18th club, whose next?

[mongoose]

Murdoch's comments at the press conference tells us which code he is willing invest in and help grow. I cannot see him investing in NRL teams from Adelaide and Perth. Nor can I see the ARLC investing in teams from Adelaide and Perth.

the AFL/Murdoch fan has spoken

 

[Wb1234]

it's hilarious how much you've read into that 1 quote

I’ve posted other quotes where Patrick Delaney has said the poor tv ratings for afl expansion sides like gws and gcs is an issue too

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

it's hilarious how much you've read into that 1 quote

It's hilarious how much you try to downplay it.

This ain't the first time you've done this and turned out to be wrong.

the AFL/Murdoch fan has spoken

You must spend a lot of money on alfoil.

 

[Iamback]

Hang on so your argument is that inflation is only working on the fumblers deal and not ours.

I didn’t think you could pick and choose on inflation.

Look at the offical announcements.

One was a total package until 2031 of $4.5bn. $3.8 Tv. On the AFL offical website

One on was just over $400m for the 2023 season on NRL.com.

That goes out to $470m using the 3% inflation.
What are we saying the 9th game brings in an extra $100m? We are looking at very similar deal by 2031 when their 7 year deal expires

This deal is propped up by the extra Dolphins money. The next deal with have an extra game,

That doesn't happen IF the long term TV wasn't locked in when it was. Yet the outcome is the same if not better.

 

[Iamback]

Happy to be shown where it says inflation is not included @Colk

 

[Wb1234]

Inflation has destroyed the afl deal

they would’ve expected 3 percent pa and it’s been 6 to 8 percent

when the nrl does it’s deal it will have those numbers in it’s mind raising its requirements

Inflation over that seven year deal will be closer to 40 percent that their expected 20 Percent

this is the problem signing long term deals with a delayed start date

 

[Colk]

Happy to be shown where it says inflation is not included @Colk

And? Do you understand your argument?

You’re arguing that inflation will swallow up the fumblers deal but you are actually not applying it to our deal. What’s the end result if you’re applying the inflation principle to our recent deal.

I’ll tell you: it would be a pretty significant net negative considering the current rate of inflation is 7.8%.

 

[Wb1234]

And? Do you understand your argument?

You’re arguing that inflation will swallow up the fumblers deal but you are actually not applying it to our deal. What’s the end result if you’re applying the inflation principle to our recent deal.

I’ll tell you: it would be a pretty significant net negative considering the current rate of inflation is 7.8%.

They are locked in five years after us they are stuck with it

we can adjust sooner

 

[AlwaysGreen]

Serenity now

 

[Colk]

Look at the offical announcements.

One was a total package until 2031 of $4.5bn. $3.8 Tv. On the AFL offical website

One on was just over $400m for the 2023 season on NRL.com.

That goes out to $470m using the 3% inflation.
What are we saying the 9th game brings in an extra $100m? We are looking at very similar deal by 2031 when their 7 year deal expires

This deal is propped up by the extra Dolphins money. The next deal with have an extra game,

That doesn't happen IF the long term TV wasn't locked in when it was. Yet the outcome is the same if not better.

Far out the lengths that people do to try and polish a turd. There’s no mention of inflation in our deal and you are trying to suggest that there is.

They are locked in five years after us they are stuck with it

we can adjust sooner

Sure we have to make up what $400-$500 million before we even negotiate our next one. If we can get outstrip their deal by that amount then great decision. Tall order though.

 

[Wb1234]

Far out the lengths that people do to try and polish a turd. There’s no mention of inflation in our deal and you are trying to suggest that there is.



Sure we have to make up what $400-$500 million before we even negotiate our next one. If we can get outstrip their deal by that amount then great decision. Tall order though.

The lengths you go to polish the afl turd

you are as bad as Perth red on this

 

[Colk]

Serenity now

 

[Colk]

The lengths you go to polish the afl turd

you are as bad as Perth red on this

It’s ok to criticise people sometimes. If he does a good job, I’ll go well done. If he stuffs up, I’ll say he stuffed up.

It’s obvious that he stuffed up here.

 

[Iamback]

Far out the lengths that people do to try and polish a turd. There’s no mention of inflation in our deal and you are trying to suggest that there is.

Literally every contract is done on a sliding scale.

Harvey Norman expects that they will be slugged more in advertising in 2027 compared to now.

Do you expect to be paying the same for Fox/Kayo at the end of the TV deal as now?

 

[Colk]

Literally every contract is done on a sliding scale.

