What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2024 TV and Streaming Ratings Discussion

Frank Burge

Juniors
Messages
272
Hi Wookie,
Can you advise if tickets to mcg and the stadium they own in Melbourne are included in the AFL revenue and then distributed to the clubs ? If so how much is that and do they seperate regular season from the finals ?
Not trying to get involved in current arguments just wanted to know as would close the gap on total revenue, I know nrl gets receipts from origin and finals but clubs directly sell home games. With the ownership of Marvel the AFL would likely get revenue from all tickets sold and then distribute to home team and I am of the understanding that the VIC teams share game revenue at MCG so not sure if AFL gets it then distributes it?
 

Billythekid

First Grade
Messages
6,826

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,565
Afl revenue from docklands is shown in the afl total revenue figure so clearly it’s misleading because stadiums rarely operate at a profit

This really should be taken out of afl revenue for comparison purposes

Also afl have to fund their juniors from their revenues whereas league is mainly via leagues club

Of course pro afl accounts won’t talk about this and are happy to post bs
 

The_Wookie

Bench
Messages
3,240
Yeah don’t you bother with us third class citizen league folk

I generally refer to league folk, afl folk, and football folk, depending on the subject matter. But hey you take it however you want.

Hi Wookie,
Can you advise if tickets to mcg and the stadium they own in Melbourne are included in the AFL revenue and then distributed to the clubs ? If so how much is that and do they seperate regular season from the finals ?

Ticketing - ie. the gate - is club revenue, not league revenue, until finals. Much is taken by membership and associated reserve seating - both of which are club revenues, except at the MCG (60 odd thousand AFL members pay the league directly, minus a club support contrbution which goes to the club, and the MCC, where members can also opt for club support contribution). Also Axxess One members at Marvel, pay the AFL directly.

The AFL does receive an attendance bonus if it meets benchmarks at the MCG.

Having said that if you are going to post stuff like that Wookie you are inviting it.

I know that, its not my first rodeo. I just couldnt be bothered last night lol

With a bit of objectivity for example you might mention the afl has much greater costs than the NRL due to more teams, a much longer and more costly women’s comp, a much greater travel component and costs and also literally hundreds of more players required. Comparing crowds in a rather snide way was also not helpful.

I was literally addressing points made in the Telegraph article. The crowd comment is also absolutely factual. If the fact that the AFL had double the NRLs attendance bothers you, get more of your friends to go to games.

I should have added that the afl is also propping up two money pits as well. It’s all about context Wookie. You should try it.

What some consider context wasnt particularly germane to the discussion at hand. Funding GWS/Gold Coast doesnt alter the AFLs position in the sporting landscape just because they can afford it.

Yes but he chose to make some rather snide comments on a day Vlandys announced the great growth of the comp. Coincidence? I think not.

Its literally minutes after an article in the Telegraph went out ion my timeline. Id have done exactly the same - have done the same - with the Aleague, Super Rugby, NBL and AFL when neccessary.

Not trying to get involved in current arguments just wanted to know as would close the gap on total revenue, I know nrl gets receipts from origin and finals but clubs directly sell home games. With the ownership of Marvel the AFL would likely get revenue from all tickets sold and then distribute to home team and I am of the understanding that the VIC teams share game revenue at MCG so not sure if AFL gets it then distributes it?

Ticketing at Marvel is still a club revenue, although clubs split corporate hospitality with the league, the league makes 20m or so in revenue annually from Axxess One members, and clubs still pay match costs.

There are signage and pourage rights at both the MCG and Docklands that go into the general revenue that is then divvied out however the AFL figures it out.

Afl revenue from docklands is shown in the afl total revenue figure so clearly it’s misleading because stadiums rarely operate at a profit

This really should be taken out of afl revenue for comparison purposes

And wll you be taking out the Gambaro hotel or whatever its called now from NRL assets? or its accommodation facility in Sydney?

