Re: TV Deal : Sun May 22, 2011 7:25 am  

Another one with the Dally thing... lol

Has nothing else clearly but to attack the man. Wrongly. Check with RB.

Re: TV Deal : Sun May 22, 2011 7:28 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Once again you have you head in the sand - TV companies buy sporting rights to sell subscriptions and advertising. 60% MARKET SHARE IN RL AREAS.

Just maybe the potential revenue streams that come from AFL coverage are better and have greater potential than that of RL. Rules is in every major city in Australia, RL is played in 3 - one of which is Melbourne. So as a TV company where are you likely to get new subscribers from in Adelaide, Perth a sport with no representation or a sport that has an established following? RULES ISN'T IN EVERY MAJOR CITY INCLUDING THE COUNTRY'S CAPITAL. RL AREAS HAVE 56% OR MORE OF THE POPULATION. 60% OF ADVERTISING SPEND.

It is not all about existing viewers? NO. I DIDN'T SAY IT WAS.

Unfortunately, as above, you fail on every count.

A rules follower in Leeds.

Re: TV Deal : Sun May 22, 2011 7:50 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

The FA Cup final is like the GF and it was on FTA - so as a % of the total population it is about 13%

You made the statement that Football in the U.K couldnt get above 3mill...How would an England - Scotland soccer game rate....prolly similar to the Origin percentages.

Of the 22m who live in Australia at the 2010 - 5.2m live in Victoria which AFL country, 2.1m in WA, 1.6m in SA - so in reality your 3.3m viewers comes from 6.9m in NSW and 4.2m in Queensland. i.e. 30%!

Or 2.2M (ish) combined...with a million from the other states...hardly unrealistic considering the massive amount of media and other coverage Origin and the NRL GF gets and, more importantly, in line with similar high profile sporting events in Australia and elsewhere...imho of course.

You compare to La Liga

Nope, not me.

I suppose the point that is strange is this - given the interest in the game why do so few people attend games?

Because they are watching the telecast is the obvious answer ...and the why isnt the topic of his thread.

For me (and considering the thread title) the important question would be: Why are the media companies allowed to underpay for Rugby League rights in Australia?

I believe WestCoaster, Eels Fan and dm may have a few ideas.

Re: TV Deal : Sun May 22, 2011 8:18 am  

WestCoaster wrote:

I certainly take the continued abuse of the great game by News Limited personally and to be honest fail to see how any true rugby league fan, with the game's best interests at heart, could feel otherwise.

No offence to you personally.

So people who aren't as bothered by what you claim as "continued abuse" are not "true" rugby league fans with the game's best interest at heart?

Why should people be made to look "lesser" or "inferior" on the back of what is only your opinion?



This is all starting to sound a bit vichy.

1. Posts designed to try and wind someone else up will lead to a ban for a certain amount of days.

Re: TV Deal : Sun May 22, 2011 8:23 am  

joedynamo wrote:

For me (and considering the thread title) the important question would be: Why are the media companies allowed to underpay for Rugby League rights in Australia?

I believe WestCoaster, Eels Fan and dm may have a few ideas.

One can only think that the aforementioned media companies view it as a lesser product to invest in. Why? You tell me.

Everyone can have a few ideas, but not all are "true" fans apparently.




I can hear Gutterfax and his SADORLF line coming soon.

Re: TV Deal : Sun May 22, 2011 9:00 am  

The number of Brits living in Spain is falling but even those ex-pats that do still live here have little or no interest in Spanish football. If you visit the many British 'colonies' along the coast you'll see people reading British newspapers, reading about British football. It's the same with the television. Most ex-pats have Sky and are far more interested in Manchester United and Arsenal than Atlético Madrid or Real Madrid.
How many clubs are there in Sydney? There are only two cities in Spain with two top flight football teams. Those two cities happen to be the two biggest, Madrid (3,273,049 inhabitants) and Barcelona (1,621,537). Maybe there are too many teams in Sydney.

