Talking Footy

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/o ... 6837559725

The NRL has one team in Victoria and none in South Australia or Western Australia. And from that base you will be the biggest sporting community in Australia? Dear God, David.

And then what about this? By 2017 you will double club membership from its current number of 228,000 to 400,000. Now, David, this little thing is called a calculator. You need to get the hang of it quickly. Last year, that’s last year, David the AFL club membership was 756,717. Do you understand what that means?

Or what about this: increasing average crowds from 13,000 to 20,000 by 2017. The AFL’s average crowd last year? 32,163. Or this: increasing participation rates from 555,000 to 700,000. David, the AFL’s participation rate last year was 938,069.

And did you have to talk about social media? Really, David, social media? You want to increase the spread in 2017 to 5.8 million. Last year the AFL had 69.7 million unique visits.

But David, if we analyse all these figures your forecasts and the AFL reality — you are actually saying by 2017 you’ll only be about half as big as the AFL is now. That is not going to get you the bragging rights as the biggest sporting community in the country. On your own figures, by 2017 you won’t even be big in West Wyalong.

I love that this isn't opinion. It's basic mathematics. David Smith, what were you thinking?

The $50m profit he delivered does that add up? (its basic maths :_<> )

AFL profit $6.7m

2013 highest rating tv shows:

1... NRL
2... NRL
3... NRL
4... AFL
5... NRL

Drac wrote:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/o ... 6837559725

The NRL has one team in Victoria and none in South Australia or Western Australia. And from that base you will be the biggest sporting community in Australia? Dear God, David.

And then what about this? By 2017 you will double club membership from its current number of 228,000 to 400,000. Now, David, this little thing is called a calculator. You need to get the hang of it quickly. Last year, that’s last year, David the AFL club membership was 756,717. Do you understand what that means?

Or what about this: increasing average crowds from 13,000 to 20,000 by 2017. The AFL’s average crowd last year? 32,163. Or this: increasing participation rates from 555,000 to 700,000. David, the AFL’s participation rate last year was 938,069.

And did you have to talk about social media? Really, David, social media? You want to increase the spread in 2017 to 5.8 million. Last year the AFL had 69.7 million unique visits.

But David, if we analyse all these figures your forecasts and the AFL reality — you are actually saying by 2017 you’ll only be about half as big as the AFL is now. That is not going to get you the bragging rights as the biggest sporting community in the country. On your own figures, by 2017 you won’t even be big in West Wyalong.

I love that this isn't opinion. It's basic mathematics. David Smith, what were you thinking?

Sorry .
This article is Null & void according to Google university whizz TLPG.

Anything found on the net especially news articles is all bullshit.

AFL has invested its money in expansion and media, the nRL keeps it in a piggy bank and beats its chest, proclaiming to the nation "look at how much money we didn't invest in growth!"

Drac wrote:

AFL has invested its money in expansion and media, the nRL keeps it in a piggy bank and beats its chest, proclaiming to the nation "look at how much money we didn't invest in growth!"

Smell the fear.

AFLcrap1 wrote:

Drac wrote:

AFL has invested its money in expansion and media, the nRL keeps it in a piggy bank and beats its chest, proclaiming to the nation "look at how much money we didn't invest in growth!"

Smell the fear.

the AFL keeps their's in the bank as well, its called a future fund
AFL also invests in projects & infrastructure something the NRL does not do

until you see the full report, the figures are pretty useless, just reign in the cutbacks & stop spending & beat your cheast "look at us"

Drac wrote:

AFL has invested its money in expansion and media, the nRL keeps it in a piggy bank and beats its chest, proclaiming to the nation "look at how much money we didn't invest in growth!"

The AFL has invested... your right about that, but i wouldnt call some of those good investments (specially GWS). the giants will hemerage money out of the AFL for decades and for very little gain, all i can see from them in the future is only marginally better than where they are currently(and im talking about off the field not on it). during negoiations for the next TV deal, the giants will also be a negative stain on the AFL's credentials, i see that they will more likely lower the final price than increase it, thus further hemerageing from AFL pockets.

