There was an inexplicable comment made by John Grant during Tuesday’s media conference, at which the NRL announced they had signed a new television deal worth in excess of $1 billion.
“The proof of this deal is there’s not a lot of value placed on that ninth game,” Grant said, to which David Gyngell nodded his head in agreement.
2015 and 2016 have been the two years touted as when the competition was most likely to expand. Conservatively, let’s say it was going to happen in 2016.
That would mean an extra game every round for two seasons – equating in 52 extra games over two years, assuming two extra teams doesn’t affect the current finals system of eight sides.
With most games able to be stretched out to take up two hours when televised, that’s 104 hours of television – presumably on a Saturday or Sunday evening.
I don’t know what that equates to in terms of dollars and cents for the NRL. But to say “there’s not a lot of value” in 104 hours of televised content doesn’t sound right, especially with mobile content yet to be settled, meaning 104 more hours of content in those negotiations as well.
While David Gyngell nodded along in agreement to John Grant’s assessment, he had just parted with around half a billion dollars. He was hardly about to lean in to his mic and say, “actually, you probably could have got another couple of hundred mil’ out of this deal if you’d guaranteed another game every round.”
So where did Grant’s assessment come from?
Is it possible he simply saw that, compared to the AFL and their $1.25 billion deal, his deal was already better? Though, the AFL are getting more in dollars and cents, with shorter games and less games per round, pound-for-pound, the NRL’s is a better deal.
But with an extra 104 hours to negotiate with, it’s hard to see how the deal couldn’t have been better still.
Particularly when one considers the two new NRL franchises are likely to go to Perth and Queensland. Perth opens up a whole new timezone in which to televise a local team and, given Channel Nine’s love affair with broadcasting Broncos games on a Friday night, an extra Queensland team – probably based in Brisbane – was hardly going to be a dud in the ratings.
Then there’s the long-term vision associated with having these extra teams. The advantages of having a national footprint may not be apparent immediately, and perhaps John Grant’s assessment that the two extra teams were not going to provide a great deal of value at this deal was correct.
However when 2017 rolls around, two extra teams, relatively settled and attracting good crowds and ratings, are hardly going to see the next TV deal suffer.
David Gyngell caused a stir a while ago, saying if the NRL wanted to make more money they needed to provide more opportunities for advertising – his suggestion was by creating more breaks in the game.
But if Mr Gyngell wants more opportunities for advertising, there are 104 hours which are going to go begging over the back end of this TV deal.
Bearfax
Guest
So tell me Haz. What's it been like working as Nine and Foxtels Public Relations officer. Good pay eh? I hear they serve a mean steak and veg at lunch time. Just my humour Haz. Your point is actually quite valid, though I suspect no matter what extra teams they put in, the audience would increase, because they would be servicing new areas and stimulating interest. Further, Rugby League is a big money earner for both sites and that is why they'll pay such big bucks for the sport. Look I think they tried to get out of it as cheaply as they could especially after other networks had been prepared to spend a quarter of a billion more for the Aussie Rules, which has more teams mind you. But there in lies the difference in the skill of the Aussie Rules negotiators and the League negotiators, and why the League is so anxious to get the Aussie Rules bloke who had been involved in the Rules negotiations.
Haz
Guest
Maybe delaying expansion is actually a better strategic move by the ARLC. While the $90m upfront payment to the ARLC provides it a war-chest, it also depletes Nine's own war-chest. To be realistic, there's only so much money Nine/FoxSports could throw at the ARLC in one go without bankrupting itself. The current competition as it stands is a safe bet, and is a safe money-earner for Nine. Expansion, however, is not. It is not just the ARLC who would be wearing a risk of bankrolling a potentially uncompetitive team for the first 2-5 years of life; but the networks who would have to risk airing dud football games. Nine/FoxSports will be more wiling to risk that in a few years once they've recouped some of their initial outlay on rugby league, but that just complicates the process of bidding right now.
