TV pays top-rating NRL half as much as AFL

[aids]

AFL have larger live crowds
NRL larger ratings

sound about right?



edit: does anyone have a list or know where i can find one, for the top rated shows on pay tv?
im curious which games pulled the most viewers on ptv last year.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

it is widely known that melbournians love big events, the NRL GF is a sporting event and given that Melbourne was playing in it, then it isn't really a surprise

as far as attendances, members, off field structure and press coverage in their home cities, the swans in sydney sh1t all over the storm here in melb...whether thats the storms fault or the NRLs fault for not promoting the game enough i dont know

Yeah but this is about TV figures and the cash they should bring the NRL. The Swans, for all their hype, can't out-rate league. They can't even attract a bigger audience in Sydney than the Strom can in Melbourne, even after years of live free to air games compared to the relative blackout the Storm have had to put up with in Melbourne.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

edit: does anyone have a list or know where i can find one, for the top rated shows on pay tv?
im curious which games pulled the most viewers on ptv last year.

I think you'd be surprised.
A few years ago the most watched program on pay TV was a Souths game, I think against the Cowboys (before the Cowboys were any good). It was a Super Saturday late game that appeared to have little going for it yet still out-rated every other show of that year. Goes to show the popularity of Super Saturday and the fact that people will watch a league game no matter who's playing.

 

[aids]

storms lives crowd figures are much lower than the swans.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

storms lives crowd figures are much lower than the swans.

How can you tell. The Storm never get a live game. Just another question for the NRL and those who own the broadcast rights.

 

[aids]

storms home ground figures have been between 8,000 and 10,000 average for the past few years.
i wouldn't be suprised if the swans more than double storms home ground average.

edit: sorry, i should have been clearer before

 

[East Coast Tiger]

It's not about crowd figures. TV companies don't care about that. It's about ratings.

 

[Collingwood Storm]

there used to be melbourne storm games on nine live into melbourne most saturday afternoons a few years ago....9 quickly put an end to that

 

[aids]

yeah i know, but time will tell if this is a good deal for tv in general.
seven and ten paid too much for afl.
as a result they've had to axe a lot of other shows to pay for it.

and up until a week ago, seven and ten were considering selling live games to chnl 31 to meet the agreement for live games made with the AFL.


for the money put down, if it doesn't pay off after the contract expires i wouldn't imagine AFL getting good money like it did this time.

paytv, makes it's money from subscribers and advertising.
if ratings are down, it means the advertisers wouldn't pay as much for spots.
and if ratings are down, less people would subscribe to the chanels for the purpose of watching AFL.

so, either the people at foxsports know people are going to watch afl, or they are taking a gamble and hope people watch afl.


anyway, as mentioned in the other thread, clubs and pubs pay a mint to show live sports.
fox will likely bleed pubs and clubs to make up the differnce on the AFL deal anyway.

 

[Quidgybo]

They can't even attract a bigger audience in Sydney than the Strom can in Melbourne, even after years of live free to air games compared to the relative blackout the Storm have had to put up with in Melbourne.

What figures are you comparing here? The only reasonably comparable figures I'm aware of are the ones for the the two GFs last year in which Swans match most certainly did outdraw the Storm (in both Sydney and Melbourne). But apart from that do we have any data? As you point out the Sorm never get a live game and the vast majority of their games that are shown on Free to Air are at graveyard hours. So for FTA we're trying to compare a graeyard replay against what - mid evening Swans replays on Saturday night? Again where are the figures? Move to Pay TV and the question is how many Swans matches have even been shown on Pay TV with which to compare?

Leigh

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

What figures are you comparing here? The only reasonably comparable figures I'm aware of are the ones for the the two GFs last year in which Swans match most certainly did outdraw the Storm (in both Sydney and Melbourne).

Errrr, no.

Storm V Brisbane
Sydney 817,000

Pink twinkies v Perth twinkies
Sydney 765,000

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Didn't last year's NRL GF draw a bigger TV audience in Melbourne than the AFL GF did in Sydney?
If so, that's about the only figures we've got but they are comparable.
If Nine had given the Storm the amount of live games in Melbiurne the various networks have given the Swans in Sydney who knows how much bigger the ratings could have been.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Errrr, no.