The NRL could of started a new franchiese in perth for the begining of the current tv deal and it would defineatly have boosted their price as GWS did for the AFL. when Gallop was CEO there were plans to do this, but when David smith took over as CEO he pushed it back. what i can say is Dave is doing a great job and i trust that his cautious and professional approach in regards to expansion is the right way and it should be commanded(Vlad perhaps should take a leaf out of his book too). The NRL pushed back expansion to WA probably because they wernt satisfied that there was enough community and corporate interest in the area. The NRL does not want to just rush the new franchiese in (like other codes have of recent coff coff).

Ignoring those just negates any extra money that would be made from the TV deal (with more teams admitted), as the extra funds as well as other money is wasted trying to keep the fledgling francheise afloat. (sounds alot like GWS doesnt it).

Now it appears to me that the major factor for the AFL with its latest expansion was solely to make the AFL worth more in TV deal negioations, but with no real look into if there was an actual demand for these teams. The problem with this is that without the adequate community and Corporate interest in these clubs expansion will only bring an inital financial benefit. inadequate demand for the francheises over the long term means that alot more money will need to be spent on these clubs than if there was adequate demand when founded.

GWS easily falls into this category. the club was founded for the areas population and more tv $$ but without the thought there was virtually no demand for them and miniscule community interest(no where near enough).

I dont know why your trying to rip on the NRL and Dave Smith on their cautious approach on expansion, maybe its because its upsetting seeing them do it right.

Drac wrote:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/o ... 6837559725

The NRL has one team in Victoria and none in South Australia or Western Australia. And from that base you will be the biggest sporting community in Australia? Dear God, David.

And then what about this? By 2017 you will double club membership from its current number of 228,000 to 400,000. Now, David, this little thing is called a calculator. You need to get the hang of it quickly. Last year, that’s last year, David the AFL club membership was 756,717. Do you understand what that means?

Or what about this: increasing average crowds from 13,000 to 20,000 by 2017. The AFL’s average crowd last year? 32,163. Or this: increasing participation rates from 555,000 to 700,000. David, the AFL’s participation rate last year was 938,069.

And did you have to talk about social media? Really, David, social media? You want to increase the spread in 2017 to 5.8 million. Last year the AFL had 69.7 million unique visits.

But David, if we analyse all these figures your forecasts and the AFL reality — you are actually saying by 2017 you’ll only be about half as big as the AFL is now. That is not going to get you the bragging rights as the biggest sporting community in the country. On your own figures, by 2017 you won’t even be big in West Wyalong.

I love that this isn't opinion. It's basic mathematics. David Smith, what were you thinking?

>

:_<> :_<> :_<>

what dribbling hands down his Y fronts fumbling cockhead wrote this utter shit ? :_<> :_<>

theres a few things this singlet wearing schlong molester forgot

Rugby League & its variants for starters have 2 Million plus participants
more then double the VFL's fake number

Rugby League is watched by up to 15 Million more Australians each year then that bumbling Victorian abortion
& up to 30 Million more in Australasia

the NRL posted a 50 Million dollar profit in 2013
the VFL
just 7 Million

type google into a search engine & it gets 200 Million hits
the VFL... just 80 Million

the NRL's crowds are 16K .... not 13K
& will be 20K by 2017
meanwhile the VFL's have dropped from 37K in 2010 .. to 32K in 2013


this wanker needs a bex & a good lie down
RL is coming
& these fumblers seemingly can't handle it :_<> :_<> :_<>

AFLcrap1 wrote:

Drac wrote:

AFL has invested its money in expansion and media, the nRL keeps it in a piggy bank and beats its chest, proclaiming to the nation "look at how much money we didn't invest in growth!"

Smell the fear.

oh they're shitting their britches this lot

& its hilarious to see their reactions :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>

pussycat wrote:

The $50m profit he delivered does that add up? (its basic maths :_<> )

AFL profit $6.7m

2013 highest rating tv shows:

1... NRL
2... NRL
3... NRL
4... AFL
5... NRL

6.7 mil profit is for 2012 season - what's was NRL's profit for 2012? The AFL has not yet published 2013 profit/loss. And what was the overall tv figures for 2013? I think you'll find you lost that one as we'll!

