Brisbane2 Bid News

[Perth Red]

The research shows Q'land viewers tune in far greater numbers when a Q'land team is playing in the game. That is where the increase is. Perth has the potential to add another 200k viewers a week (I said potential as they have to show the games first!) CC i'm not sure will really add mnay extra viewers.

I am making assumptions re Brisbane2 ability to bring in sponsors, they have some powerful businessmen running the bid with strong corporate conections in a city that is freezing out many sponsors as there is only one team to back and they can only have so many sponsors. They have a stadium to play in and we can be reasonably confident from the Crusher evidence there will be a fanbase to tap into. I'd say they are a goer.

 

[_Johnsy]

The research shows Q'land viewers tune in far greater numbers when a Q'land team is playing in the game. That is where the increase is. Perth has the potential to add another 200k viewers a week (I said potential as they have to show the games first!) CC i'm not sure will really add mnay extra viewers.

QLD gets a FTA friday night game each week, so where are these new viewers ? There are none, they are already watching.

Perth will of course bring in new viewers how many, same with CC how many additional TV viewers same answer who knows. There is no study that has been done to show how many new TV viewers each team will bring in, it is all speculation. The opinions on here are just that, and they are biased (which is to be expected). Both sides dismissing each others merits is pretty pathetic. Each of the bids bring something to the NRL, that should be embraced and supported by all RL fans, not denigrated.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Um, it means an EXTRA Qld game per week. There's your extra viewers.

 

[AuDragon]

QLD gets a FTA friday night game each week, so where are these new viewers ? There are none, they are already watching.

So, Qld only watches footy on Friday night on TV? :sarcasm:

 

[_Johnsy]

It is simple, you cannot say any one new team will increase TV numbers in SEQ or Sydney. People who watch & follow the game in these 2 areas will already be watching. Is a 2nd Brisbane side or CC side going to bring new fans/TV viewers to RL ? No. They are already watching the game.

QLD gets a FTA friday night game each week, so where are these new viewers ? There are none, they are already watching.

Um, it means an EXTRA Qld game per week. There's your extra viewers.

I hope the above quotes help.

You can argue semantics all year if you want, extra viewers, or are they the same viewers tuning into another game in a different time slot. I was actually referring to new viewers. I thought it was pretty obvious, I am surprised you missed it.

So, Qld only watches footy on Friday night on TV? :sarcasm:

I was replying to the comment that QLD numbers spike when a QLD team play. My response was regarding a 2nd brisbane sides ability to attract new tv viewers.

 

[AuDragon]

The point is that Qld'ers will be more likely to watch a televised footy game with a Qld team in it, be it on Friday night, Saturday, MNF or Sunday arvo.
Qld'ers will generally not watch a game involving 2 NSW teams, however if one of those teams is from Qld, they will. This is a known fact for the networks and the NRL.

In other words, if you have a Souffs-Bears game on TV, there will be the usual people watching it and the extra CC Bears fans, but only a very little Qld audience. If that game is Souffs-BNE2, you'll suddenly have a major audience in Qld.

If CC Bears fans try to argue they will bring the same amount of TV viewers and the resulting commercial revenue as a SEQ team would, they are delusional.

 

[clarency]

You can argue semantics all year if you want, extra viewers, or are they the same viewers tuning into another game in a different time slot. I was actually referring to new viewers. I thought it was pretty obvious, I am surprised you missed it.

It appears you are arguing semantics here. Why does it need new viewers? 200,000 people watching an extra game a week is far more beneficial than a purely new group of 75,000 or so. Regardless I would bet that a large portion of CC already watch the NRL on a weekly basis, and on the flip side a Bris2 side would spark a lot of interest in people who don't follow Broncos.

So new fans in this respect are not as important as more fans.

This is ignoring the Reds, of course.

