Peter V'landys - New NRL/ARLC Chairman

[Iamback]

Safe to say it is mammoth. Unless you are thinking that fumbleball are getting $150 -$200 million in contra?

All we know is ch7 is paying $170m a year. What the breakdown is we don't know

 

[Colk]

All we know is ch7 is paying $170m a year. What the breakdown is we don't know

So you’re applauding V’Landys for holding back on what the game has earned from this deal but at the time demanding that fumbleball release everything. You do realise the cognitive dissonance in that.

Also, however you want to slice or dice it, the headline figure is $640 million and ours is what closer to $400 million. They win. Easily.

 

[Iamback]

So you’re applauding V’Landys for holding back on what the game has earned from this deal but at the time demanding that fumbleball release everything. You do realise the cognitive dissonance in that.

Also, however you want to slice or dice it, the headline figure is $640 million and ours is what closer to $400 million. They win. Easily.

Where did I say AFL should release it?

But you can't say NRL got undersold as you and others are claiming without knowing the breakdown

So Fox is paying $470m? We both know they aren't. Hence why you can't use the headline figures and need the actual figures...Which we don't get

 

[Colk]

Where did I say AFL should release it?

But you can't say NRL got undersold as you and others are claiming without knowing the breakdown

So Fox is paying $470m? We both know they aren't. Hence why you can't use the headline figures and need the actual figures...Which we don't get

But the argument is pedantry though isn’t it? There are countless reports suggesting that the NRL is around a certain figure (what around early $400 odd million including contra) whilst AFL’s is about $640 odd million including contra per year.

Even if we were to exclude Telstra from the deal, the laws of probability states that it is most likely that they are getting paid a very great deal more than what we are now. That’s all that matters doesn’t it?

I’d be more worried about why that is the case and how it happened and criticising that (mainly because fumbleball conducted their negotiations in the proper fashion whilst we gave away our rights during a pandemic because Pay would catch a cold otherwise) rather than hopelessly looking at some finer detail that will shed your man in a greater light.

You can admit that he made a mistake and f***** up when it is so plainly obvious.

 

[Iamback]

But the argument is pedantry though isn’t it? There are countless reports suggesting that the NRL is around a certain figure (what around early $400 odd million including contra) whilst AFL’s is about $640 odd million including contra per year.

Even if we were to exclude Telstra from the deal, the laws of probability states that it is most likely that they are getting paid a very great deal more than what we are now. That’s all that matters doesn’t it?

I’d be more worried about why that is the case and how it happened and criticising that (mainly because fumbleball conducted their negotiations in the proper fashion whilst we gave away our rights during a pandemic because Pay would catch a cold otherwise) rather than hopelessly looking at some finer detail that will shed your man in a greater light.

You can admit that he made a mistake and f***** up when it is so plainly obvious.

Again though does the $400m count the extra $20m a year for Dolphins? So this is why you can't make accurate comparisons there are too many unknowns, What matters is growth and profit and loss.

I have listed earlier in this thread why there will be a difference in the deals, However until we know what the Breakdown is we can't discuss if the difference is due to The NRL dropping the ball or the National reach, Length of games etc of AFL.

 

[Pink Panther]

Peter is very accommodating to the homosexual community and for that we thank him for his inclusiveness

 

[Pink Panther]

But the argument is pedantry though isn’t it? There are countless reports suggesting that the NRL is around a certain figure (what around early $400 odd million including contra) whilst AFL’s is about $640 odd million including contra per year.

Even if we were to exclude Telstra from the deal, the laws of probability states that it is most likely that they are getting paid a very great deal more than what we are now. That’s all that matters doesn’t it?

I’d be more worried about why that is the case and how it happened and criticising that (mainly because fumbleball conducted their negotiations in the proper fashion whilst we gave away our rights during a pandemic because Pay would catch a cold otherwise) rather than hopelessly looking at some finer detail that will shed your man in a greater light.

You can admit that he made a mistake and f***** up when it is so plainly obvious.

