The No.1 Football Code in Australia

[King-Eliagh]

Lamo, limp effort there Xman.

You're losing your touch there bigboy, grab a kitkat and have a break, you're dusted.

[pussycat]

Like them or loathe them. News Ltd are one of the most powerful companies in the word, Said to wield more power and have more wealth then many small countries. So who better to judge which is the better code. What sport was it they chose to spearhead there , start up Pay TV bussiness,? This, despite the fact that the Mudoch family comes from adelaide. So the decision to take over the popular NRL was purely based on bussiness motives, any thoughts of bias never came into it. The No1 sport that would deliver the start up bussiness the highest number of subscribers.

[Beaussie]

Like them or loathe them. News Ltd are one of the most powerful companies in the word, Said to wield more power and have more wealth then many small countries. So who better to judge which is the better code. What sport was it they chose to spearhead there , start up Pay TV bussiness,? This, despite the fact that the Mudoch family comes from adelaide. So the decision to take over the popular NRL was purely based on bussiness motives, any thoughts of bias never came into it. The No1 sport that would deliver the start up bussiness the highest number of subscribers.

Oh dear.

Murdoch bought your sport when you lot whored yourselves to the only bidder. You lot were so desperate for money you completely forgot about your fans and sold your soul to the evil empire. How embarrassing to be waffling on with that rubbish above pussycat. You oughta be ashamed of yourself. News Ltd sellout.

[Xman]

Like them or loathe them. News Ltd are one of the most powerful companies in the word, Said to wield more power and have more wealth then many small countries. So who better to judge which is the better code. What sport was it they chose to spearhead there , start up Pay TV bussiness,? This, despite the fact that the Mudoch family comes from adelaide. So the decision to take over the popular NRL was purely based on bussiness motives, any thoughts of bias never came into it. The No1 sport that would deliver the start up bussiness the highest number of subscribers.

You can't be serious.

The AFL dominate all but one key indicator: crowds, memberships, revenue, media interest, national footprint.

The only thing the NrL compare in is TV ratings which is almost irrelevant given the differences in how the two codes go about broadcasting their products.

[pussycat]

Like them or loathe them. News Ltd are one of the most powerful companies in the word, Said to wield more power and have more wealth then many small countries. So who better to judge which is the better code. What sport was it they chose to spearhead there , start up Pay TV bussiness,? This, despite the fact that the Mudoch family comes from adelaide. So the decision to take over the popular NRL was purely based on bussiness motives, any thoughts of bias never came into it. The No1 sport that would deliver the start up bussiness the highest number of subscribers.

Oh dear.

Murdoch bought your sport when you lot whored yourselves to the only bidder. You lot were so desperate for money you completely forgot about your fans and sold your soul to the evil empire. How embarrassing to be waffling on with that rubbish above pussycat. You oughta be ashamed of yourself. News Ltd sellout.

So Beaussie News Ltd spent around 1/2 a billion trying to gain control, and the ARL spent a few hundred million trying to maintain conntrol yet your saying the ARL whored themselves out! You make about as much sense as usual Beau

[pussycat]

You can't be serious.

The AFL dominate all but one key indicator: crowds, memberships, revenue, media interest, national footprint.

The only thing the NrL compare in is TV ratings which is almost irrelevant given the differences in how the two codes go about broadcasting their products.

Can't be serious??? Its a fact!

The Key indicator is the one that you trail in .

Our crowds ordinary - I agree. But it doesnt mean much - So what if they prefer to whatch it on TV then go to the ground? But, since 2000 NRL Crowds have increased around 15%.

Revenue is lower due to our News Ltd ownership, now we are free of them , it will soon sky rocket past past and above the level of the AFL.

Weve only become serious about membership in recent years. Already our Top clubs are passing your bottom ones.

Media interest


National imprint? whats this shit? dots on a map - a complete meaningless stat.

[Xman]

You can't be serious.

The AFL dominate all but one key indicator: crowds, memberships, revenue, media interest, national footprint.

The only thing the NrL compare in is TV ratings which is almost irrelevant given the differences in how the two codes go about broadcasting their products.

Can't be serious??? Its a fact!

The Key indicator is the one that you trail in .

Our crowds ordinary - I agree. But it doesnt mean much - So what if they prefer to whatch it on TV then go to the ground? But, since 2000 NRL Crowds have increased around 15%.

Revenue is lower due to our News Ltd ownership, now we are free of them , it will soon sky rocket past past and above the level of the AFL.

Weve only become serious about membership in recent years. Already our Top clubs are passing your bottom ones.

Media interest


National imprint? whats this ****? dots on a map - a complete meaningless stat.

So you disregard crowds which a more than double gate receipts bring the AFL clubs millions of dollars. The AFL yearly crowds have risen by 800k since the year 2000. That's over a quarter of your codes total figure. In the same time the NRL crowds have only risen by 500k for the year.

You Disregard media interest which is about double google AFL news and NRL news on any given day or week and the difference is there consistently.

You Disregard memberships which is more than double Again these bring in Millions of extra dollars for each club each year? Your membership numbers will rise by 20k. Ours will rise by over 50k! Just like they did last year.

Disregard revenue which is around double with the AFL earning around1 bil per year sponsorships and other incomes sees the AFL far wealthier and in amuch better position to expand with new teams and grass roots development. How are the NRL going to be ahead? tV rights? That's only 250mil a year of the AFLs 1bil annual revenue.

You claim a TV audience advantage which is BS anyway given AFL games are 50% longer than NRL games meaning more viewers and more advertising revenue.

So in what way are the NRL ahead??

[pussycat]

I dont diregard them but they mean little next to to 100's of Million's Tv - media brings our game. Our crowds are up about 15%, your crowds, alot less - down in some areas.

