2022 NRL ratings

[Pneuma]

Post 2113 offering nothing to a discussion.

Whereas you contribute nothing but relentless negativity.

 

[Pneuma]

See now that’s a childish response bc people don’t agree with you

if you want a response don’t be childish

Not at all. I’m just noting your endless negative agenda which is there for all to see. Unlike you I see the potential for rugby league to become Australia’s number one sport. You prefer to hide behind a tree because it’s all too hard.

 

[Wb1234]

Not at all. I’m just noting your endless negative agenda which is there for all to see. Unlike you I see the potential for rugby league to become Australia’s number one sport. You prefer to hide behind a tree because it’s all too hard.

It’s already number one

 

[Perth Red]

It’s already number one

On Twitter? Not by any any other meaningful metric.

 

[Colk]

Look everybody can have an opinion about whether Perth should have a side or not. That’s fair enough. There are legitimate concerns about it like every other option (for example the player thing is fair enough) but using a financial argument against it whilst also not applying it to all prospective options is a bit silly.

So travel costs would be something monumental and hard to overcome for Perth but that it wouldn’t be for NZ 2, Pacific Islands or PNG. If travel costs are a worry or there is a concern about the NRL propping up a failing club then we have to apply that same logic to all prospective options.

 

[Wb1234]

Look everybody can have an opinion about whether Perth should have a side or not. That’s fair enough. There are legitimate concerns about it like every other option (for example the player thing is fair enough) but using a financial argument against it whilst also not applying it to all prospective options is a bit silly.

So travel costs would be something monumental and hard to overcome for Perth but that it wouldn’t be for NZ 2, Pacific Islands or PNG. If travel costs are a worry or there is a concern about the NRL propping up a failing club then we have to apply that same logic to all prospective options.

New Zealand tv deal 38 million pa
Nz warriors grant 18 million
Arlc advance to nzrl 2 million pa
Travel costs 1 million pa

arlc profit 17 million (contra included)

 

[Perth Red]

New Zealand tv deal 38 million pa
Nz warriors grant 18 million
Arlc advance to nzrl 2 million pa
Travel costs 1 million pa

arlc profit 17 million (contra included)

Wrong as usual. It’s $32mill. chunk of contra. Probably around $28-30mill cash.

let’s hope there another competitor in nz for tv rights in 2028 or we could be back to the $20mill it’s been since forever.

are you suggesting that another nz team will realise the same result?

 

[Colk]

New Zealand tv deal 38 million pa
Nz warriors grant 18 million
Arlc advance to nzrl 2 million pa
Travel costs 1 million pa

arlc profit 17 million (contra included)

But the argument is for another NZ team, not just keeping the existing one.

Any option outside of say NSW and QLD (unless you want to advocate Adelaide) would have higher travel costs. It’s a challenge for all options

 

[Pneuma]

It’s already number one

No it isn’t.

 

[Wb1234]

But the argument is for another NZ team, not just keeping the existing one.

Any option outside of say NSW and QLD (unless you want to advocate Adelaide) would have higher travel costs. It’s a challenge for all options

Another nz team will be funded by an increase in the sky nz tv deal

the travel costs to Brisbane or nz are more than covered by the large tv deals those clubs generate

the travel costs for Perth will have to be covered by the arlc in the (unlikely) hope that one day they get enough viewers to result in a large boost to our tv deals and be valuable to broadcasters like the warriors are

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

To think we’ve had our asses handed to us on a plate by a bloody awful game like afl should be embarrassing.

Seen a number of testimonies over the years from Poms or Yanks who've taken in an AFL game. Even if they're bemused and amused by the on-field antics they all still enjoy the experience. What percentage of regular AFL attendees go along for the communal occasion rather than the game itself?

Do AFL stadium announcers bellow out exhortations to "Make Some Noise" as is common at NRL games? Never a good idea. Only serves to highlight the lack of atmosphere. Like ordering sulky children to enjoy themselves on a day trip to Southport. (not the one on the Gold Coast).

 

[Perth Red]

Travel costs for nz or perth will only be 0.1% of nrl revenue. it’s really not an issue lol

skynz pay 7% of the tv deal, australian tv 93% of the deal. Maximising the Australian content is where the $’s will be. As witnessed by afl, 16 clubs in Australian metro cities $550mill Australian tv value, nrl 12 metro clubs, $365million Australian tv value. bit of a no brainer really!

 

[Perth Red]

Seen a number of testimonies over the years from Poms or Yanks who've taken in an AFL game. Even if they're bemused and amused by the on-field antics they all still enjoy the experience. What percentage of regular AFL attendees go along for the communal occasion rather than the game itself?

Do AFL stadium announcers bellow out exhortations to "Make Some Noise" as is common at NRL games? Never a good idea. Only serves to highlight the lack of atmosphere. Like ordering sulky children to enjoy themselves on a day trip to Southport. (not the one on the Gold Coast).

