TV Deal Announced

[East Coast Tiger]

Honestly after some of the more ridiculous comments about the ARLC today, I'm going to reserve judgment until 2017.

Brilliant. That seems to be the ARLC's attitude. Sit on their hands for five years and THEN start to think about the future. If they don't make a decision on expansion until 2017 there won't be any new clubs till at least 2019.

 

[docbrown]

Brilliant. That seems to be the ARLC's attitude. Sit on their hands for five years and THEN start to think about the future. If they don't make a decision on expansion until 2017 there won't be any new clubs till at least 2019.

What you have just written has little to do with what I actually wrote.

I was saying that I am not going to judge the ARLC's performance until after they've actually had some time to do something!

But go on. Tell us about the ARLC's attitude... :roll:

 

[WayneBennett]

At last at Last the Mariners might be restarted * rubs hands *

 

[carlosthedwarf]

I presume it means no more than 1 team before 2018, since you can add one and still only have 8 games. 18th team and 9th game comes in for the following season.

2015 is probably the best time, gives current clubs two seasons of extra grants and enough time for team #17 to be established.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

What you have just written has little to do with what I actually wrote.

I was saying that I am not going to judge the ARLC's performance until after they've actually had some time to do something!

But go on. Tell us about the ARLC's attitude... :roll:

They've had time to do something. They've had time to provide a good TV deal. They haven't done it.

Why don't you tell us some more about how you know so much about the TV rights bidding. You know, all that insider knowledge you claimed to have.

 

[Perth Red]

I presume it means no more than 1 team before 2018, since you can add one and still only have 8 games. 18th team and 9th game comes in for the following season.

2015 is probably the best time, gives current clubs two seasons of extra grants and enough time for team #17 to be established.

Hmm that's interesting hadn't considered having a 17 team comp. I guess it wouldn't need a ninth game, if its us it would open up that Sunday evening slot and as the only real expansion club in a new area shows the game is growing. Hmmm. You may be on to something? Would other clubs prefer a bye or not do you think that having an odd number of clubs would bring?

 

[Kirky]

Grandstand on ABC24 interviewed the Bulldogs CEO Todd Greenberg, who had just come from a broadcast rights briefing. He seemed of the opinion that the existing clubs would be given the duration of the broadcast deal to reap the rewards and achieve sustainability/growth. Wilko asked him if that meant no new expansion clubs for 5 years, and while he qualified with a 'that's more a question for the ARLC', he then said that it was very unlikely that expansion would happen in the next five years.

I'm in 2 minds about this decision (if true). One the one hand it'll be good to get the existing clubs stable, and give them enough cash to drive up memberships and attendance. Will also leave plenty of room for grass roots development and stadium investment. But on the other hand, it seems absurd to put off expansion for a few reasons.

1) It will take at least 2 years to set up an expansion franchise from the date we decide to do it. If we're not investing money into expansion in the next 5 years, the earliest new teams will be launched is 2019. By that stage the Suns and GWS will have been around for almost a decade. We're already behind the 8-ball on expansion, and this delay would only serve to put us behind further.
2) AFL sides in Perth are (the Eagles at least) restricted by the capacity of Subiaco. in 2018 their brand new 60,000 seat stadium opens. There's a real opportunity to attract some of the Eagles/Dockers fans in Perth that can't get tickets to AFL games towards League, but that window closes when the huge new stadium opens for business. Also, it would suck launching our team up against a giant stadium. We need to be the hot new ticket in town when we expand.
3) 5 more years of our second biggest heartland city having only one team is a tremendous waste. It's incredible that the Broncos monopoly has lasted this long, but to stretch it on for 5 more years boggles the mind.

 

[Dragon]

Blokes on the back page seemed to think this TV deal was basically done with no expansion in mind and that the NRL are spooked by the craptacular failures of the Gold Coast Suns and GWS

 

[Perth Red]

Comparing RL in Perth to AFL on the Gold Coast is insane, the two are not remotely linked or comparable. We just got 20,500 fans to a game at Subi for two out of town teams ffs!

 

[Perth Red]

Greenberg said rugby league had "more blue sky ahead of it than any other sport" but admitted NRL expansion past the current 16 clubs will not happen under the new agreement.
"In the next five years it is about a national footprint, playing games in new markets and developing new markets rather than adding new teams," he said.
"At the moment almost every club is making a significant loss.
"Adding new teams to that is increasing that volume.
"Let's get the sustainability of our clubs right first, make sure we pay our players appropriately and then let's add to it after that."


FFS we've spent 5 years building the game in Perth, you want to spend another 5? No fricking idea.

Would cost max $20mill a year to expand. Out of a total income in the region of $1.5billion it is peanuts. Not having expansion will make very very little difference to the grants the 16 NRL clubs get. This game of ours is so frustrating!

 

[docbrown]

They've had time to do something. They've had time to provide a good TV deal. They haven't done it.

Why don't you tell us some more about how you know so much about the TV rights bidding. You know, all that insider knowledge you claimed to have.

See it's posts like these that remind me that you're a f**kwit :lol:

The commission hasn't even been running for a year for f**ksake. Are you just trying to act geniused or are you genuinely geniused?

 

[RLNY]

They've had time to do something. They've had time to provide a good TV deal. They haven't done it.

