Discussion in 'NRL Expansion' started by Golden point, Jun 14, 2017.
I think you need to go into more detail so he can understand
I would like to have expanded ,but I am in the process of writing War and Peace episode 2.I plan to scale the Andes,Himalayas ,Mt Kilimanjaro,the Swiss alps and circumnavigate the Siberian Tundra,whil;st waiting for publication.
The Fremantle Doctor ATM is taking up far too much of my valuable time, with me trying to spell out in detail when it comes to NRL monies, the only guarantees in life are taxes and carking it.
He is of the money grows on trees variety.nuff said.
so you wouldn't take $17mill profit a year now for something that may or may not happen in 6 years time? You could work for the NRL lol.
There was a $250mill gap in the 2012 deal and a $205 million gap in this Australian media deal. How much of that is due to expansion v stagnation one can only speculate.
Same old, same old.
Ignores the negatives already in place with the fumblers.5 years compared to 6 years latest Tv deal.18x( a much bigger playing roster0 and football departments.Only minor issues LOL.
Still no improvement in Nth Tv ratings.
You continue to speculate,trhat's what you're an expert at.
In actual fact worked in finance for a few years, don't work on hearsay and don't agree with waste .Valiue for money and results is what I expect.The more one gets the more one can waste, the fumblers have shown this more than once.
Of course you have a big Oak tree in your backyard ,that grows money during the drought years.
Read somewhere that SOO is valued at $500mill of the TV deal. If that is anywhere near correct it shows even more the massive gulf between how Australian media value the AFL club competition compared to NRL, despite NRL's greater audience figures.
I doubt there are many businesses that would turn down profit now for something that may or may not happen in 5 years time. IF the ninth game really isn't worth more than it would cost then it is a pretty dire assessment of how poorly viewed the NRL comp is by media and what limited value it actually offers. If AFL can make around $17mil a year profit by bringing in two basket cases then surely we can do better., or do you not feel our game has the same value?
Supposedly $500m over 5 years.Yet I've read of figures well under that mark.
On that basis take out the SOO and you believe FTA stations and Foxsports(who don't have SOO) won't shuffle to grans NRL.You're dreaming.
No business would turn down" profits" or extras"sigh" , but any decent business would spend it shrewdly.
Pumping up 2 clubs ,whilst another club is in deep crap,is hardly the substance of business nous.
Forgetting of course all AFL clubs are Australian based totalling 18 .Their contract is over 6 years and Murdoch made it known what he thought of the NRL trying to shaft him, by upping the ante on the fumbler's deal.Masters maintains the AFL got an extra $500m as a result over the 6 years.
NRL 16 clubs of which one is from NZ.
The value to the Oz TV stations in Oz for a game involving an NZ side is less than the Oz ones.
TV ads which Gyngell readily acknowledged would be more financially beneficial for NRL clubs ,if they played in 4 quarters.Suggesting fumblers also get more because of that fact.Plus 9 Tv games.The whole
idea of rl endurance,would change forever.And having teams in all caps sure helps, no argument from me.
Gyngell also noted at one stage an extra NRL game would be worth $20m pa with a Brisbane side, then went back on that comment.Why?
If the media views that to be the case about the NRL comp as you suggest (which doesn't mean it's correct BTW just your opinion),throwing in a Perth side will add little to the equation.One thing for sure it ain't going to be $500m over 5 years.
Who said the AFL has made $17m profit by bringing in two basket cases?At the expense of the Lions a basket case needing propping up and a couple of Vic clubs ditto, any profit has been gobbled up.
And the supposed figures for supporting the Gnats and Suns ,is rubbery with all the extras thrown in, that other AFL clubs whine about.
The AFL has been throwing money around for years firstly on the Swans,Gants/Suns and Lions seemingly for ages.Read about the amount AFL clubs lost in 2016,this from the most successful crowd and membership code in the country.You continually ignore the negatives' typical AFL stooge attitude.
My response to your last line is spelt out above. And you somehow think the fumblers will have a huge increase in their next TV deal.I'd suggest based on the Nth TV ratings ,they would be hardly jumping for joy.
Afl claim the ninth game is worth $57mill a year to their contract. The two teams plus extra cost of operating a ninth game costs them around $40mill, ergo the ni th game is making them money! Not sur how much clearer I can make it. Now if you're saying you don't believe a ninth nrl game would be worth more than it would cost it would be a pretty dire reflection on the value of the nrl wouldn't you say?
