Talking Footy

pussycat wrote:

Xman wrote:

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... 1ln6r.html

Regional free-to-air figures for the NRL the past two years were 38 million. The AFL's were 23 million this year

Rather than your ridiculous guesses the above source shows the AFL reginals are 2/3rds the NRLs. Hardly surprising given the population of Tasmania and regional Vic are over 2mil, plus add SA, WA, and sections of NSW/ACT and QLD that follow AFL, since there are teams in those states.

This years cummulative figures, which ignore the 50% running time of the AFL, will embarrass the NRL, as they already are. That will match attendances, revenue and memberships.

AFL matches(150m) are about 1/3 longer than Rugby League matches(100m) . And as I said earlier, this is more than counter balamced by the higher price for advertising time, in RL's part of the country. Also, the exta lenth of an AFL game makes it much more difficult for TV Networks to find suitable timslots, one's in which there matches dont overlap for example, 2 games of a FN or 3 games Sunday afternoon.

3hrs is 50% longer than 2 hrs

Is advertising space in NSW QLD 50% more expensive than Vic SA WA Tas?

100 is 1/3 of 150. In reply to your second question , I dont know if the advertising is 50% greater, however it is certainly 30% greater! As pointed out, the length of your games would more than likely be seen as a hinderance rather than a positive by the networks. Already you have less viewers so all in all AFL's future doesn't look that rosy

pussycat wrote:

100 is 1/3 of 150. In reply to your second question , I dont know if the advertising is 50% greater, however it is certainly 30% greater! As pointed out, the length of your games would more than likely be seen as a hinderance rather than a positive by the networks. Already you have less viewers so all in all AFL's future doesn't look that rosy

What, what and want?

Since when is 100 1/3rd of 150?

As claimed by Roy Masters, the AFL have nearly 2.5 times the advertising time per game compared to the NRL.

There are about 80 commercials in an AFL match, which is divided by quarters, compared with 34 in the NRL, with two recent NRL Saturday evening finals matches lasting as long as one AFL final.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... z1rW1FCBkj

So if the advertising revenue in NsW and QLD is 30% more value this would make a comparison around 80 to 45, still a massive advantage to the AFL. If the NRL attempt to include more ad breaks in their games to increase revenue it will lengthen the game time and potentially drive ratings and attendances away due to unnatural and unnecessary breaks.

As far as the AFL game length being a problem, it isn't. 27 hours of sport compared to 16 is a massive advantage. The only disadvantage is trying to fit them all in to a weekends broadcasting. However foxtel and the AFL have done a great job adjusting the schedule with 7-8 viewable games per weekend this year. This is highlighted by the massive increase in viewership for the AFL this year since 3 - 4 more games a weekend are scheduled in isolation.

As for the ratings dropping off, they are on schedule for a weekend of near 5million viewers. Yet the NRL have dropped to around 2.7m viewers for each round. So it's close to double now.

Now before you cry "what about the regionals" let's add an estimate from last year. 38mil divided by 30rnds is around 1.27m per round. The AFL will get 23m divided by 28, or .82m per round. So the AFL will still be ahead by close to 1.5 million viewers per round.

That should read read 100 is 2/3 of 150. .....50m is 1/3.....100m is 2/3....... is 150m or 1 AFL game.

[Quote xman] As claimed by Roy Masters, the AFL have nearly 2.5 times the advertising time per game compared to the NRL. [/quote]

Currently, but as was said the NRL are working on ways to reduce that.

As far as matches lastimg longer this goes both ways.

An AFL is 1/3 longer - that is an advantage - your only one .

League are well in front =D> =D> =D>

pussycat wrote:

As claimed by Roy Masters, the AFL have nearly 2.5 times the advertising time per game compared to the NRL.

Currently, but as was said the NRL are working on ways to reduce that.

As far as matches lastimg longer this goes both ways.

An AFL is 1/3 longer - that is an advantage - your only one .

League are well in front =D> =D> =D>

How exactly are they well in front? Are you disputing the fact they had 5.2m viewers last week to the NRLs 2.8m?

Oh and 2.5 times the advertising time is a massive advantage.

