Top 10 Markets in Australia and the NRL's Presence

[titoelcolombiano]

Here are the top 10 population centres in Australia:

1. Sydney
2. Melbourne
3. Brisbane
4. Perth
5. Adelaide
6. Gold Coast-Tweed Heads
7. Newcastle-Maitland
8. Canberra-Queanbeyan
9. Sunshine Coast
10. Wollongong

• The NRL has a presence in seven of those ten markets
• The NRL is the number one sport in seven of those ten markets
• The NRL's # 1 competitor, the AFL has a presence in six of those ten markets and is the number one sport in only three of them
• Out of the top eight (which are the only markets in the country right now that can sustain a top level full-time sporting team), the NRL has a presence in six them and is the number one sport in five of them. The AFL has a presence in six and a half and is the number one sport in only three of them.
• Based on this the NRL expansion plan is pretty straight forward; Brisbane, then Perth, then Adelaide
• Also based on this, the AFL marketshare and footprint is a bit of an overblown myth if you also consider that the NRL has a strong presence in Auckland which ranks at number five (above Adelaide) if you combined a list of Australian and New Zealand cities.

Discuss...

 

[The_Frog]

Based on this the NRL expansion plan is pretty straight forward; Brisbane, then Perth, then Adelaide

Brisbane, then TBA. They aren't interested in any further AFL heartlands. They see AFL flushing money down the toilet on GWS and GC and don't wish to follow suit.

 

[T-Boon]

Discuss...

Go Rugba League

 

[T-Boon]

NRL could argue it is the biggest football comp in the Pacific right?
We should really be aiming to take over NZ. Its weird that they prefer Rugba Union.

 

[Perth Red]

AFL has a presence in 7 of them (GWS in Canberra). They also realised early doors that Metro was worth more than regional and to have clubs that could achieve revenue needed it was no good putting them in regional centres. I'm surprised they went with GC TBh rather than Brisbane 2. I suspect if Lions had maintained a 30k crowd and been doing better they would have. You also have to consider that in many of these bigger cities the AFL has x2 clubs where as we have 1 or none.
Sunshine coast is a region not a city? It would be more accurate to include Geelong rather than SC.

A quick google shows
1. Sydney 5.3mill
2. Melbourne 5.1mill
3. Brisbane 2.5mill
4. Perth 2.1mill
5. Adelaide 1.3mill
6. Gold Coast-Tweed Heads 680k
7. Newcastle-Maitland 463k
8. Canberra-Queanbeyan 435k
9. Wollongong 300k
10. Geelong 265k

NRL has a reach into 14.8mill
AFL has a reach into 17.7mill

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Perth could be worth looking at as it has history with the game, but only after Queedsland and NZ have been sorted.

The game will get far more in return from investing in Queensland and NZ than Perth.

Adding teams in Brissie will improve television ratings in southeast Queensland, adding value to the broadcast rights that will benefit every tier of the game. The media saturation that will come from having 3 Brissie teams will make it impossible for any other sport to get any publicity, making RL the game kids grow up wanting to play. Keeping Brissie strong protects the jewel in RL'S crown, Origin.

Grow the game in NZ and the Test arena could become more profitable. NZ only has 2 football codes so 3 teams here will give kids a good reason to choose RL over soccer. With RU becoming more Euro-centric, it could be the incentive for kids to choose RL over RU in NZ. 3 teams will make the NZ TV rights more valuable.

Perth will give kids a reason to play the game, but it will never be anything but a niche sport and won't strengthen Origin or Test football. Player development will hinge on ARLC throwing large sums of funding at promotional programs, and we know they couldn't be bothered doing this.

Adelaide getting a team is about as likely as North Korea becoming the world's most livable democracy and global leader for humanitarianism.

 

[Perth Red]

NRL could argue it is the biggest football comp in the Pacific right?
We should really be aiming to take over NZ. Its weird that they prefer Rugba Union.

You can argue anything if you pick the right statistic lol

 

[Perth Red]

If they capped club spending to $20million then it would make smaller market options much more viable as clubs could get by on 12k crowds and less sponsorship and no LC. A $20mill cap could see NRL easily expand sustainably into Perth, Adelaide, Sunshine Coast, Gosford and other parts of NZ. At the moment the arms race means that even clubs in bigger populations are making losses as they try to compete with the big 3 or 4 and spend upwards of $30mill which they cant generate. F1 are doing this as the arms race is killing the sport and whilst just a soft cap AFL has reduced their expenses.

