverage from 2008 - a deal that includes a substantial upfront payment in 2007.
How does such a staggering sum begin to make sense, given the losses that Foxtel makes already on its NRL coverage? The answer lies in the history of Super League and the NRL, and in understanding just where the money goes.
Super League broke the NSWRL. When the war began, the NSWRL had net assets of $16.4 million. When the smoke cleared, that figure was down to $2 million, barely enough to run the game for a week.
News Corporation had to be hurting badly from its Super League adventure, but there were few clues in its accounts. For 10 years, on its company filings at least, Super League Pty Ltd remained a $2 company.
News Corp group accounts show it has a $160 million investment in NRL, a figure that has not changed since 1998.
An American News Corp executive, Bill Sorenson, told analysts in 1998 that the group had written down $100 million from Super League, including tax benefits. However, the true position was much worse than this.
Last November, a week after reincorporating in the US, News began the process of converting $560.2 million in loans to Super League Pty Ltd into shares – this finally was a more realistic measure of how much the rugby league wars had cost News.
He denied the moves were related to News Corp’s move to the US. The Super League investment included $130 million that News agreed to pay into the NRL as part of the 1997 peace agreement, through a News subsidiary, NRL Investments Pty Ltd.
However, this total is an understatement, because it doesn’t include ongoing direct payments that News continues to make to former Super League clubs, which are channelled separately, and which take total costs for News well over $700 million.
Even after the 1998 write-off, News appears to have more than half a billion dollars in undisclosed losses from rugby league, an accounting treatment that puts it on a collision course with the game - that is, the News accountants believe the company can extract this money back from the NRL, in one form or another.
After the 1997 peace deal, News imposed a blackout on financial details for the NRL, the ARL and NSWRL.
What can be said, however, is that in the NRL era, money has flowed in a series of neat circles, each of which is dominated by News.
The media group owns half of the NRL partnership, which reports some but not all of its finances through its operating company, National Rugby League Pty Ltd.
The NRL partnership currently receives more than half its budget from Premier Media Group (formerly called Fox Sports), which is owned by News and Nine. In addition, Nine pays about $18 million a year for free-to-air rights and Telstra $7 million a year for naming rights to the Telstra Cup and for internet rights.
Other sponsors reportedly provide another $9 million.
Premier Media Group is a highly profitable operation that provides NRL programming to Foxtel, which is owned by Telstra, News and PBL.
Even back in 1998, when the league was doing it tough as it faced the need to reduce players’ salaries, News was selling Fox Sports programming to Foxtel for $62 million a year - that is, for more than the NRL’s total income.
News also has the right under the peace deal to take $8 million in dividends each year from the NRL partnership for 20 years, to recover its start-up costs.
In 2000, the NRL announced a huge new programming contract with Fox Sports worth $65 million a year. It was a bonanza that unfortunately didn’t go to rugby league.
The real cash figure paid to the NRL was approximately $34 million, and that included GST. The rest was contra in various forms, including the cost of producing the programs, and a series of two-minute “Stories of Leagueâ€
-
Beaussie
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9664
- Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
- Team: Sydney Swans
- Location: Sydney
Wow, interesting read there dr nick.
Leaguies always tell AFL fans that RL is a huge cash cow for Fox Sports. That article you posted seems to suggest otherwise with continuing losses being the norm.
What a sorry state of affairs rugby league finds itself in. Makes sense why News Ltd papers like the Daily Telegraph are so anti pokie tax increases in NSW. It seems they'll have to fork out more to prop up already struggling rugby league clubs that are heavily reliant on leagues club grants.
Where would rugby league be without pokies and News Ltd?
Leaguies always tell AFL fans that RL is a huge cash cow for Fox Sports. That article you posted seems to suggest otherwise with continuing losses being the norm.
What a sorry state of affairs rugby league finds itself in. Makes sense why News Ltd papers like the Daily Telegraph are so anti pokie tax increases in NSW. It seems they'll have to fork out more to prop up already struggling rugby league clubs that are heavily reliant on leagues club grants.
Where would rugby league be without pokies and News Ltd?