AFL may well claim that.They don't actually claim the money they have wasted in the Northern states in addition to the the figures shown.
You're telling me nothing new.All you continue to do is ignore money wasted by the AFL,and the financial positions of clubs like the Lions which suck up profits made by so called additional teams.
I have spelt out the reasons including having an NZ team and 4 qtrs and breaks for the disparity between the AFL and the NRL,you can;t see it because you are using AFL licenced glasses.
What a 9th game is worth to the AFL ,does not automatically mean the same for the NRL.
I'm reporting what Gyngell stated re a 9th game.You know the guy who ran ch9 reasonably successfully for a fair time.He stated ,and I repeat one more time for the dummies.
Having a 2nd brisbane side in the comp with a 9th slot would be worth $20m pa.Then some time later he backtracked.How many times do i have to spell it out in class.
Now you work that out ,even if that was the case, an extra $20m would not even cover an extra 2 teams NRL grants.The code would be further out of pocket.You're grasping at straws mate.
He obviously had a clue about the drop in advertising revenue down the line ,and the introduction of new streaming methodology.Suggestion melad,try to drag yourself to the current situation and what appears to be lying ahead re FTA TV, not the past.Perth maybe 2 hours behind but appears 10 years behind reality.
And FYI.you continually crap on about where the NRL money went.
Let me tell you when Smith ran the admin, the salaries had skyrocketed with new "expert's coming in to do certain tasks on around $6-700,000 pa), SFA were really successful, and they have left or been chopped.Saving millions since.
$750,000 was wasted on an SFS feasibility study by Smith for the new State Govt infrastructure.
Money was spent on lavish functions at the drop of a hat.
Greenberg is on less than 50% Smith was on, a further saving of over $1m pa.
Smith did a great job as a Banker,and in that industry entertaining and lavish functions are par for the course, not so the NRL.He tried hard in the NRL but Banking it is not.
Its not money wasted, its money invested to return a profit! They needed a ninth game to make that money, that required two new teams, they have saturated their heartland markets so the only option was two expansion clubs. They are MAKING more money that it has COST them, as numbers guy Id have thought this was pretty clear to you that this was a good decision, and that's before you look at he benefit to strategic positioning of the game into NRL heartlands.
Funny how AFL went "we have a ninth game heres what it will cost you", NRL went "would you like to pay us for a ninth game?". Of course Ch9 don't want to stump up more cash for content, but if they had to or else it went elsewhere then they would. Gygnell was very ambiguous and all over the place in his statements with what expansion might be valued at.
So you believe an extra AFL games is worth $57mill but an extra NRL game is only worth $20mill? You don't value our game much do you?
and re money wasted, the NRL spent more on admin last year than anytime in its entire history. re Greenburgs salary, you pay peanuts.....
So the money that continually is being fed to the Lions ,is not wasted LOL.Bottomless pits are good for business.Money thrown at Suns and Gnats continually fine, yet TV ratings for them/Lions and Swans are deplorable in the North,despite all the PR ,all the promo and freebies.Let's ignore the Melbourne clubs bleeding.Let's ignore the $90m plus the AFL clubs lost last year.:Let's ignore the forays into NZ.
Again you continually in your bleedingly obvious AFL mode, expect the NRL to match it with a 9th game.I repeat til I'm blue in the face,Gyngell stated what's its really worth and it"aint' anywhere near $57 million.
Gyngell made the comment ,and you are guessing.The choice is noting his view as one who works in the industry , in contrast to a naive media bloke from WA who apparently still living in the early noughties.Thinks money rains down from heaven.
FTA is on a downer champ, you can't see it, that's not my problem.Advertising money is going more and more to the likes of Amazon etc.Even ru noted yesterday viewership in FTA around the world is falling .
Yeah it's funny how you continually praise the AFL,ignore their mistakes, bag NRL clubs and administrators ,rarely if ever accept the AFL debacles.You should be employed by that mob.
You couldn't even appreciate the NRL left the AFL for dead on the ASADA scandals re their approaches.Yes Smith deserves praise on that one.
I don't believe any such thing brainstorm.I'm only citing Gyngell,and I spelt out the difference in situations re NRL and AFL,which you have difficulty in grasping.You need spoon feeding.
What the AFL supposedly received was inflated by Murdoch who got the dirts with the NRL, due to the behind the scenes deal with 9.The AFL press conference when he was asked about the NRL was clear with his response.I saw and listened to him.
The NRL admin also paid out some senior people(employed in the Smith era) in that last accounting period who were installed then left either of their own volition or they were excess to requirements.
