New Zealand 2 will deal a massive blow to NZ rugby

[Perth Red]

The NRL should tell them they will give a game to a FTA rival for free then…let’s see if Sky want to protect their “exclusive “ rights

And sky say, fine we'll reduce our value accordingly. whats NRl going to do then?
Telling someone who is paying for something that f they dont pay more you will give the product away for free is hardly a bargaining position lol

 

[Wb1234]

And sky say, fine we'll reduce our value accordingly. whats NRl going to do then?
Telling someone who is paying for something that f they dont pay more you will give the product away for free is hardly a bargaining position lol

This is nrl not super league

 

[Gobsmacked]

And sky say, fine we'll reduce our value accordingly. whats NRl going to do then?
Telling someone who is paying for something that f they dont pay more you will give the product away for free is hardly a bargaining position lol

That's because the bargaining position isn't with the NRL, it's with it's subscribers.
NRL is massive here, losing the NRL will see a big drop in subscription.
Another team in NZ only makes that an ever more pressing matter for Sky to keep it and those subscribers.

If the NRL put a bran new shiny club in NZ, it'll be the hottest ticket in the country! = Subscribers $$$
Losing that= losing $$$

The position at the bargaining table is knowing what you have.

 

[Perth Red]

That's because the bargaining position isn't with the NRL, it's with it's subscribers.
NRL is massive here, losing the NRL will see a big drop in subscription.
Another team in NZ only makes that an ever more pressing matter for Sky to keep it and those subscribers.

If the NRL put a bran new shiny club in NZ, it'll be the hottest ticket in the country! = Subscribers $$$
Losing that= losing $$$

The position at the bargaining table is knowing what you have.

True but Sky NZ arent stupid, they've been here before when there was no competition. NRL isnt going to walk away from $20-30mill a year becasue they cant get another $5-10mill out of them. They have no alternative.

In the situation where there is no competition why would Sky NZ pay more than they have to when they know NRL has no option but to accept the deal? I mean we saw exactly the same thing with Ch9 this tv deal.

 

[Gobsmacked]

True but Sky NZ arent stupid, they've been here before when there was no competition. NRL isnt going to walk away from $20-30mill a year becasue they cant get another $5-10mill out of them. They have no alternative.

In the situation where there is no competition why would Sky NZ pay more than they have to when they know NRL has no option but to accept the deal? I mean we saw exactly the same thing with Ch9 this tv deal.

Why not. You have to be prepared to walk if you're being low balled.
That's how negotiations work..
If the NRL walk - it goes fta and blows up even more!
Keep your 30 million- we'll move ahead captivating the entire country while you lose 40 million in subscribers.

 

[Perth Red]

Why not. You have to be prepared to walk if you're being low balled.
That's how negotiations work..
If the NRL walk - it goes fta and blows up even more!
Keep your 30 million- we'll move ahead captivating the entire country while you lose 40 million in subscribers.

But they wont be, it'll hurt NRL a lot more to lose $20-$30mill a year than it will Sky to lose 100k subscribers. Sky now this, NRL know this. But its all hypothetical until it happens.
NZ2 wont be club 18 by time next deal comes around so its a pointless debate really.

 

[Gobsmacked]

But they wont be, it'll hurt NRL a lot more to lose $20-$30mill a year than it will Sky to lose 100k subscribers.

No, it won't. Sky will lose it's credibility and $40 million in Subscribers.
NRL only lose possible $ 20 million as fta will still pay something and the NRL is beamed into every living room in the country...
It would be an investment.
Sky lose massively for the same reason fox pay a substantial sum without a competitor.

 

[Perth Red]

No, it won't. Sky will lose it's credibility and $40 million in Subscribers.
NRL only lose possible $ 20 million as fta will still pay something and the NRL is beamed into every living room in the country...
It would be an investment.
Sky lose massively for the same reason fox pay a substantial sum without a competitor.

History would say I’m right and you’re wrong in this one.

 

[Gobsmacked]

History would say I’m right and you’re wrong in this one.

Sky sign $30 million.
Since then the " up the wahs " movement has swept the country and NRL has gone mainstream..
With the introduction of a new exciting team in NZ...
You think they'll pay less?
If they under pay, it'll still be 50 million.
Good luck.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Politis and Gould are familiar with RL in SEQ? hahahah....

Considering the Bulldogs have links with Toowoomba and Gold Coast and both men are high ups in the game, they'd know a lot more than you and I

 

[Gobsmacked]

Considering the Bulldogs have links with Toowoomba and Gold Coast and both men are high ups in the game, they'd know a lot more than you and I

Gould couldn't have less of a clue about the average punter in SEQ .
All he knows is that on any given day that he's in Queensland, he could have a full stubby throw at his head.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

That's some brains trust. No history of ignorance, prejudice, bias, flipflopping based on what's best for their club/employer in the moment, total disregard for the best interest of the sport as a whole, etc, etc, amongst that lot at all... Next you'll be holding up Buzz Rothfield's opinion as a source of great wisdom lol.

Another Brisbane/SEQ team so soon makes zero sense whatsoever, and wouldn't be necessary at all if the NRL had anything approximating a half decent administration instead of a cult of personality.

Have you considered relocating one of the other Queensland clubs if a WC team is so crucial? Or the people of Brisbane could, you know, just support the pre-existing Brisbane suburban competition if that's the sort of product they'd prefer watch. Of course that's unthinkable in a sport where the National competition actually living up to it's name a foreign concept...

