Talking Footy

Just when the broadcast rights negotiations are in full swing.

Could it be he got his marching orders after last week begging and failing to secure any assistance from Wagga Wagga City Council after they made a nice donation of $300,000 to the AFL and GWS Giants. Hmmm

Yes the timing after wagga is very interesting isn't it.

Beaussie wrote:

Just when the broadcast rights negotiations are in full swing.

Could it be he got his marching orders after last week begging and failing to secure any assistance from Wagga Wagga City Council after they made a nice donation of $300,000 to the AFL and GWS Giants. Hmmm

Even by your low grade standards this is a bad thread beassie, pickup your game chaaammmpionnn.

How much did Galop have to do with the TV rights negotiations?
To me the writing has been on the wall for Galop to go since the establishment of ARLC.

I see in this mornings paper, Demetrou been ringging every hour after Gallops old a job - hes looking something with a future.

pussycat wrote:

I see in this mornings paper, Demetrou been ringging every hour after Gallops old a job - hes looking something with a future.

Oh yes, I'm sure AD would like to cut his income by 80% and take over a basket case competition like the nRL. The first week he saw the horrible attendance figures, and the lack of revenue from the tiny gate receipts, catering, sponsorship, memberships etc he'd neck himself!

Demetrou gets about 3 times the pay that Galop got. The AFL only needs to survive another 5 years and he would earn more then the NRL would pay him for 15 years.

He does , but the NRL are about to double there revenue overnight . And if they can do that just 5 minutes after getting rid of News Limited just imagine what the future holds.

pussycat wrote:

He does , but the NRL are about to double there revenue overnight . And if they can do that just 5 minutes after getting rid of News Limited just imagine what the future holds.

steady on sunshine. Firstly, if doubling their income from TV rights is seen as a good thing your code really is in deep shite.

And don't think this will continue to happen. The new commission timed their introduction for just prior to the TV rights agreement expiring. Once this is settled the dramatic increases in revenue will all but cease. That's of course unless your games memberships and attendances dramatically increase. But given they've been static for many years now I cannot see that changing in a hurry. In fact if the new TV deal brings more live games this will only serve to further reduce your games low attendances. Can you get a negative attendance figure?

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

He does , but the NRL are about to double there revenue overnight . And if they can do that just 5 minutes after getting rid of News Limited just imagine what the future holds.

steady on sunshine. Firstly, if doubling their income from TV rights is seen as a good thing your code really is in deep shite.

And don't think this will continue to happen. The new commission timed their introduction for just prior to the TV rights agreement expiring. Once this is settled the dramatic increases in revenue will all but cease. That's of course unless your games memberships and attendances dramatically increase. But given they've been static for many years now I cannot see that changing in a hurry. In fact if the new TV deal brings more live games this will only serve to further reduce your games low attendances. Can you get a negative attendance figure?

The AFL have been heading that way in the last few years.

pussycat wrote:

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

He does , but the NRL are about to double there revenue overnight . And if they can do that just 5 minutes after getting rid of News Limited just imagine what the future holds.

steady on sunshine. Firstly, if doubling their income from TV rights is seen as a good thing your code really is in deep shite.

And don't think this will continue to happen. The new commission timed their introduction for just prior to the TV rights agreement expiring. Once this is settled the dramatic increases in revenue will all but cease. That's of course unless your games memberships and attendances dramatically increase. But given they've been static for many years now I cannot see that changing in a hurry. In fact if the new TV deal brings more live games this will only serve to further reduce your games low attendances. Can you get a negative attendance figure?

The AFL have been heading that way in the last few years.

Btw Xman the thread is about Gallop not crowds figures....

Whenever you got nothing to add you always go to crowd figures, a bit like Homer Simpson going through a deep though process about food, only crowd figures.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHy1rFeBDzQ This must be whats going on in your brain when we talk about topic's, your always taking things of topic.

eelofwest wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Xman wrote:

steady on sunshine. Firstly, if doubling their income from TV rights is seen as a good thing your code really is in deep shite.

And don't think this will continue to happen. The new commission timed their introduction for just prior to the TV rights agreement expiring. Once this is settled the dramatic increases in revenue will all but cease. That's of course unless your games memberships and attendances dramatically increase. But given they've been static for many years now I cannot see that changing in a hurry. In fact if the new TV deal brings more live games this will only serve to further reduce your games low attendances. Can you get a negative attendance figure?

The AFL have been heading that way in the last few years.

Btw Xman the thread is about Gallop not crowds figures....

Whenever you got nothing to add you always go to crowd figures, a bit like Homer Simpson going through a deep though process about food, only crowd figures.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHy1rFeBDzQ This must be whats going on in your brain when we talk about topic's, your always taking things of topic.

That was one part of a number of revenue raisers I mentioned. Did you conveniently forget the rest?

As for the AFLs crowd getting smaller, nothing could be further from the truth. Lat year saw the most number of AFL fans attend matches ever in the history of the game! =D>

Gallops gone and the fans of all the other footy codes in Australia think RL is at crisis point

Haha, this is the best news RL has had in near 20 years, Gallop done good after the war till about 2006, but now it's time to look to the future and take the game in a completely different direction. The game should've expanded 5-6 years ago.

Gallop was a news puppet, he couldn't do anything without news allowing it, he was last piece of news limited scum left until the other day, this has been an absolutely wonderful week in Australian RL's history.

And the ALRC has just shown they aren't going to take it easy and pussy foot around, I think they have just shown all the other footy codes out here that they mean business and RL is going to be a hellava lot more aggressive in the way it does things, a bit like it was pre Super Greed.

This is fantastic and what RL fans and the game have wanted since Uncle Rups tried to kill it back in 1995.

Onward and upwards =D>

pussycat wrote:

I see in this mornings paper, Demetrou been ringging every hour after Gallops old a job - hes looking something with a future.

Yes, he's got some great idea's like removing the crossbar, removing the offside rule, awarding penalties for fair catches, restricting how far a player can run.....
It's no coincidence that the AFL officially brought in AFL9s this year.
NRL teams will be cut down and repackaged as AFL 9s teams.
The Sydney PayTV market will be rapt.

. =D> =D> =D>

.

Is it just me or does it seem like a bad idea to be declaring war on an organization that your hoping will become your major broadcaster.Doesn't young Lachie have a bit of clout at channel ten. Seems to me that the new commission isn't very happy with news could it be that they know they aren't going to get the money they so need. Gallop makes the Perfect foil when the cash don't come and they can say sacking him was proactive instead of reactive.