Of course the Digital admin costs and hiring people are going to inflate admin ,that is planning for a new digital future, something you are still struggling with.
Now Greenberg (love him or loathe him is earning more than 50% less than Smith)..Now if in the future that savings goes to grassroots rather than admin, I'll form a cheer squad.
What actually do you prefer, expand to 18 teams now and reduce expenditure on grassroots which is already bleeding?
Or get rid of two Sydney Nrl clubs, just to keep you warm and comfy?
Look you hate the afl and would rather not admit that they have managed to expand their national footprint, I get it, further strengthen their claim as "Australias game" and done so whilst making at least $17million a year profit in the process. All nrl fans should be pssed about it, we should be livid that there is still no sign of expansion, there is still a massive pay gap in the australia tv deals and that afl has once again strengthened in nrl heartlands whilst making money doing so. It sucks.
Lol.... So the deal your mate Smith made with Nine looks even better now does t it?
I'll ask once again as you love deflecting ,ignoring the realities of the Tv industry at present(and BTW I don't like the AFL nothing to do with their finances but their BS at times,and the game itself ) you got it.
Based on the money we know is forthcoming thus no Perff Red guesswork:-
"What is more important ATM for the NRL, stop the bleeding in grassroots participation and grow it,so you have quality and quantity for eventual expansion?.
Or transfer money that should be spent on grassroots to fund Perth and Brisbane.Or get rid of 2 Sydney clubs to keep your warm and fuzzy.?"
The ARU with their grassroots policy(and their Perth team) has shown how wonderful ignoring grassroots works.
You dont know what will happen in 5, or afl's case 6, years any more than I do. What we know for a fact is what the deal fr the next period is and the last period was. What we also know, if you choose to believe it, is that the ninth game for afl is brining in a significant amount more than it is costing, and had the benefit of strengthening their national footprint. If that will be the case when the next deal happens who knows, I don't have a crystal ball.
What is most important for nrl is to maximise revenue to do all those things. A ninth game may have done that if we look at the afl experience. The fact we have no faith in the value of our sport is just reflective of the games inability to grow beyond a small niche sport in a few pockets of the world despite being an amazing sporting product on the field.
Never suggested I did .I have worked on the basis of now,what is happening with FTA viewers and ad income declines, which you continually ignore. 9 clubs or 59 clubs is not going to change FTA problems FFS.
I'd hate you running a school tuckshop. Overstocked on unsaleable food.
Another deflection to my question .
Grassroots or expansion now? Still awaiting your answer.
Simple answer to a simple question. $70mill to grass roots $30mill a year to expansion with the understanding this $30mill investment will aim to achieve a return with profit in next deal. This was the gamble AFL took which paid dividends for them. It is hard to make an argument for or against $100mill a year being spent on grass roots when we do not what this will be spent on and what the intended outcomes of the investment are. I have a very sneaky suspicion it is in fact going to be mostly used to fund the second tier NSW and Qlnd comps with little of it going to new DO's, school comps or schemes such as centralised insurance and club equipment etc that would make the real difference to viability of grass roots clubs.
Or $85mil grass roots, $85mill digital $30mill expansion. There many ways to slice a large pie.
Your statements about Gygnell are disingenuous. He talked about the value a second Brisbane team would add to the comp, other commentary in 2015 put this value at $200mill over the life of the next TV deal. The added value of the extra content of a ninth game, new city audience, flexible time slot in a different time zone etc was not part of that media speculation and has, to best of my knowledge, never put out there in $ value to the deal. Reality is anything over around $30mill a year extra returns a profit to the NRL for it to invest elsewhere. We know Fox are desperate for extra Qland subscribers, how hard a sell would it have been to convince them a second Brisbane club would impact positively the Qland subscription rate? Maybe with a ninth game Ch9 don't sell the 4th fta game to Fox and instead that money stays with NRL?
Ship has well sailed and I very much doubt we will have any signs of expansion by time next deal is done in 2021 and once again we will have nothing extra to sell.
If you ran the tuck shop you'd have out of date products the few kids coming to the shop didn't want and wonder why your revenue isn't as big as the new sweet shop down the road that is providing sweets the modern kids want and longer opening hours.
So you are taking from a bleeding grassroots proving my point.Thanks.Your concern about grassroots is paper thin.
He(Gyngell) was talking $20m pa for a 2nd Brisbane side .whether it was 10 years our 100 years is irrelevant;as of now, he changed his tune.You can't accept the fact.He's seen what is happening,ch10 reinforced the fact.
