Nrl 2022

[Perth Red]

Ithe extra funding is coming out of the overall revenue for the AFL which the NRL will easily surpass come 2018.

You overestimate this "ticket tax"...at a $1 a ticket we aren't talking much in the scheme of things when the Suns and Giants are getting an extra $20 mil per year.

It's not just the ticket tax, they also have an unequal grants payment scheme which saves them millions in some teams to spend on others and this year are bringing in a luxury tax for those rich clubs who want to spend squillions on coaches etc.

Afl are unashamedly investing in their expansion clubs in the same way nrl has with storm. How much better would the Titans be if the nrl had the same mentality. Instead of wondering if they'll survive we should be celebrating them being a strong qland club challenging Brisbane in front of sell out crowds mixing up the Friday night qland game. If news ltd hadn't owned storm I dread to think what would have happened to them in their first ten years or even now if news hadn't insisted on ongoing payments when they left.

 

[BuffaloRules]

It's not just the ticket tax, they also have an unequal grants payment scheme which saves them millions in some teams to spend on others and this year are bringing in a luxury tax for those rich clubs who want to spend squillions on coaches etc.
.

And don't forget the minimum a team gets is $10 Million grant a year from the AFL,

Basket case Melbourne teams like the Bulldogs and Kangaroos get millions more.

I know you will want to see the NRL give struggling Sydney teams the same helping hand when they surpass the current levels of AFL revenue by 2018...

 

[Perth Red]

You also have to remember the afl salary cap covers up to 45 senior list players. A $10mill club grant with a $9mill salary cap would be a good outcome for clubs. I think whatever you give clubs they would end up spending ah d still claiming poverty. The grant has increased significantly in last two years yet we still have some clubs needing bailing out. With a $10mill grant plus income from centralised Merch distribution plus memberships and sponsorships you'd think a min club spend of $15mill is manageable and sustainable?

 

[BuffaloRules]

You also have to remember the afl salary cap covers up to 45 senior list players. A $10mill club grant with a $9mill salary cap would be a good outcome for clubs. I think whatever you give clubs they would end up spending ah d still claiming poverty. The grant has increased significantly in last two years yet we still have some clubs needing bailing out. With a $10mill grant plus income from centralised Merch distribution plus memberships and sponsorships you'd think a min club spend of $15mill is manageable and sustainable?

The grant at the moment only pays the salary cap.

My initial point was around the players getting their fair chunk of the increasing revenue coming into the game.

I think the American sports give about 45-50 per cent of the revenue the games earn back to the players. I don't know the figures for the EPL but it wouldn't surprise me if it was higher.

Why would our sport be any different when the physical demands are higher than soccer and the American sports ( other than NFL).

If the revenue coming into the NRL in 2018 is $500mil a year, I would have no issues with say $300mil going to the 18 clubs with the majority of this going on the Salary Cap- $225 mil a year.

Is $200 Mil leftover enough to cover the other expenses? I would suggest yes.

 

[Perth Red]

Mainly because the nrl has taken n responsibility for all elements of the sport. American leagues such as NFL only have to worry about that league. Junior and amateur elements of the game are not in their remit, nor any responsibility for growth of their game internationally. NRL has to pay for everything of its income not to mention playing catch up on developing the business infrastructure after decades of under funding.

I can see in years to come that more money will flow to clubs and players but at the moment there are many mouths to feed and some bigger investment priorities.

If the game can bring in $300mill a year in the next media deal then I think $200mill of that going to the 18 top tier clubs is a good ratio. How much of that goes to players will depend on the financial health of the clubs. If they do a better job building memberships and attracting sponsors more of the grant can go to salary cap.

 

[Perth Red]

Just had a quick look and the avg NFL club revenue is around $375mill. NFL salary cap is $143mill. So around 38% of revenue is spent on player salaries.

In NRL the current avg club revenue is around $16million with $7mill going on salary cap ie around 44%

EPL doesn't have a salary cap so can't compare.

Afl avg club revenue is around $44mill and they pay out $10mill ie around 26% of club revenue.

When you compare, the nrl players are even now getting a good slice in comparison to other sports in relation to overall club revenue.

 

[BuffaloRules]

Just had a quick look and the avg NFL club revenue is around $375mill. NFL salary cap is $143mill. So around 38% of revenue is spent on player salaries.

In NRL the current avg club revenue is around $16million with $7mill going on salary cap ie around 44%

EPL doesn't have a salary cap so can't compare.

Afl avg club revenue is around $44mill and they pay out $10mill ie around 26% of club revenue.

When you compare, the nrl players are even now getting a good slice in comparison to other sports in relation to overall club revenue.

I am talking about revenue that the governing bodies get and distribute back to clubs.

The NFL get around 9 billion a year but give about 4.6 Bill to the clubs to fund salary caps.

Did you check the NBA because I believe it's higher.

The AFL got $446 Mil last year and gave back $209 m to the clubs.

No comment on whether $200 mil is enough for the NRL to run the non salary and club grants part of the game?

How much do you want David Smith to get paid?

 

[BuffaloRules]

Mainly because the nrl has taken n responsibility for all elements of the sport. American leagues such as NFL only have to worry about that league. Junior and amateur elements of the game are not in their remit, nor any responsibility for growth of their game internationally. NRL has to pay for everything of its income not to mention playing catch up on developing the business infrastructure after decades of under funding.

I can see in years to come that more money will flow to clubs and players but at the moment there are many mouths to feed and some bigger investment priorities.