 

[_Johnsy]

The point is that Qld'ers will be more likely to watch a televised footy game with a Qld team in it, be it on Friday night, Saturday, MNF or Sunday arvo.
Qld'ers will generally not watch a game involving 2 NSW teams, however if one of those teams is from Qld, they will. This is a known fact for the networks and the NRL.

In other words, if you have a Souffs-Bears game on TV, there will be the usual people watching it and the extra CC Bears fans, but only a very little Qld audience. If that game is Souffs-BNE2, you'll suddenly have a major audience in Qld.

If CC Bears fans try to argue they will bring the same amount of TV viewers and the resulting commercial revenue as a SEQ team would, they are delusional.

I understand that, however my point relates to new viewers.

So are you advocating we pander to QLD TV audiences (that will bring in no new viewers), I thought the idea of expansion was to grow the game. if that is the case CC & Bris 2 both miss out.

When expansion is discussed what is more important to growing the game existing RL fans (who already watch TV games) or new RL fans?

If we are talking about expanding the game new fans is the way to go IMO.

By the way I don't think this will be the case. IMO Bris 2 & CC will more than likely get the nod, Perth a very, very close 3rd. if we are talking purely based on TV rights it would be Perth and bris 2.

I would actually love to see the NRL release a criteria that expansion would be based upon, but then again we all know what happened last time we had a criteria for inclusion.

 

[_Johnsy]

It appears you are arguing semantics here. Why does it need new viewers? 200,000 people watching an extra game a week is far more beneficial than a purely new group of 75,000 or so. Regardless I would bet that a large portion of CC already watch the NRL on a weekly basis, and on the flip side a Bris2 side would spark a lot of interest in people who don't follow Broncos.

So new fans in this respect are not as important as more fans.

This is ignoring the Reds, of course.

No my original point related to NEW viewers, not existing. if you are unable to differentiate this basic point, well not much point continuing the discussion.

On the bolded part I call bullsh*t.

Are you saying that the self proclaimed RL heartland has people who follow RL, but not the broncos and don't currently watch RL on TV. Surely you're taking the piss.

A I said in the post above what is the basic premise of expansion?

Growing the existing fan base (increase people attending the games);
Getting existing RL fans to watch another game of footy on TV (Increase TV numbers);

 

[Perth Red]

All bids have their strengths and weaknesses, I love the Bears community focus, I love the idea of RL becoming more dominant in Brisbane (and leaving bias aside) i love the idea of the NRL increasing its National footprint by including Perth. Tough decisions ahead for the IC!

 

[AuDragon]

I understand that, however my point relates to new viewers.

So are you advocating we pander to QLD TV audiences (that will bring in no new viewers), I thought the idea of expansion was to grow the game. if that is the case CC & Bris 2 both miss out.

When expansion is discussed what is more important to growing the game existing RL fans (who already watch TV games) or new RL fans?

If we are talking about expanding the game new fans is the way to go IMO.

By the way I don't think this will be the case. IMO Bris 2 & CC will more than likely get the nod, Perth a very, very close 3rd. if we are talking purely based on TV rights it would be Perth and bris 2.

I would actually love to see the NRL release a criteria that expansion would be based upon, but then again we all know what happened last time we had a criteria for inclusion.

I get your point, but I believe we can satisfy both criteria with WA and SEQ.
New TV viewers: WA without a doubt
Higher TV ratings: SEQ and WA

Not trying to ignore the Bears potential to increase on both numbers, but nowhere near what SEQ and/or WA would achieve.

If the NRL wants a better TV deal, they have to listen to what the TV networks want. And we all know that potential ratings is what will bring the dough to the table...

 

[BDGS]

Imo any QLD bid will not need to be as far advanced as CC and WA.

Why would Queensland get special treatment?

The research shows Q'land viewers tune in far greater numbers when a Q'land team is playing in the game. That is where the increase is. Perth has the potential to add another 200k viewers a week (I said potential as they have to show the games first!) CC i'm not sure will really add mnay extra viewers.

