Talking Footy

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Pretty well given we got more!

sure yuz did ..... about 50 Mill less as we now all know

& we weren't even spose to get close to yuz
yet alone get more then yuz

RL... KING

Rubbish. Far less without NZ, since these are the ratings we are discussing

I'm sorry
we'll include any revenue we get .. from anywhere ... & you lot can do the same ... K

RL... Numb 1 [/quote]Thats not the issue. You're going "the regionals, the regionals!!!"

Well for Australia only, even with your glorious regionals, you still lost convincingly. What does that say about the 5 city metro worth compared to the "regionals"?

Xman wrote:

Drac wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

then the same in the NRL

well for starters ... I'd say every NRL fan genuinely believes their side can make the play offs in 2013
the fans of many ... many VFL clubs cannot claim to have this confidence

Yea, i'm sure Panthers fans consider making the finals a mere formality....

and the eels

Don't talk about things you know nothing about.

The eels have a good chance of making the 8, we now have an actual coach for a start.

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Pretty well given we got more!

sure yuz did ..... about 50 Mill less as we now all know

& we weren't even spose to get close to yuz
yet alone get more then yuz

RL... KING

Rubbish. Far less without NZ, since these are the ratings we are discussing

I'm sorry
we'll include any revenue we get .. from anywhere ... & you lot can do the same ... K

RL... Numb 1 [/quote]
Well for Australia only, even with your glorious regionals, [/quote]

whats this even with business ... you said the regionals were worthless
with em & the Kiwis we won easily .....
of course when the so called media experts in here ... the ones in singlets

when they summised .... pontificated ... analysed the landscape
there was no mention of the Kiwis
when we included the Kiwis in our estimations in deabtes about how much we'd get way before the deal was announced ..... there were no objections then from the flogballers ... so confident .. so arrogant were they in the belief that even with the kiwis ... the NRL could still not get within a whisker of the VFL
of course ... as of today , we're almost on the same money
& even they know when the kiwis are added .... we surpass the dollar value of their deal

so out come the excuses ..... oh the kiwis can't be added


oh they don't count
oh.... when we talk ratings .. we don't include them

oh ... but when we're talking about Australia only .....


have you ever read more buts ... & hangs on's ...etc
F'ing hilarious

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Pretty well given we got more!

sure yuz did ..... about 50 Mill less as we now all know

& we weren't even spose to get close to yuz
yet alone get more then yuz

RL... KING

Rubbish. Far less without NZ, since these are the ratings we are discussing

I'm sorry
we'll include any revenue we get .. from anywhere ... & you lot can do the same ... K

RL... Numb 1 [/quote]
Well for Australia only, even with your glorious regionals, [/quote]

whats this even with business ... you said the regionals were worthless
with em & the Kiwis we won easily .....
of course when the so called media experts in here ... the ones in singlets

when they summised .... pontificated ... analysed the landscape
there was no mention of the Kiwis
when we included the Kiwis in our estimations in deabtes about how much we'd get way before the deal was announced ..... there were no objections then from the flogballers ... so confident .. so arrogant were they in the belief that even with the kiwis ... the NRL could still not get within a whisker of the VFL
of course ... as of today , we're almost on the same money
& even they know when the kiwis are added .... we surpass the dollar value of their deal

so out come the excuses ..... oh the kiwis can't be added


oh they don't count
oh.... when we talk ratings .. we don't include them

oh ... but when we're talking about Australia only .....


have you ever read more buts ... & hangs on's ...etc
F'ing hilarious
[/quote]


123 million > 113 million.

Game ova

Stewie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Pretty well given we got more!

sure yuz did ..... about 50 Mill less as we now all know

& we weren't even spose to get close to yuz
yet alone get more then yuz

RL... KING

Rubbish. Far less without NZ, since these are the ratings we are discussing

I'm sorry
we'll include any revenue we get .. from anywhere ... & you lot can do the same ... K

RL... Numb 1 [/quote]
Well for Australia only, even with your glorious regionals, [/quote]

whats this even with business ... you said the regionals were worthless
with em & the Kiwis we won easily .....
of course when the so called media experts in here ... the ones in singlets

when they summised .... pontificated ... analysed the landscape
there was no mention of the Kiwis
when we included the Kiwis in our estimations in deabtes about how much we'd get way before the deal was announced ..... there were no objections then from the flogballers ... so confident .. so arrogant were they in the belief that even with the kiwis ... the NRL could still not get within a whisker of the VFL
of course ... as of today , we're almost on the same money
& even they know when the kiwis are added .... we surpass the dollar value of their deal

so out come the excuses ..... oh the kiwis can't be added


oh they don't count
oh.... when we talk ratings .. we don't include them

oh ... but when we're talking about Australia only .....


have you ever read more buts ... & hangs on's ...etc
F'ing hilarious
[/quote]


123 million > 113 million.
Game ova [/quote]

ya got our figures.... numbers in the wrong order you gerbil

its 131.... not 113

& as a result
we win ... again

Prove it

Xman wrote:

Prove it

He can't

Xman wrote:

Prove it

I've proven it many times
just because u you live in denial
well......
thats not my problem princess

Stewie wrote:

Xman wrote:

Prove it

He can't

he can
he has ..............

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Prove it

I've proven it many times
just because u you live in denial
well......
thats not my problem princess

Yep, no proof

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Prove it

I've proven it many times
just because u you live in denial
well......
thats not my problem princess

Your "proof" includes a contract that hasnt been decided and another that hasnt been disclosed!

Xman and proof = oxymoron.

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

Xman and proof = oxymoron.

ParraEels = moron

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Prove it

I've proven it many times
just because u you live in denial
well......
thats not my problem princess

Your "proof" includes a contract that hasnt been decided and another that hasnt been disclosed!

180M for our online rights ( but this includes naming, but doesn't including revenue sharing for non telstra customers wanting NRL on their phones & tablets etc ) ... the NRL said this is the amount , no if or buts ... end of

& everything else has been doubled for existing NRL contracts
meaning 150 Mill for the Kiwis
100 Million minimum.

thats 330 Million
plus 1.025 Bill for Aust TV..... 1.355 Billion is where we are at

suck on that VFL'ers

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

I've proven it many times
just because u you live in denial
well......
thats not my problem princess

Your "proof" includes a contract that hasnt been decided and another that hasnt been disclosed!

180M for our online rights ( but this includes naming, but doesn't including revenue sharing for non telstra customers wanting NRL on their phones & tablets etc ) ... the NRL said this is the amount , no if or buts ... end of

& everything else has been doubled for existing NRL contracts
meaning 150 Mill for the Kiwis
100 Million minimum.

thats 330 Million
plus 1.025 Bill for Aust TV..... 1.355 Billion is where we are at

suck on that VFL'ers

So as I said, either contracts that havent been finalised or contracts that are undisclosed