Fight Club - Football TV Ratings (AFL vs NRL)

[MarkZZZ]

Those that pay the bills say NRL rates less than AFL.

Game, set and match.

.

I don't think so cos boy


I knew this was the case but someone has sat down and done the maths

.. Source: The Daily Telegraph

THE National Rugby League climbed to the top of the nation's TV sporting ladder yesterday with a monumental $1.025 billion deal that trumps the game's rival code AFL.
The broadcast rights deal granted to Channel Nine and Fox Sports sees the NRL worth an incredible $1275 per minute on TV screens - as opposed to the AFL's $1170 per minute - cementing league as the most powerful sporting code in the country.

An analysis of the two codes and their TV deals shows that, while each NRL game gets $15,000 less per match than AFL, rugby league over 80 minutes is more valuable to broadcasters than Aussie rules over 100 minutes.


http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/ ... =public_js

game, set and match... indeed

[Xman]

Those that pay the bills say NRL rates less than AFL.

Game, set and match.

.

I don't think so cos boy


I knew this was the case but someone has sat down and done the maths

.. Source: The Daily Telegraph

THE National Rugby League climbed to the top of the nation's TV sporting ladder yesterday with a monumental $1.025 billion deal that trumps the game's rival code AFL.
The broadcast rights deal granted to Channel Nine and Fox Sports sees the NRL worth an incredible $1275 per minute on TV screens - as opposed to the AFL's $1170 per minute - cementing league as the most powerful sporting code in the country.

An analysis of the two codes and their TV deals shows that, while each NRL game gets $15,000 less per match than AFL, rugby league over 80 minutes is more valuable to broadcasters than Aussie rules over 100 minutes.


http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/ ... =public_js

game, set and match... indeed

interesting. If its as simple as that why didnt the NRL sell more games?

Word is for them to get a similar broadcast deal to the AFL they were looking at 800M.

Game......set........match

[MarkZZZ]

I don't know how your arriving at that logic (they made a deal to maximise thier return, it's called good business, most people watch 3 games max per week, FTA or Foxtel, do you watch 9 games per weekend?) but thats all by the way now. The facts are that the NRL is getting more per minute than the AFL and therefore it is more valuable to the advertisers per minute. The broadcasters know what the product is worth and paid for it accordingly (i'll say it again- more per minute than AFL)

game, set and match. again

[Xman]

I don't know how your arriving at that logic (they made a deal to maximise thier return, it's called good business, most people watch 3 games max per week, FTA or Foxtel, do you watch 9 games per weekend?) but thats all by the way now. The facts are that the NRL is getting more per minute than the AFL and therefore it is more valuable to the advertisers per minute. The broadcasters know what the product is worth and paid for it accordingly (i'll say it again- more per minute than AFL)

game, set and match. again

how does more per minute translate to more of anything meaningful? More content for fans to watch? NO. More exposure to expansion states? NO. More exposure for team sponsors? NO. More exposure for the game overall? NO.

Its a meaningless figure with no benefit at all. Of course you get more per game. If you sell few games, most of which are prime time and none of which are shown concurrently, plus SOO you should bloddy well get more per game! But that means nothing. What are you keeping some for yourself so you can sell them to another network?

[MarkZZZ]

They can do more with a billion+ dollars than what they can do with $800m. Thats the meaning.

[Xman]

They can do more with a billion+ dollars than what they can do with $800m. Thats the meaning.

and thats the crux of it. They took 40m per year over better TV scheduling for 5 years. Was it really worth that much to spend another 5 years with such poor FTA coverage. Isnt that a bit counter-productive? You may have more to spend on grass roots development but with poor FTA coverage you cant promote your product as well to the average fan.

[MarkZZZ]

They can do more with a billion+ dollars than what they can do with $800m. Thats the meaning.

and thats the crux of it. They took 40m per year over better TV scheduling for 5 years. Was it really worth that much to spend another 5 years with such poor FTA coverage. Isnt that a bit counter-productive? You may have more to spend on grass roots development but with poor FTA coverage you cant promote your product as well to the average fan.

Ratings show that the NRL rates about the same as AFL so coverage by FTA could be better but about the same amount watch NRL as watch AFL now. I love my NRL and watch games every week. I watch 2 sometimes 3 games per week. I suspect most others are happy with that. I am happy that there is more money to spend on roots development. It means that in 5 years or so there will be the development there to expand. The problem the AFL is facing this year is that the talent is spread too thin over too many teams. I am not privy to how the Commission plans to do that but I would hope that more money is spent in areas like Perth and the Central Coast etc, building the skills levels of players at the root level to be competitive so that when they eventually have a home team they don't end up like the GWS who battle to get 7000 at their games.