Dingo
Guest
You keep banging on about Big Footy. I've scoured my comments and as far as I can see I have made no reference to that site at all. You might be able to see something that I can't. If you have any credible information to support your argument about merchandise post it, but please spare us D.T. "facts".
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League
Guest
"No, but I am grinning smugly." Are you on drugs? If you think bigfooty.com.au is more credible than the Daily Telegraph then you're beyond brainwashed. Your AFL mates are always pointing to bigfooty.com.au as if it's the most trustworthy souce in the universe. I do not trust the mainstream media one bit, but on the same note I will not trust a site that is run by some nutty AFL fan who was caught out by MediaSpy for telling lies. How can anyone take you seriously when you believe that a biased pro-AFL site is more credible than the mainstream media?
Dingo
Guest
"You’re having a laugh, aren’t ya?" No, but I am grinning smugly. :)
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League
Guest
Part of the broadcast agreement was that all four weekend matches would be broadcast into QLD and NSW on one of the secondary channels. If it wasn't for that then Seven would have been happy to not air the games until 1:00am, or not at all.
Australian Rules
Guest
"I know this because I read an article about it on a media website a couple of years ago." Well, it's case closed then. "Seven don’t even want to broadcast the AFL into QLD and NSW." And you know this because...you don't like AFL?
Australian Rules
Guest
He wasn't quoting bigfooty. But you WERE quoting Rebecca Wilson and Phil Rothfield haha
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League
Guest
Keep telling yourself that poor ratings in the four markets that command more advertising revenue than every other market put together, combined with good ratings in the other markets, equals more money than good ratings in the four markets that rake in the most money. If the AFL believed you were right then they wouldn't be wasting millions of dollars on trying to get a leg into the door of those four markets. Keep telling yourself that Aussie rules on 7Mate in QLD/NSW commands advertising revenue. While you're telling yourself that, the networks are giving free ad space on their secondary channels to the companies that pay to air a commercial on their main channels.
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League
Guest
"If you want any credibility all, don’t quote an article from the Terrorgaffe as proof of something being true, especially one written by the universally disrespected Rebecca Wilson and Phil Rothfield." You're having a laugh, aren't ya? Your Aussie rules buddies are always quoting bigfooty.com.au. That site has been exposed as a bias site that peddles out fudged data. I'll take the Daily Telegraph over bigfooty.com.au any day.
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League
Guest
"Ultimately, a KFC ad airing during an AFL game in QLD, NSW, VIC, SA & WA…provides more revenue than one that airs in QLD and NSW. That basic concept is one Qgirl fails to understand." In your opinion, which is hopelessly blinded by your passion for AFL. Free TV does not back you up. The stats on there show that far more can be gained from rating well in Sydney, Brisbane, Regional NSW and Regional QLD. AFL fails. You're crazy if you think KFC is going to pay a fortune to air a commercial on 7Mate during an AFL game that's broadcast into QLD and NSW. The ads on the secondary channels don't really command anything. The networks usually give free ad space away to the companies who purchase commercial space on the main channels. I know this because I read an article about it on a media website a couple of years ago. Seven don't even want to broadcast the AFL into QLD and NSW.
Australian Rules
Guest
Qgirl 85k on a secondary channel IS actually quite good. It's more than the NRL has ever rated on Gem...ever. You argue that none of the Fox viewers for AFL are from Qld or NSW - which is frankly ridiculous. So I don't *think* I'm dumb, but I'll see if you are... AFL attracts national advertisers in every single state and territory. The NRL is primarily confined to 2 states and 1 territory. Which do you think has the greater national advertising pull? All states...or 2? I'll give you some time to think about it. Matt_S Your argument raises a different question. The amount of promotion may NOT be yielding satisfactory ratings - but that's a completely differetn issue and one for the AFL to determine. Ultimately, a KFC ad airing during an AFL game in QLD, NSW, VIC, SA & WA...provides more revenue than one that airs in QLD and NSW. That basic concept is one Qgirl fails to understand.
