atmosphere is building in England

[adamj1300]

1.025 doesnt include digital rights which the AFL figure does.

AFL is over 3 hours with more breaks (played in quarters) nrl is over 2

if theres so many participants then why did the NRL GF in victoria outrate AFL GF in Sydney with teams from the opposite state not playing? not even taking into account the extra 0.7 million people sydney has.

okay, nrl is not national. so? still had 150k in perth watching the GF and probably more for SOO. in a city of 1.7 million without a team it's not too horrible. and will be a lot better when they do have a team. and don't come in with 2013 AFL gf figures for perth cause im pretty sure they were in the gf if im not mistaken.

Again you didn't answer the question - you went back to TV ratings - you don't even mount an argument against me when I said they are far from accurate - is that because you have none? Yes - you don't even mount an argument against me that ALL factors need to be considered - I feel like I'm talking to Baldrick from Black Adder! I have also said this many times (maybe not to you though) Melbourne people support ANY team that is in their state - when the Storm had their salary cap issue the local radio stn SEN (AFL OWNED) ran a campaign to get as many people to buy memberships in the club - because the Storm weren't in this years GF there was a substantial drop! This doesn't indicate support for RL but support for the Storm! In Perth they do have a large RU following which may account for the interest - yet their participation rate for actually playing the game is about 2700 whereas RU has about 22k! As for the media rights deal the AFL will make about 425 mil in total revenue - the NRL 284mil - so you tell me if you can face the truth who is the number one code ..........the AFL!

whats the question?

(cue some idiotic joke about comprehension skills or intelligence)

how will the media rights deal make 425 mil AFL, 284 mil nrl? source.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league/833 ... not-enough

http://www.smh.com.au/data-point/AFL-le ... 2grkp.html

Question

Like I have said MANY times you have to look at more than just TV ratings - the last NRL TV deal prior to last year was a fraction of the previous AFL deal (750 mil) the NRL got 1.025 in the AUSTRALIAN broadcast deal NZ last I looked was not part of AUSTRALIA! So for TV revenue from the AUSTRALIAN TV deal the AFL win and has always won - then we go to crowds, sponsorship, total revenue streams, memberships and lastly participation and again the AFL clearly win - before you try and tell us that TV ratings are the ONLY consideration AGAIN - tell me this would you rather that the NRL had all these boxes ticked or not? If the answer is yes than you have a paradox in your argument which is unsustainable!

So does NRL tick all those boxes BETTER than the AFL?

when the NRL commission took over from the joint benture News limtd & the ARl
After inheriting a game with only $4.8 million in the bank, Grant said the ARLC aimed to put $40 million a year aside in a futures fund for big projects but he hoped that figure would be more
the League had no money
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league/833 ... not-enough
the NRL is a shit show,
has the 2013 NRL League Financials been released yet?

[Fred]

So counting how many people watch on nz is an indicator of popularity in Australia ?
The domestic one day comp with India coming up is going to be huge then l

How do you get people watching on Tv ,when we are talking about $$$$ for TV deals.

I was replying to the braindead who says NZ tv rights should not be counted.

God Damn
you derpball fans are thick.

Well tv rights deals are being used as a measure of popularity in this country ... And you add in what nz tv paid to show it in their country ? What is paid reflects ratings you see.

[Raiderdave]

1.025 doesnt include digital rights which the AFL figure does.

AFL is over 3 hours with more breaks (played in quarters) nrl is over 2

if theres so many participants then why did the NRL GF in victoria outrate AFL GF in Sydney with teams from the opposite state not playing? not even taking into account the extra 0.7 million people sydney has.

okay, nrl is not national. so? still had 150k in perth watching the GF and probably more for SOO. in a city of 1.7 million without a team it's not too horrible. and will be a lot better when they do have a team. and don't come in with 2013 AFL gf figures for perth cause im pretty sure they were in the gf if im not mistaken.

Again you didn't answer the question - you went back to TV ratings - you don't even mount an argument against me when I said they are far from accurate - is that because you have none? Yes - you don't even mount an argument against me that ALL factors need to be considered - I feel like I'm talking to Baldrick from Black Adder! I have also said this many times (maybe not to you though) Melbourne people support ANY team that is in their state - when the Storm had their salary cap issue the local radio stn SEN (AFL OWNED) ran a campaign to get as many people to buy memberships in the club - because the Storm weren't in this years GF there was a substantial drop! This doesn't indicate support for RL but support for the Storm! In Perth they do have a large RU following which may account for the interest - yet their participation rate for actually playing the game is about 2700 whereas RU has about 22k! As for the media rights deal the AFL will make about 425 mil in total revenue - the NRL 284mil - so you tell me if you can face the truth who is the number one code ..........the AFL!

whats the question?

