Next TV deal discussion 2028 -

[Perth Red]

For me I don't see if having any chance to betting habits, For the actual punter there is no change.

Really is only hurting TV and the clubs.

I'd be fine with it if it was as part of some other policy, For example can only have an active account with 1 agency. Without that it makes sense

Are you saying you don't believe advertising works? With over $675billionUS spent on advertising a year globally it would seem most disagree with you!

 

[Chief_Chujo]

For me I don't see if having any chance to betting habits, For the actual punter there is no change.

Really is only hurting TV and the clubs.

I'd be fine with it if it was as part of some other policy, For example can only have an active account with 1 agency. Without that it makes sense

It not about adult gamblers, more about not normalising it for kids. Same reason we banned durry ads.

 

[Pneuma]

It not about adult gamblers, more about not normalising it for kids. Same reason we banned durry ads.

The success of which can be seen by the level of vaping in the under 18 cohort ……..

 

[Chief_Chujo]

The success of which can be seen by the level of vaping in the under 18 cohort ……..

vaping != smoking

 

[Iamback]

It not about adult gamblers, more about not normalising it for kids. Same reason we banned durry ads.

Yet. You go on the AFL or NRL site and get odds.

Not to mention social media advertisement will be left out of any legisation

As for durry ads, Was it banning the ads or taxing them heavily that had the affect?

 

[Iamback]

The success of which can be seen by the level of vaping in the under 18 cohort ……..

Yep because it is cheaper than cigarettes

 

[Perth Red]

Yet. You go on the AFL or NRL site and get odds.

Not to mention social media advertisement will be left out of any legisation

As for durry ads, Was it banning the ads or taxing them heavily that had the affect?

Combination of increasing cost, removing normalising by banning advertising and making it socially unacceptable by banning it in public spaces.

when I was a kid in uk the only gambling you saw was a bookies in the high street with blacked out windows. Always seemed a really seedy and secretive thing. Now it’s so in your face. Anything they can do to reduce people betting has to be a good thing when you look at the staggering amount of money people pss away in this country.

back on topic though won’t make a blind bit of difference to tv value. Something will always replace the gambling ads.

 

[Pneuma]

Yep because it is cheaper than cigarettes

Yep banning things weally twuly works don it?

 

[Iamback]

Yep banning things weally twuly works don it?

Yep why have something in the open that can be watched and regulated. Lets just drive it underground

 

[Perth Red]

Yep why have something in the open that can be watched and regulated. Lets just drive it underground

Bit strawman, no one’s suggesting banning it, just don’t promote it and don’t normalise it. Only so much society can do to prevent people’s stupidity, but doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be doing anything.

 

[Iamback]

Bit strawman, no one’s suggesting banning it, just don’t promote it and don’t normalise it. Only so much society can do to prevent people’s stupidity, but doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be doing anything.

It only said TV in that article. Facebook and Twitter feeds will still be filled with it.

Again hit the problem gamblers. Nothing stopping multiple accounts across various betting companies.

 

[Chief_Chujo]

Yet. You go on the AFL or NRL site and get odds.

Not to mention social media advertisement will be left out of any legisation

As for durry ads, Was it banning the ads or taxing them heavily that had the affect?

Someone going to the website isn't the same as being bombarded with betting options while you're watching.

As to durry ads I can only comment anecdotally. I grew up in the 80s where it was the norm and by the time I was in my 20s it was being looked at as a filthy habit. Cost had nothing to do with that.

 

[Iamback]

Combination of increasing cost, removing normalising by banning advertising and making it socially unacceptable by banning it in public spaces.

when I was a kid in uk the only gambling you saw was a bookies in the high street with blacked out windows. Always seemed a really seedy and secretive thing. Now it’s so in your face. Anything they can do to reduce people betting has to be a good thing when you look at the staggering amount of money people pss away in this country.

back on topic though won’t make a blind bit of difference to tv value. Something will always replace the gambling ads.

Like what? Advertisers aren't exactly being knocked back.

Then the nanny staters will start on fast food or something

 

[Iamback]

Someone going to the website isn't the same as being bombarded with betting options while you're watching.

As to durry ads I can only comment anecdotally. I grew up in the 80s where it was the norm and by the time I was in my 20s it was being looked at as a filthy habit. Cost had nothing to do with that.

Yep and problem gamblers are left to go as they are now,

Teens will see x team paying good odds online and go bet. As they spend more time on line than watching tv

 

[Chief_Chujo]

Yep and problem gamblers are left to go as they are now,

Teens will see x team paying good odds online and go bet. As they spend more time on line than watching tv

Do you have anything to back that up? Restrictions on tobacco advertising have displayed clear results. Why would gambling be any different?

 

[Iamback]

Do you have anything to back that up? Restrictions on tobacco advertising have displayed clear results. Why would gambling be any different?

Because banning the ads was only part of it, Price, banning it in certain areas too.

Did you read the article?
It says gambling companies would still be able to sponsor teams.

So I will be able to go to Bluebet Stadium or Pointsbet stadium, Watch Cowboys with TAB on the jerseys

Log on to NRL.com and check the ladder along side it is the odds of a team to win the comp.

Yet because I am not flooded with ads on TV. Gambling won't be cool?

That is the stupidity of this sort of thing

 

[Perth Red]

Because banning the ads was only part of it, Price, banning it in certain areas too.

Did you read the article?
It says gambling companies would still be able to sponsor teams.

So I will be able to go to Bluebet Stadium or Pointsbet stadium, Watch Cowboys with TAB on the jerseys

Log on to NRL.com and check the ladder along side it is the odds of a team to win the comp.

Yet because I am not flooded with ads on TV. Gambling won't be cool?

That is the stupidity of this sort of thing

Thin edge, eventually that will happen as well. Gambling is so ingrained here and they will have to nudge it out rather than take a
Sledge hammer to it. Smoking was no different, was many many years of changes Before we finally got to this point

 

[Wb1234]

 

[Wb1234]

This looks like a super result from a few years back and even sky wanting to drop it

I was telling the poms 15 years ago they needed every game on tv like the nrl

currently super league games are being shown in awful slots lie Thursday night

more games on free to air (channel four) will grow the game

exposure is more important than money rn

 

[Wb1234]

EXCLUSIVE: TNT Sport make a shock bid for Super League TV rights

EXCLUSIVE BY MATT HUGHES: Rugby League officials are understood to have been disappointed by Sky Sports' offer, which is believed to be similar to the £25million-a-year they are currently paying.

www.dailymail.co.uk