What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

TV rights

ExJnrKiwi

Juniors
Messages
79
Reality check for all the pro supporters.

$10m turnover but Panthers still lose $1m
By Dean Ritchie

THE Panthers will register a gross turnover this season of $10 million – up $1.7 million from last year, Penrith chief executive Shane Richardson revealed last night.

The $10 million figure comes on the back of Penrith's historic season where the club secured an NRL premiership and minor premiership.

Penrith's financial bonus came through:

Gate takings ($2.5 million).

NRL grant ($2.5 million).

Corporate sponsorship ($2.5 million).

Concession at grounds such as beer and food ($1 million).

Merchandising ($1.5 million). But the Panthers will still post a $1 million loss.

Only three NRL clubs – Brisbane, New Zealand and Newcastle – made a profit last year without grants or loans.

"We've had a very successful season," Richardson said last night. "And things will only get better next year.

"We had 900 season ticket holders at the start of this season yet averaged crowds of more than 18,000.

"We're hoping we can get that figure up 3000 to 4000 next year. It will be the hottest ticket around.

"But it's only the beginning. We want to be in a position where we make a profit."

Penrith aim to make a profit next season through marketing their high-profile stars, including Craig Gower, Ryan Girdler, Luke Priddis, Luke Lewis, Trent Waterhouse and Joel Clinton.

Richardson also called for all NRL clubs to receive additional television revenue.

"The bottom line is we (rugby league) are the No. 1 TV sport," he said. "Yet we can't make a profit despite winning the premiership.

"We have improved $3 million since we (Richardson and coach John Lang's team) arrived in 2002.

"Rugby league is great TV sport and I think clubs need at least another $1 million revenue annually from TV.

"We need that extra money to come out square each year and make the game pay for itself."


In any one season only 1-3 of 15 clubs will make a profit. Clubs are heavily supported by their Leagues clubs commercial operations. The NRL as a whole only turns a small profit from year to year. It substantially reduced the number of teams to protect its revenue base a few years ago.

It's the premier RL Comp in the world.

Has the largest global TV market of any RL comp

The ESL is seen in AU but is usually a week behind and we don't get every game.

There is no NZ Bartercard Cup televised here or anywhere else and no French RL either.

So someone please tell me how a pro US comp is going to be financially viable? And FFS don't tell me there's a potentially huge US audience for RL who will want to watch a second rate pro comp on TV.

This is never going to fly unless you call jumping off a cliff flying before you hit the ground with a thud.
 

dimitri

First Grade
Messages
7,980
if we got the tv deal right in the first place they would have made a profit



not only do ch 9 get tv rights for bugger all they also do a terrible job



no pregame entertainment


:roll: :roll: :roll:
 

ExJnrKiwi

Juniors
Messages
79
if we got the tv deal right in the first place they would have made a profit

Infers that those who negotiate deals undersell the rights which begs the question if RL was so valuable why aren't others bidding for it? The ESL has put the bite on the TV media for a better deal and is struggling. We all like to think that when we sell something we should get top dollar. Buyers on the other hand want something that is economical. There will always be a gap between what the NRL wants and what the market is prepared to pay. A fact of life. The media can live without RL but RL cannot live without the media.



not only do ch 9 get tv rights for bugger all they also do a terrible job

Personally I don't have a problem with it.



no pregame entertainment

Pregame entertainment is for the spectators not the TV audience

So what relevance does this have to he US pro Comp concept anyway??
 

Alan Shore

First Grade
Messages
9,390
ExJnrKiwi said:
if we got the tv deal right in the first place they would have made a profit

Infers that those who negotiate deals undersell the rights which begs the question if RL was so valuable why aren't others bidding for it? The ESL has put the bite on the TV media for a better deal and is struggling. We all like to think that when we sell something we should get top dollar. Buyers on the other hand want something that is economical. There will always be a gap between what the NRL wants and what the market is prepared to pay. A fact of life. The media can live without RL but RL cannot live without the media.



not only do ch 9 get tv rights for bugger all they also do a terrible job

Personally I don't have a problem with it.



no pregame entertainment

Pregame entertainment is for the spectators not the TV audience

So what relevance does this have to he US pro Comp concept anyway??

So $15,000,000 for the NRL per annum is reasonable in your mind?
 

The Observer

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
1,742
ExJnrKiwi said:
There is no NZ Bartercard Cup televised here or anywhere else and no French RL either.
How much NRL and ESL gets on TV in NZ? Is it on FTA or Pay TV? How does NZ TV coverage compare to Union?
 

Misanthrope

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
47,604
Personally I think Channel Nine should take a leaf from Channel Ten when it comes to televising the NRL. Ten has a lot of shows dedicated to the AFL, whilst league only has the two Footy Shows (both crap) and Boots 'n' All.

I'd love to see some QLD Cup, Bartercard Cup, and ESL stuff more often. It's not like Channel Nine show a whole lot of decent programming after midnight.

Chris
 

Te Kaha

First Grade
Messages
5,998
Joker said:
ExJnrKiwi said:
There is no NZ Bartercard Cup televised here or anywhere else and no French RL either.
How much NRL and ESL gets on TV in NZ? Is it on FTA or Pay TV? How does NZ TV coverage compare to Union?

NRL - All games live if you have SKY Digital. Live on SKY Sport 1, SKY Sport 2 and SKY 1 for The Warriors. If you don't have Sky Digital then Warriors and one game at a time live then delayed on SKY sport one. Still all games shown just not all live. FTA has Warriors and one other game, both delayed on PRIME. PRIMEs signal only in cities. They say they will have over 85% national coverage by next season. (prime does better job as we don't get stupid SKy commentators).