Storm V Brisbane
Sydney 817,000

Pink twinkies v Perth twinkies
Sydney 765,000

What about Melbourne's NRL figures?

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

What about Melbourne's NRL figures?

903k, the AFL's was over 1,100k.

Overall, the AFL GF finished a gnat's pube ahead of the NRL GF 4,151,000 to 4,084,000.

Which, when you take into account the fact that the NRL GF is on at very odd hours in WA and SA and not on at all to my knowledge in Tasmania and the AFL GF is live everywhere, makes the deal look extremely dodgy.

By the way, the next 3 highest rating games in the two codes were the 3 SOOs.

 

[Quidgybo]

Errrr, no.

Storm V Brisbane
Sydney 817,000

Pink twinkies v Perth twinkies
Sydney 765,000

My bad then. But are we basing all this on the figures from just one match in each code? I'm not sitting here trying to defend the NRL but at least let's base our complaints on solid facts. Comparing a package of the three worst of eight AFL games each week to a package of five of seven NRL games doesn't tell us much. Of course the NRL is going to rate better, pay TV has access to a higher percentage of games and higher quality matches - it's a no brainer. It says nothing about how the networks see the relative value (or likely ratings) of the television products if they had similar access arrangements. While there may very well be some valid points to be made on the merits of these two deals, the whole Masters report reaks of sloppy logic and glazed over assumptions. It's designed to stir desent among the fairthful, nothing more.

Leigh.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

My bad then. But are we basing all this on the figures from just one match in each code? I'm not sitting here trying to defend the NRL but at least let's base our complaints on solid facts. Comparing a package of the three worst of eight AFL games each week to a package of five of seven NRL games doesn't tell us much. Of course the NRL is going to rate better - it's a no brainer. It says nothing about how the networks see the relative value (or likely ratings) of the television products if they had similar access arrangements. While there may very well be some valid points to be made on the merits of these two deals, the whole Masters report reaks of sloppy logic and glazed over assumptions. It's designed to stir desent among the fairthful, nothing more.

Leigh.

4 of the top 5 matches in either code were Rugby League matches. Our deal includes SOO matches.

It's hard to tell after that because the AFL preliminary finals didn't make the regional top 20 the week they were on. But going on commonsense, #6 & 7 were the NRL Preliminary Finals.

http://72.52.152.33/~leagueun/forums/showthread.php?t=104804&page=59

So, in 2006, it's entirely possible that of the two codes 6 of the top FTA rating 7 matches Australia-wide were Rugby League matches.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

Also, for a few years now the NRL FNF match has regularly outrated the AFL FNF match Australia-wide.

And with the NRL going live, that gap will become a chasm....

 

[East Coast Tiger]

I agree the Masters story is designed to send a very specific message and all the facts used are used to support that idea. But even taking that into account, the points made are still damning for the NRL. Whatever figures you use, it seems we are getting the less good deal. The report doesn't take into account the free to air deals or the internet deal, but there's some pretty strong whispers that those too have been poorly handles by the NRL, or at least the AFL have managed to get a better deal.
Basically, we should be dissenting, or at least very concerned. We do want answers as to how the game is being run and this is a very important issue.

 

[airpoe]

Firstly, as someone said the NRL should buy back the 50% from NewsLimited.

I don't think the NRL can afford it & you can only buy something if the other party wants to sell!!

Secondly, why should ch9/fox pay more to the NRL if they can pay less.

ch10 says they don't want NRL
ch7 wants NRL but the owners won't let them get the rights (hence 1997 when ch7 bid more than ch9 but the NRL accepted the ch9 less money bid)


Also for GF figures the timeslot also helps figures

Saturday afternoon: lowest figures for tv watching
Sunday night: highest figures for tv watching

 

[El Diablo]

Also for GF figures the timeslot also helps figures

Saturday afternoon: lowest figures for tv watching
Sunday night: highest figures for tv watching

AFL - Live into Syd, Mel, Bris, Adel and Perth

NRL - Live into Syd, Mel and Bris