The TV rights thread part II

[El Diablo]

this bloke is a nut http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=22926569&postcount=55

3. TV execs know the value of AFL games and the value of nrl games and they know how rubbery some figures can be. They're good for bluffing the clients but when there's no crowd at the games you can bet there's not much TV viewing either despite what the companies say about the couple of people pushing the buttons on the black boxes .

:lol:

so TV stations buy rights based on attendances, not ratings

:crazy:

 

[Rockin Ronny]

this bloke is a nut
so TV stations buy rights based on attendances, not ratings

:crazy:

Hold on - how can we knock the AFL when they get TV deals pumping hundreds of millions of dollars more into their game than ours?

TV/media companies writing big cheques aren't idiots. There are clear reasons apparently why they keep getting bigger deals than rugby league.

"Ratings" number are a little like NRL crowd numbers a few years ago. Remember when it was exposed that crowd numbers were being jacked up and were just bullshit. Well, maybe the same applies to TV "ratings" because evidence shows that rugby league isn't rated as highly for dollar value as AFL.

So - seems a bit dumb knocking the AFL when they smash the NRL for getting $$$$ into their game.

 

[Rockin Ronny]

The difference is that Gallop has been answering to News Ltd, when the IC hits he'll be answering to them..

If he f**ks the TV rights up, he'll be looking for a new job.

Let's be honest here:

Gallop was appointed by News Limited many years ago. He has added nothing. Worse, he has talked up AFL and other codes many time. He presided over an appalling TV rights deal when dealing with his ex-employer. He has introduced no proactive improvements to the game or strategic initiatives to improve the game. He simply comes out and makes nothing motherhood statements which neither commit him to action or for which he might be accountable.

The game always improves and grows naturally - because there is a large core fan base and it goes well on TV. Gallop has added absolutely nothing in this regard. He is a seatwarmer focussed on covering his @rse paid hundreds of thousands of dollars with zero accountability. he contributes NOTHING to this game.

So - accepting the above (which is pretty obvious) - why the f**k is he CEO of what is supposed to be an independent game?

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

Hold on - how can we knock the AFL when they get TV deals pumping hundreds of millions of dollars more into their game than ours?

TV/media companies writing big cheques aren't idiots. There are clear reasons apparently why they keep getting bigger deals than rugby league.

"Ratings" number are a little like NRL crowd numbers a few years ago. Remember when it was exposed that crowd numbers were being jacked up and were just bullshit. Well, maybe the same applies to TV "ratings" because evidence shows that rugby league isn't rated as highly for dollar value as AFL.

So - seems a bit dumb knocking the AFL when they smash the NRL for getting $$$$ into their game.

AFL hasn't had their half owner news limited sitting at both ends of the negotiating table selling the game to themselves on the cheap to make a damn profit has it?

 

[El Diablo]

so you agree with him that TV networks ignore ratings numbers and go off crowd stats when they decide how much will they pay?

you're as stupid as he is

he only says that because he claims the NRL rig the ratings btw

 

[Rockin Ronny]

so you agree with him that TV networks ignore ratings numbers and go off crowd stats when they decide how much will they pay?

you're as stupid as he is

he only says that because he claims the NRL rig the ratings btw

Who's stupid? they obviously base their valuation on something - and it seems AFL is more attractive than the NRL.

AFL get TV rights deals which gives them hundreds of millions of dollars more to grow their game.

Rugby league - We say "let's get independent" and then retain the News Limited lackey as CEO - just when TV rights are about to be negotiated.

No wonder this game has basically stayed static for 100= years.

 

[El Diablo]

Who's stupid?

answer the question

do you agree with him that TV Networks totally ignore ratings and go off crowd figures?

it's not hard

yes or no

 

[Raiderdave]

Who's stupid? they obviously base their valuation on something - and it seems AFL is more attractive than the NRL.

AFL get TV rights deals which gives them hundreds of millions of dollars more to grow their game.

Rugby league - We say "let's get independent" and then retain the News Limited lackey as CEO - just when TV rights are about to be negotiated.

