Soccer threat to Union and AFL

Which is the best football code? Here you can have it out with other football fans.
Post Reply
Willis 21
Captain
Captain
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 1:20 am
Team:
Location:
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Soccer threat to Union and AFL

Post by Willis 21 »

Interesting article...

Couldn't agree more.. AFL is dying, and union has been dead for years..
Soccer threat to union and AFL


June 14, 2006

RUGBY union and the AFL have been warned they have most to fear from a World Cup-inspired surge in support for Australian soccer.


Former rugby league international John Ribot, the chairman of A-League side the Queensland Roar and consultant with NRL team the Melbourne Storm, said rugby union audiences were a target for soccer.

"The obvious one is rugby union which I think in the last few years has lost its way a little bit," he said today.

"That would be an easier target than the other two."


"If you look at a code with masses playing it that could be damaged a lot because the type of athlete playing the game is more akin to football it is the AFL," he said.

"You could see Jason Akermanis playing soccer."

But outspoken Brisbane Lions wingman Akermanis said he did not believe soccer appealed to an Australian sporting culture demanding more physical contact.

"If the World Cup was held every year, maybe soccer would be a worry," Akermanis wrote in his Brisbane Courier Mail newspaper column.

"But kids will continue to be inspired by the weekly feats of the AFL and NRL or Test match rugby.

"And the corporate world will continue to see greater value in the three contact codes."

Queensland Reds coach Eddie Jones said soccer presented a huge challenge for Australian rugby at an international level.

"In reality our other two winter sports are more domestic sports than international sports," the former Wallabies coach said.

"So rugby's got a great challenger there."

Jones said the Australian Rugby Union was addressing domestic challenges to the code by starting a national club competition to support the Super 14 and Test program.

But he said officials would be unwise to tinker with rugby's rules to boost the game's entertainment value by reducing the number of penalties or the importance of the scrum.

"The sport itself if it's played well is entertaining," he said.

"If you go down the track of wanting to make it entertaining you take the contest out of the game.

"I think the big emphasis for rugby should definitely be in youth development programs."

Ribot said the A-League, which starts its second season in August, was not a direct threat to the rival codes because it was played over spring and summer months.

But he said because of the boost in the Socceroos profile from the World Cup the sport had become "a real competitor".

"I'm not saying it's going to be doom and gloom for rugby league or Aussies Rules or rugby union.

"But I think if people don't really go out there and sharpen their pencil and make good corporate decisions going forward in the best interests of their game they could really get themselves in a bit of strife."
Grim Reaper
Coach
Coach
Posts: 1334
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 11:40 pm
Team:
Location: Sydney - Home of the AFL
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Grim Reaper »

Soccer is boring....Once the Soccerboos get smashed by Brazil on the weekend these bandwagon supporters will vanish. Soccer in Australia will go back to it's old ways....riots between supporters of different teams and more violence at the local games!

Go Brazil!
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9920
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 232 times
Been liked: 51 times

Re: Soccer threat to Union and AFL

Post by Beaussie »

Willis 21 wrote:
Interesting article...

Couldn't agree more.. AFL is dying, and union has been dead for years..
If the AFL TV rights went for $750 million and the NRL TV rights went for about $400 million, which code do you think would be more concerned. Keep in mind which code of the two has nationwide coverage. As for Union and TV rights money. :(/
Willis 21
Captain
Captain
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 1:20 am
Team:
Location:
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Willis 21 »

NRL rights went for $500 million...

Nationwide coverage?? You mean the 100,000 in Sydney watching the Swans matches each weekend.... Does that count??
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9920
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 232 times
Been liked: 51 times

Post by Beaussie »

More like an average of 160,000 - 180,000 weekly peaking at 1,000,0000+ for the AFL GF. That is on a weekly basis many, many, many thousands more than the numbers watching the NRL in VIC, SA, WA, TAS and NT. Does that count?

You know I make sense.
Willis 21
Captain
Captain
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 1:20 am
Team:
Location:
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Willis 21 »

270,000 average watched the delayed coverage of SOO 1 in Melbourne....
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9920
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 232 times
Been liked: 51 times

Re: Soccer threat to Union and AFL

Post by Beaussie »

Willis 21 wrote:
Interesting article...