Also afl have to fund their juniors from their revenues whereas league is mainly via leagues club

Speaks to profit margins - which favours the NRL - not revenue generation.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,520
Afl revenue from docklands is shown in the afl total revenue figure so clearly it’s misleading because stadiums rarely operate at a profit

This really should be taken out of afl revenue for comparison purposes

Also afl have to fund their juniors from their revenues whereas league is mainly via leagues club

Of course pro afl accounts won’t talk about this and are happy to post bs
In that case wouldn’t expense also be shown? End of the day it’s their asset so I would assume revenue and expense from any owned asset would show up in financials. I assume the revenue from the nrls hotels is showing up in the nrl revenue line?
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,565
I generally refer to league folk, afl folk, and football folk, depending on the subject matter. But hey you take it however you want.



Ticketing - ie. the gate - is club revenue, not league revenue, until finals. Much is taken by membership and associated reserve seating - both of which are club revenues, except at the MCG (60 odd thousand AFL members pay the league directly, minus a club support contrbution which goes to the club, and the MCC, where members can also opt for club support contribution). Also Axxess One members at Marvel, pay the AFL directly.

The AFL does receive an attendance bonus if it meets benchmarks at the MCG.



I know that, its not my first rodeo. I just couldnt be bothered last night lol



I was literally addressing points made in the Telegraph article. The crowd comment is also absolutely factual. If the fact that the AFL had double the NRLs attendance bothers you, get more of your friends to go to games.



What some consider context wasnt particularly germane to the discussion at hand. Funding GWS/Gold Coast doesnt alter the AFLs position in the sporting landscape just because they can afford it.



Its literally minutes after an article in the Telegraph went out ion my timeline. Id have done exactly the same - have done the same - with the Aleague, Super Rugby, NBL and AFL when neccessary.



Ticketing at Marvel is still a club revenue, although clubs split corporate hospitality with the league, the league makes 20m or so in revenue annually from Axxess One members, and clubs still pay match costs.

There are signage and pourage rights at both the MCG and Docklands that go into the general revenue that is then divvied out however the AFL figures it out.



And wll you be taking out the Gambaro hotel or whatever its called now from NRL assets? or its accommodation facility in Sydney?



Speaks to profit margins - which favours the NRL - not revenue generation.
My point was is that your revenue comparison is heavily flawed

Heck let’s add the billion in cumulative leagues clubs revenues to the 720 million revenue.

Afl clubs aggregate gambling revenues with other revenues so perhaps league clubs should do the same
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,565
In that case wouldn’t expense also be shown? End of the day it’s their asset so I would assume revenue and expense from any owned asset would show up in financials. I assume the revenue from the nrls hotels is showing up in the nrl revenue line?
That’s what I’m getting at

100 million in stadium revenue isn’t available to be spent on afl actives like club grants or juniors

Nrl is making around three million profit from the beetson hotel for example that’s the relevant figure
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,565
I was chatting with an afl fan on twitter. He was a genuinely nice guy

First thing is it took him ages to realise there were two codes of rugby which was pretty funny

Then we were talking about expansion and he just couldn’t get his head around league expanding around the pacific and what benefits that would have

He started getting it eventually but they are just so focused on Australia they don’t see the benefits of international expansion

People can laugh but png will add millions to our ratings. They might be worth little today but decades down the track it’s going to be a huge source of income

As will a second nz side
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,520
That’s what I’m getting at

100 million in stadium revenue isn’t available to be spent on afl actives like club grants or juniors

Nrl is making around three million profit from the beetson hotel for example that’s the relevant figure
Not sure what you’re getting at. The financials show revenue and expense. If afl are making significant revenue from the stadium they own then it will show in their revenue line, just as any revenue from the nrl hotels will show in the nrl revenue line. like wise any expenses related to those asset operations will show in expenses.