No wonder this game has basically stayed static for 100= years.

cough ** idiot ** cough :sarcasm:

 

[Perth Red]

1. TV figures are statistically speaking bullox!
2. News owning NRL doesn't explain why Telstra and Ch9 also paid unders compared to AFL's FTA, internet and naming rights
3. Perception of popularity does influence advertisors imo and tbf 90K in the MCG makes AFL look a heck of a lot more popular than 15K in the SFS. Not to mention differing levels of media and news coverage, aggressive expansion, national profile etc that all contribute to perception of popularity.

We have a lot of ground to make up (around $900million in fact!) but we have the product to do it, we just need the leadership and vision now.

 

[El Diablo]

1. TV figures are statistically speaking bullox!

another nut

TV networks set advertising rates of ratings you idiot

 

[Perth Red]

Have you seen the sample size? Have you seen how in a population like WA's of 2mill even a very small sample differential can be extrapolated to show a massive viewing variance? As I said the sample size is so small across a pop of 22mill that to suggest you can get accurate extrapolation figures within a 100k accuracy is dumb.

I know they use these ratings to set advertising rates generally (although they also state they use economic income and income flexibility of likely viewing audience as well) but that doesn;t make the figures accurate!

Of course we love them as they show we are more popular, when that translates to us earning more $'s than AFL than I will get excited by viewing figures!

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

Oh well, no team for Perth then eh?

 

[Perth Red]

not getting any brighter I see Parra

nah all I need to do is find out the 500 households with a box, get 1/2 of them to tune into NRL at midnight on a Sunday and wow we have 1million viewers in Perth watching NRL! Expansion would be a dead cert!, no need for the efforts of the bid team!

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

not getting any brighter I see Parra

Well according to you, the statistics don't back anything up, so we may as well scrap Perth now, they don't get crowds either if you look at the overall population.

 

[Perth Red]

1% of the population attending isn't bad going, if it was reflected elsewhere in the NRL we wouldn't be having the discussion about clubs going broke!

 

[El Diablo]

Have you seen the sample size? Have you seen how in a population like WA's of 2mill even a very small sample differential can be extrapolated to show a massive viewing variance? As I said the sample size is so small across a pop of 22mill that to suggest you can get accurate extrapolation figures within a 100k accuracy is dumb.

I know they use these ratings to set advertising rates generally (although they also state they use economic income and income flexibility of likely viewing audience as well) but that doesn;t make the figures accurate!

Of course we love them as they show we are more popular, when that translates to us earning more $'s than AFL than I will get excited by viewing figures!

confirmed idiot

 

[CC_Roosters]

I hate the fact that numerous pundits seem to think that its up to the tv stations whether we have a fixed schedule as if it belongs to them. Its the NRL's intelectual property to sell or adjust pending on how they want the media contracts to look.

TK in particular is being a total nein knob over it but that is to be expected i guess.

I am no longer confident the much mooted $1billion will be acheived but around $900m is realistic and acheivable with expansion set in stone and every game live on Fox. The game itself does not allow for the same advertising potential as AFL without significant changes to the structure of the matches itself which wont happen IMO. Plus we are negotiating of a base of two major capital cities while the AFL is in 5 wiht multiple teams in each market.

Dont get me wrong, anything close to or above $900b would still be fantastic and allow the game to make significant progress and improvements off the field

 

[NRL-TGG]

Looks like someone in this thread may have outed themselves.

 

[Highway1]

I hate the fact that numerous pundits seem to think that its up to the tv stations whether we have a fixed schedule as if it belongs to them. Its the NRL's intelectual property to sell or adjust pending on how they want the media contracts to look.

TK in particular is being a total nein knob over it but that is to be expected i guess.

I am no longer confident the much mooted $1billion will be acheived but around $900m is realistic and acheivable with expansion set in stone and every game live on Fox. The game itself does not allow for the same advertising potential as AFL without significant changes to the structure of the matches itself which wont happen IMO. Plus we are negotiating of a base of two major capital cities while the AFL is in 5 wiht multiple teams in each market.

Dont get me wrong, anything close to or above $900b would still be fantastic and allow the game to make significant progress and improvements off the field

:-k I like that figure very much.

 

[El Diablo]

:-k I like that figure very much.

:lol:

i would have been happy with just $1 billion