$1 Billion

[Perth Red]

We have zero presence in 25% of the country. Until that changes no way we are getting the biggest $'s of any code.
You can take NZ out of the equation as that is sold under a seperate deal.
Our best bet is making up the shortfall by getting a huge deal for SOO and Tests. Doubt it will happen though given the general apathy to our sport the media show.

I find it interesting that every other code has expanded before teh TV deal as a selling point whilst we are not, and probably won;t in 2013 if the clubs have their way.

 

[babyg]

Yeh the figures used aren't quite right there but if you have a look through the ratings for this year, the NRL is clearly beating the alf in ratings on Friday and Sundays. That's not including when you add in the regional figures which in the future will be included in the Aus wide ratings. one day.

but back to the question. an extra 2 teams means an extra game each week to sell. Even at a bargain basement price of $500k per game, for 26 weeks means $13mill a year or $50mill over 4 years. Extra content means extra $.
It's a no brainer really.

If the NRL sell a Saturday night game or even the Monday night game to FTA (which I bloody hope they do) then foxtel will need more content to fill their super saturdays. Bring on the IC please.

 

[bobmar28]

I can't be arsed looking up a link for 2009, but rest assured there have never been 8 AFL games on FTA TV. I think 5 is the most there have ever been so using 2009 wouldn't really help your argument. I haven't seen other figures on TV viewership so can't comment beyond the numbers you posted. If they are accurate, then 29% fewer viewers per game for NRL is not exactly "as large a viewership as the AFL". Also, most FTA AFL games are shown on delay. I don't know if that's the case for NRL or not? It certainly hurts the ratings on Friday night as a lot of people would rather listen live on radio or stream on the net.

But I won't clog up your boards with pedantics. I saw the error in your original argument that AFL had way fewer TV viewers per game than NRL which was blatantly false, so wanted to clear that up. Now I'll let you get back to AFL bashing, name calling and references to Victorians and Merkins loving gay porn.

Lrt me simply quote the SMH TV ratings for Friday night. NRL (shown in 2 cities) outrated AFL (broadcast in 5 cities).

 

[typicalfan]

We aren't worth a billion but if it weren't for the Super League war we would be well above that mark, long term goals will get us there and beyond.

 

[Big Mick]

We aren't worth a billion but if it weren't for the Super League war we would be well above that mark, long term goals will get us there and beyond.

Not living in the past and focussing on the future would get us there quicker as well.

 

[Doomednow]

Brave of fumblebum to have a go. I don't think he'll be back to see the counter-arguments though. Sooner or later someone is going state their "winning" argument, stick their fingers in their ears, and shout "lallaalalalalala not listening!" Im not an expert and have done zero research so I don't know who that will be.

I'm hopeful we'll get the cash we need out of the new tv deal but I'm a realist and its perfectly likely to not be as much as we hope and theres no guarantee management will know how to use it properly.

 

[typicalfan]

Not living in the past and focussing on the future would get us there quicker as well.

True but things happen for a reason. It all kicks off when the IC starts. All this beforehand is a glorified trial. Once we have a commission whose goals should be only for the benefit of the game at the junior and senior level and nothing else we should see some proper progression.

 

[Slackboy72]

BigMick,
As you can clearly see only one city gets 5 games while the rest get 4 games. Which 4 games doesn't really matter but it just seems silly to count games played when Collingwood v Adelaide was only broadcast in Adelaide.

If you did by broadcasts that would be a bit better though still just as misleading as counting games because of the different broadcast areas.
That way you would get AFL= 156,000 per broadcast vs NRL= 294,000 per broadcast.
Mind you this is with that great big outlier (Carlton v Richmond) which most people had turned off by half time due to one of the most anti-climactic blowouts in recent memory.

All of this is moot though as in the key markets of Sydney and Brisbane which the AFL is after AFL average ~ 45,000 per broadcast while NRL averages ~ 330,000 and 250,000 per broadcast respectively.

Who is going to pay $50m p.a. for access to 90,000 viewers in Sydney and Brisbane when there is something that can guarantee you 6 times that number and snare you 200,000 in Melbourne?

All this d!ck waggling around viewing numbers just ignores where those numbers are coming from and how it transfers into dollars.