Why don't you tell us some more about how you know so much about the TV rights bidding. You know, all that insider knowledge you claimed to have.

You have been misreading Doc's posts on here. Nowhere did he claim that the NRL is going to get x amount of money nor did he say that a broadcaster is going to get x in the rights negotiations. All he did was highlight LEK's evaluations of the NRL rights and highlight what the broadcasters might want in the deal. You might have read more into what he was saying (I did too), but that was not his intent.

Personally, Doc, you and LEK both stated that the NRL would get a total deal between $1 Billion and $1.4 Billion. The TV deal with 9 and Fox by itself achieved the minimum that LEK stated by itself, and when the NZ and internet rights are added, the total will be closer to $1.2 Billion. Doc, no matter what other people say or whinge on this board, in my book, you passed with flying colors.

 

[docbrown]

You have been misreading Doc's posts on here. Nowhere did he claim that the NRL is going to get x amount of money nor did he say that a broadcaster is going to get x in the rights negotiations. All he did was highlight LEK's evaluations of the NRL rights and highlight what the broadcasters might want in the deal. You might have read more into what he was saying (I did too), but that was not his intent.

Personally, Doc, you and LEK both stated that the NRL would get a total deal between $1 Billion and $1.4 Billion. The TV deal with 9 and Fox by itself achieved the minimum that LEK stated by itself, and when the NZ and internet rights are added, the total will be closer to $1.2 Billion. Doc, no matter what other people say or whinge on this board, in my book, you passed with flying colors.

Cheers but it's pointless getting into another one of these debates because as they say, haters gunna hate. If a couple of angry strangers on the internet have a problem with what I say, do I really care? No. They mean nothing to me and usually they're pissed off for other reasons but because they don't understand the issues they instead attack the character as all frightened people do. I can understand that people aren't happy with 9 as the broadcaster. I really dislike them as a network. Hopefully when the buyout occurs we get a massive housecleaning and some new blood come in.

That said these negotiations were real negotiations unlike the proxy ones we've had the past two times. They were open to real competitive tension. People says 'oh but we should've had this' but they need to realise that everything comes at a cost and in fact what they want might never have been on offer or might not have been on offer in a feasible manner.

There's a story going around that it was Kim Williams at Fox Sports that pretty much sank 7 & 10 because those networks were forcing Fox to make concessions that they were unwilling to make and thus the overall potential combined packages involving those networks were lower than what 9 & Fox finally offered.

Now people might question whether or not the NRL should have lost $100 million in exchange for an extra F2A game. Well they can argue that till the cows come home. I was expecting that the announcement of a $1 billion dollar deal would at least trigger some optimism about where the game was headed but it seems there are people who struggle with that and think that they could've done better despite having no experience and no understanding of such processes and as such have no way of ever proving it.

It was a real negotiation. They got what they got. People need to accept these terms and focus on the positives rather than whinging about it for the next 5 years.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

See it's posts like these that remind me that you're a f**kwit :lol:

The commission hasn't even been running for a year for f**ksake. Are you just trying to act geniused or are you genuinely geniused?

Every single indicator proves that they are not going to expand. Yet all the apologists are pretending that they might to cover their ignorance for blindly believing in a flawed system. So who knows more about this, Todd Greenburg or some nuffies on a site who claimed all along that Ten and Seven were going to at least get some of the rights and were as wrong as you can be?

Grandstand on ABC24 interviewed the Bulldogs CEO Todd Greenberg, who had just come from a broadcast rights briefing. He seemed of the opinion that the existing clubs would be given the duration of the broadcast deal to reap the rewards and achieve sustainability/growth. Wilko asked him if that meant no new expansion clubs for 5 years, and while he qualified with a 'that's more a question for the ARLC', he then said that it was very unlikely that expansion would happen in the next five years.

 

[Parra]

Honestly after some of the more ridiculous comments about the ARLC today, I'm going to reserve judgment until 2017.

Which is exactly when the NRL partnership would have ended.

The rush to create the ARLC and relieve News ltd of their obligations has changed nothing from an ARL perspective. News got out for whatever their reasons were and still got the deal they would have had to 2017 anyway.

 

[Frailty]

There will be no expansion until a new TV deal...

But the TV Deal will help grow the game by doing what its done the last 6 years!

 

[East Coast Tiger]

It will grow the game by growing the wages of the top 1% of players. That's the ARLC's definition of growth.

 

[docbrown]

or some nuffies on a site who claimed all along that Ten and Seven were going to at least get some of the rights and were as wrong as you can be?

See its comments like this that make you sound like a genius. It was even in the paper this morning that the NRL was about to go with Channel 10 before 9 & Fox upped their offer at the last moment. :lol:

But go on, tell us all that 7 & 10 weren't interested. :lol:

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Yeah yeah. So because you were wrong all along and all your little bum chums aren't pissing in your pocket anymore you resort to name calling. Shown up. "but but but it said in the paper..." Is that where you get your insider knowledge?

 

[BuffaloRules]

Which is exactly when the NRL partnership would have ended.

The rush to create the ARLC and relieve News ltd of their obligations has changed nothing from an ARL perspective. News got out for whatever their reasons were and still got the deal they would have had to 2017 anyway.

But at least now that the first and last clause has been removed, you wont have anything to whinge about the next time...