Welcome to the comp, Redcliffe.

[Colk]

Which place gets higher ad rates Adelaide, Perth or Sydney?!

Conveniently forgetting Melbourne I see

 

[Pippen94]

Conveniently forgetting Melbourne I see

Sydney more important than there too!!

 

[Colk]

Discourse here has to be smarter. TV dying (or just shrinking) for a while. What has happened to TV deals in that time?! Value of live sport goes up

Value is always relative to supply and demand. Economics 101.

If you want to compare FTA ratings AFL vs NRL then they are smashing us. Their product would be more valuable than ours to FTA markets.

Now, I have given you the reasons why FTA is not a particularly sound measurement for our game, as opposed to their game.

Anybody with anything more than a cursory interest in the game is going to have PayTV or Kayo etc, as it is the only way in which you can watch your team and every game. For fumbleball, their rights are so that every game is shown on FTA. Therefore they have the choice to either watch it on FTA or get PayTV and their access is pretty much the same. Ergo, the take up rate and their viewership on Pay would be less

 

[Colk]

Sydney more important than there too!!

Evidence? Melbourne’s population is pretty much equal to Sydney now so unless there is a dramatic difference in pay/local economy than I don’t see how

 

[Pippen94]

Value is always relative to supply and demand. Economics 101.

If you want to compare FTA ratings AFL vs NRL then they are smashing us. Their product would be more valuable than ours to FTA markets.

Now, I have given you the reasons why FTA is not a particularly sound measurement for our game, as opposed to their game.

Anybody with anything more than a cursory interest in the game is going to have PayTV or Kayo etc, as it is the only way in which you can watch your team and every game. For fumbleball, their rights are so that every game is shown on FTA. Therefore they have the choice to either watch it on FTA or get PayTV and their access is pretty much the same. Ergo, the take up rate and their viewership on Pay would be less

TV ratings have dropped in last decade but TV rights for live sport has increased

 

[Wb1234]

Why did nt. H10 now backed by cbs bid against nine? Where they given an opportunity?

They said they didn’t have the money
Looks like they want afl not nrl

 

[Wb1234]

Th

Which place gets higher ad rates Adelaide, Perth or Sydney?!

This is an excellent point

when they’ve studied this figure it’s shown that around 65 percent of all sports marketing was spent in rugby league areas. Obviously Sydney was way out in front

 

[Wb1234]

It's shrinking too. 50k in Sydney for swans vs Richmond against all qld clash. Match went down to wire. Can't get better situation than that.

Yeh afl ratings in nsw and Queensland have tanked

 

[Colk]

TV ratings have dropped in last decade but TV rights for live sport has increased

That’s not an answer to the point I addressed. Anyway that would obviously include Foxtel.

We and everybody else get that and that’s not the main point.

This started because you used data incorrectly by stating that it was a good thing to have two teams from QLD playing because of the FTA ratings in QLD, notwithstanding that it was terrible everywhere else.

Then, I suggested that FTA ratings are becoming less and less important (particularly for League) because of access and demand for subscription services, and that even if you wanted to FRA parameters, you are actually suggesting that your main competitor AFL, which has a national competition, would be notionally more valuable due to their higher overall metro FTA ratings. Something I don’t think that you’d want to argue.

 

[Pippen94]

Yeh afl ratings in nsw and Queensland have tanked

Broncos vs titans in Sydney should never happen. All conditions were prefect for big rating but guess swans are niche

 

[Pippen94]

That’s not an answer to the point I addressed. Anyway that would obviously include Foxtel.

We and everybody else get that and that’s not the main point.

This started because you used data incorrectly by stating that it was a good thing to have two teams from QLD playing because of the FTA ratings in QLD, notwithstanding that it was terrible everywhere else.

Then, I suggested that FTA ratings are becoming less and less important (particularly for League) because of access and demand for subscription services, and that even if you wanted to FRA parameters, you are actually suggesting that your main competitor AFL, which has a national competition, would be notionally more valuable due to their higher overall metro FTA ratings. Something I don’t think that you’d want to argue.

Yeah, I want to get into argument defending point I never made. FTA ratings are important as long as sports get big money for it.

 

[Colk]

Yeah, I want to get into argument defending point I never made. FTA ratings are important as long as sports get big money for it.

