What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Next TV deal discussion 2028 -

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,378
It is worth something, it pays for advertising that the sport would otherwise have to buy. If it’s a genuine reflective value is debatable.
re afl they have announced the deal is worth $570mill cash avg A year. No need to worry about in kind or contra, we know the cash amount they are getting.
We dont know what the telstra deal is and what services they are offering to afl in the deal. Until we do it’s hard to say what value it has.
It’s bs

It’s like when the aru are saying they have made 20 million in free advertising from signing suaali lol

And what’s it really worth ? Both sides have an incentive to make the figure higher
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,458
It’s bs

It’s like when the aru are saying they have made 20 million in free advertising from signing suaali lol

And what’s it really worth ? Both sides have an incentive to make the figure higher
Are you saying nrl getting ads for origin, internationals, magic weekend, all stars, memberships, playing the game etc etc isnt of any value to the nrl?
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,378
Are you saying nrl getting ads for origin, internationals, magic weekend, all stars, memberships, playing the game etc etc isnt of any value to the nrl?
Contra value is bs

It’s not worth the paper it’s written on

It’s used so sports can brag about large tv deals

Only figure that matters is cash paid
 

Iamback

Referee
Messages
20,248
Contra sits as a revenue and an expense to give it a net zero at the bottom line. It’s a weird weird way of accounting for it But as it is in fact an in kind not a cash value that’s how they deal with it.

as for the missing $50mill. How do you explain the gap between the announced deal and the actual reported revenue?

The betting TV and so on section last report had $490m

last I checked that was more than $400m as reported.

That also is in year 1 of the TV deal and jumped up $80m from the year before.

Which you would expect from a new TV taking over.

So the figures show it can be possible for that figure to be as the NRL said.

The players share was based on the projected revenue. If the NRL said the same thing at over $400m a year for 5 years and that was an average then that would make year 1 just over $350m.

On $600m revenue projected that is 8% missing. IF that was the case you can bet Clint Newton would be telling everyone about it.

As would Blake Solly and some of the other outspoken clubs.

So why the NRL can keep things quiet internally their books go to the stake holders and they haven't been afraid in the past to speak up. I can't see them doing it in this case either
 

Iamback

Referee
Messages
20,248
Over the past five years not even that

Their deal has fallen in real terms

Edit nah your right inflation went up around 14 percent of the same period

There are a few outliers. NFL and NBA being the big ones to buck the trend but even they are adding value to their deals to justify raises

Most sports aren't really getting huge increases
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,378
There are a few outliers. NFL and NBA being the big ones to buck the trend but even they are adding value to their deals to justify raises

Most sports aren't really getting huge increases
Wonder how much inflation only increases from 2021 to 2027 would yield for the nrl ?

Got to be over 15 to 20 percent
 

Latest posts

Top