The AFL is a longer game with more natual stoppages for commercial breaks so naturally it will attract more $$$$$ in its contract
The viewing audience for AFL and NRL is about the same

 

[Iamback]

The AFL is a longer game with more natual stoppages for commercial breaks so naturally it will attract more $$$$$ in its contract
The viewing audience for AFL and NRL is about the same

and has all capital cities too.

 

[MugaB]

But the argument is pedantry though isn’t it? There are countless reports suggesting that the NRL is around a certain figure (what around early $400 odd million including contra) whilst AFL’s is about $640 odd million including contra per year.

Even if we were to exclude Telstra from the deal, the laws of probability states that it is most likely that they are getting paid a very great deal more than what we are now. That’s all that matters doesn’t it?

I’d be more worried about why that is the case and how it happened and criticising that (mainly because fumbleball conducted their negotiations in the proper fashion whilst we gave away our rights during a pandemic because Pay would catch a cold otherwise) rather than hopelessly looking at some finer detail that will shed your man in a greater light.

You can admit that he made a mistake and f***** up when it is so plainly obvious.

Again regardless of the amount, are they (the ALF) worth more per game than an NRL game, signing songs of saint peter f**king up solves nothing if all you're doing is comparing oranges with apples... and sounding worse than PR when he talks about crowd figures or stacks on regarding any other option for expansion but perth... as much as i read the news regardless of where its coming from, the sports are built differently, and both require different costs... not to mention this was done now, when NRL did there's a few years back. And can up it further when a 9th game can be available

 

[Colk]

Again though does the $400m count the extra $20m a year for Dolphins? So this is why you can't make accurate comparisons there are too many unknowns, What matters is growth and profit and loss.

I have listed earlier in this thread why there will be a difference in the deals, However until we know what the Breakdown is we can't discuss if the difference is due to The NRL dropping the ball or the National reach, Length of games etc of AFL.

Mate who cares if there is an extra $20 million on top for the Dolphins or not (although if there isn’t then that it is even more an argument for negligence or that he is a News Ltd toad)

Only somebody who is completely deluded or unable or unwilling to accept the truth could be trying to argue the merits of a business deal that is $150 - 200 million deal less than our competitor in a market that is as small as Australia.

Just give it up and stop trying to defend him. It is clear and obvious to anybody with any common sense that he way he ‘negotiated’ (I’ll use the term pejoratively here) would mean that he left money on the table. Seriously if you roll over a contract, don’t put it out to tender, negotiate during a pandemic and demand nothing in return that it is probably not a good way to do business.

Also ask yourself a simple question: do you think that the AFL is worth $200 million or thereabouts more than the NRL considering ratings and available data. If the answer is no, then the way the deals were negotiated plays a role

 

[Iamback]

Mate who cares if there is an extra $20 million on top for the Dolphins or not (although if there isn’t then that it is even more an argument for negligence or that he is a News Ltd toad)

Only somebody who is completely deluded or unable or unwilling to accept the truth could be trying to argue the merits of a business deal that is $150 - 200 million deal less than our competitor in a market that is as small as Australia.

Just give it up and stop trying to defend him. It is clear and obvious to anybody with any common sense that he way he ‘negotiated’ (I’ll use the term pejoratively here) would mean that he left money on the table. Seriously if you roll over a contract, don’t put it out to tender, negotiate during a pandemic and demand nothing in return that it is probably not a good way to do business.

Also ask yourself a simple question: do you think that the AFL is worth $200 million or thereabouts more than the NRL considering ratings and available data. If the answer is no, then the way the deals were negotiated plays a role

Because it makes the deal $420m not $400...Again if you want to whinge the deal is a shit deal for NRL then you need the actual figures

But it isn't $200m different though. You can't tell me if it is $400m or $420m for the NRL for starters.

Channel 7 has declared they are paying $170m.

Yes or no do you believe Fox Sports is paying $470m for a sport that runs for 30 weeks?