Big crowds generate great atmosphere and become self perpetuating. People go because it’s a good experience, unlike sitting in a half empty stadium, or worse at anz and allianz.

for afl most games are big events each home game and feel like it, for nrl it still seems like it’s a not must do thing and that leads to even more apathy as the buzz just isnt there to entice people off their sofas.

 

[Colk]

Another nz team will be funded by an increase in the sky nz tv deal

the travel costs to Brisbane or nz are more than covered by the large tv deals those clubs generate

the travel costs for Perth will have to be covered by the arlc in the (unlikely) hope that one day they get enough viewers to result in a large boost to our tv deals and be valuable to broadcasters like the warriors are

I don’t think we’ll see a substantial increase from NZ to be fair.

I’d love to see another Kiwi side: take on union as well take on fumbleball.

In saying that though, it would be purely for player numbers. Like a PNG team perhaps would be

 

[Iamback]

But the argument is for another NZ team, not just keeping the existing one.

Any option outside of say NSW and QLD (unless you want to advocate Adelaide) would have higher travel costs. It’s a challenge for all options

It is a given that a side from non heartland area will have higher travel costs - so they all cancel each other out.

A decision needs to be made what is better for potential and the growth of the game.

How long realistically do you think until the crowd regularly outgrows the Stadium in Perth and they need to look at playing at Optus or something?

Considering the Storm have been a great team for so long and are only at 60% capacity most weeks.

If TV is going to put in huge figures then that equation is helped out

 

[Iamback]

I don’t think we’ll see a substantial increase from NZ to be fair.

I’d love to see another Kiwi side: take on union as well take on fumbleball.

In saying that though, it would be purely for player numbers. Like a PNG team perhaps would be

It will be interesting now they have FTA coverage if the General public jump on board.

The 2 NZ sides playing each other should pull a crowd so there is that too but yeah for me player numbers are top of my list. A severe lack of player depth across the game

 

[Pneuma]

Another nz team will be funded by an increase in the sky nz tv deal

the travel costs to Brisbane or nz are more than covered by the large tv deals those clubs generate

the travel costs for Perth will have to be covered by the arlc in the (unlikely) hope that one day they get enough viewers to result in a large boost to our tv deals and be valuable to broadcasters like the warriors are

Isn’t it amazing how for any other location other than Perth money magically appears from everywhere! It’s almost as if you have a massive anti-Perth agenda.

 

[Colk]

It is a given that a side from non heartland area will have higher travel costs - so they all cancel each other out.

A decision needs to be made what is better for potential and the growth of the game.

How long realistically do you think until the crowd regularly outgrows the Stadium in Perth and they need to look at playing at Optus or something?

Considering the Storm have been a great team for so long and are only at 60% capacity most weeks.

If TV is going to put in huge figures then that equation is helped out

I obviously agree hence why I would suggest it is the best bet for a financially sustainable side with a positive commercial result for the game. If we are comparing all options outside of NSW and QLD (which will be niche) then for the growth of the game’s commercial footprint you go for the biggest market. It’s an area experiencing great growth economically and in population - there are projections suggesting it will go to 4 million in 20 years. There is clear evidence that the place is booming.

This doesn’t necessarily mean that it will be a raging success as nobody can guarantee anything but if I were going to invest in an area I’d rather go for an area which has these aspects - a strong economy and a booming population to ones that don’t.

Now I have no problem with another NZ side and if they pick that, it’s not a bad call at all. It just wouldn’t net the same amount of money and it would be a bigger challenge to build a financially strong club.

On the crowds, I think crowds could be improved for every club barring perhaps the Broncos and the Eels. If they get similar crowds to other clubs then to me that is fine.

 

[Colk]

It will be interesting now they have FTA coverage if the General public jump on board.

The 2 NZ sides playing each other should pull a crowd so there is that too but yeah for me player numbers are top of my list. A severe lack of player depth across the game

They are good points. That’s what the advantages of a second New Zealand side would be.

 

[Wb1234]

I obviously agree hence why I would suggest it is the best bet for a financially sustainable side with a positive commercial result for the game. If we are comparing all options outside of NSW and QLD (which will be niche) then for the growth of the game’s commercial footprint you go for the biggest market. It’s an area experiencing great growth economically and in population - there are projections suggesting it will go to 4 million in 20 years. There is clear evidence that the place is booming.

This doesn’t necessarily mean that it will be a raging success as nobody can guarantee anything but if I were going to invest in an area I’d rather go for an area which has these aspects - a strong economy and a booming population to ones that don’t.

Now I have no problem with another NZ side and if they pick that, it’s not a bad call at all. It just wouldn’t net the same amount of money and it would be a bigger challenge to build a financially strong club.

On the crowds, I think crowds could be improved for every club barring perhaps the Broncos and the Eels. If they get similar crowds to other clubs then to me that is fine.

The Chinese property market is tanking and their population growth could go negative

if their property bubble gets pricked finally the price of iron ore will collapse and Perth will end up like places like Yeppoon when their mining boom busted