Can't disagree about the bias you talk about with those guys, but you be hard pressed to find anyone in RL that's a clean skin in that regard.

On the timing, I completely agree. I think SEQ can definitely support another team and it would be of great benefit to the game, but I'm happy for them to wait to be team 20 if needs be.

On relocation of another QLD NRL team, no. That would defeat the purpose od the exercise. You want to tread that fine line of growing into the future with the region without oversaturating. Broncos, Dolphins and WC could all exist and all draw over 20k averages at the same time which is a net gain in supporters and all three would be in the top 5 of the NRL in that regard

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Of course there is room, but we just saw the birth of one new SEQ team this season, lets not overcrowd the area with another one so soon... maybe 5-10 years, let the dolphins cement in further, the issue with the expansions in the late 90s was too many too soon, need to give some breathing space, go either to perth, nz or png then come back

I would be fine with them coming in as team 20 in a decade

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Gould couldn't have less of a clue about the average punter in SEQ .
All he knows is that on any given day that he's in Queensland, he could have a full stubby throw at his head.

Agreed about the punters, I was referring more to the links the Bulldogs have in SEQ and the fact that he has the ear of the higher ups in the game. He'd be in the know about RL in SEQ more than most club administrators

 

[BuffaloRules]

And sky say, fine we'll reduce our value accordingly. whats NRl going to do then?
Telling someone who is paying for something that f they dont pay more you will give the product away for free is hardly a bargaining position lol

So why even pay as much as they do then? Why not just pay the NRL $5m a year? $2m? ( I know they had competion the last time …. but that was a one off apparently)

I’m sure the NRL will have information about ratings …if they are going up then they deserve more money…

If it’s a subscription driver for Sky … are they prepared to lose some of these over a fair increase ? Cut off your nose to spite your face?

The goal posts seem to be moving over there … the last year for the Warriors was by far their most successful..

And if the NRL are ”giving it away for free” to a FTA channel … its a short term play to grow your market … to try to resolve an unfair deal might require short term pain in respect of the loss of dollars for long term gain

 

[Matua]

That's because the bargaining position isn't with the NRL, it's with it's subscribers.
NRL is massive here, losing the NRL will see a big drop in subscription.
Another team in NZ only makes that an ever more pressing matter for Sky to keep it and those subscribers.

If the NRL put a bran new shiny club in NZ, it'll be the hottest ticket in the country! = Subscribers $$$
Losing that= losing $$$

The position at the bargaining table is knowing what you have.

Sheesh, are we back to this again? The NRL is not massive for Sky, their most important subscriber base is rugby.

Yes, they want to keep the NRL subscribers and not lose the sport to another broadcaster (as we saw with Spark), but it doesn't drive the organisation.

Cool that you're living in Christchurch for 5 weeks (for work? Have you eaten at Benson's?) but you seem to have an odd takeaway of the relative size of the sports - especially considering a morning match in the RWC has been easily the most watched in the country this year.

Yes, lets have a NZ2, but keep the feet on the ground, it's not going to determine the success/failure of Sky. Let's also see if the Warriors can maintain the momentum next year (with Webster on board I'm more confident than not, but there's still the chance that George and the owner could tank everything).

 

[Gobsmacked]

Agreed about the punters, I was referring more to the links the Bulldogs have in SEQ and the fact that he has the ear of the higher ups in the game. He'd be in the know about RL in SEQ more than most club administrators

It's the potential supporter that is important for a new team- not his wheelhouse.

 

[Matua]

The goal posts seem to be moving over there … the last year for the Warriors was by far their most successful..

That's not really true, the early 2000s and 2011ish teams were better on the field, and as well supported/hyped off the field. The 1995 team were easily as hyped, probably more, than this year too.

You only have to look the period between Clearly leaving and Webster arriving to know that it's futile to make predications based on a single year.

I hope this is a real new beginning and we're finally going to become a top NRL side like we should, but I've been burn't too many times.

 

[BuffaloRules]

That's not really true, the early 2000s and 2011ish teams were better on the field, and as well supported/hyped off the field. The 1995 team were easily as hyped, probably more, than this year too.

You only have to look the period between Clearly leaving and Webster arriving to know that it's futile to make predications based on a single year.

I hope this is a real new beginning and we're finally going to become a top NRL side like we should, but I've been burn't too many times.

Record crowds this year wasn’t it?

Ive been around following them on this side of the puddle since their inception,,, and this year seemed like a new peak to me

 

[Wb1234]

That's because the bargaining position isn't with the NRL, it's with it's subscribers.
NRL is massive here, losing the NRL will see a big drop in subscription.
Another team in NZ only makes that an ever more pressing matter for Sky to keep it and those subscribers.

If the NRL put a bran new shiny club in NZ, it'll be the hottest ticket in the country! = Subscribers $$$
Losing that= losing $$$

The position at the bargaining table is knowing what you have.

It’s weird he’s going out of his way to find scenarios where rugby league would get less

if we want to pick holes at bids Perth is a literal sieve

i suspect rugby league ratings would’ve doubled this year in New Zealand

sky sports sponsored the kiwis

they are working as partners to grow rugby league

but they won’t want to invest in one of their top ratings sports