 

[Colk]

Again regardless of the amount, are they (the ALF) worth more per game than an NRL game, signing songs of saint peter f**king up solves nothing if all you're doing is comparing oranges with apples... and sounding worse than PR when he talks about crowd figures or stacks on regarding any other option for expansion but perth... as much as i read the news regardless of where its coming from, the sports are built differently, and both require different costs... not to mention this was done now, when NRL did there's a few years back. And can up it further when a 9th game can be available

You seem to be agreeing with me though Mugab even if you don’t think so. If you are of the opinion, like I, that fumbleball’s deal shouldn’t be worth some $200 million dollars per annum more than RL (to be fair only the most fumbleballer would argue that line) then what natural conclusion can be drawn from that?

If their deal was some 10% or more (taking into the fact that their game is longer and they have teams in every capital city) then people would begrudgingly accept it. But that’s not the difference is it?

 

[Steel Saints]

and has all capital cities too.

Yes, and NRL has origin and a team in NZ.

 

[Colk]

Because it makes the deal $420m not $400...Again if you want to whinge the deal is a shit deal for NRL then you need the actual figures

But it isn't $200m different though. You can't tell me if it is $400m or $420m for the NRL for starters.

Channel 7 has declared they are paying $170m.

Yes or no do you believe Fox Sports is paying $470m for a sport that runs for 30 weeks?

Ok it might not be $200 million. But again this is a pedantry argument. Would you agree that it is at least a lot more. Unless, you are arguing of course that it is some grand conspiracy and that NRL have either declared that they have a struck a deal that in reality is a lot more than is reported or that fumbleball are also lying and it is a lot less than reported. You’re talking absolute nonsense and you’re smarter than that.

If it is not $470 million then it might be close. It might be $350 million or it might be $400 million. Nobody knows the exact amount but in any case, who cares because the probability is that it is a lot more then they are paying our game. Also, you don’t get any particular prizes or kudos m based on what media partner you get the money from, all that matters is what you actually get.

Also you are arguing like there isn’t precedence for this? Fumbleball have extracted more from Foxtel in pretty much every TV deal, sometimes a lot more. Again, you should ask yourself why that is the case?

 

[Iamback]

Yes, and NRL has origin and a team in NZ.

This is true. Lets compare what we know the FTA figures, Then we can discuss good or bad deal

NRL gets $130m
AFL deal starting in 2025 $170m

Both Sports get 3 games

NRL being 80 mins x 3 is 240mins of content
AFL 120mins x 3 is 360mins of content

NRL rates almost nothing outside of QLD and NSW, Melbourne is hit and miss but we will count them for this discussion.

Ch 7 is able to sell to advertisers as per 5 capital city. Compared to ch9 3

What Origin is worth is the unknown in this

 

[Colk]

The AFL is a longer game with more natual stoppages for commercial breaks so naturally it will attract more $$$$$ in its contract
The viewing audience for AFL and NRL is about the same

Exactly. As I said taking everything into account, but also bearing in mind that we have outside of competition aspects like SOO and internationals, you could begrudgingly accept that their deal would be higher. You would/should never accept that there should be a 30, 40 or even 50% difference between the deals, should you?

 

[Colk]

This is true. Lets compare what we know the FTA figures, Then we can discuss good or bad deal

NRL gets $130m
AFL deal starting in 2025 $170m

Both Sports get 3 games

NRL being 80 mins x 3 is 240mins of content
AFL 120mins x 3 is 360mins of content

NRL rates almost nothing outside of QLD and NSW, Melbourne is hit and miss but we will count them for this discussion.

Ch 7 is able to sell to advertisers as per 5 capital city. Compared to ch9 3

What Origin is worth is the unknown in this

Yeah let’s just ignore the headline figures shall we. After a while, it becomes risible and somewhat self-defeating doesn’t it.

Also, you have stated on numerous occasions that the fact the metro reach of fumbleball has played a role, yet in other posts we shouldn’t follow suit? Also, as other posters (in other threads/posts) have correctly pointed out, fumbleball doesn’t rate well in NSW/QLD, yet now you’re not mentioning this?

You can go through as many semantics or finer details as you want - they have got a good deal, we comparatively haven’t.

 

[Iamback]

Ok it might not be $200 million. But again this is a pedantry argument. Would you agree that it is at least a lot more. Unless, you are arguing of course that it is some grand conspiracy and that NRL have either declared that they have a struck a deal that in reality is a lot more than is reported or that fumbleball are also lying and it is a lot less than reported. You’re talking absolute nonsense and you’re smarter than that.