What each code decides to spend the difference on is up to the codes and their current strategic goals. Afl is focused on investing in participation, expansion and its clubs. Nrl on clubs and state leagues and currently building its asset base and alternative revenue streams.

what did you think of the nrls projected revenue increase for this year of about 2.7%? If they want a billion $’s it’s going to take some time to get that $300mill at a $19mill a year increase! I guess they are banking on the next tv deal delivering much more?
 
Last edited:

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,565
Not sure what you’re getting at. The financials show revenue and expense. If afl are making significant revenue from the stadium they own then it will show in their revenue line, just as any revenue from the nrl hotels will show in the nrl revenue line. like wise any expenses related to those asset operations will show in expenses.

What each code decides to spend the difference on is up to the codes and their current strategic goals. Afl is focused on investing in participation, expansion and its clubs. Nrl on clubs and state leagues and currently building its asset base and alternative revenue streams.
They arent making significant profits from the stadium

Most of it goes to cost unlike crowd and broadcasts revenue
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,520
They arent making significant profits from the stadium

Most of it goes to cost unlike crowd and broadcasts revenue
What is it returning? It’s a very nice asset value, god knows what that land must be worth,

the expense relating to broadcast revenue is actually the cost of delivering the content and engaging the fans to watch it, so it’s quite considerable And makes up most of the codes expenses.
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,565
What is it returning? It’s a very nice asset value, god knows what that land must be worth,
Five to eight percent?

Now you are shifting the goal posts

They can’t spend asset value to cover costs

Afl has had 2 to 3 billion more revenue than nrl over the past 20 years

Where has it gone ?

League has never been so dominant
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,520
Five to eight percent?

Now you are shifting the goal posts

They can’t spend asset value to cover costs

Afl has had 2 to 3 billion more revenue than nrl over the past 20 years

Where has it gone ?

League has never been so dominant
No but as long they make a surplus each year they don’t need to. Aside from extra revenue the asset is emergency backup to be borrowed against or sold if things become dire. People buy assets fro two reasons, to make an ongoing roi from a revenue point of view, or to sell at a later date for more money. Ideally both.

5-8% of its purchase cost or ongoing revenue? What’s that in $’s?

they’ve spent it on asset purchases, strengthening clubs and expansion.

we are finally playing catch up but in reality we still sit $300mill a year in revenue behind them, a couple of hundred mill in assets, still haven’t sorted expansion out and still struggle to realise the media and corporate deals they achieve.

there is no doubt our potential and where we could go, but we need to sort our sht out in some key areas before we overtake them in a meaningful way. I still think we are no where near leavering off touch football, int RL, national expansion, tv deal as we could be as examples.
 
Last edited:

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,565
No but as long they make a surplus each year they don’t need to. Aside from extra revenue the asset is emergency backup to be borrowed against or sold if things become dire. People buy assets fro two reasons, to make an ongoing roi from a revenue point of view, or to sell at a later date for more money. Ideally both.

5-8% of its purchase cost or ongoing revenue? What’s that in $’s?

they’ve spent it on asset purchases, strengthening clubs and expansion.

we are finally playing catch up but in reality we still sit $300mill a year in revenue behind them, a few hundred mill in assets, still haven’t sorted expansion out and still struggle to realise the media and corporate deals they achieve.

there is no doubt our potential and where we could go, but we need to sort our sht out in some key areas before we overtake them in a meaningful way. I still think we are no where near leavering off touch football, int RL, national expansion, tv deal as we could be as examples.
Again the revenue difference is irrelevant

If they were making 300 million difference in profits you would have a point
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,520
Again the revenue difference is irrelevant

If they were making 300 million difference in profits you would have a point
Not really given they arent a for profit company, sports invest their surpluses back into their strategic objectives. So if they are spending a lot more on jnrs or clubs or growing assets and making zero bottom line they are arguably doing their job better than if they were to not spend in those areas and make a big annual surplus whilst those areas are neglected. There’ll be a level of retained cash and other assets a code is comfortable with, everything else should be spent on making it bigger and better.
 

Latest posts

Top