Re: TV Deal : Sun May 22, 2011 9:31 am  

RB wrote: Everyone can have a few ideas, but not all are "true" fans apparently. Aye, but then you type wiv a landarrrn accent and are therefore worthy of suspicion I can hear Gutterfax and his SADORLF line coming soon I was thinking the same..wasnt one of his best tho, imho. Oh and talking of wind ups, denier has multiple meanings: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/denier One can only think that the aforementioned media companies view it as a lesser product to invest in. Why? You tell me Hmmm, a mod inducing a poster to go off topic... Not sure RL is viewed as a lesser 'product', if it was the SL War wouldnae happened and news wouldnt be fighting so hard to keep an influence within the sport...taken for granted maybe...hasnt Manly just started a thread about neins treatment of RL. A constant theme since the Afl deal has been the NRL 'reminding' media companies that its not much good gaining subscribers in less populated markets if you're hemmoraging in the two biggest...

RB wrote: Everyone can have a few ideas, but not all are "true" fans apparently. Aye, but then you type wiv a landarrrn accent and are therefore worthy of suspicion I can hear Gutterfax and his SADORLF line coming soon I was thinking the same..wasnt one of his best tho, imho. Oh and talking of wind ups, denier has multiple meanings: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/denier One can only think that the aforementioned media companies view it as a lesser product to invest in. Why? You tell me Hmmm, a mod inducing a poster to go off topic... Not sure RL is viewed as a lesser 'product', if it was the SL War wouldnae happened and news wouldnt be fighting so hard to keep an influence within the sport...taken for granted maybe...hasnt Manly just started a thread about neins treatment of RL. A constant theme since the Afl deal has been the NRL 'reminding' media companies that its not much good gaining subscribers in less populated markets if you're hemmoraging in the two biggest...

Re: TV Deal : Sun May 22, 2011 9:32 am  

Rooster Booster wrote:

Why are we going to be screwed? And how? That perception would be based on whatever expectation you yourself had of our new deal wouldn't it?

Also Why did you never mention a conflict of interest in the past when you and Dally were going on about how we would get over $1b etc. etc. Is it because you saw what another sport got in their deal and now think we will get shafted? Did you believe that RL would get more than AFL? If so, why?




I think we'll be fine, we always will. In this country RL is very significant on any sporting radar. Even if we get less than AFL. So what, we'll still grow and teams will get a few more quid.

I have mentioned it here quite a few times, it seems that you are one of the few who can't and refuses to see the conflict.

Re: TV Deal : Sun May 22, 2011 9:41 am  

Rooster Booster wrote: So people who aren't as bothered by what you claim as "continued abuse" are not "true" rugby league fans with the game's best interest at heart? Why should people be made to look "lesser" or "inferior" on the back of what is only your opinion? This is all starting to sound a bit vichy. 1. Posts designed to try and wind someone else up will lead to a ban for a certain amount of days. Naaa, no one cares http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showt ... p?t=365874 2,878 replies in this thread. http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showt ... p?t=352299 2,069 replies in this thread. Read and educate yourself. And vichy, lol, talk about scrapping the bottom of the barrel. You sure you're a fan of RL?

Rooster Booster wrote: So people who aren't as bothered by what you claim as "continued abuse" are not "true" rugby league fans with the game's best interest at heart? Why should people be made to look "lesser" or "inferior" on the back of what is only your opinion? This is all starting to sound a bit vichy. 1. Posts designed to try and wind someone else up will lead to a ban for a certain amount of days. Naaa, no one cares http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showt ... p?t=365874 2,878 replies in this thread. http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showt ... p?t=352299 2,069 replies in this thread. Read and educate yourself. And vichy, lol, talk about scrapping the bottom of the barrel. You sure you're a fan of RL?

Re: TV Deal : Sun May 22, 2011 9:44 am  

Rooster Booster wrote:

One can only think that the aforementioned media companies view it as a lesser product to invest in. Why? You tell me.

Everyone can have a few ideas, but not all are "true" fans apparently.




I can hear Gutterfax and his SADORLF line coming soon.

Ummmm, because news owns half of the game, they own part of Foxsports along with Telstra, so when they go to buy the games, they are selling them to themselves.

They are profit driven, why would they pay as much as they should if they can get away with buying it off themselves cheaper?

Wouldn't that help them with their profits, the one and only thing they care about?