 

[Stormcap]

The one thing the AFL has over NRL is the fact that with all the pregame and post game hoohah an AFL game goes for 3 hrs compared to 2 for an NRL game. Thats an extra hour of programming to play ads.

The only only offiical ratings i could find are pretty damming for NRL showing AFL had 65mil viewers for 2009 on FTA to NRL 42 mil. Taking in to account the hours thats 195 mil viewer hours to 80 mil for NRL.

These are the oztam readings that tv stations use. This doesnt include regional areas whre NRL would get more but you can see why the AFL gets more money.

 

[E.T.D]

I'm amused that a thread that talks about getting a certain dollar figure for the next TV rights, yet not one poster has linked the issue to what length the next contract is going to be.

Looking at past deals with our sport and deals with others, I can only assume that the length of the next contract whilst trying to achieve the dollar term nominated, the NRL will be looking to sign a six or seven year contract.

 

[taipan]

If it were a 6-7 year deal,I would be working on a realistic base min $160m p.a. for the first year,with 10% incremental yearly increases(indexing) from the 1st year

ie: Yr 1(2013) $160m
yr 2 $176m
yr 3 $194m
yr 4 $213m
yr 5 $233m
yr 6 $256m

Basically keeping pace with inflation and dollar values.
Throw in sponsorship of the NRL $20m pa,meaning a min of $180m(conservative).They may well get $200m in toto.

Allocation as follows (rough guide) minimum income
18 clubs by 2013 x $5.5m grants =$99m
admin costs including d/os =$30m
junior /country/school development =$40m
surplus say $11m for banking and cash reserves.
That is what the game should be aiming for.
If the game had $50-60m in reserves they could tell the fumbleball mob to rack off.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2009/05/15/1242335881328.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

Double or nothing: Why the NRL TV rights are worth $1 billion

Roy Masters | May 16, 2009

NRL club bosses will press chief executive David Gallop to demand $1 billion in TV rights fees in the next broadcasting contract following the release of a confidential report showing rugby league has closed the viewership gap on the AFL over the past three years, with both codes having a cumulative audience of 120 million last year.

Rugby league has also continued its popularity on pay-TV, seizing 15 of the top 20 most popular programs last year, while the AFL's most watched game came in 26th, despite an improved programming deal in the existing broadcasting contract.

AFL boss Andrew Demetriou said recently he would expect an increase of $200m on the AFL's five-year deal of $780m, prompting one NRL club chief to say: "If they can get a billion dollars for the same audience we get, we should get a billion."

The NRL's six-year deal (2007-12) with Channel Nine-Fox Sports is valued at $500m, well below the AFL's contract, despite both codes staging the same number of games each week.

While the revelations on an ABC Four Corners program concerning the group sex incident involving Matthew Johns is expected to hurt the NRL in the corporate marketplace with sponsorships, TV ratings have surged since the launch of the season, when the code was forced to cancel an advertising campaign that had focused on Brett Stewart, after he was charged with the sexual assault of a 17-year-old girl.

This year, Channel Nine's NRL coverage of rounds one to five attracted an average capital city audience of 761,000 per match, up 9 per cent on last season's average, based on OzTAM figures. Nine's second match on Friday night, up 42 per cent in Sydney and Brisbane on last year's average, is driving most of this increase.

By comparison, the AFL's free-to-air audiences this year after three rounds (Seven's Friday night game 717,000; Ten's Saturday game 536,000 and evening game 774,000 and Seven's Sunday game 529,000) are down across all matches on the previous year, and well below 2007 figures. "Our NRL ratings are only in two capital cities [Sydney and Brisbane]," said Nine sports director Steve Crawley, drawing a difference with AFL figures which embrace five capitals.

Regional ratings - the NRL has strong followings in rural NSW and Queensland - are not included in this year's figures.

The free-to-air components of the TV rights deals of both codes show the AFL receives almost twice as much per game, despite the NRL rising in popularity.

The AFL receives $465m for five years for four games a week, or $23m for the right to telecast one game each week for a year, while the NRL gets $250m over six years for three games a week, or $14m for a game a week each year.

