State of Origin continues ratings run: What's it worth to the game?

thats because no one cares about Melbourne,its a hole full of cheats.

I remember when the indy racing pulled out of the gold coast. They said they did not want to globalize anymore,they just wanted to concentrate on the market they already had.Maybe the r.l. should take a leaf out of their books.qld and nsw and a little slice of melbourne and aukland are about as much as we need.south australia and tasmania aren't a lucrative market and perth is a one code wonder.Regional w.a. and s.a. will never grow into anything substantial but regional qld and nsw are becoming powerhouses.

Not sure how many Perth homes lost thier power during the 9 coverage due to storms.

the master. According to the Telegraph industry sources(not Roy Masters but a News publication)) claim Origin is worth about $25m pa through Tv coverage. To compare that figure with an AFL game and extrapolate that to est a $5m figure,is let us say a bit out of kilter with the reality.

damien, we don't need as much as the afl who cares what they got i certainly don't. in business terms the afl"s competition is more expensive to run eg: salary cap, teams and the estimated cost of 40 million a year for gws and the gold coast. i believe rl will achieve close to 1 billion dollars over five years and more from sky nz . raise the base salary cap to 6million and still have exemptions for loyalty and 3rd party agreements the nrl grant to clubs should be 6million a season total 96 million p/y 2 new expansion teams brisbane central coast perth 5 years from now country football to be funded properly and the nsw cup bunderberg cup expanded

Clint .There was a lot of its all talk,when the AFL negotiations were going on.The talk is not coming from rl people BTW. It will depend on how desperate Foxtel is of keeping rugby league.Lek have made it obvious, what not having the code will mean for Fox.If they wont increase it by muchIi suggest it's see you later Fox,and enjoy the churrning. Any Pay TV company that wants to lose a sport,that supplies 60-70 top programs in its stable,is asking for a massive cash flow hit.And that too is basic economics.Consumer is king. ATM rl may be behind the curve, but I suggest us "leaguies"under the chairmanship of Grant(an IT whiz) running a public compamy,may in fact be laughing down the line. Wrong my friend ch10 has had a very large cash injection,partly to assist in debt reduction and programming,money supplied by Rinehart,Packer,Gordon and Murdoch. If you believe that 9 is the only one interested,when 10 has already stated they will bid,and 7 is interested in securing SOO and/or NRL for the northern states,then you have not been keeping up to date with developments. Not a case of good luck,but good management..

Excellent Point Gaz, spot on!

Did you notice during the game the graphic they use to promote tonight's game only showed QLD and NSW times. It's like they're ashamed to promote the fact that the games are shown on GEM channel outside of the heartland states. I watched the SOO game in Adelaide and was disappointed (but not surprised) when they cut straight to the AFL footy show. I'd love to see these guys lose the rights. I'll party so hard.

CC, talk of a dedicated R.L. Channel on Fox. Like most comments regarding TV rights and league, it's all talk. The AFL have been told that the last TV rights deal will most likely be the high watermark in revenue, they are now investing in direct Internet licensing. Leaguies are behind the curve as usual. I never said Foxtel won't bid, I just believe they won't increase there bid by much. You need competition to increase the value of something, basic economics. 7 have paid for the AFL, Foxtel paid big for the right to show All AFL games live for the 1st time. Who will bid for league outside of 9. 10 has no money, 7 has the AFL. Good luck

Clint .The figures and comments on the next Tv deal,are hardly confined to Masters.they have been scattered around the Australian(News Ltd _Canning) other Herald writers,and independent media analysts. Why would Foxtel pay more for league.If they don;t they lose a fair swag of their subs base. between 60-70% of the top Tv rated shows are rugby league. If they dont'pay more they lose it,and AFL would suffer next time as cash flow would drop dramatically due to large churning figures.It appears you have failed to understand this aspect. Perople don't have to pay for FTA,they make a committment to by Pay subs.They have the option QED of ditching said pay Tv. And to keep you up to speed ,their is now talk of Foxtel having aa rl dedicated channel. The anti rl brigade are doing their best,biting nails nervously,stomach discomfort.A bit of real competition in the future?

Sorry, the above comment was directed at (PBB)

Seeing ch9 is paying currently more than that figure of $5m per game. Half the ratings what the! ,when it toto SOO2 was 3.85m including regionals.NRL with one live FTA ad oen delay and one replayed at 9-30pm.Bad comparsions for a so called "rl "fan.

Once you use Roy Masters as a source to support your position you arguement is flawed from association. Masters has no credibility at all and tells half truths just to to try and prove his point, he's an embarrassment. What you fail to understand in this whole debate is growth for the tv networks. The biggest jump in $$ paid for the AFL was from Foxtel. Why, because they were able for the first time to show all games live. That in there opinion was an area of growth for them. On back of that they have created a whole channel with daily shows which rate well, focused entirely on the AFL. Now that's growth, real growth for Foxtel. Why would a tv network or Foxtel pay more for league, they have had this situation for the past 5 years, there is no growth to be had. You mention live into Vic and Sth & West Aust., that would be very hard work and they have been showing live with GEM into these markets for very low ratings. There is no way league will crack 1 Billion $$,

That might change,with the Main Game interviewing John Grant on ch10 next thursday evening @ 8pm.