Harvey Norman expects that they will be slugged more in advertising in 2027 compared to now.

Do you expect to be paying the same for Fox/Kayo at the end of the TV deal as now?

No, you’re arguing that the fumblers haven’t somehow factored it in and are arguing NRL have when you have no evidence of either.

There is no evidence that the NRL is getting $470 million at the end of this arrangement and in any case it is still $400 million per annum. It is a little bit less than $500 -$550 million per annum however way you want to spin it.

It’s ok to criticise V’Landys on this deal. He even criticised himself for it in a roundabout way.

 

[Wb1234]

It’s ok to criticise people sometimes. If he does a good job, I’ll go well done. If he stuffs up, I’ll say he stuffed up.

It’s obvious that he stuffed up here.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing

but if the afl deal was so good they wouldn’t be hiding it behind Telstra contra

you know that’s bs

 

[Colk]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing

but if the afl deal was so good they wouldn’t be hiding it behind Telstra contra

you know that’s bs

We danced around it but we finally got there. Hopefully he learned the lesson and doesn’t just take broadcasters by their word. We have different interests to them we shouldn’t just heed to them all the time. Channel Nine and Foxtel used money that they saved on this deal and spent it on our competitors.

They do have contra for sure but what’s the plausible scenario here - that the increase is only contra or they did indeed get a fairly sizeable increase.

 

[Iamback]

No, you’re arguing that the fumblers haven’t somehow factored it in and are arguing NRL have when you have no evidence of either.

There is no evidence that the NRL is getting $470 million at the end of this arrangement and in any case it is still $400 million per annum. It is a little bit less than $500 -$550 million per annum however way you want to spin it.

It’s ok to criticise V’Landys on this deal. He even criticised himself for it in a roundabout way.

Dude the Salary cap goes up each year for Male and Female players. The players admitted they have a 41% revenue share. Given TV money is 60% of the revenue. How would the TV money not also be going up each year? I used 3% but it could be less. Could be more but it is going up looking at the revenue projections

Because you are only looking at 2024 money not what the next deal will bring, Remember the 2031 aim to have 20 teams? I personally don't think it happens but that changes where both codes sit in 2031

AFL and cricket also admitted they left money on the table. So that isn't an NRL only thing there are very few options in this country

The CBA it was announced the players get $1.35bn over the 5 years.

If that is 41% of the revenue it makes it $3.92bn revenue

Having TV as 2/3rds of that gives you about $2.2bn tv. Across the 5 years is an average of $440m

 

[Colk]

Dude the Salary cap goes up each year for Male and Female players. The players admitted they have a 41% revenue share. Given TV money is 60% of the revenue. How would the TV money not also be going up each year? I used 3% but it could be less. Could be more but it is going up looking at the revenue projections

Because you are only looking at 2024 money not what the next deal will bring, Remember the 2031 aim to have 20 teams? I personally don't think it happens but that changes where both codes sit in 2031

AFL and cricket also admitted they left money on the table. So that isn't an NRL only thing there are very few options in this country

Who cares if there is a sliding scale? Your argument is just sophistry dressed up to defend a pretty ordinary deal.

If one deal is averaging $550 million per annum and one is averaging $400 million per annum, then I’ll take the former.

The other argument also about striking later is also pretty invalid because you not only now have to match that deal ($550 million per annum average) but also make up that difference over and above what you have essentially sacrificed for that period that you haven’t put it out to commercial tender. If he can do that then he is an absolute master.

 

[Iamback]

Who cares if there is a sliding scale? Your argument is just sophistry dressed up to defend a pretty ordinary deal.

If one deal is averaging $550 million per annum and one is averaging $400 million per annum, then I’ll take the former.

The other argument also about striking later is also pretty invalid because you not only now have to match that deal ($550 million per annum average) but also make up that difference over and above what you have essentially sacrificed for that period that you haven’t put it out to commercial tender. If he can do that then he is an absolute master.

From the Maths above

NRL $2.2bn - up until 2027
AFL $3.8bn up until 2031

Difference is $1.6bn which RL should make up from the next deal this despite the difference in length of game etc.

Assuming as predicted the 9th game brings in $100m extra. This is why going early and bringing expansion forward seems better for the game.

I'd be on your side of the fence if not for expansion. I'd rather that then keeping the same for 3 extra seasons and possibly expanding next tv deal

As for tender.

AFL and cricket knocked back more from Paramount 10. Those issues are valid for RL.

So while no offical tender process was in place. Behind the scenes homework would of been done