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!

Peter V'landys - New NRL/ARLC Chairman

The Penguin #6.

Juniors
Messages
485
Just saw this :

" the NRL returned a profit of $50million last year and a bigger profit this year. The total revenues are going up from $550million before COVID to $640million next year. This is the most revenue the NRL has achieved in its history."

I thought the figure being bandied around was $575m, that`s a big difference to $640m.
 
Messages
7,816
Just saw this :

" the NRL returned a profit of $50million last year and a bigger profit this year. The total revenues are going up from $550million before COVID to $640million next year. This is the most revenue the NRL has achieved in its history."

I thought the figure being bandied around was $575m, that`s a big difference to $640m.
It begs the question what was the revenue being spent on prior to COVID-19?

Where is the revenue being generated?

If the game is generating more revenue outside of broadcast rights than ever before then V'landys is the best chairman we've ever had. Pity he f**ked up the broadcast rights deals, but no one's perfect.

How much money is going towards the QRL, NSWRL and affiliated states?
 

The Penguin #6.

Juniors
Messages
485
It begs the question what was the revenue being spent on prior to COVID-19?

Where is the revenue being generated?

If the game is generating more revenue outside of broadcast rights than ever before then V'landys is the best chairman we've ever had. Pity he f**ked up the broadcast rights deals, but no one's perfect.

How much money is going towards the QRL, NSWRL and affiliated states?
Yeah that`s a mad jump. I`m positive the figure being quoted was $575m, to add another $ 65m is quite extra-ordinary especially as you say we haven`t heard any big announcements, apart from Westpac, regarding sponsorships. But as we know from the racing, increasing revenue streams is V`landy`s thing.
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
30,410
Just saw this :

" the NRL returned a profit of $50million last year and a bigger profit this year. The total revenues are going up from $550million before COVID to $640million next year. This is the most revenue the NRL has achieved in its history."

I thought the figure being bandied around was $575m, that`s a big difference to $640m.

Link?
 

The_Wookie

Juniors
Messages
1,720
Yeah that`s a mad jump. I`m positive the figure being quoted was $575m, to add another $ 65m is quite extra-ordinary especially as you say we haven`t heard any big announcements, apart from Westpac, regarding sponsorships. But as we know from the racing, increasing revenue streams is V`landy`s thing.

575m was last years revenue, To add to that, youve got increased broadcast revenue kicking in from next season, COVID reductions from the current deal ending, increased sponsorship revenues

aflnl total revenue.png
 

The Penguin #6.

Juniors
Messages
485
It was a tweet relayed by our mate Wookie from his SportsIndustry site.

" the NRL returned a profit of $50million last year and a bigger profit this year. The total revenues are going up from $550million before COVID to $640million next year. This is the most revenue the NRL has achieved in its history. " SportsIndustry.
 

The Penguin #6.

Juniors
Messages
485
575m was last years revenue, To add to that, youve got increased broadcast revenue kicking in from next season, COVID reductions from the current deal ending, increased sponsorship revenues

View attachment 68430
And if we get the broadcast deal stuff sorted we are hot on fumbleball`s tail. More monies for pre-season, more monies for internationals,18th team, proper value for NRL.
 

The_Wookie

Juniors
Messages
1,720
It was a tweet relayed by our mate Wookie from his SportsIndustry site.

" the NRL returned a profit of $50million last year and a bigger profit this year. The total revenues are going up from $550million before COVID to $640million next year. This is the most revenue the NRL has achieved in its history. " SportsIndustry.

Article the quote comes from was linked here before.

 
Messages
11,312
Yeh sure having five days turnaround maybe once or twice a season will lead to higher incidence of injury because well ????

since they did play mnf for years and diid have five day turnarounds you will have some actual evidence

Why is a five day turnaround some magical borderline when crossed the risk of injury skyrockets ?

and since the fumblers just agreed to play another round of afl guess by your argument the ur sports scientists don’t know what they are talking about ?

Oh please. Ask teams who have to play interstate or overseas and then back up in 5 days time in a different state or country how their re-hab and preparation goes. Players get bumps, bruises and strains all the time which, with 5 days of treatment, often see them fit to play. If you only have 5 days between games, and have to spend 1 day travelling, it means your 5 day winds up like this -

Day 1 - Travel home
Day 2 - Recovery
Days 3 + 4 - Training and prep for next game; and
Day 5 - Next game.

Only person disputing this is you mate. None of the clubs have, none of the players have, no other poster here has. It's not my job to comb thru hundreds of sports science websites to find research for you. If you can't comprehend what the issue is, then on this point there is no helping you.

Oh and by the way, as the clubs who regularly got the 5 days turn around pineapple (e.g. Cronulla, NZ Warriors, Knights) what it was like as opposed to teams like the Broncos which always seemed to get a 7 day turn around. Yeah getting that 7 day turn around never gave the Broncs any advantage eh? :rolleyes:

Oh and by the way, if you want to say that an AFL game has as much contact and physical contact as the NRL, then you have real issues mated. You've been listening to Perth Red too much. Also AFL games have unlimited interchange.

As I said, the only comparable sport with as much physical contact and collision is NFL, and as I repeat, they cut down the pre-season by 2 games so they could add 1 additional regular season game. Even then, and NFL team comprises 53 players, of whom only 11 are on the field at any one time and can be changed at will and unlimited number of times.