I think it has more to do with the fact that you don’t have an answer for those points. You’re addressing this like a politician who has an autocue or talking points but can’t answer a direct question.

I’ll give you a few questions:

If FTA is as important as you say, why are you using a game which tanked everywhere else outside of Brisbane as your argument?

If FTA is important, wouldn’t that also denote that a similar product (live sport) which has accrued 200k more people nationwide is more important to the FTA market?

If FTA is as profitable as you say, why has the game never asked to have all the games shown on live TV and simulcast on subscription networks?

 

[Perth Red]

Look at storm weekly ratings. Perth will be in that range

Top 5 rating team in the league for overall audience? Be sweet if they do lol

 

[Perth Red]

Fta tv pay $115mill cash
Ptv pays $215mill cash

end of debate lol

 

[Pippen94]

Top 5 rating team in the league for overall audience? Be sweet if they do lol

If you can find qld following & always make finals. Little home town viewership.

 

[Pippen94]

Fta tv pay $115mill cash
Ptv pays $215mill cash

end of debate lol

FTA comes with more exposure, so fox needs to pay more to compensate.

Best to have at least two media partners to play off each other. Art of deal making

 

[Pippen94]

I think it has more to do with the fact that you don’t have an answer for those points. You’re addressing this like a politician who has an autocue or talking points but can’t answer a direct question.

I’ll give you a few questions:

If FTA is as important as you say, why are you using a game which tanked everywhere else outside of Brisbane as your argument?

If FTA is important, wouldn’t that also denote that a similar product (live sport) which has accrued 200k more people nationwide is more important to the FTA market?

If FTA is as profitable as you say, why has the game never asked to have all the games shown on live TV and simulcast on subscription networks?

Because you've clouded my original post; two qld teams don't rate in Sydney.

Nrl top in Sydney & Brisbane time slots. Which other sport is going to do that on Fridays?!

Pay should be more lucrative because product is hidden from non paying fans.

 

[Colk]

Fta tv pay $115mill cash
Ptv pays $215mill cash

end of debate lol

Exactly. It’s ridiculous he is talking up FTA ratings when

a) FTA ratings are trending downwards for everything but even more importantly due to the type of viewer and the type of TV deals that League get, they are becoming more and more skewed towards PayTV and subscription
b) Further to point a.) any increase in money, at least substantially so, is going to come from PayTV and subscription services not FTA. You only have to refer to the last few deals for evidence.
c.) The FTA ratings are poor, which makes no sense why you would use FTA ratings when arguing about the value of League sides in certain areas.

 

[Pippen94]

Exactly. It’s ridiculous he is talking up FTA ratings when

a) FTA ratings are trending downwards for everything but even more importantly due to the type of viewer and the type of TV deals that League get, they are becoming more and more skewed towards PayTV and subscription
b) Further to point a.) any increase in money, at least substantially so, is going to come from PayTV and subscription services not FTA. You only have to refer to the last few deals for evidence.
c.) The FTA ratings are poor, which makes no sense why you would use FTA ratings when arguing about the value of League sides in certain areas.

All ratings are trending down that's why value is going up.

Ratings aren't poor if ur winning ur timeslot & will dominate the top ten broadcasts for year again after sos & grand final.

Pay TV has limited exposure & hurt rugby here & cricket in England. Makes sense the ppl proposing superleague 2.0 are talking up pay TV because they never learn

 

[Colk]

Because you've clouded my original post; two qld teams don't rate in Sydney.

Nrl top in Sydney & Brisbane time slots. Which other sport is going to do that on Fridays?!

Pay should be more lucrative because product is hidden from non paying fans.

1. Because it was an illogical point. Why are you arguing for more and more sides in the same area or areas because it rates well in one metro market but goes poorly in every other metro market? It doesn’t make sense.

The goal should be to rate as well as you can in every metro market

2. Who cares? If you are using this as your only yardstick (why I don’t know) why would you use a yardstick that shows your competitor smashing you. If you use a comparison across both PayTV and FTA, it might actually help your argument somewhat (that League is a popular TV sport for example). It might also disprove some of your other arguments though.

3. We’ve finally got it. Any increase in TV rights is going to come from subscription not from FTA for a variety of reasons. Hence, it is better for our sport to focus on subscription, as that will more likely determine where new markets will be going etc because that is where any increase in money is coming from.