If it is not $470 million then it might be close. It might be $350 million or it might be $400 million. Nobody knows the exact amount but in any case, who cares because the probability is that it is a lot more then they are paying our game. Also, you don’t get any particular prizes or kudos m based on what media partner you get the money from, all that matters is what you actually get.

Also you are arguing like there isn’t precedence for this? Fumbleball have extracted more from Foxtel in pretty much every TV deal, sometimes a lot more. Again, you should ask yourself why that is the case?

The numbers pushed around is $550m TV AFL. Rest Telstra
$130m FTA for NRL. $300m Fox/Sky (that would count the $20m for Dolphins)

$120m difference

NRL 8 games x 80mins = 640mins content
AFL 9 games x 120mins = 1080 mins content

AFL 198 games ( Regular Season ) x 120 mins = 23,760 mins
NRL 204 ( with 17 teams) x 80 mins = 16,320 mins

AFL 198 games play quarters = 792 stoppages
NRL 204 games play halves = 408 stoppages

There is also Origin left off here

So on minutes alone AFL has effectively 93 NRL games of extra content

Almost double the stoppages

Discuss

 

[Colk]

The numbers pushed around is $550m TV AFL. Rest Telstra
$130m FTA for NRL. $300m Fox/Sky (that would count the $20m for Dolphins)

$120m difference

NRL 8 games x 80mins = 640mins content
AFL 9 games x 120mins = 1080 mins content

AFL 198 games ( Regular Season ) x 120 mins = 23,760 mins
NRL 204 ( with 17 teams) x 80 mins = 16,320 mins

AFL 198 games play quarters = 792 stoppages
NRL 204 games play halves = 408 stoppages

There is also Origin left off here

So on minutes alone AFL has effectively 93 NRL games of extra content

Almost double the stoppages

Discuss

So? The situation hasn’t changed for how many years - they have always had longer games. Also they have had 18 teams for how long? More than 10 years? They have also had a national competition for what 30 years now? You can’t all of a sudden use these arguments if you’re being genuine, otherwise they would have always had deals 30% or more than what we have achieved in the last 30 years.

Anyway the game can fix some of these things if they wanted to - obviously they can’t fix the length of their games realistically but they can go to 18 or 20 teams if they wanted or put teams in all of the metro markets, if you are considering these as significant factors. There is nothing stopping the game from planning or doing these things, other than myopia.

Also look at the ratings. You and other posters keep talking about how League games rate as well or even better or how fumbleball doesn’t rate in NSW and Qld. Do these things no longer matter.

They have offered no new content. All they have done is frame their schedules in a similar way. We on the other hand have offered a new side and given in to broadcasters on a lot of things. Compare the percentage increase of both deals and how they conducted their negotiations and discuss that

 

[MugaB]

You seem to be agreeing with me though Mugab even if you don’t think so. If you are of the opinion, like I, that fumbleball’s deal shouldn’t be worth some $200 million dollars per annum more than RL (to be fair only the most fumbleballer would argue that line) then what natural conclusion can be drawn from that?

If their deal was some 10% or more (taking into the fact that their game is longer and they have teams in every capital city) then people would begrudgingly accept it. But that’s not the difference is it?

Let's put both games in perspective, regardless of what is personally getting paid to each player from both codes... there is 44 1st grade players playing at every single AFL match every week times by 9 games, then add 42 AFLW players playing 9 games aswell
So thats 396 + 378 = 744 AFL playing talent every week being put on show, 18 games of content per week, (albeit aflw goes for 10 rounds) for the AFL/W season
flip side for NRL they just meet half of that...
NRL has 16 teams, NRLW 6 teams
17 players on each team, times by 8 games for mens, and 3 games for womens
17× 16 = 272, and 17x 6 = 102, that totals to only 374 playing talent for their respective seasons,
Add in grants, staff salary, travel cost, etc which could be the same amount for each code, the biggest takeaway is that AFL have double the amount of players on field per season comparing to the NRL