Agreed the tv eyes are really still poor for AFL in NSW and Qland and it makes the Fox deal seem even more incredible really.
Has their investment been worth it in terms of A) growing a decent presence in non AFL states B) Developing fanbases in those regions C) feeding into the long term strategic goal to be "seen" as Australia's game?
Yep absolutely. Whilst we have sat on our hands since the SL debacle killed expansion of RL ,AFL has continued to push out. You can argue they haven't got many people watching on TV but that doesn't seem to have mattered what iota to their TV deals. Sometimes perception is far more valuable than reality.
In regards to every thing else ie members, attendances, registered players, development officers, jnr programmes etc be honest, if we were even remotely close to their figures in these areas in Vic, SA and WA we would be very happy and rightly challenging that RL is the national game. The inactivity to develop non RL states is a blight on the games administration, first Gallop and now Smith.
That's a massive roll of the dice by the NRL. What if the expected subscriber drop off isn't as bad as Fox feared? Fox could look at it and go well we don't need NRL after all and just push for AFL to be the dominant game over the next few decades. We are basing our argument on a supposition that Fox will lose a large % of subscribers in NSW and Qland without NRL. I wonder if either party have done market research to determine what this looks like? I guess we will know when the deal or no deal comes out.
It just proves that you don't know much about Sydney, nor Qld for that matter. The GWS Giants have little popularity in Sydney let alone NSW. Their crows are poor, they do not rate well on TV, be it free to air nor pay TV. The Sydney Swans get good crowds, granted, but they do not rate well on TV in Sydney on free to air or Pay TV. As such the AFL can throw as much money as they want at Sydney, but Sydney siders are not going to change to AFL despite it mate. It is not an AFL town. I've lived here all my life so I have some idea what I'm talking about (as do others).
As to subscriber churn, which you constantly seem to be saying "it won't happen if Foxtel don't have any NRL rights" is not based on reality. Facts are NRL matches are amongst Foxtel's highest rating shows bar none. That is not over 1 year but has been consistent over the nigh on 17 years they have the NRL rights. Further there are more people who subscribe for sport because of the NRL as opposed to the AFL as the NRL only have 2 game on FTA per week. If you do a bit of searching you will find quotes from Fox execs saying how important the NRL is for their subscriber base.
Consequently it is not as much a risk as you make out. Fact is Fox have underpaid the rights for years. It was the cost paid to end the SL War, a war they started for the said rights to drive Foxtel subscriptions. It stuffed expansion completely. So don't blame the NRL for what News did by "not expanding". They've spent their time trying to repair the damage and get out from under News' thumb. Also you seem to ignore the role News Ltd had in the makeup of the game's administration - they controlled the purse strings. So if you have a problem with the non-expansion of rl, take it up with Mr Murdoch's team.
Finally if you think that people in Sydney, Wollongong, Newcastle, Brisbane, Canberra, Townsville who love league and who subscribe to Foxtel for their NRL (of which there are very many) will all of a sudden switch over to watch AFL cause of News Ltd's advertising then you really are a dope. People are not sheep.