(cue some idiotic joke about comprehension skills or intelligence)

how will the media rights deal make 425 mil AFL, 284 mil nrl? source.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league/833 ... not-enough

http://www.smh.com.au/data-point/AFL-le ... 2grkp.html

Question

Like I have said MANY times you have to look at more than just TV ratings - the last NRL TV deal prior to last year was a fraction of the previous AFL deal (750 mil) the NRL got 1.025 in the AUSTRALIAN broadcast deal NZ last I looked was not part of AUSTRALIA! So for TV revenue from the AUSTRALIAN TV deal the AFL win and has always won - then we go to crowds, sponsorship, total revenue streams, memberships and lastly participation and again the AFL clearly win - before you try and tell us that TV ratings are the ONLY consideration AGAIN - tell me this would you rather that the NRL had all these boxes ticked or not? If the answer is yes than you have a paradox in your argument which is unsustainable!

So does NRL tick all those boxes BETTER than the AFL?

has the 2013 NRL League Financials been released yet?

has the Wions ?
they'd kill for 4.8 million in the bank :_<> :_<> :_<>

in fact
they'd kill for $4.80 in the bank :_<> :_<>


after just 1 year of the NRL's 1.3 Billion dollar media rights deal ... the largest in Australian sport
the NRL will post profits of over 45 Million in 2013
that figure more then 3 times larger then the VFL's 2013 profit

wow
just wow

[NRLCrap1]

If a club has $4.8 million in the bank, they are doing something wrong. Why aren't they spending it?

You work it out.....oh wait. You can't.

[adamj1300]

1.025 doesnt include digital rights which the AFL figure does.

AFL is over 3 hours with more breaks (played in quarters) nrl is over 2

if theres so many participants then why did the NRL GF in victoria outrate AFL GF in Sydney with teams from the opposite state not playing? not even taking into account the extra 0.7 million people sydney has.

okay, nrl is not national. so? still had 150k in perth watching the GF and probably more for SOO. in a city of 1.7 million without a team it's not too horrible. and will be a lot better when they do have a team. and don't come in with 2013 AFL gf figures for perth cause im pretty sure they were in the gf if im not mistaken.

Again you didn't answer the question - you went back to TV ratings - you don't even mount an argument against me when I said they are far from accurate - is that because you have none? Yes - you don't even mount an argument against me that ALL factors need to be considered - I feel like I'm talking to Baldrick from Black Adder! I have also said this many times (maybe not to you though) Melbourne people support ANY team that is in their state - when the Storm had their salary cap issue the local radio stn SEN (AFL OWNED) ran a campaign to get as many people to buy memberships in the club - because the Storm weren't in this years GF there was a substantial drop! This doesn't indicate support for RL but support for the Storm! In Perth they do have a large RU following which may account for the interest - yet their participation rate for actually playing the game is about 2700 whereas RU has about 22k! As for the media rights deal the AFL will make about 425 mil in total revenue - the NRL 284mil - so you tell me if you can face the truth who is the number one code ..........the AFL!

whats the question?

(cue some idiotic joke about comprehension skills or intelligence)

how will the media rights deal make 425 mil AFL, 284 mil nrl? source.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league/833 ... not-enough

http://www.smh.com.au/data-point/AFL-le ... 2grkp.html

Question

Like I have said MANY times you have to look at more than just TV ratings - the last NRL TV deal prior to last year was a fraction of the previous AFL deal (750 mil) the NRL got 1.025 in the AUSTRALIAN broadcast deal NZ last I looked was not part of AUSTRALIA! So for TV revenue from the AUSTRALIAN TV deal the AFL win and has always won - then we go to crowds, sponsorship, total revenue streams, memberships and lastly participation and again the AFL clearly win - before you try and tell us that TV ratings are the ONLY consideration AGAIN - tell me this would you rather that the NRL had all these boxes ticked or not? If the answer is yes than you have a paradox in your argument which is unsustainable!

So does NRL tick all those boxes BETTER than the AFL?

has the 2013 NRL League Financials been released yet?

has the Wions ?
they'd kill for 4.8 million in the bank :_<> :_<> :_<>

in fact
they'd kill for $4.80 in the bank :_<> :_<>


after just 1 year of the NRL's 1.3 Billion dollar media rights deal ... the largest in Australian sport
the NRL will post profits of over 45 Million in 2013
that figure more then 3 times larger then the VFL's 2013 profit

wow
just wow

no dick head dave, the NRL had 4.8 million in the bank the League. every club bar the bonco's wouldn't even have half that in the bank
wow on the back of their 1.025 they only made 45 million profit?
they own nothing, set aside nothing for the future. put nothing back in to grass roots, to expand the game.
the NRL sounds like a coles commercial, down down our crowds, ratings, participation rates are down

the AFL 2013 financials havent been released yet, but whats the point in claiming you are making profits, but put nothing back in to the game to grow it for the future?
the AFL has well over 200 million set aside in future fund, invests in grass roots, money in to stadium's. weather it claims to make a 10 or 20 million dollar profit, it invests heavily for the future. crowds, & ratings continue to grow

the NRL do none of this! it is nothing but an abomination of a administration, but then again it goes with the sport of NRL

[Swans4ever]

1.025 doesnt include digital rights which the AFL figure does.