ESL - Sweat F**K all. No longer shown anywhere.

As compared to UNION. All major Union games (except world cup) world wide live and delayed on the SKY Sport Rugby Channel. ALL NPC, Tri-Nations, Super 12 and All Blacks games live on SKY Digital. Some delayed for those without Digital.
FTA Channel Three has Two/Three NPC - Super 12 games delayed each weekend. All All Black Tests (except world cup) delayed. Channel 3 used to have NRL but when rights came up last year 3 couldn't afford Union and League so kept Union and Prime got League.
All World cup games are live / Delayed only on TVNZ Channel 1.
 

Gorillasanti

Juniors
Messages
33
Joker said:
ExJnrKiwi said:
There is no NZ Bartercard Cup televised here or anywhere else and no French RL either.
How much NRL and ESL gets on TV in NZ? Is it on FTA or Pay TV? How does NZ TV coverage compare to Union?

NZ gets all NRL games (some live and some delayed if they clash, though we can have two going live on different Sky channels) on pay TV, also heaps of midweek replays \\:D/ . Prime TV which is free to air and owned by Channel 9 gets all Warriors games delayed and with ads, it also has one or two other NRL games late at night on the weekends.
ESL as far as I know we get one or two live matches a week on pay TV (Sky), though I havent seen any play off games :-k
NZ TV coverage is is very good but Union gets priority but if you have Sky Digital like I do you can choose, but if you only have Sky UHF your screwed and may have to wait for delayed coverage ](*,) .
 

Te Kaha

First Grade
Messages
5,998
Gorillasanti said:
ESL as far as I know we get one or two live matches a week on pay TV (Sky), though I havent seen any play off games

Where is the ESL I haven't seen any games shown since last year. I keep looking and hoping but nothing.
 

Gorillasanti

Juniors
Messages
33
Te Kaha said:
Gorillasanti said:
ESL as far as I know we get one or two live matches a week on pay TV (Sky), though I havent seen any play off games

Where is the ESL I haven't seen any games shown since last year. I keep looking and hoping but nothing.

Yeah you may be right I don't think I've seen anything since the Challenge cup final. (Is that what its called?).
 

The Observer

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
1,742
Fox sports reports that Nine's exclusive free-to-air $150million deal (with the NRL) will run until the end of the 2008 season and Fox Sports' $400million agreement will be in place for another three years.
 

Razor

Coach
Messages
10,077
ExJnrKiwi said:
if we got the tv deal right in the first place they would have made a profit

Infers that those who negotiate deals undersell the rights which begs the question if RL was so valuable why aren't others bidding for it? The ESL has put the bite on the TV media for a better deal and is struggling. We all like to think that when we sell something we should get top dollar. Buyers on the other hand want something that is economical. There will always be a gap between what the NRL wants and what the market is prepared to pay. A fact of life. The media can live without RL but RL cannot live without the media.

On pay TV - C7 offered significantly more than Fox Sports, but the NRL went with the News Ltd owned Fox Sports deal.

fta TV - Channel 10 was broke, Channel 7 had AFL commitments so Ch 9 had no opposition. Therefore they got a long term deal for a little amount of money. Had News Ltd not got into the game, then 9 wouldn't have had to sign a new deal, so their original deal with the ARL (which was also long-term for a low amount of money because 10 did have the rights and had them taken off them because they couldn't afford to pay, and 7 had AFL) would have expired at the end of 2000. And by that time 10 actually had money.

Look at the facts beforehand.

chriswalkerbush - Nine can't show the QLD Cup, as the QRL has a deal with the ABC. QLD Cup game live every Saturday at 2:00pm. I understand QLD only, which surprises me considering it'll rate higher than some of the sports they show nationwide.
 

ExJnrKiwi

Juniors
Messages
79
So who's the mod who cut the Pro Us Comp thread in half and restarted it as 'TV rights' . A subject that's been hammered to death in the past.
 

roopy

Referee
Messages
27,980
ExJnrKiwi said:
So who's the mod who cut the Pro Us Comp thread in half and restarted it as 'TV rights' . A subject that's been hammered to death in the past.

It was me.
I wanted to move the pro us comp thread over to the AMNRL section, and the last four or five posts were off subject, so i split the thread and stuck a new name on the leftover bit.

Sorry that it ended up looking like you started the thread.
 

yakstorm

First Grade
Messages
5,413
Razor said:
On pay TV - C7 offered significantly more than Fox Sports, but the NRL went with the News Ltd owned Fox Sports deal.

The deals were pretty equal, what the NRL really didn't like was that C7 wanted a large share of its money to go directly to the clubs, and not through the NRL, as well wanted a seat on the board.

I wont argue that some parts of the deal with Fox are dodgy, but on the other side it was only a matter of time till Optus and Fox Sports merged and C7 was axed.

Razor said:
fta TV - Channel 10 was broke, Channel 7 had AFL commitments so Ch 9 had no opposition. Therefore they got a long term deal for a little amount of money. Had News Ltd not got into the game, then 9 wouldn't have had to sign a new deal, so their original deal with the ARL (which was also long-term for a low amount of money because 10 did have the rights and had them taken off them because they couldn't afford to pay, and 7 had AFL) would have expired at the end of 2000. And by that time 10 actually had money.

Add to that at the time of the original long term deal, Channel 7 was facing insolvency. As for the extension of the deal till 2008 that was on very strange terms, both 10 and 7 weren't allowed to make offers, possibly because both ARL and SL already had contracts with Nine, and thus Nine possibly locked in to make sure they would have first right of refusal.
 
Top