AFL clubs have been set a spending limit of $511,000 per month on their football operations, minus player payments, until the end of the 2020 season.
The new budget, which would translate to a football cap of $6.132 million over a year, is a reduction of just under 37 per cent compared to the pre-COVID-19 cap that clubs had at the start of this season of around $9.7 million.
https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-sets-new-soft-cap-on-club-spending-20200528-p54xgi.html

 

[T-Boon]

You can argue anything if you pick the right statistic lol

AFL don't really have a big presence in the pacific. Just Melbourne and some teams they are propping up in Sydney and Brisbane.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

If they capped club spending to $20million then it would make smaller market options much more viable as clubs could get by on 12k crowds and less sponsorship and no LC. A $20mill cap could see NRL easily expand sustainably into Perth, Adelaide, Sunshine Coast, Gosford and other parts of NZ. At the moment the arms race means that even clubs in bigger populations are making losses as they try to compete with the big 3 or 4 and spend upwards of $30mill which they cant generate. F1 are doing this as the arms race is killing the sport and whilst just a soft cap AFL has reduced their expenses.

Open wheel racing went through this in the 90s and 00s. What was known as 'champ cars' tried to compete with F1 by adding street courses like Surfers Paradise and spending big on engineeing. Nigel Mansell made the tramsition in 1993 and Ayrton Senna evem test drove a car.

The owner of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway disagreed with the excess spending, focus on street cpurses over traditional ovals and negligence of thr American market. He chose to split from the competiton, creating the Indy Racing League and trademarking the name Indycar. Only the IRL drivers got to compete for championship points at the Indianapolis 500. He built his series around oval courses and made it a spec series to cut back on costs. Champ cars, racing under the banner CART, tried to expand into Australia, Europe and Asia with cashed up teams spending big bucks trying to create the fastest car and ended up going bust in the early 2000s. It went into bankruptcy and was brought back as the Champ Car World Series, but folded in 2008.
IRL became Indycar and is the only form of open wheel racing in America, but it is no where near as popular as the old CART was in the 80s and early 90s.

I bring this up because it shows what will probably happen if you neglect Brissie and Sydney in pursuit of fumbleball cities like Adelaide and Perth. It will cost a fortune for minimal gain and anger people from the heartlands.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Brisbane, then TBA. They aren't interested in any further AFL heartlands. They see AFL flushing money down the toilet on GWS and GC and don't wish to follow suit.

It will either be Bris 2 and NZ 2 or Bris 2 and Bris 3, depending on which one brings in the most money.

My guess is 2 Brissie teams will bring in higher ratings than 2 from NZ, and that will make the TV deal more valuable. FTA is in a fight for its lives with streaming services for viewers. If Bris 2 and 3 average 173k in Brissie like the Broncos do, compared to 107k when no Queensland team is playing, then Ch9 will say put the teams in Brissie or we will lower the amount we give you.

 

[blue bags]

it all comes down to money, how can any current club, or new club afford to pay the money to run a NRL club, team
the NRL has about 42% and growing, Polynesian, indigenous, players i believe
thats an indication of the future
we have PAPUA in Queensland cup, FIJI has entered nsw cup
the south pacific is the future. but comes down to money
we could have a pacific super cup league,
with all the strong pacific nations, nz. major aus cities involved

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

it all comes down to money, how can any current club, or new club afford to pay the money to run a NRL club, team
the NRL has about 42% and growing, Polynesian, indigenous, players i believe
thats an indication of the future
we have PAPUA in Queensland cup, FIJI has entered nsw cup
the south pacific is the future. but comes down to money
we could have a pacific super cup league,
with all the strong pacific nations, nz. major aus cities involved

The amount they spend is ridiculous. It hasn't really made the game safer or more entertaining. The only area that is superior today is the acrobatic try scoring feats of the wingers and kicking skills.

The weight training puts their tendons and ligaments under increased risk of tearing. A muscle can be strengthened and enlarged. A tendon and ligament cannot. Their massive muscles are putting their tendons and ligaments under extra stress. Soft tissue injuries are becoming very common.

In the 80s they only lifted weights during the off-season.

Polynesians are larger framed than Caucasians. Whites are getting bashed out of the game. AwFuL's attempt to lure Polynesians to their game was always doomed to fail as their larger framed bodies make it harder for them to run long distances. Folau and Hunt failed for that reason.

Make fatigue a factor again by getting rid of interchanges and put a limit on weight training so players cannot bulk up too much, and whites will be drawn back to the game.

 

[mongoose]

Here are the top 10 population centres in Australia:

1. Sydney
2. Melbourne
3. Brisbane
4. Perth
5. Adelaide
6. Gold Coast-Tweed Heads
7. Newcastle-Maitland
8. Canberra-Queanbeyan
9. Sunshine Coast
10. Wollongong

• The NRL has a presence in seven of those ten markets
• The NRL is the number one sport in seven of those ten markets
• The NRL's # 1 competitor, the AFL has a presence in six of those ten markets and is the number one sport in only three of them
• Out of the top eight (which are the only markets in the country right now that can sustain a top level full-time sporting team), the NRL has a presence in six them and is the number one sport in five of them. The AFL has a presence in six and a half and is the number one sport in only three of them.
• Based on this the NRL expansion plan is pretty straight forward; Brisbane, then Perth, then Adelaide
• Also based on this, the AFL marketshare and footprint is a bit of an overblown myth if you also consider that the NRL has a strong presence in Auckland which ranks at number five (above Adelaide) if you combined a list of Australian and New Zealand cities.