If they were not interested in any way shape or form, they wouldn't be watching it.The excuses would put a 10 years old to shame. So the SOO was scheduled so it would slot it nicely, with AFL style scheduling in Melbourne LOL. The SOO has always lasted that long,pre game chit chat,post game analysis. The anti rl brigade are out in force.But,but ,but.

I think the AFL is scared of rugby league's potential. They know it will overtake Aussie rules around the country if it's run right. The regional Queensland television networks collected $115,558,314 from advertisers in the 2nd half of 2011. Adelaide networks received $117,750,735. Rugby league dominantes regional Queensland, much like Aussie rules dominates Adelaide. Fancy that, a regional market being worth almost as much as one of the metro markets that the cheersquad are always pointing to as the reason the AFL gets so much money from Seven. Regional NSW's networks collected $207,315,118. Perth's networks collected far less -- over $30,000,000 less -- with the lousy figure of $174,983,262. A huge win for rugby league. No wonder the cheersquad are quick to dismiss regional ratings! Sydney and Melbourne are the two largest markets, but the networks in rugby league mad Sydney received more advertising revenue ($577,597,088 vs $434,129,053). Brisbane's networks collected $283,258,091. Another win for rugby league. Time for the AFL cheer squad to stop overlooking regional QLD and regional NSW. These two areas are larger than Perth and Adelaide. If you add the regionals of WA and SA ($24,342,211 vs $18,272,479), then the two metros and regionals in WA and SA are slightly ahead of the regionals in QLD and NSW, but only just. Sydney and Brisbane, combined, dwarf Melbourne and Tasmania.. Dont' take my word for it, see for yourselves: ThinkTV.com.au

I thought the 4,200,000 figure represents metro and regionals. My mistake. I assumed the 4,200,000 figure represented all nine games. Damien and The Master were talking about the amount of viewers the AFL gets each round.

I left some things out, which I cannot actually bear to leave unsaid, for fairness. The NRL is still yet to make the broadcaster show games live into Melbourne. They should be doing that this deal. Quote from above stated SMH article by Roy Masters "The AFL can boast it has superior free-to-air capital city figures, based on its national spread of teams, with 71 million viewers this year, compared with 57 million in the NRL, which is essentially a two capital city game, with matches live into Sydney and Brisbane and televised after midnight in Melbourne." -- AFL is 5 capital cities versus 2 capital cities. If the NRL got games into Melbourne at a decent hour - origin ratings have shown that there will be a sizeable audience in time. ___ Regionals, also are much overlooked. But foxtel is increasing their importance. Quote from above mentioned article "Regional free-to-air figures for the NRL the past two years were 38 million. The AFL's were 23 million this year, in areas where it has no teams in major centres of the size of population of the size of Newcastle, Wollongong and Townsville." --- As you can see, with the recent aquisition of austar, ratings into these markets are going to come under greater importance for foxtel. ___ Its no wonder to me why the ARLC has matched the AFL deal (via speculation in papers; with a high degree of possibility for truth from the mole; daily telegraph).....its CLEAR that the NRL is equal to AFL; and further, that while AFL has room to grow in sydney and brisbane, its clear the NRL has greater ease of growth for rugby league across the country. We will need to wait a long time before GWS and the Giants live up to their billing, but in any case, such growth would see the two sports be "evens" for a long time to come. ___ Now, if the networks have realized the sports' individual strengths, equal basically so it would seem on evidence, then we need to as well. In fact, the NRL is probably ahead in potential not only because its heartland has the largest share of resources, but because it has the largest room for growth: new teams, crowds, international. If you are truly a rugby league supporter, you should rejoice. If not, I await your excuses.

You have counted regionals in your SOO but not in the AFL numbers, why? Also you count all AFL games and no just the FTA games which have much higher viewership than those on Pay. Your comparisons are too skewed to be considered serious

see my forthcoming comment below. its under moderation. The ARLC are looking at implementing more ads next deal. The origin just gone, had no ads for 20 minutes....thats too long. Just imagine how much more it will be worth when they slot some more in.....ch9 said they would pay up to 70 million more for extra ads (40-70 was the estimation). Its only up for the NRL. I have tried to put a lot of backed up info from what I've read/know about the process below. To give my final assumptions. I basically think we're in for a cracker. The battle for NRL will relegate one network to third place, and has the potential to lift another to second - possibly forever (as long as that is in TV land....a decade?). Its all on the line. ALL