Trials on Radio?

[whall15]

Here mate: can't post links

Thanks

 

[TeHEel]

that just illustrates how small rugby league is in the scope of national coverage

I don't really think that's the case. You only need to look at the ratings and audience to see that it's number one...

 

[Eels Dude]

that just pisses me off whats the point of sending a film crew down there and covering the entire game just to get a 2 minute highlight package for the news if you are filming the game then fkn well show it are you a sports channel or what?

Using a handful of cameras to catch footage of a game is a whole lot different to sending an entire production crew down there, commentary team, and all the equipment required to broadcast a game of the game properly. That figure can go into six figures, so hardly worth it for a meaningless trial which will get limited ratings. Be thankful you got to see some highlights.

 

[benoir91]

really? he did stay on though..:?

Yeah it was an injury that you could play on with, should be only 1-2 weeks out if any, but when the trainers saw his elbow when he came off they just said you shouldn't be playing again and risk further damage

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I don't really think that's the case. You only need to look at the ratings and audience to see that it's number one...

That's right.

The bulk of the advertising money is on the east coast. It's no coincidence that this is also where the bulk of Australia's population lives. This is why the AFL are trying to expand further into this part of Australia.

NSW and SE QLD might be a small part of the country geographically, but population-wise it's massive.

 

[The EELiminator]

Using a handful of cameras to catch footage of a game is a whole lot different to sending an entire production crew down there, commentary team, and all the equipment required to broadcast a game of the game properly. That figure can go into six figures, so hardly worth it for a meaningless trial which will get limited ratings. Be thankful you got to see some highlights.

im not saying they need to have a full production crew just show the footage they have (delayed of course naturally they wont pay $$$$$ to show it live) if they dont want to pay for commentary use the refs mike feed or the ground announcer if they dont want to show it on foxtel maybe they could stream it from their website or something it just seems crazy to me that they taped the whole game but nobody will ever see it apart from a pissy little 2 min clip

 

[hineyrulz]

That's right.

The bulk of the advertising money is on the east coast. It's no coincidence that this is also where the bulk of Australia's population lives. This is why the AFL are trying to expand further into this part of Australia.

NSW and SE QLD might be a small part of the country geographically, but population-wise it's massive.

60% of advertsing dollars come from NSW and QLD alone. Last season 5 million more people watched RL than AFL. Unfortunately we are getting ripped off with our TV deal. The sooner News and their conflict of interest is gone from RL the better.

 

[Eelementary]

great to hear that you've picked yourself up mate, looking forward to having a beer with you at the footy.

Thank you very much, mate. It is something I do look forward to - meeting the gang and adding a face to the names!

 

[Suitman]

Thank you very much, mate. It is something I do look forward to - meeting the gang and adding a face to the names!

That's also a thing I'd like to do. As you may remember, we have a small, somewhat distant connection.
Look forward to catching up.

Suity

 

[Eelementary]

That's also a thing I'd like to do. As you may remember, we have a small, somewhat distant connection.
Look forward to catching up.

Suity

Indeed I do, good sir! I hope all is well for you and your family! Hope the kids are enjoying their time at the ol' Alma mater!

 

[lingard]

I don't really think that's the case. You only need to look at the ratings and audience to see that it's number one...

I think Spartan`s talking about national coverage. You`re talking about NSW and possibly Queensland.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I think Spartan`s talking about national coverage. You`re talking about NSW and possibly Queensland.

He is, but what does 'national coverage' even mean?

If you had ten fans spread evenly across the country would they be worth more than twenty fans living on the same street in Sydney?

 

[Eels Dude]

He is, but what does 'national coverage' even mean?

If you had ten fans spread evenly across the country would they be worth more than twenty fans living on the same street in Sydney?

Well the reason why the AFL already do, and stand to get even more than the NRL get again next contract, is that they have a team in all 5 of the major cities and television ratings just about all of the time simply refer to the ratings in those 5 major cities and ignore other highly populated areas. So without the NRL having sides in either Perth or Adelaide they are far behind the AFL in regards to broadcasting advertising appeal.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

But is it enough just to be on telly?

Advertisers don't reach me through Swans games because I don't watch them. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

 

[spartan2153]

dont forget tv coverage is 1 thing. As fans who grew up on rugby league of course its better in our eyes.

Lets not be fooled here qld & nsw have 40% of australias population as where afl have the other 60% covered as well as a team in qld & nsw. Also throw in the fact they double our crowds on attendance. As business man i would be throwing my dollars at afl because your company would get extra exposur It also gets proper national coverage which dwarfs rugby plus the walk up attendance at games & membership alone triples rugby league & thats why the commanded the dollars & can get it.

In my opinion the only way rugby league will get near the same money is by selling state of origin & tests separately to the nrl competition

 

[Poupou Escobar]

dont forget tv coverage is 1 thing. As fans who grew up on rugby league of course its better in our eyes.

TV coverage might only be one thing but as far as advertising goes, it's king. That and drive time radio are all that matters.

Lets not be fooled here qld & nsw have 40% of australias population as where afl have the other 60% covered as well as a team in qld & nsw.