Discuss...

Sure the NRL covers more population centres outside of the 5 metros but AFL has way more penetration in the top 5.
NRL has 9 x Sydney, 1 x Brisbane and 1 x Melbourne
AFL has 9 x Melbourne, 1.5 X sydney, 1 x brisbane, 2 x adelaide and 2 x perth

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

Sure the NRL covers more population centres outside of the 5 metros but AFL has way more penetration in the top 5.
NRL has 9 x Sydney, 1 x Brisbane and 1 x Melbourne
AFL has 9 x Melbourne, 1.5 X sydney, 1 x brisbane, 2 x adelaide and 2 x perth

Ch7 is owned by a fumbleball fan from Perth. Foxtel is owned by a fumbleball fan fron Adelaide who admitted he prefers AwFuL. These blokes think with their hearts when they negotiate with AwFuL and their heads when dealing with NRL.

Putting teams in Adelaide and Perth isn't going to endear Mr Murdoch and Mr Stokes to our game or entice them to give us more money. We had teams in these cities and when Murdoch's company got 50% ownership of the game it folded them up quick smart. They don't want teams there.

 

[The Great Dane]

Population size doesn't necessarily equal market demand.

Take Geelong, it's not on that list but the Cat's average roughly 30k a year in attendance and have 65k members, numbers that most NRL clubs would kill for.

So really measuring markets just by their population size doesn't tell you anything. You need to take demand for the product, potential corporate and government backing, the culture and demographic makeup of the city, etc, etc, all into account as well.

 

[The Great Dane]

Brisbane, then TBA. They aren't interested in any further AFL heartlands. They see AFL flushing money down the toilet on GWS and GC and don't wish to follow suit.

They used to say the same thing about the Swans, now look at them 40 years later...

Turns out that one man's "flushing money down the toilet" is another's long term investment.

 

[Perth Red]

It will either be Bris 2 and NZ 2 or Bris 2 and Bris 3, depending on which one brings in the most money.

My guess is 2 Brissie teams will bring in higher ratings than 2 from NZ, and that will make the TV deal more valuable. FTA is in a fight for its lives with streaming services for viewers. If Bris 2 and 3 average 173k in Brissie like the Broncos do, compared to 107k when no Queensland team is playing, then Ch9 will say put the teams in Brissie or we will lower the amount we give you.

there is a 50k drop off in Sydney viewers when Brisbane are on, fta won’t be that bothered about just a 20k net gain, and this is if the new Brisbane team is as popular as broncos, which there is no guarantee of.

 

[Get Rid of The Donkeys]

there is a 50k drop off in Sydney viewers when Brisbane are on, fta won’t be that bothered about just a 20k net gain, and this is if the new Brisbane team is as popular as broncos, which there is no guarantee of.

That's a lie.

A tale of two cities….the rest​

In Sydney, the highest rating match was Round 12s Parramatta v South Sydney game which rated 259,000. 13.9 million people watched the NRL on Nine in Sydney in 2019 at an average of 197,000 per game. Matches involving Sydney teams rated an average of 198,000, while matches involving both sides from outside Sydney rated an average of 186,000.​

In Brisbane, the highest rating game was Round 2s Brisbane v North Queensland fixture which rated 240,000. 8.743 million people watched on Nine during the season at an average audience of 123,000 per game. Matches involving the Broncos average 173,000 for the season, while Queensland sides averaged 157,000. Matches involving two out of state teams rated an average of 107,000.​

Outside of the two main cities, the highest rating game in Melbourne/Adelaide/Perth was the 66,000 who watched Melbourne v Brisbane in Round 1. The same game also had the highest rating regional audience with 325,000​

http://www.footyindustry.com/?p=4923

Sydney ratings

With Sydney teams
198,000
Without Sydney teams
186,000

Brisbane Ratings

With Broncos
173,000
Without Broncos But With Cowboys or Titans
157,000
Without Queensland Team
107,000

Melbourne metro's most watched game drew only half of Brisbane's average and it involved the Broncos. The Broncos were involved in the most watched match in the regional areas.

 

[Perth Red]

Not this year

Thursday Sydney avg
Featuring Broncos 214k
Not Featuring Broncos 240k

16k difference

Friday Sydney Audience avg
games featuring Broncos 181k
games not featuring Broncos 226k

45k difference

Brisbane audiences

Thursday Brisbane audience avg
Featuring Broncos 175k
Not featuring Broncos 121k

54k difference

Friday Brisbane audience avg
games featuring Broncos 193k
games not featuring Broncos 128k

65k difference

net difference
thursday +39k
Friday +20k