I don't disreguard membership at all. We have only got serious about it in recent years since the poker machine tax has cut into the grant money the league clubs can give the football clubs. But as I said our top clubs are already passing your bottom clubs.

We've already had this discussion it wont change. We swamp you in Tv coverage. And advertising is more expensive in league territory , which more than counters longer games. We also enjoy a longer seaon, Tests & Origin. as well as oversees interest that you could only dream of.

[Xman]

I dont diregard them but they mean little next to to 100's of Million's Tv - media brings our game. Our crowds are up about 15%, your crowds, alot less - down in some areas.

I don't disreguard membership at all. We have only got serious about it in recent years since the poker machine tax has cut into the grant money the league clubs can give the football clubs. But as I said our top clubs are already passing your bottom clubs.

We've already had this discussion it wont change. We swamp you in Tv coverage. And advertising is more expensive in league territory , which more than counters longer games. We also enjoy a longer seaon, Tests & Origin. as well as oversees interest that you could only dream of.

Pffft. The only thing you have is a fudged cummulative ratings advantage which includes all your rep games. Even then it's only 10% more but doesn't take into account the 50% longer running time of the AFL telecasts.

Crowds you are less than half. At a growth of 15% per decade it will take almost 70 years to reach the AFLs current levels. Given the AFL crowds have risen by more than the NRL crowds over the last century I'm not sure how you think you'll ever get near.

Memberships are also increasing more for the AFL every year despite the media claiming otherwise. So what if you have a few big clubs with 20k members. As was shown on here and admitted by RD, some of these clubs have huge proportions of non ticketted members. The broncos bolstered their tally with single game memberships. the NRL again are Atleast 50 years off achieving the levels of memberships the AFL have now, and thats assuming the AFL memberships don't increase. But Just like this year the AFL memberships will be up 50k and the NRL up 20k.

This leaves TV rights, which is probably the NRLs main income sources because their crowds and memberships are so low, and across the board their sponsorships are low because of this. So the NRL need a big tv rights deal to get anywhere close to the AFL in revenue. Yet most commentators are saying the NRL will still get less than the AFL this year, and furthermore the AFLs TV rights deal is a smaller proportion of their total revenue. So the AFL will still be way ahead in TV rights, members, crowds, sponsorship, media interest, national coverage, and overall revenue.

Participation rates are also far higher for ARs than RL in Australia.
Exactly how are the NRL the number one sport in Australia?

[TLPG]

Have to get involved here breifly.

Pussycat, shut your mouth! The key indicator is NOT television ratings! It's attendances at games and participation! That's where the real money is for clubs.

To say otherwise is to ignore the bottom line for clubs. No clubs - no competition.

Clear?

[King-Eliagh]

Have to get involved here breifly.

Pussycat, shut your mouth! The key indicator is NOT television ratings! It's attendances at games and participation! That's where the real money is for clubs.

To say otherwise is to ignore the bottom line for clubs. No clubs - no competition.

Clear?

Hey TLPG get off that high pony of yours and come and join us in here in the FC you chicken shiiiit!

Enough of the bullshitty riding in on your pink pony thinking you're the know it all saviour of wimps like Xman, Beaussie and cos lettuce saying "have to get involved here" or "a briew cameo to help Xman out". Fact is you're under a self imposed ban from the FC. Either acknowledge that ban or giiiiiit the fukk out you high pony riding hairy kyber!

Pussycat is right, the real money is in the tv ratings and money makes the world go round. You and your clubs/attendances BS are way off the mark.

Now set the pony free TLPG and comon back to playtime.

[Xman]

Have to get involved here breifly.

Pussycat, shut your mouth! The key indicator is NOT television ratings! It's attendances at games and participation! That's where the real money is for clubs.

To say otherwise is to ignore the bottom line for clubs. No clubs - no competition.

Clear?

Hey TLPG get off that high pony of yours and come and join us in here in the FC you chicken shiiiit!

Enough of the bullshitty riding in on your pink pony thinking you're the know it all saviour of wimps like Xman, Beaussie and cos lettuce saying "have to get involved here" or "a briew cameo to help Xman out". Fact is you're under a self imposed ban from the FC. Either acknowledge that ban or giiiiiit the fukk out you high pony riding hairy kyber!

Pussycat is right, the real money is in the tv ratings and money makes the world go round. You and your clubs/attendances BS are way off the mark.

Now set the pony free TLPG and comon back to playtime.

Shut up you stupid twat!

If the real money is in TV rights why did the AFL, excluding club revenue, earn over 500m in income last year which only included about 100m from TV rights? Add the club revenues from membership, gate receipts, sponsorships etc, and the AFL have an annual income of nearly 1 billion dollars, 10% of which is TV rights.

Don't kid yourself, to the NRL they may mean everything, but that's because their other revenue sources are so poor in comparison.

[pussycat]

The AFL made a profit of 210m in 210 , What was your TV money that year? 120-140m?. I doubt your profit more than doubled last year. Your new TV deal would have seen a profit of a little over 200m last year.

[Xman]

The AFL made a profit of 210m in 210 , What was your TV money that year? 120-140m?. I doubt your profit more than doubled last year. Your new TV deal would have seen a profit of a little over 200m last year.

True, but it is still less than 20% of the AFLs total revenue, excluding club revenues. You could say that about all their revenue streams. Unfortunately for the NRL it is worth about double that to them because their other revenue streams are so poor in comparison.

Rally the only thing the NRL can brag about is TV, and we know that the AFL have had a better deal, and will still probably have a better deal for years to come anyway. Yet this only takes up a small proportion of the AFLs income.

So by what measure are you saying the NRL are number one? Because they play in your area?

[King-Eliagh]

Thanks for pointing out Xman is full of BS. Give yourself a point Xman ya big