I am making assumptions re Brisbane2 ability to bring in sponsors, they have some powerful businessmen running the bid with strong corporate conections in a city that is freezing out many sponsors as there is only one team to back and they can only have so many sponsors. They have a stadium to play in and we can be reasonably confident from the Crusher evidence there will be a fanbase to tap into. I'd say they are a goer.

Where is there any evidence of the bold section?

So, Qld only watches footy on Friday night on TV? :sarcasm:

According to this:

The research shows Q'land viewers tune in far greater numbers when a Q'land team is playing in the game.

Yes, exactly.

 

[BDGS]

double post.

 

[BDGS]

double post

 

[BDGS]

I get your point, but I believe we can satisfy both criteria with WA and SEQ.
New TV viewers: WA without a doubt
Higher TV ratings: SEQ and WA

Not trying to ignore the Bears potential to increase on both numbers, but nowhere near what SEQ and/or WA would achieve.

Where is the evidence of this?

SEQ along with WA to boost higher TV viewers argument can be and has been made for a combined expansion of CC and WA.

 

[BuffaloRules]

Where is there any evidence of the bold section?

Where is the evidence of this?

What evidence have you ever been able to present?

 

[Goddo]

The point is that in terms of TV, NSW is at saturation point. Adding more teams in NSW will do nothing for ratings/tv revenue, other than provide another game to sell.

Queensland is not at saturation point - there is a big market for more local content in Queensland. Free to air and PayTV would love to have another option for broadcasts into Queensland. The NRL just needs to get an idea of what sort of $ figure this translates to. I'm sure the feel-ers are out on this issue.

Another Qld side would mean more Qld vs NSW club games. There is also a problem where the fewer Qld teams there are, the more the NRL rellies on them to be at the top of the ladder for TV money. Teams need to be local, and winning to maximise ratings. More teams in a state means more local content, and a better chance that one of those teams is doing well.

Western Australia is a new market, with huge potential, but it will take time to tap into it. But it makes sense concidering the games exposure over there will increase massively with the Anti-siphoning law changes (hopefully to take effect before the end of this year)

 

[East Coast Tiger]

You can argue semantics all year if you want, extra viewers, or are they the same viewers tuning into another game in a different time slot. I was actually referring to new viewers. I thought it was pretty obvious, I am surprised you missed it.

Why the feck would Channel 9 care if they are different viewers or the same ones watching different games? Put simply, they don't. It means more high rating time slots and that's all they care about.

And if you think Central Coast are going to provide more "new" viewers than a second Brisbane side you have to be kidding.

 

[_Johnsy]

Why the feck would Channel 9 care if they are different viewers or the same ones watching different games? Put simply, they don't. It means more high rating time slots and that's all they care about.

And if you think Central Coast are going to provide more "new" viewers than a second Brisbane side you have to be kidding.

Ok
I'll slow it down for you, afterall it's friday afternoon and you've probably had a couple of bundy's.


I didn't say wether Ch9 would care, my original point was new viewers.

You sated that Ch9 don't care, they just want more people watching their tv slots, No sh*t einstein!!!

You obviously glossed over my post or didn't read it properly, you seemed to think I was referring to something else other than new viewers & and fans of RL. I was talking about what type expansion we are after, again you may need to actually read what was written.

I have never once said CC would provide more "new" viewers, read the post again or just give the ignorance a rest.

Are you now claiming that a 2nd brisbane side would provide more "new" viewers than a CC side. Is there anything other than a biased attitude to back this claim up ?

 

[BDGS]

Why the feck would Channel 9 care if they are different viewers or the same ones watching different games? Put simply, they don't. It means more high rating time slots and that's all they care about.

And if you think Central Coast are going to provide more "new" viewers than a second Brisbane side you have to be kidding.

Maybe you should actually do some reading :roll:

He himself said "So are you advocating we pander to QLD TV audiences (that will bring in no new viewers), I thought the idea of expansion was to grow the game. if that is the case CC & Bris 2 both miss out."