Brisbane2 Bid News

[AuDragon]

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.

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 rest my case... :crazy:

 

[AlwaysGreen]

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

Its Thursday isn't it?

 

[BDGS]

I rest my case... :crazy:

Oh i forgot, you said it. It must be right :roll:

 

[AuDragon]

Oh i forgot, you said it. It must be right :roll:

Now you're learning!

 

[_Johnsy]

Its Thursday isn't it?

Very true, I guess it's the mindset having friday, saturday & sunday off. I'm already in weekend mode.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

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 ?

You are the one who needs to read. The topic of conversation was which bid would be worth more to the TV networks. The answer is the one that brings in the better ratings. And the answer to that is Brisbane. Your nonsense about "new" fans has no bearing on this. So your contribution was completely irrelevent. Well done. You don't even know what day of the week it is and you're calling others ignorant! FMD this has to be the most ironic post ever. And you want to call people bias. What is the basis for this accusation? Making a judgement and backing it up is not bias. Bias is having some sort of conflict of interest. What conflict of interest do I have exactly? But then again you have more serious issues to deal with like figuring out what day of the week it is.

 

[lturner]

You are the one who needs to read. The topic of conversation was which bid would be worth more to the TV networks. The answer is the one that brings in the better ratings. And the answer to that is Brisbane. Your nonsense about "new" fans has no bearing on this. So your contribution was completely irrelevent. Well done. You don't even know what day of the week it is and you're calling others ignorant! FMD this has to be the most ironic post ever. And you want to call people bias. What is the basis for this accusation? Making a judgement and backing it up is not bias. Bias is having some sort of conflict of interest. What conflict of interest do I have exactly? But then again you have more serious issues to deal with like figuring out what day of the week it is.

Spot on. It doesn't matter for ratings whether the people watching are "new" supporters or the same old punters.

The only time it matters whether there are "new" people watching is for the big one off games like GF and origin when all or most supporters are watching the one game. This might be where Perth has some appeal. Raise the profile of RL in WA and you will start to get more people watching the GF and origin even if it's the only games they watch all year.

But which ever way you slice and dice it, another Brisbane team would be first with daylight second for adding value to a TV deal.

 

[adamkungl]

But which ever way you slice and dice it, another Brisbane team would be first with daylight second for adding value to a TV deal.

Well, you're right about daylight being second. But Perth would be first.

 

[beave]

For mine Perth is the 'shoe in' or the one I would pick as the expansion team (new area, timeslot is excellent for a live game into the east coast on a saturday night)


it's the 2nd team that I can't split. So many +'s and -'s for both CC and Bris2. I sat down at lunchtime and went through both teams credentials on a piece of paper and it drove me nuts just how good both areas would be for the league, thank f**k it's not me making the decision as I would be having sleepless nights.

 

[adamkungl]

Which is why both should come in, if not immediately, then in the next few years

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Which brings us to the question: What are the chances of the NRL setting out the plan for the next round of expansion at the same time as announcing the 2013 decision?

 

[BuffaloRules]

Very true, I guess it's the mindset having friday, saturday & sunday off. I'm already in weekend mode.

#-o

Are you sure you dont have every day "off"?

 

[BuffaloRules]

Well, you're right about daylight being second. But Perth would be first.

A lot of people will lead you to believe that the Bears are the "bookies favourite"....

 

[Perth Red]

Which brings us to the question: What are the chances of the NRL setting out the plan for the next round of expansion at the same time as announcing the 2013 decision?

:lol::lol::lol: The NRL have a long term vision and strategy:lol:

 

[lturner]

Well, you're right about daylight being second. But Perth would be first.

Not a chance. Perth will cost money in the short term. The games will rate quite poorly in Perth just like all the other foreign clubs ie the Sydney Swans ratings in Sydney, Brisbane Lions ratings in Brisbane. They don't even bother showing Melbourne Storm games live in Melbourne. So how does a low rating team generate more money for the NRL? By the time new teams come in the club grant will probably be $5m or $6m.....will a Perth team increase a TV deal by more than that? If not it is costing money. I'm not saying Perth isn't a good idea, but more for the idea of spreading the game, rather than increasing the value of the next tv deal.

 

[adamkungl]

Not a chance. Perth will cost money in the short term. The games will rate quite poorly in Perth just like all the other foreign clubs ie the Sydney Swans ratings in Sydney, Brisbane Lions ratings in Brisbane. They don't even bother showing Melbourne Storm games live in Melbourne. So how does a low rating team generate more money for the NRL? By the time new teams come in the club grant will probably be $5m or $6m.....will a Perth team increase a TV deal by more than that? If not it is costing money. I'm not saying Perth isn't a good idea, but more for the idea of spreading the game, rather than increasing the value of the next tv deal.

Perth is a definite. You'll see.

 

[Perth Red]

Not a chance. Perth will cost money in the short term. The games will rate quite poorly in Perth just like all the other foreign clubs ie the Sydney Swans ratings in Sydney, Brisbane Lions ratings in Brisbane. They don't even bother showing Melbourne Storm games live in Melbourne. So how does a low rating team generate more money for the NRL? By the time new teams come in the club grant will probably be $5m or $6m.....will a Perth team increase a TV deal by more than that? If not it is costing money. I'm not saying Perth isn't a good idea, but more for the idea of spreading the game, rather than increasing the value of the next tv deal.

no we won't - $4mill in sponsors already on the table, 15k+ paying fanbase from day one, potential 50-100k TV audience per game, live timeslot currently not available, adds another capital city viewing figures to Oztam ratings, provides greater national profile for sponsors in one of the most affluent places in the country. How is it going to cost the NRL money?

Maybe the reason they don;t show the Storm in Melbourne is because they are the largest viewed team on pay TV? Coincidence? I think not!

 

[bobmar28]

For mine Perth is the 'shoe in' or the one I would pick as the expansion team (new area, timeslot is excellent for a live game into the east coast on a saturday night)


it's the 2nd team that I can't split. So many +'s and -'s for both CC and Bris2. I sat down at lunchtime and went through both teams credentials on a piece of paper and it drove me nuts just how good both areas would be for the league, thank f**k it's not me making the decision as I would be having sleepless nights.

Just ask yourself which state needs a team most. The answer is QLD.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

:lol::lol::lol: The NRL have a long term vision and strategy:lol:

Now? No.

But you never know how the IC will turn out. They could surprise us all and actually start to develop plans for the medium and long term.

 

[lturner]

Perth is a definite. You'll see.

No doubt, I don't disagree.

no we won't - $4mill in sponsors already on the table, 15k+ paying fanbase from day one, potential 50-100k TV audience per game, live timeslot currently not available, adds another capital city viewing figures to Oztam ratings, provides greater national profile for sponsors in one of the most affluent places in the country. How is it going to cost the NRL money?

Maybe the reason they don;t show the Storm in Melbourne is because they are the largest viewed team on pay TV? Coincidence? I think not!

That's great and I think Perth would be a good idea. But I'm sure you are aware that the NRL pays the clubs money out of the general revenues from media rights. Do you think a Perth club will increase these revenues by more than they will be paid? Eventually yes it will pay off, but not in this next deal I would bet.