You are assuming an extra Brisbane side will draw in more Qld subscribers, that IMO is a furphy just as adding a CC side would add few extra Pay TV subs.
The Subs market has remained about 30% or 2.3m subscribers and has hardly moved, in fact it is dropping now marginally with increased churning, that stuffs your theory .WE have a small population, with an already saturated Pay TV market.
Mate dip your head into the reality FTA TV bucket.If the NRL TV deal was up for negotiation today, with the Tv ratings now, and the drop in ad revenue and the lack of competitive tension from ch10,the deal would be a fair size less.Not only my view but more than a large number of pundits including Masters.hence the reason for Digital Investment by the NRL.
You sit back like an armchair general put X amount into grassroots x amount into expansion,without knowing what funding is available and what overheads that are growing such as power/isurance are in the pipeline..Anyone can do that,doesn't mean it's the situation.
If the ship has sailed you won't have to worry about a C of E,nor continue to whine, because there will be nothing to whine about.
This coming from a bloke who cannot accept the fact new technology and watching sport is changing habits indeed rapidly changing, hence the expenditure for digital.
Hence the reason you are living in the school tuck shop zone, getting more food in expenditure and throwing quantities of it out (ala Lions/Gnats/Suns) and it will solve the problem.
When the NRL sorts out its sh*t with its own clubs Knights and Titans ,gets repaid by Dragons/Tigers,provides the necessary funding to grassroots and yes part of that would be 2nd tier Star Cup and bush rl and sets its;ef up for the unpredictable technological future, they can expand to wherever they wish as long as they don't spend nilly willy like the AFL,but spend prudently.
No Im suggesting that maybe increasing grass roots funding by "just" 200% a year is enough!
So you agree Gygnell wasn't talking about value of a ninth game, glad we agree on something!
Fox seem to disagree and see Qland as a under developed market.
Nope will just have to put up with life without an NRL club, how we will ever cope? lol
Again maybe $80mill a year (from nothing at the moment) is enough rather than $100mill on digital? Not one single entity is investing anything like what the NRL is proposing. Maybe they are geniuses for once?
NRL will never sort out its sht, its a nonsense argument. There will always be sht to sort out, always has been, always will be.
No sorry, what your'e suggesting is grassroots is not that important, the only thing that's more important is getting your team in the NRL and stuff any other aspect of the game, and stuff Sydney clubs, hoping one or two die.Take from grassroots give to Perth,stuff Sydney clubs, it's all about me.
Reality .Neither you nor I have sighted the full details of expenditure or expected revenue for the next 5 years from go to whoa.Nor the expenditure outlaid to date and the reasons why it was allocated.Only the CEOs and Chairmen to my knowledge have.
Neither you or I know the full impact new technology is having and will have on FTA deals in the future and Pay Tv for that matter.
So to be nice, you allocating X amount because you(not the actual code) think it's right, to grassroots.I mean the people who actually fork out the cash, pay the DOs,try to assist volunteers (who in my opinion should get some recompense)have a flipping better idea(and yes they have their dumb moments at times)than you or I.
Therefore to spell it out bluntly ,you are p*ssing in the wind, grasping at straws, fiddling the flesh, take your pick.
People in the TV industry know what's going on in their industry and appear to be nervous about the future.You carry on like there is zilch to worry about, the money is literally falling off trees. LOL.
Gyngell/TV industry V PR.
If we had the free flowing money,I would be pushing for expansion right now.The code has immediate problems to rectify, and these have to be resolved first.
BS Didn;t agree with you at all re Gyngell.He stated $20m ,then realising the Tv monies are not there pulled the pin on the comment.He is of the opinion the ,money you think is there,IS NOT.
Nonsense, I would say increasing grass roots funding from current $40mill to my proposed $125million a year is anything but suggesting it isn't important. The code always has problems, the money is never free flowing, you advocate stagnation for fear of things that may or may not happen. Did you notice the AFL launching a new format of the game this week? and on the back of launching a national womens comp which was on the back of national expansion for the second time. Now there's an organisation not afraid to take chances. As the saying goes :"If you never climb a tree you'll never have the risk of falling, but you'll never reach the top either".
Re Gygnell, at no point has he ever publicly aired his opinion of the value, or lack of, of a ninth game. Funny how the money was there for AFL though, maybe just Ch9 and FOXNRL that didn't want to find the money?
Separate names with a comma.