Talking Footy

King-Eliagh wrote:

TV rights deals are where the real money is thankyou drac. Therefore, in turn, those who view on tv consistently provide the bulk of support for the game.

And thanks for those figures. Looks like support for RL has boomed since 2010, BOOMED!

1) The money has already been paid to both the AFL and NSWRL. Unless they have a ratings box, the viewers watching at home don't actually contribute anything.

2) Are you being sarcastic? How bad is your maths?

1. I think you'll find the data collected on viewers who have ratings boxes is surprisingly accurate so your point is mute
2. My apologies. I thought you had presented us data with comparable variables. Can you provide us only with how many shows in the top 50 or 100 the NRL has?

King-Eliagh wrote:

TV rights deals are where the real money is thankyou drac. Therefore, in turn, those who view on tv consistently provide the bulk of support for the game.

And thanks for those figures. Looks like support for RL has boomed since 2010, BOOMED!

really? The AFL will earn over 1billion dollars this year and TV will only provide 250m...

Talking about support for the clubs Xman, not the greedy self obsessed immoral organisation called the AFL.

King-Eliagh wrote:

Talking about support for the clubs Xman, not the greedy self obsessed immoral organisation called the AFL.

Take Dave's tinfoil hat off would ya!?

You inferred TV ratings were more important than attendance or membership. I showed you that you were wrong because the AFL, with clubs, earn 4 times the revenue form TV with other means.

Any questions? :D

King-Eliagh wrote:

1. I think you'll find the data collected on viewers who have ratings boxes is surprisingly accurate so your point is mute
2. My apologies. I thought you had presented us data with comparable variables. Can you provide us only with how many shows in the top 50 or 100 the NRL has?

I'd love to have provided consistant data, but I sourced them from nRL state of the game reports, which are a bit of a joke. They selectiveley frame data to suit them. Some years they use a top 50 when it makes them look good, other years they have to use a top 100 when their top 50 isn't so flash. This year they released their report early before the finals series had even started, to avoid having their numbers diminished by the AFL's finals ratings.

It's quite unproffessional TBH.

Well if you're telling the truth that is a fair enough point there drac.