2026 TV and Streaming Ratings thread

[comeinpeace]

Spot on. Corporate sponsors looking for a product with a national footprint to advertise with care primarily about the big 5 metro markets: Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide.
Not Canberra, Wollongong, Newcastle or Townsville. Not Auckland or PNG.
The AFL has a weekly game on average in all 5 key metro markets and at least 2 teams in each. This is a national game.
The NRL, while heading in the right direction with Perth Bears, is a long way behind.

To be clear, I don't think the NRL should over-index this. There are proud fans in those cities, who deserve to have a team to support in the NRL.

It's just that that's not what NRL fans are talking about in this thread - it is in fact about maximising revenue. But you can't have it both ways. It does not drive revenue to provide football to the people of Newcastle and Wollongong, even though it is the right thing to do because that's where NRL fans live.

 

[i0Nic]

Racism exists in all sporting codes, cherry-picking incidents relating to AFL says nothing.

Hardly cherry picking, if you haven’t noticed racism towards indigenous people has been rife in afl and reported as such in the mainstream media for years. Despite the afl trying to sweep it under the rug.

 

[i0Nic]

Btw how many duplicate accounts is this afl troll gonna create? Jesus Christ.

 

[Barney Stubble]

Good thing the Lions will soon have a bigger stadium to play in to further help them not have to take money from head office.

And if your argument is that professional football clubs might rely on lots of pokies revenue... I mean, how is the NRL ever winning that argument?

that will never be much more then half full .....the same 35K dribblers from whorethorn or saint killed it
or their offspring...
on the teet forever will be the paddle pop wions

 

[Barney Stubble]

Btw how many duplicate accounts is this afl troll gonna create? Jesus Christ.

yea
but they keep getting progressively dumber

 

[BlueandGold]

It's a pretty uncontroversial fact that Toyota pay around $10 million to be the naming rights sponsor of the AFL and Telstra (inferred via their other media deal) pay around $6 million to be the naming rights sponsor of the NRL. Again, I work in the industry and I believe that's generally understood/public in the industry.

Please don't lie to everyone on here.

NRL naming rights was sold for 90m over 5 years.

 

[Barney Stubble]

Spot on. Corporate sponsors looking for a product with a national footprint to advertise with care primarily about the big 5 metro markets: Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane, Perth and Adelaide.
Not Canberra, Wollongong, Newcastle or Townsville. Not Auckland or PNG.
The AFL has a weekly game on average in all 5 key metro markets and at least 2 teams in each. This is a national game.
The NRL, while heading in the right direction with Perth Bears, is a long way behind.

look at this tosser talking to itself & liking its own posts

 

[i0Nic]

look at this tosser talking to itself & liking its own posts

It’s sad as f**k seriously. I feel icky for even bothering to respond to this sad sack.

 

[comeinpeace]

Sure but what's that got to do with being 'the national game'? Was it like a conversation between the CEOs of Toyota and Telstra they were like "hey Jim, I'm spending a few extra mill on the AFL because you know, it's the national game". And were you part of that conversation? Maybe Toyota have got more ad placements or more value for their deal I dunno, the whole commercial deal is not soley focused on which comp is the national game... I guess you being in the industry might know a bit about that.

But then you're almost getting into a question of existentialism. Why do the NRL and AFL need to raise revenue at all? Why do they even exist? It's because they want to encourage participation in their sport? How do you encourage participation in your sport? You spend the money on the revenue you do have.

Whatever the reasons for Toyota paying more than Telstra, that's what they pay. I don't know why. If I did, I'd have my bosses job who gets to make those decisions and instead gets me to do the grunt work.

Ok, so the media rights deals are the same. As many people in Australia like the idea of watching NRL on TV as AFL. That's good. But the AFL still has far more money generally to help it in its mission for the reason for its existence - to get people to participate. It's why AFL participation numbers is better than NRL's - they have simply had money to spend on it. It's. It about the natural appeal of playing one sport or another. And in fact, I think touch rugby and the growth of it is a strategic advantage participation wise that the AFL can't compete with (remember AFLX? That was the AFL's attempt to eventually have a touch-rugby style participation base. It failed miserably lol. NRL's management of touch and OzTag have been oustanding in comparison).

 

[comeinpeace]

Please don't lie to everyone on here.

NRL naming rights was sold for 90m over 5 years.

They can play whatever accounting tricks they like but Telstra also pay money in the media rights deal. An NRL major sponsorship of the league itself is only worth about 60% of the AFL's, that's how the industry understands it.

 

[comeinpeace]

look at this tosser talking to itself & liking its own posts

We're clearly writing in completely different writing styles.

 

[storm1999]

NRL naming rights was sold for 90m over 5 years.

A third of this figure was contra and it also included digital content rights.

 

[Barney Stubble]

But then you're almost getting into a question of existentialism. Why do the NRL and AFL need to raise revenue at all? Why do they even exist? It's because they want to encourage participation in their sport? How do you encourage participation in your sport? You spend the money on the revenue you do have.

Whatever the reasons for Toyota paying more than Telstra, that's what they pay. I don't know why. If I did, I'd have my bosses job who gets to make those decisions and instead gets me to do the grunt work.

Ok, so the media rights deals are the same. As many people in Australia like the idea of watching NRL on TV as AFL. That's good. But the AFL still has far more money generally to help it in its mission for the reason for its existence - to get people to participate. It's why AFL participation numbers is better than NRL's - they have simply had money to spend on it. It's. It about the natural appeal of playing one sport or another. And in fact, I think touch rugby and the growth of it is a strategic advantage participation wise that the AFL can't compete with (remember AFLX? That was the AFL's attempt to eventually have a touch-rugby style participation base. It failed miserably lol. NRL's management of touch and OzTag have been oustanding in comparison).

dumber by the post

 

[Barney Stubble]

We're clearly writing in completely different writing styles.

oh clearly

 

[storm1999]

oh clearly

I concede that's probably difficult to discern when you're barely literate.

 

[i0Nic]

But but we’re writing in completely different writing styles obviously can’t you tell?!

yes we can tell, we’re not your average gullible fumble fool.

 

[i0Nic]

But but we’re writing in completely different writing styles obviously can’t you tell?!

yes we can tell, we’re not your average gullible fumble fool.

Great point i0Nic well constructed.

 

[Barney Stubble]

I concede that's probably difficult to discern when you're barely literate.

waiting for your alt to like your post in


5
4
3

 

[comeinpeace]

oh clearly

I know this sounds like a dumb question, but pause and ask yourself this.

What is actually the motivation behind the NRL seeking to maximise its revenue rights deal?

Part of the reason is because the players and private owners of the clubs want to make more money, but that's only part of it. The NRL is a subsidiary commercial brand of its owner, the ARLC. Why does he ARLC exist in the first place?

If you go to the the NRL website, it states what the ARL Commission (the directors of the ARLC), it states the Objects of its Constitution. One of the key points is to fund the participation of the sport.

Obviously, the AFL has similar aims.

Obviously, it is easier to get more people to play the sport if they're interested in watching it on TV. But you still need to spend money on a TV-watcher to actually play it. The AFL has more money to do that. Personally I think they've pissed that money down the drain - nobody cares about GC/GWS when I lived in Sydney and Brisbane - but AFL fans have been conned into thinking that that money hasn't been pissed down the drain, so they continue to spend hundreds of dollars each on tickets and memberships just so that money can continue to be pissed down.

 

[Barney Stubble]

Great point i0Nic well constructed.

maybe Im you too ?