The NRL? Has a 17 player saquad with the 4 on the bench only allowed on and off on a limited basis. It doesn't take Einstein to work it out.

I'm not going to respond anymore on this as you refuse to heed anything at all. You sound as dogmatic as PR.

(edit: Fixed a typo.)
 
Last edited:
Messages
7,816
Yeah that`s a mad jump. I`m positive the figure being quoted was $575m, to add another $ 65m is quite extra-ordinary especially as you say we haven`t heard any big announcements, apart from Westpac, regarding sponsorships. But as we know from the racing, increasing revenue streams is V`landy`s thing.
I think V'landys has increased gambling revenue. There's also $20m from the new broadcast rights deal.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
53,672
Just saw this :

" the NRL returned a profit of $50million last year and a bigger profit this year. The total revenues are going up from $550million before COVID to $640million next year. This is the most revenue the NRL has achieved in its history."

I thought the figure being bandied around was $575m, that`s a big difference to $640m.
This year V next year maybe?
$22mill tv cash and contra extra (you also have to remember we never realised the full tv deal last time annually as ch9 paid $90mill up front)
Westpac $5mill
telstra $8mill in kind and contra
gambling ?
revenue from the hotel?
not sure I’ve heard any other increases.
SA are paying for origin again but no $’s mentioned.

expense wise we have $16mill plus for a new club and running costs of the hotel extra. Also an estimated $1-2mill to each of the other clubs.
hopefully they’ll return the missing $35mill to development and grassroots as well!


devils always in the detail!

hopefully we don’t have to give most of the surplus back to the players like this time!
 
Last edited:

Wb1234

First Grade
Messages
5,294
Oh please. Ask teams who have to play interstate or overseas and then back up in 5 days time in a different state or country how their re-hab and preparation goes. Players get bumps, bruises and strains all the time which, with 5 days of treatment, often see them fit to play. If you only have 5 days between games, and have to spend 1 day travelling, it means your 5 day winds up like this -

Day 1 - Travel home
Day 2 - Recovery
Days 3 + 4 - Training and prep for next game; and
Day 5 - Next game.

Only person disputing this is you mate. None of the clubs have, none of the players have, no other poster here has. It's not my job to comb thru hundreds of sports science websites to find research for you. If you can't comprehend what the issue is, then on this point there is no helping you.

Oh and by the way, as the clubs who regularly got the 5 days turn around pineapple (e.g. Cronulla, NZ Warriors, Knights) what it was like as opposed to teams like the Broncos which always seemed to get a 7 day turn around. Yeah getting that 87 day turn around never gave the Broncs any advantage eh? :rolleyes:

Oh and by the way, if you want to say that an AFL game has as much contact and physical contact as the NRL, then you have real issues mated. You've been listening to Perth Red too much. Also AFL games have unlimited interchange.

As I said, the only comparable sport with as much physical contact and collision is NFL, and as I repeat, they cut down the pre-season by 2 games so they could add 1 additional regular season game. Even then, and NFL team comprises 53 players, of whom only 11 are on the field at any one time and can be changed at will and unlimited number of times.

The NRL? Has a 17 player saquad with the 4 on the bench only allowed on and off on a limited basis. It doesn't take Einstein to work it out.

I'm not going to respond anymore on this as you refuse to heed anything at all. You sound as dogmatic as PR.
Like I said they had Monday night football for years

if there’s enough money on the table the clubs and players will jump at it

and the season is being extended from next year with regular internationals

I don’t see many players complaining about playing in the World Cup eating into their pre season

higher tv deals means the game has to offer more content to get a big increase

or we can be content having a big gap with afl
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
53,672
But according to some 'experts' on here TV money didn't go up
Like i said devils in the detail. it’s gone up $22 mill, of which somewhere between $5-10mill of that is contra. So at most $17mill cash, more likelly around $14-15mill cash.

Only problem is the new club is going to cost $15-16mill CASH. So in effect the new tv deal is delivering nothing extra cash wise when you take into account cost of the 17th club.
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
30,410
Like i said devils in the detail. it’s gone up $22 mill, of which somewhere between $5-10mill of that is contra. So at most $17mill cash, more likelly around $14-15mill cash.

Only problem is the new club is going to cost $15-16mill CASH. So in effect the new tv deal is delivering nothing extra cash wise when you take into account cost of the 17th club.

That's a really odd way to look at it.

Surely a new NRL club being fully funded is not "nothing extra" to the competition.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
53,672
That's a really odd way to look at it.

Surely a new NRL club being fully funded is not "nothing extra" to the competition.
No one has said the next tv deal isnt “more” Despite Iambacks claim.
I’m just pointing out that it isnt making the game any extra money once you take out the cost of expanding by a club. You’d have hoped brisbane2, which was allegedly what tv wanted and worth loads we’ve been hearing for years, had done better than just break even!
We haven’t had a tv deal that hasn’t delivered more cash after new expense before.
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
30,410
No one has said the next tv deal isnt “more” Despite Iambacks claim.
I’m just pointing out that it isnt making the game any extra money once you take out the cost of expanding by a club. You’d have hoped brisbane2, which was allegedly what tv wanted and worth loads we’ve been hearing for years, had done better than just break even!
We haven’t had a tv deal that hasn’t delivered more cash after new expense before.

Considering there hasn't been any extra content (games) created yet, I think being able to expand without any financial burden is a pretty good achievement.
 

Latest posts

Top