[pussycat]

interesting. If its as simple as that why didnt the NRL sell more games?

Word is for them to get a similar broadcast deal to the AFL they were looking at 800M.

Game......set........match

Those voices in your head back again, hey XMan?

[pookus]

You know you are dealing with apologists when they think this is OK.I know this forum is made to hang it on eachother but REALLY.You come in 225 million dollars cash not the other made up shite short.Also they lose a day grand final and now have more live AFL beamed in to Sydney than league.And what do they come up with WE are worth 100 dollars more per minute.lolWorth less per game,per season per five year deal but at least you got us for a 100 dollars per minute.And your on here spruiking about it.A poll in the courier asked if it was a good deal for QLD 80% said no.Seems our most northern neighbours get it.As i said the AFL commision wouldve been sacked if they came to the fans with this rot.

[enarelle]

Did they sack the AFL guys who negotiated the previous AFL deal? You know the one where not all games got onto Fox or extended FTA. Wait a minute aren't they the same guys who did the last deal? Perhaps they didn't get "shot" because they were negotiating in a different time with a different set of drivers.

As for things like night grand finals - always been a fan - not scared of the night.

As for dollars the NRL will end up on around $1.2b and they have not yet sold the farm. Imagine what the next deal will be.

[Xman]

Did they sack the AFL guys who negotiated the previous AFL deal? You know the one where not all games got onto Fox or extended FTA. Wait a minute aren't they the same guys who did the last deal? Perhaps they didn't get "shot" because they were negotiating in a different time with a different set of drivers.

As for things like night grand finals - always been a fan - not scared of the night.

As for dollars the NRL will end up on around $1.2b and they have not yet sold the farm. Imagine what the next deal will be.

They did well with the product they had to sell, as far as cash anyway. But really, your TV coverage sucks and will be that way for another 5 years.

[pookus]

Did they sack the AFL guys who negotiated the previous AFL deal? You know the one where not all games got onto Fox or extended FTA. Wait a minute aren't they the same guys who did the last deal? Perhaps they didn't get "shot" because they were negotiating in a different time with a different set of drivers.

As for things like night grand finals - always been a fan - not scared of the night.

As for dollars the NRL will end up on around $1.2b and they have not yet sold the farm. Imagine what the next deal will be.

Your wrong on the total lucky to be 1 bill cash a long way behind.Lucky to get 60 cash from new zealand and you have already sold digital rights to 5 games.Not much left to sell or maybe you didnt pick that up.Weve been having our grand final on the last sat in september for a 100 years .No TV exec will ever take that from us.As I have said previous why should I care about the money ,how does it benefit me or Joe punter it doesnt.You the supporter has been screwed so Ingliss can have a new Hummer.Most of your bretheren are disgusted but for the apologists on this forum it all seems dandy.Could you honestly imagine a day when the AFL would have 3 times the live coverage in to Sydney than the NRL.I can its here.

[enarelle]

What a lot of AFL nonsense. First we could not get near the AFL deal or get to a billion. Now we are "lucky" that both of those were achieved. Lucky to get money from NZ were the time and effort was spent to expand the game over there. Talk about sour grapes and ignoring the facts and a general lack of good grace.

As for me the supporter I get to see a game that was knocked to knees during the super league now continue its recovery and move into a period were it will flourish.

If you read the facts only a fraction of the "additional" money is going to salary cap. The greater majority is aimed at the juniors and development in all regions.

Long reign the "lucky" game in the lucky country.

PS You can beam as much AFL into Sydney as you like cause no one watches.

[pussycat]

You know you are dealing with apologists when they think this is OK.I know this forum is made to hang it on eachother but REALLY.You come in 225 million dollars cash not the other made up shite short.Also they lose a day grand final and now have more live AFL beamed in to Sydney than league.And what do they come up with WE are worth 100 dollars more per minute.lolWorth less per game,per season per five year deal but at least you got us for a 100 dollars per minute.And your on here spruiking about it.A poll in the courier asked if it was a good deal for QLD 80% said no.Seems our most northern neighbours get it.As i said the AFL commision wouldve been sacked if they came to the fans with this rot.

Hokus your deal includes 150m a year extra for I.T rights.


Only Whingers and narks like yourself reply to such polls . It was a great deal. Somethings might have been done differently, but in the end it was the best decision to get rid of any final hold News Ltd still had on us.

Demetriou could tell AFL fans anything , there all brainwased mushrooms.

[King-Eliagh]

Xman, Cant the tv coverage change within the contract? Didnt the AFL just change their coverage in sydney this season?