NSW and QLD have just over 50%.

But that figure is secondary to viewership numbers, which are freely available. And NRL smashes the AFL for TV viewers. Absolutely destroys it.

This is a direct indicator of the value of advertising space; number of viewers. Geographic spread and population figures are secondary.

Also throw in the fact they double our crowds on attendance.

Match day crowds are good for bragging rights and little more. The TV audience dwarfs match day attendance to the point of making it irrelevant.

As business man i would be throwing my dollars at afl

Then I'm guessing you're not a businessman who advertises on TV.

because your company would get extra exposur

Extra exposure to who exactly? Don't list cities or states, because cities and states don't watch TV, and they sure as sh*t aren't a marketer's target audience.

People watch TV. And it doesn't matter how far apart those people live if marketers want to reach them.

It also gets proper national coverage which dwarfs rugby

Once again, what the f**k does 'proper national coverage' mean, and why are you calling league rugby?

Do you really think the geographic spread of people matters when measuring advertising effectiveness?

To use an example, does the combined audience of Perth, Adelaide and Hobart count for more than Sydney because that's three cities and Sydney's only one?

What a load of bullsh*t. Sydney has one and a half times the population of those three cities put together. Geographic spread is irrelevant.

plus the walk up attendance at games & membership alone triples rugby league & thats why the commanded the dollars & can get it.

Mate you've got no idea.

In my opinion the only way rugby league will get near the same money is by selling state of origin & tests separately to the nrl competition

Maybe so but that's a different issue again.

 

[The EELiminator]

dont forget tv coverage is 1 thing. As fans who grew up on rugby league of course its better in our eyes.

Lets not be fooled here qld & nsw have 40% of australias population as where afl have the other 60% covered as well as a team in qld & nsw. Also throw in the fact they double our crowds on attendance. As business man i would be throwing my dollars at afl because your company would get extra exposur It also gets proper national coverage which dwarfs rugby plus the walk up attendance at games & membership alone triples rugby league & thats why the commanded the dollars & can get it.

In my opinion the only way rugby league will get near the same money is by selling state of origin & tests separately to the nrl competition

you can see the nrl is trying to catch up with stuff like the membership drive which they should have started 5 years ago

 

[Eels Dude]

But is it enough just to be on telly?

Advertisers don't reach me through Swans games because I don't watch them. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

As Spartan said, and also just having the exposure of a side in a major city is what counts just for a marketing point of view. It doesn't matter if you don't watch a Swans game but they still have a major presence in the city of Sydney and have far more of a following here as a club than the whole game of rugby league has as a whole in Adelaide and Perth.

 

[spartan2153]

TV coverage might only be one thing but as far as advertising goes, it's king. That and drive time radio are all that matters.



NSW and QLD have just over 50%.

But that figure is secondary to viewership numbers, which are freely available. And NRL smashes the AFL for TV viewers. Absolutely destroys it.

This is a direct indicator of the value of advertising space; number of viewers. Geographic spread and population figures are secondary.



Match day crowds are good for bragging rights and little more. The TV audience dwarfs match day attendance to the point of making it irrelevant.



Then I'm guessing you're not a businessman who advertises on TV.



Extra exposure to who exactly? Don't list cities or states, because cities and states don't watch TV, and they sure as sh*t aren't a marketer's target audience.

People watch TV. And it doesn't matter how far apart those people live if marketers want to reach them.



Once again, what the f**k does 'proper national coverage' mean, and why are you calling league rugby?

Do you really think the geographic spread of people matters when measuring advertising effectiveness?

To use an example, does the combined audience of Perth, Adelaide and Hobart count for more than Sydney because that's three cities and Sydney's only one?

What a load of bullsh*t. Sydney has one and a half times the population of those three cities put together. Geographic spread is irrelevant.



Mate you've got no idea.



Maybe so but that's a different issue again.

Mr escobar i believe you said you live in melbourne. YOu shold know of all people how irrelevant league is in states other than sydney & brisbane. Attendance is a major issue. HOw can you say thet fact they get double the attendance means nothing. Melbourne is equal with sydney when it comes to working dollars & sponsorship money as well as population. SO brisbane is the 3rd biggest city behind sydney & victoria.

The other 4 states actually dwarf qld. When the afl team the hawthorn are getting paid 16.4 million over 5 years to take 4 games a year to launceston we are talking big money here. Your trying then to tell me that league is the biggest sport in this country. All the nrl teams can spin whatever they like but fir them it is about gate receipts & sponsor ship. Nrl teams do not come close to afl & thats why the nrl is a second sport behind afl. All you need to do is watch fox sport news a proper sports coverage & 75% of the time they lead off with afl news the true national sport. ( i cant stand the game but thats me)

So as a business man you would have to take emotion out of it & sponsor a sport that gets more exposure & tv in 2 states does not count if you want national exposure.

If you want to break it down that way so it means sweet. SO hawthorn signing for just over 3 million a year to play 4 games a year in launceston is chump change to you.

I think you wrong & most marketing firms would agree when it comes to wanting the sponsor ship to reach the furthest