AFL is over 3 hours with more breaks (played in quarters) nrl is over 2

if theres so many participants then why did the NRL GF in victoria outrate AFL GF in Sydney with teams from the opposite state not playing? not even taking into account the extra 0.7 million people sydney has.

okay, nrl is not national. so? still had 150k in perth watching the GF and probably more for SOO. in a city of 1.7 million without a team it's not too horrible. and will be a lot better when they do have a team. and don't come in with 2013 AFL gf figures for perth cause im pretty sure they were in the gf if im not mistaken.

Again you didn't answer the question - you went back to TV ratings - you don't even mount an argument against me when I said they are far from accurate - is that because you have none? Yes - you don't even mount an argument against me that ALL factors need to be considered - I feel like I'm talking to Baldrick from Black Adder! I have also said this many times (maybe not to you though) Melbourne people support ANY team that is in their state - when the Storm had their salary cap issue the local radio stn SEN (AFL OWNED) ran a campaign to get as many people to buy memberships in the club - because the Storm weren't in this years GF there was a substantial drop! This doesn't indicate support for RL but support for the Storm! In Perth they do have a large RU following which may account for the interest - yet their participation rate for actually playing the game is about 2700 whereas RU has about 22k! As for the media rights deal the AFL will make about 425 mil in total revenue - the NRL 284mil - so you tell me if you can face the truth who is the number one code ..........the AFL!

whats the question?

(cue some idiotic joke about comprehension skills or intelligence)

how will the media rights deal make 425 mil AFL, 284 mil nrl? source.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league/833 ... not-enough

http://www.smh.com.au/data-point/AFL-le ... 2grkp.html

Question

Like I have said MANY times you have to look at more than just TV ratings - the last NRL TV deal prior to last year was a fraction of the previous AFL deal (750 mil) the NRL got 1.025 in the AUSTRALIAN broadcast deal NZ last I looked was not part of AUSTRALIA! So for TV revenue from the AUSTRALIAN TV deal the AFL win and has always won - then we go to crowds, sponsorship, total revenue streams, memberships and lastly participation and again the AFL clearly win - before you try and tell us that TV ratings are the ONLY consideration AGAIN - tell me this would you rather that the NRL had all these boxes ticked or not? If the answer is yes than you have a paradox in your argument which is unsustainable!

So does NRL tick all those boxes BETTER than the AFL?

has the 2013 NRL League Financials been released yet?

has the Wions ?
they'd kill for 4.8 million in the bank :_<> :_<> :_<>

in fact
they'd kill for $4.80 in the bank :_<> :_<>


after just 1 year of the NRL's 1.3 Billion dollar media rights deal ... the largest in Australian sport
the NRL will post profits of over 45 Million in 2013
that figure more then 3 times larger then the VFL's 2013 profit

wow
just wow

Yeah and where is the NRL's 89 mil futures fund? Zip nada zero until THIS year! Now go away and find a nice little corner to cry in you whiny little coward!

[pHyR3]

that's what we're (or i) am SAYING NRL management has been abysmal compared to the AFL, now that we've got some decent one (who need to fix up A LOT) we are raking in money into our future funds. I wish we had AFL management mate, i really do.

[Fred]

See psy is a realist ... On most parts

[NRLCrap1]

They won't fix up a thing as long as Nine dictate when the games are! They are powerless to do so - unless they want to risk their precious Oz TV rights!

[Swans4ever]

that's what we're (or i) am SAYING NRL management has been abysmal compared to the AFL, now that we've got some decent one (who need to fix up A LOT) we are raking in money into our future funds. I wish we had AFL management mate, i really do.

Don't disagree - RD is in a bubble he thinks because he believes something then it is so! NRL financial wise is doing better but they have a long way to go to make up the 200 mil a year that the AFL has in ALL its revenue streams. This is what a lot of RL fans don't understand - the AFL has a lot more money because it has grown more support Australia wide!

[pHyR3]

the lions and gws are shit shows financially though....

the money comes from melbourne and adelaide. a bit from perth. whereas money in NRL comes from brisbane and sydney and NZ. and a bit from melbourne

[NRLCrap1]

Perth contributes a lot more than that, and you're forgetting the Swans!

GWS are young so naturally they would have some financial issues. The Lions are going through a transistion off field with some board changes, so they'll bounce back.

[pHyR3]

the whole nrl is going through a transition into the independant management. just hope they dont screw up the onfield any further and hopefully make it better. but financially they are extremely competent, and NRL will soon be matching AFL in terms of money.

i really wish we had your management, live simulcast all games, grassroot development, mostly decent rule system, financially well managed etc. etc.

but the new management will stride forth in that department, we'll see what happens in the next year or two. next year will probably define it and the nines tournament is a great start.

[Raiderdave]

Perth contributes a lot more than that, and you're forgetting the Swans!

GWS are young so naturally they would have some financial issues. The Lions are going through a transistion off field with some board changes, so they'll bounce back.

some financial issues

the Wions are going through some changes >


:_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>
cuckoo

cuckoo


cuckoo

:_<> :_<>

fuck me
these clowns & the bubble they live in ..... honestly heaven forbid :_<> :_<> :_<>

[NRLCrap1]

Well at least Dave is using his own account again to make a fool of himself.