Couldn't agree more.. AFL is dying, and union has been dead for years..
I think following article puts things into perspective. TBH, I think the title says it all. What do you think Willis? Was surprised to also read that the Super 14 Rugby Union series is valued at the same amount as the NRL TV rights deal which is set to suffer cost cutting measures by Channel 9 it seems.
Fox Sports home of the Unwanted
Author: eNews staff and agencies | Apr 21, 2006, 18:09
http://www.ebroadcast.com.au/enews/Fox_ ... anted.html

The contrast was telling. Here was the News Ltd-owned Daily Telegraph in Sydney trumpeting this big deal for soccer in Australia with a fantastic rights deal with Fox Sports, owned by Premier Media Group, which is half owned by News, with PBL.

And here is a story (which is a rewritten version of two press releases) on the more dramatic switch of the domestic cricket competition from the Nine Network to Fox Sports.

In the Tele story much was made of the $120 million value over five years ($25 million a year), while not a mention of the value of the cricket deal by either Cricket Australia or Foxtel or Fox Sports.

And yet the domestic cricket deal is a bigger story because it represents a major retreat (for cost reasons) by the country’s leading Free To Air sports TV Network. Nine’s move means it is now out of any future battle for sports rights, unless its at a more acceptable price.

Nine just doesn’t have the money to maintain the AFL, NRL and Cricket.

The Nine Network signed a huge deal with Cricket Australia last year: a deal driven and shaped by Lynton Taylor, the former Nine executive brought back by Kerry Packer to help David Gyngell and Nine retain the cricket and the AFL and the Rugby League TV rights.

That deal was estimated in media reports to be worth more than $240 million to $280 million over six years starting April 1, 2006.

So within three weeks of the new contract starting, Nine has flicked a large proportion of its coverage to the half-owned associate Fox Sports so that Nine can save money. No mention of that at Nine or in the News Ltd media or any other media.

It's a straight cost cut by Eddie McGuire, Nine's Director of Sport, Steve Crawley and CFO, Brent Cubis.

Nine will retain the international cricket, and games like the World Cup matches from overseas. Foxtel will probably end up sharing those as well showing all non-Australian World Cup Games plus all future overseas tours by Australian teams, except the Ashes, which will be left on the anti-siphoning list.

Nine is also looking at ditching or sharing other sports (and cost) with Fox Sports: these include golf and tennis, such as the US masters and British Open and more of Wimbledon and the US Open tennis.

No mention either in the News Ltd prose about the relative ranking of the deal, which confirms that Soccer is a niche sport and will remain so because it can't make it on free to air TV.

Seven's AFL deal with Ten is valued at $780 million, Nine's NRL contract over six years is valued at $500 million (and will be subjected to cost cutting by Nine management to reduce the impact of the 60% increase next year), the Super 14 Rugby Union deal is worth around $500 million, the cricket is worth more than $240 million (but less now to Nine) and Soccer is worth around $120 million.

Not the gold mine to the code that the AFL, NRL Union and cricket TV deals are.


Looking at the Foxtel deal, subscribers will pay more for their subscriptions to enable Fox Sports to be paid more because they are in the process of lifting fees.

Foxtel will use the soccer and cricket deals as subscription drivers.

It means Foxtel will reach a deal with Seven and Ten on the AFL for Pay TV; AFL is the most important subscription driver : just look at the premium built into the FTA deal for the AFL compared to other sports.

Foxtel subscribers will be financing the $25 million a year that the soccer will cost. They presently finance the $35 million and $40 million a year paid for the AFL under the contract with Nine and Ten that expires at the end of this season.

Seventeen million dollars a year in rights fees will flow to soccer, the other $8 million will be production and marketing costs.

That sounds a lot, but compared to the AFL it's not.

Soccer doesn't even come near the sort of audiences that AFL and NRL games attract on Foxtel: those two codes are by far the biggest audience grabbers.

For Foxtel, the soccer and cricket deals are as cheap if not cheaper than spending millions on marketing to limit customer churn and try and sign up new customers. It will enable Foxtel to have a better chance of retaining customers when their contracts are about to expire.

There are hundreds of thousands of contracts expiring over the next year from the people for moved early to digital when Foxtel converted.
Willis 21
Captain
Captain
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 1:20 am
Team:
Location:
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Willis 21 »

I assume they are talking about the SANZAR deal and not the Super 14 deal.

This would be the rights bought by News Ltd for the Super 14 and the Test matches comprising South Africa, NZ and Aust....and the rights for those 3 countries...

