Talking Footy

The AFL game is 1/3 longer than a rugby league yet they have around 3 times as many adds. So Beau, who has already sold ther soul?

Be careful what you wish for leaguies. Fans already shun the Friday night double headers. Put more ads in the broadcast and it has disaster written all over it for fans at the game and those watching on tv.

Do you support the Channel Nine proposals to have more ad breaks in NRL match coverage?

Yes 15.15% (513 votes)
No 84.85% (2873 votes)

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/n ... 6347259953

Will the broadcasters offer anything like what the AFL achieved without more ads destroying the viewing experience? Good luck with that one.

pussycat wrote:

The AFL game is 1/3 longer than a rugby league yet they have around 3 times as many adds. So Beau, who has already sold ther soul?

The AFLs breaks in play are suitably long enough to fit an ad in without lengthening the break and making the play wait.

The NRL don't have these longer breaks so they are making them longer. That'll please their fans!

I voted yes on that poll, simply because I thought it would be good for the game of RL in Australia. No one likes to have more advertising, but I dont believe that it will affect the game that much. In the end with more adds the game will be 4-5 minutes longer, which is not a huge difference. I guess most people dont really care about the health of the game as long as they can watch it with no adds.

piesman2011 wrote:

I voted yes on that poll, simply because I thought it would be good for the game of RL in Australia. No one likes to have more advertising, but I dont believe that it will affect the game that much. In the end with more adds the game will be 4-5 minutes longer, which is not a huge difference. I guess most people dont really care about the health of the game as long as they can watch it with no adds.

Yeah your exactly right pies, Nine wanted to add double the amount of adds than what is proposed atm.
League heavies said no and worked out a way to put in more adds without effecting the coverage at all or very minor.
So its not going to effect the flow of the game at all and will provide Rugby league with its 1 billion minimum.
Tu for voting btw, i also voted No, but i hate nine so its mainly for that reason.

Opening bid $1b - WOW - is $2b a possibility?

pussycat wrote:

Opening bid $1b - WOW - is $2b a possibility?

Lol 2b
I think anything from 1B-1.2Billion is possible not including Telstra and NZ rights. Including Telstra 150mill over 5 years and NZ right 15Mill annually. and i think we can get about 1,375Million at best.

pussycat wrote:

Opening bid $1b - WOW - is $2b a possibility?

Link? or is that speculation?

eelofwest wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Opening bid $1b - WOW - is $2b a possibility?

Lol 2b
I think anything from 1B-1.2Billion is possible not including Telstra and NZ rights. Including Telstra 150mill over 5 years and NZ rights 15Mill annually. and i think we can get about 1,375Million at best.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-n ... 6347338822

http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2012/05/nin ... ights.html

http://afr.com/p/national/game_on_for_n ... PDi53HkQfM

pussycat wrote:

Opening bid $1b - WOW - is $2b a possibility?

Oh dear!

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Opening bid $1b - WOW - is $2b a possibility?

Oh dear!

Pussycat is that a typo or are you on crack atm :D ?

pussycat wrote:

Opening bid $1b - WOW - is $2b a possibility?

You're a nutter.

In their most important job since taking control of the NRL this year, the commissioners will start assessing the Nine Network and Fox Sports bids for broadcast rights, expected to be less than $1 billion.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/b ... 6348183510

The less the opening bid the better.

justanotherleaguefan wrote:

The less the opening bid the better.

Once again, you've been proven way off with your silly predictions of a $1 billion+ deal doc.