Pay TV figures also reflect the popularity of rugby league, with NRL matches on Fox Sport last year making up two-thirds of the top 100. The AFL had only 10 top 100 programs, and its most popular game - Fremantle versus Essendon - came 26th.

Foxtel paid Seven and Ten $315.5m over five years to cover four live matches a week, equal to $15.8m for the right to televise one game a week for the season.

Fox Sports pay the NRL $42m a year for five games, or $8.4m or the right to televise one game a week for the season.

Insofar as News Ltd owns both half the NRL and half Fox Sports, the pay TV rights' underpayment reflects badly on this continuing conflict of interest.

This year, Fox Sports' live viewing for the first five NRL rounds (Saturday evening average viewing per match 279,000; Sunday 210,000; Monday evening 268,000) is well ahead of the AFL's 182,000 average for the first three rounds.

NRL viewing is up 3 per cent on last season's average and the same rounds last year, while AFL is up 8 per cent on last year's average and 9 per cent on the same rounds last year.

Foxtel penetration is highest in Sydney, with a report commissioned by the NRL quoting a Foxtel executive in March this year saying, "Rugby league is a key driver for our Sydney penetration. It is rare to get a single decision-making purchase, but NRL is an important tentpole factor."

Of pay TV's 100 most popular programs last year, a rugby union Test came in first; two football World Cup qualifier matches occupied the next two positions, then came the NRL's top game, Cowboys versus Storm.

Overall, NRL occupied 66 spots; Test cricket 12; AFL 10; union Tests 4; America's Next Top Model 4; World Cup football qualifiers 3; Super 14 rugby 1.

However, free-to-air coverage has been largely responsible for NRL closing the gap on overall TV figures with the AFL, which has lost one free-to-air game to pay.

Since 2005, Channel Nine's NRL audience has increased 7 per cent a year, driven predominantly by viewership in an additional Friday night game introduced in 2007.

The introduction of the Titans and the double-header format has increased Queensland audiences by 25 per cent, with limited effect on NSW viewership until this year when the combination of games which are close and free at a time of global recession has boosted the second Friday night match by 42 per cent.

The AFL's expectation of a $1b TV contract beginning in 2012 is based on an additional game each week, as a result of a western Sydney team starting that year and a Gold Coast team entering the competition in 2011.

To win the extra revenue, the AFL might be willing to abandon its set fixture schedule to allow broadcasters flexibility to maximise ratings, with double-headers, such as Collingwood matches in Melbourne and West Coast-Fremantle matches in Perth on Friday nights.

Channel Nine televises higher- ranked, closer-positioned NRL teams on Friday night in prime time, again indicating how the NRL is underpaid by the broadcasters.

 

[El Diablo]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/why-nrl-deserves-bumper-tv-deal/story-e6frfgbo-1225822324520

Why NRL deserves bumper TV deal

* By Josh Massoud
* From: The Daily Telegraph
* January 22, 2010 12:00AM

WHEN rugby league bosses open negotiations for a new TV rights deal this year, they should be armed with these compelling figures of the code's undersold popularity on the box.

Rugby union officials, however, would be inclined to feed them into the nearest paper shredder.

The annual Repucom survey of TV audiences for clubs across all four football codes has declared correct weight on a historic NRL quinella, with Brisbane and Parramatta attracting more viewers than AFL giant Collingwood in 2009.

In further proof the code's off-field dramas in 2009 had no effect on its appeal, five of the eight-most watched teams in Australian sport last winter represented the NRL.

Other top-raters were the Dragons, Bulldogs and Storm - and the premiers might have finished higher had Channel 9 not broadcast their Friday night games into Melbourne at obscene hours of the morning.

Furthermore, the figures only applied to regular-season games. Given the NRL Grand Final out-rated the AFL decider on a national scale, it's not out of the question that rugby league could have bridged the slender 400,000 viewer gap in combined audiences for the entire season.

It's no wonder the Bulldogs are standing firm on a $300,000 asking price for their sleeve sponsorship, which last year's occupant Bankstown Sports Club has refused to pay.

"We know it's worth that much because of the amount of exposure our club and the game in general is creating," Bulldogs CEO Todd Greenberg said. "We've had plenty of companies try to get it cheap, but we won't be budging below $300,000."

The fascinating rankings leave no room for speculation on the sustained power of free-to-air coverage.