If the game can bring in $300mill a year in the next media deal then I think $200mill of that going to the 18 top tier clubs is a good ratio. How much of that goes to players will depend on the financial health of the clubs. If they do a better job building memberships and attracting sponsors more of the grant can go to salary cap.

Didn't see this post earlier.

The media rights aren't the only part of the game's revenue. They will be bringing in another $150 mil per year in other revenue by 2018.

I think the more money going to the NRL players will help attract plenty of talent from around the world to play the game, and encourage talented kids to take up/remain in the sport.No more getting outbid by Union anyway.

I also believe that it's not up to the NRL to be the biggest funders of International Rugby League.

 

[Perth Red]

$130mill of $345mill in 2014 nrl
$209mill of $446mill afl
Leaves about the same to run the game in both codes.

In terms of salary to re ensue and $'s to clubs v cost of running and growing game the codes are very close.

 

[BuffaloRules]

$130mill of $345mill in 2014 nrl
$209mill of $446mill afl
Leaves about the same to run the game in both codes.

In terms of salary to re ensue and $'s to clubs v cost of running and growing game the codes are very close.

But the NRL doesn't need to spend as much as the AFL pisses so much up against a wall in the Northern States where TV ratings and interest are going backwards.

 

[Perth Red]

True but as I said the nrl is playing catch up in terms of spending on its infrastructure plus funding states which the afl doesn't do plus funding development in PI, PNG and paying for soo and internationals plus putting a lot away for a future fund which are costs the afl doesn't have.

 

[BuffaloRules]

Like I said.. $200mil should cover it...

 

[Perth Red]

So, presuming the nrl can get its income up to around $450mill a year by 2018-2020, you'd be happy to see $250mill of that go straight to clubs ie around $15mill a club? I'd rather see the clubs be up around the $10-12mill a year with the nrl having more money to spend on developing the game, centralised marketing, supporting clubs to reduce ticket costs, investing in stadia, developing the international game etc. that would still be a significant increase on what clubs receive now as long as salary cap is controlled.

We are not losing heaps of players out of the game so I don't see a desperate need to pay players twice as much as they can earn now and as I've shown in terms of revenue generated by clubs they are doing better than most other codes in the world.

 

[BuffaloRules]

I feel that if they have anymore than $200 million a year to spend, a lot of it will be squandered like the AFL does.

Didn't Demitiriou get $3mil a year towards the end of his tenure as an example? Let alone their waste with the Suns and Giants which is even more criminal.

The game is still losing big names .. SBW, Burgess and Hayne... One or more may have stayed if there was more money to pay them.

Ultimately though, I just think it's fair that the players get paid more money. It's solely through their efforts that the game earns every dollar. I think returning at least 45 per cent back to them, like other major sports I have demonstrated is not unreasonable.

 

[Perth Red]

Re losing players, I doubt it. Maybe Burgess, depends on if you believe he went mainly to have a crack at the RUWC and Olympics. Something that nrl can't offer. would you be happy to see Burgess paid $1.3million? That's what he is now earning in Union.

Re AFL, the club grant money quoted includes what they are spending on Suns and GWS. You may consider it a waste, they consider it an import at part of their long term strategy to be "Australia's game". It is hard to say things like Auskick and capping child ticket prices are not great spends.

Give the money to the clubs and all indications are they will just spend spend spend trying to better each other and still plead poor. Their grant this year is $2.5milion more than 3 years ago yet half of them still make a loss or are reliant on pokie or owner hand outs.

I have no problem with a successful CEO of a $450mill organisation earning $3mill if he has met the kpi's set him by the board in terms of growing revenue, participation and interest in the nrl.

You have to judge that % on club revenues not on code revenue, sadly at the moment our most successful club earns less than the lower afl clubs. When clubs bring in more players can earn more. I don't disagree that they bring in the money but the nrl has a lot of things it needs to do with that money.

 

[BuffaloRules]

You have to judge that % on club revenues not on code revenue, sadly at the moment our most successful club earns less than the lower afl clubs. When clubs bring in more players can earn more. I don't disagree that they bring in the money but the nrl has a lot of things it needs to do with that money.

Why? The club percentage is something you have continued to mention but I haven't mentioned once.

It's a ridiculous measure in fact, as the NRL sets a limit on how much the clubs can pay via the Salary Cap regardless of whether the club makes $12 mil or $25Mil

Anyway, you have made your position clear. Let's wait and see if the NRL Players association and the Clubs will be happy with another $500k a year in grant/ salary cap when the revenue they are bringing into the game is set to increase by at least another $150m a year come 2018.

 

[Perth Red]

The reason it is relevant is club sustainability. Even with big grant increases recently the subsequent salary cap increase has meant clubs are still in financially perilous situation. It's why any increase in nrl revenue should not be mirrored by equal increase in salary cap. $250mill to nrl to run and grow the code, $200 mill to clubs and a salary cap of around $$9mill would be a win for everyone. If the clubs can increase their non grant revenue significantly then the salary cap could be higher. You have to remember it is set at lowest common denominator in terms of what clubs can afford.

 

[BuffaloRules]

I've given my estimates. We will see the outcome in due course but expect the Clubs and RLPA to be very vocal about this.

The current TV deal was the 5 yr period for the NRL to consolidate with 16 clubs and bank some money.

 

[Perth Red]

Yeh will be interesting to see, good debating with you.