There is no way that the amount quoted is correct for the Super 14 rights alone in Australia.. I'm sure you would realise that...
Soccer doesn't even come near the sort of audiences that AFL and NRL games attract on Foxtel: those two codes are by far the biggest audience grabbers
Obviously an AFL bias here.... the top 20 shows on Foxtel last year were all NRL programs.. its laughable the AFL is trying to compare itself to Rugby League games on Fox...
Willis 21
Captain
Captain
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 1:20 am
Team:
Location:
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Willis 21 »

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Breaking- ... 13671.html
Rugby claims big win on broadcast deal
December 22, 2004 - 12:44PM


Rugby has secured a significant increase in its broadcast rights after the SANZAR rugby alliance finalised a five-year $US323 million ($A423 million) deal with News Ltd and South Africa's Supersport.

The deal with SANZAR - the alliance between the South Africa, New Zealand and Australia rugby unions - includes broadcast rights for Australia, New Zealand, Africa, the United Kingdom and Ireland from 2006 until 2010.
So as you can see, the rights were worth $423Mil a year for 5 years, but this has to be split between Aus, NZ and South Africa...

I hear that the ARU's share is around A$25 million a year.. small bikkies next to the NRL...
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9920
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 232 times
Been liked: 51 times

Post by Beaussie »

Point taken with the Super 14 TV rights, still doesn't change the fact that Soccer is not wanted by any FTA commercial network in Australia. How can Soccer be considered a threat to the AFL or Union for that matter as your article suggested when it can't be viewed on FTA TV and the season is during summer with no competition from the AFL or Union?

The A-League is held during summer for a reason. Any idea why that is?
Willis 21
Captain
Captain
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 1:20 am
Team:
Location:
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Willis 21 »

Yeah.. your right .. I was just taking the pis... Soccer is no threat to AFL...

I think some of the soccer idiots get a bit ahead of themselves.... One month of World Cup every four years does not translate into FTA contracts and huge crowds for the domestic comp...

Union could be a little worried though - they have no proper club competition, and their band wagon niche of the Wallabies could be threatened by the Socceroos around the country... I notice that their test match last week was a rating disaster in the AFL states, and the crowds in Sydney and Melbourne for the tests against the poms were far from sell outs...
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9920
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 232 times
Been liked: 51 times

Post by Beaussie »

Willis 21 wrote:
Yeah.. your right .. I was just taking the pis... Soccer is no threat to AFL...
You're good at stirring the pot I must admit.
Willis 21 wrote:
I think some of the soccer idiots get a bit ahead of themselves.... One month of World Cup every four years does not translate into FTA contracts and huge crowds for the domestic comp...
Exactly. There's been plenty of talk of the "world game" as it's constantly referred to as finally taking it's place as the number one football code in Australia from soccer fans and administrators alike - not to mention the media. :roll:
Willis 21 wrote:
Union could be a little worried though - they have no proper club competition, and their band wagon niche of the Wallabies could be threatened by the Socceroos around the country... I notice that their test match last week was a rating disaster in the AFL states, and the crowds in Sydney and Melbourne for the tests against the poms were far from sell outs...
Isn't there talk of a new domestic competition starting next season for Rugby Union?

Must admit I was very surprised to see the crowd numbers in Sydney in particular for the recent Wallabies game. Also read somewhere like you say that it was a ratings disaster and not expected for prime time on a Sunday night.
User avatar
Beaussie
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 9920
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 6:38 pm
Team: Sydney Swans
Location: Sydney
Has thanked: 232 times
Been liked: 51 times

Post by Beaussie »

Willis 21 wrote:
Union could be a little worried though - they have no proper club competition, and their band wagon niche of the Wallabies could be threatened by the Socceroos around the country... I notice that their test match last week was a rating disaster in the AFL states, and the crowds in Sydney and Melbourne for the tests against the poms were far from sell outs...
According to pbl.com.au that was not the case at all.

http://www.pbl.com.au/media/pdf/2006/20 ... k%2024.pdf

Australian vs England - Rugby Union

107,000 Melbourne
49,000 Adelaide
72,000 Perth

Compare those figures above with the SoO 2 tv figures below.

NSW vs QLD - State of Origin Rugby League:

58,000 Melbourne
11,000 Adelaide
12,000 Perth

Rugby Union is the winner of the rugby codes in the AFL states.
Willis 21
Captain
Captain
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 1:20 am
Team:
Location:
Has thanked: 0
Been liked: 0

Post by Willis 21 »

What time was the origin on compared to the UNion?

How bout we compare those figures with SOO 3 which will be shown in a more viewed friendly time... Don't forget OK??
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Bing [Bot] and 48 guests