Clubs from the two competitions without it - Super 14 and the A-League - were found wallowing on all of the bottom 12 rungs.

Most disconcerting was the performance of Australia's Super 14 quartet. Every A-League team bar the Wellington Phoenix finished above the Waratahs, Brumbies, Reds and Force, with soccer's overall viewership nearly double that of the rah-rahs.

TV ratings ... the stats. Source: The Daily Telegraph

 

[Perth Red]

If it were a 6-7 year deal,I would be working on a realistic base min $160m p.a. for the first year,with 10% incremental yearly increases(indexing) from the 1st year

ie: Yr 1(2013) $160m
yr 2 $176m
yr 3 $194m
yr 4 $213m
yr 5 $233m
yr 6 $256m

Basically keeping pace with inflation and dollar values.
Throw in sponsorship of the NRL $20m pa,meaning a min of $180m(conservative).They may well get $200m in toto.
.

If AFL get a $250mill 5 year increase on their last TV deal that still leaves us over $150mill a year less than the AFL's revenue. Where the frick do they get their all their income from?

 

[intentcity]

If AFL get a $250mill 5 year increase on their last TV deal that still leaves us over $150mill a year less than the AFL's revenue. Where the frick do they get their all their income from?

memberships to put it simply, most AFL clubs have 30k plus members, this is something the NRL need to enbrace IMO, also crowd figures, the bigger the crowd, the more footy records/pies/beers/merchandise you will sell.

regarding the TV deals, you can argue all day which code is better, me, i like them both TBH, but what the AFL have that the NRL dont is the ability to play many adds, after each goal an add is played, most games have 30+ goals kicked, the AFL also flog the adds in their qtr time/3 qtr time breaks, something the /NRL cant do obviously, add the extra running time of an AFL match as well.

people may say im stupid, but IMO, the NRL needs to undergo drastic changes, the product is good, no doubting that, but they need similar abilitys the AFL have to maximise earnings, for instance, 100 minute games with qtrs or rest breaks after each 25 minute block, even just a 4/5 minute break, just enough to let the broadcasters do their stuff, the increased playing time will also IMO add to crowd numbers, not many people will travel very far for a 2hr game if you get my drift, this may be one reason why the AFLs crowds are better.

infastructure, the AFL basicly play all their melbourne games at the 2 venues, ethiade stadium and the G, both are public transport freindly, the G having its own train station, these are things the NRL need to copy IMO.

also regarding total TV numbers, you need to count in that the AFL season is 2 weeks shorter as well, so IMO, as it sits now, the AFL rights are worth a lot more to the broadcasters than the NRLs, im not saying the AFL has a better product to watch, but it is clearly a better product for the broadcasters IMO, changes can be made for the NRL to close the gap though.

 

[typicalfan]

Well there has been talk of increasing the fixtures to 30+ a season that would give it exposure without competing with the AFL.

Not to mention representative games and the All Stars game that could become an annual tradition.

 

[intentcity]

double post

 

[Swamp]

While I confess to knowing very little about the last TV deal, TV ratings & the upcoming TV deal, I want to ask the question: What happens if a network does pay overs to either NRL or AFL & they just can't sustain it then go belly up? This could be catastrophic for either code with expansions & raising the salary cap etc. Has this been discussed before?

Swamp

 

[intentcity]

While I confess to knowing very little about the last TV deal, TV ratings & the upcoming TV deal, I want to ask the question: What happens if a network does pay overs to either NRL or AFL & they just can't sustain it then go belly up? This could be catastrophic for either code with expansions & raising the salary cap etc. Has this been discussed before?

Swamp

owning a FTA TV station is a licence to print money basicly, most of the adds are bought well in advance, just wont happen.

 

[applesauce]

Well there has been talk of increasing the fixtures to 30+ a season that would give it exposure without competing with the AFL.

Not to mention representative games and the All Stars game that could become an annual tradition.

If they add more games our crowd numbers will be down. If you think about it if you lower the rounds as it is the demand for games will grow causing more crowds (not saying we should shorten the season).

But by adding more games people don't care if they miss a couple or simply have an overload of RL.

Wait till we start selling out more games before we think of adding more rooster v cowboys fixtures.