Oh and 3 hours is and increase of 50% on 2 hours. What is 50% of two hours? Well it's one hour. 2 + 1 = 3

More fans primarily and the gap gets bigger every year




According to Wikipedia the average AFL quarter is 30m X 4 =120m add 30m for breaks and youve got a total of 150m.
A Rugby leagee match lasts 100m. or 2/3 the time.

pussycat wrote:

More fans primarily and the gap gets bigger every year




According to Wikipedia the average AFL quarter is 30m X 4 =120m add 30m for breaks and youve got a total of 150m.
A Rugby leagee match lasts 100m. or 2/3 the time.

All polls and ratings show the AFL is easily in front. 2 million ahead per round this year.

An AFL game telecast goes for 3 hrs. Today was 3pm to 6pm. Friday is 7.30 to 10.30. Etc

Its the complete opposite. What about the won you just quoted ?

League has pre and post match coverage just like AFL. FN 4h coverage 7.30 -11.30, Does AFL hve that?

pussycat wrote:

Its the complete opposite. What about the won you just quoted ?

League has pre and post match coverage just like AFL. FN 4h coverage 7.30 -11.30, Does AFL hve that?

You just proved my point. The nrl has 2 games on fn over 4 hours. Their fta telecast on Sunday is 2 hours.

Roy's figures are for last year. This years broadcasting has seen a massive increase for the AFL because we finally have live games into most markets, plus far fewer Overlapping games. I noticed you're ignoring the AFL's 2m ratings advantage per round, plus their increase in ratings of 66% on last year.

You don't have a point. that is the point. - It's still to 2/3 however you swing it. Just mach time, or match talkback time/extra adds included.

You may have extra matches and extra tv coverage but thats only in the short term. We are currently in negotiation for similar.

Your initial euphoria about your opening handpicked rounds will be short lived, just as they are every year.

pussycat wrote:

You don't have a point. that is the point. - It's still to 2/3 however you swing it. Just mach time, or match talkback time/extra adds included.

You may have extra matches and extra tv coverage but thats only in the short term. We are currently in negotiation for similar.

Your initial euphoria about your opening handpicked rounds will be short lived, just as they are every year.

And the NRL didn't hand pick their first round but still lose by 2 million?

And when we are still 1.5-2m ahead of you this round?

Changing track slightly from the same old 'same ol'. This article comes from the Crickey website.

Showing the total FTA ratings for AFL's first match of the year.

A total of 897,000 watched the FTA coverage on Seven in the metro markets and its regioal affiliates.
This website has the total of metro viewer at 689,000,
meaning there must of been a total of 208,000 regional viewers.

The corresponding NRL game R4. Penrith v Parra had total audience of 1.116 million shown in metro and the regional markets.

This website puts the metr figure at 647,000,
meaning there must of been a total of 469,000 regionals

So,
Regional figures for the AFL = 208,000
Regional figeres for the NRL = 469,000

More than double!
=D> =D> =D>


http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/03/26/AFL ... fta-watch/

Mon AFL: #aflcatshawks Seven/7mate 635k metro (Syd 27k Mel 393k Bri 32k Ade 84k Per 99k) @FOXFOOTY 334k national

What a result! =D> 969k for a Sunday afternoon! These are double the normal NrL figures for this period!

pussycat wrote:

Changing track slightly from the same old 'same ol'. This article comes from the Crickey website.

Showing the total FTA ratings for AFL's first match of the year.

A total of 897,000 watched the FTA coverage on Seven in the metro markets and its regioal affiliates.
This website has the total of metro viewer at 689,000,
meaning there must of been a total of 208,000 regional viewers.

The corresponding NRL game R4. Penrith v Parra had total audience of 1.116 million shown in metro and the regional markets.

This website puts the metr figure at 647,000,
meaning there must of been a total of 469,000 regionals

So,
Regional figures for the AFL = 208,000
Regional figeres for the NRL = 469,000

More than double!
=D> =D> =D>


http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/03/26/AFL ... fta-watch/

If crickey are reporting thinktv they ignore Tasmania which usually rates around 50k. This also excludes other AFL regional areas. Therefore the 2/3rd rule holds true.

Note that the AFL still won this battle despite their broadcast being averaged over 3 hours and only live into Melbourne Sydney and Qld.