Swans4ever wrote:

pussycat wrote:

The $50m profit he delivered does that add up? (its basic maths :_<> )

AFL profit $6.7m

2013 highest rating tv shows:

1... NRL
2... NRL
3... NRL
4... AFL
5... NRL

6.7 mil profit is for 2012 season - what's was NRL's profit for 2012? The AFL has not yet published 2013 profit/loss. And what was the overall tv figures for 2013? I think you'll find you lost that one as we'll!

oh wow
the other dickhead is back too

how was your stay at her majesty's pleasure ?
or

were you repeating Yr 10 again at yr kids high school ?
I can't recall which it was >

:_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>

214Four wrote:

Drac wrote:

AFL has invested its money in expansion and media, the nRL keeps it in a piggy bank and beats its chest, proclaiming to the nation "look at how much money we didn't invest in growth!"

The AFL has invested... your right about that, but i wouldnt call some of those good investments (specially GWS). the giants will hemerage money out of the AFL for decades and for very little gain, all i can see from them in the future is only marginally better than where they are currently(and im talking about off the field not on it). during negoiations for the next TV deal, the giants will also be a negative stain on the AFL's credentials, i see that they will more likely lower the final price than increase it, thus further hemerageing from AFL pockets.

The NRL could of started a new franchiese in perth for the begining of the current tv deal and it would defineatly have boosted their price as GWS did for the AFL. when Gallop was CEO there were plans to do this, but when David smith took over as CEO he pushed it back. what i can say is Dave is doing a great job and i trust that his cautious and professional approach in regards to expansion is the right way and it should be commanded(Vlad perhaps should take a leaf out of his book too). The NRL pushed back expansion to WA probably because they wernt satisfied that there was enough community and corporate interest in the area. The NRL does not want to just rush the new franchiese in (like other codes have of recent coff coff).

Ignoring those just negates any extra money that would be made from the TV deal (with more teams admitted), as the extra funds as well as other money is wasted trying to keep the fledgling francheise afloat. (sounds alot like GWS doesnt it).

Now it appears to me that the major factor for the AFL with its latest expansion was solely to make the AFL worth more in TV deal negioations, but with no real look into if there was an actual demand for these teams. The problem with this is that without the adequate community and Corporate interest in these clubs expansion will only bring an inital financial benefit. inadequate demand for the francheises over the long term means that alot more money will need to be spent on these clubs than if there was adequate demand when founded.

GWS easily falls into this category. the club was founded for the areas population and more tv $$ but without the thought there was virtually no demand for them and miniscule community interest(no where near enough).

I dont know why your trying to rip on the NRL and Dave Smith on their cautious approach on expansion, maybe its because its upsetting seeing them do it right.

And you say AFL followers are in denial about their CEO - wasn't Gallop at the helm when the NRL TV rights deal was negotiated - what his signature on a contract that was agreed to by his predecessor is a mark of greatness - oh dear - 200 mil invested in the code in 5 years is 40 mil a year - if RD is correct (which he isn't ) the AFL has invested 500 000 000 since 1982 which is about 150 mil a year! Again you NRL posters on here accuse us of lying yet you say things like you do - by the way the next AFL TV rights is being forecast at 1.6 Billion obviously your insights have very little credence! PS good to see the NRL finally making money!

Raiderdave wrote:

Swans4ever wrote:

pussycat wrote:

The $50m profit he delivered does that add up? (its basic maths :_<> )

AFL profit $6.7m

2013 highest rating tv shows:

1... NRL
2... NRL
3... NRL
4... AFL
5... NRL

6.7 mil profit is for 2012 season - what's was NRL's profit for 2012? The AFL has not yet published 2013 profit/loss. And what was the overall tv figures for 2013? I think you'll find you lost that one as we'll!

oh wow
the other dickhead is back too

how was your stay at her majesty's pleasure ?
or

were you repeating Yr 10 again at yr kids high school ?
I can't recall which it was >

:_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>

Good to see some things never change unlike you I have work to think about which has kept me busy! If only you knew!

It's clear that the majority of recent infrastructure spending has been on the Suns and the Giants in the AFL. The NRL is bringing it's finances under proper control whereas the AFL's finances are so volatile if their crowd average drops below 30,000 they'll be in trouble.

The $50 million profit is a great result for a competition that is needing the money from State of Origin at least to run competitively. The publicity from the RLWC has helped provide a massive success in Auckland with the 9's and will provide a better run into the 2014 season than the AFL have. Their pre season competition has been a useless waste in comparison. Hell, it's not even a competition!

Volatile?? What planet were you born on??

Here's a question for you, newbie. How well do you think the NRL would go without it's rep program?