Talking Footy

Parra are the big club of the West.

Yes, they are the bigger rugby league football club.

Cracker wrote:

I was talking about now, not two or three years ago.

i honestly couldnt care. there football clubs is a worthless pile of crud. they borrowed a pile of money off packer build poker machines, tried to live above their means. nearly there whole revenue is pokes. wow,

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

Parra are the big club of the West.

http://issuu.com/parramattaleagues/docs ... eport_2013
lol
they have a big poke venue, their footy department is more laughable than penrith

No, that I disagree with.

here is a half decent report done a few years ago bug seems rather accruate, when you compare it up against the top teams annual reports in terms of sponsorship, memberships and crowds
After a little research, I uncovered a top 10 “Sporting brands” in Australia from an article published in the Sun-Herald (Sydney Morning Herald) in August 2010. No surprises for guessing top spot:

Collingwood Magpies (AFL)- $263m ($AUD)
Geelong Cats (AFL)- $238m
Essendon Bombers (AFL)- $184m
Carlton Blues (AFL)- $170m
Brisbane Broncos (NRL) $169m
Hawthorn Hawks (AFL)- $168m
West Coast Eagles (AFL)-$162m
St Kilda Saints (AFL)- $157m
Fremantle Dockers (AFL)-$144m
Parramatta Eels (NRL)- $141m
A year later the Magpies were valued at $344 million. What I therefore interpret from this list is that a) they are fickle and constantly subject to change, and b) winning the premiership boosts value significantly. On the above list, the reigning premiers Geelong are ranked (somewhat) closely behind Collingwood. The following year, the new reigning premiers, Collingwood, surged ahead. This would likely make the above statistics on Australian sport very redundant. But nonetheless it provides some indication as to the landscape of Australian sports clubs value.

but again how reliable is the list, it has stkilda in the top 10, the are one of the smallest AFL clubs,

Cracker wrote:

No, that I disagree with.

read their annual reports, then the footy club section.

I suggest it would be better to compare the venues of the two clubs. Parramatta wins that battle by a substantial margin. Also, the Eels didn't need help from a financial white knight to survive.

Cracker wrote:

I suggest it would be better to compare the venues of the two clubs. Parramatta wins that battle by a substantial margin. Also, the Eels didn't need help from a financial white knight to survive.

difference is half their revenue comes from the NRL 7 million and rest is raised through, gate takings and sponsorship.
the smaller AFL clubs run in to trouble as to needing to raise 30 million plus for survive, 9 odd million comes from the AFL distribution, and manage to raise the rest

Run like crap for decades and still in your list.

Derp.

leagueiscrap wrote:

Cracker wrote:

I suggest it would be better to compare the venues of the two clubs. Parramatta wins that battle by a substantial margin. Also, the Eels didn't need help from a financial white knight to survive.

difference is half their revenue comes from the NRL 7 million and rest is raised through, gate takings and sponsorship.
the smaller AFL clubs run in to trouble as to needing to raise 30 million plus for survive, 9 odd million comes from the AFL distribution, and manage to raise the rest

I thought we were comparing Parramatta and Penrith, not Parramatta and any AFL club you care to name.

It has no idea what it's doing.