Dingo
Guest
@ QGirl, I'll give you a tip If you want any credibility all, don't quote an article from the Terrorgaffe as proof of something being true, especially one written by the universally disrespected Rebecca Wilson and Phil Rothfield. If NRL did sell more merch than the AFL it would be the ONLY area in which it exceeds the AFL at anything. So all things being equal, even those with minimal mathematical ability, would be able to work out for themselves which one would sell more.
Matt_S
Roar Pro
AR, you must also understand the amazing amount of publicity that Swans game gets on 7 & its digital stations. i mean advertising during Home & Away, X Factor etc , same with the Lions. It is absolutely staggering. And puts the Swans figures into further scrutiny.. How long has NRL been live into Victoria on a consistent week to week basis? 30 plus years, opps sorry, that has been VFL/AFL into the Northern States. Now how much promo do the Storm really get on 9 in Melbourne? They can't even tell their viewers on Wide World of Sport they have NRL on GEM.
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League
Guest
Daily Telegraph published a story a couple of years ago: "THE AFL is reeling after receiving an independent report into the state of its merchandising business, putting it well behind the NRL in terms of the multi-million dollar industry. The report, obtained by Bec and Buzz, says the AFL's sales are $15 million less than the NRL across the country, and reveals: * The AFL sells a whopping 68 per cent less merchandise per fan than the NRL, though twice as many attend AFL games than NRL matches; * Licensing revenue has fallen dramatically, even though memberships and game attendances are steady; and * The AFL sells only one-tenth of the merchandise per person attending a game than the most successful merchandising code in the world, the NFL. The report is damning of distribution and point of sale strategies and has called for a complete overhaul of every aspect of the AFL's licensing department. The AFL is now looking at a complete restructure of the department, which will lead to many of the current licensees being axed.
Dingo
Guest
Matt _S, rugby league people ALWAYS claim that the NRL outsells the AFL in merchandise but they NEVER back it up with links. However, when someone disputes their claim, the rl person demands a link. Do you see any hypocrisy in that? For your benefit I have added a couple of links so that before you make any unsubsantiated claims again you will know the facts. It is several years old but I think you will be able to get the picture. "AFL licensed product also maintains its position as Australia’s number one licensed sports brand with retail sales of more than $150 million in 2006." http://www.superbrands.com/au/content/view/182/1/ 2008. "At the end of the 2nd quarter, the NRL’s licensing program (including Centenary of Rugby League royalties) was up 22% on the same period last year. This represents more than $65M worth of retail sales for NRL, Kangaroos and Centenary of Rugby League sales for quarters 1 and 2." http://www.sportsbar.net.au/nrl-state-of-the-game/ It is almost impossible to find current and complete info on this for some reason.
Queensland's Game Is Rugby League
Guest
85k isn't a good rating. Obviously 18k is worse, but it does't make the 85k good. But why bring it up? I never said the NRL draws great ratings in Melbourne. An advertiser isn't going to pay too much money for a spot on a program that draws just 85k viewers when there's a cooking program on SBS drawing HIGHER ratings. If you do not understand that then you're just dumb. My point about most businesses being in QLD, NSW and Vic stands. There are more franchises for most businesses in QLD, NSW and Vic than there are in SA, WA and Tas. It doesn't matter if it's Bunnings, KFC, McDonalds or Coles.You'll find more of those stores in QLD, NSW and Vic. If you do not understand that then you're just dumb.
oikee
Guest
No, not the cap, i dont have a problem with the cap. The cap is working. What i keep saying is not working is the rewards to clubs with huge junior bases. These clubs are suffering and are not rewarded for bringing through juniors. Look, some say the Broncos can choose from a huge junior base, yes this is true, but it is a refined base. We dont get to pick from NZ, or Fiji, or Perth, we are refined to only having juniors from our area because we bring them through. So we cant find a Shaun Johnson, or a Cherry Evens , even a Ben Barba gets through because we have Wallace and Hunt, so we lose twice. Not only do we have to bring through our own juniors, any we miss go to other clubs and we are stuck with hopeless players while other teams are useing our juniors to kill us, killing us with our own juniors. And what did these other clubs pay for the privalige. ? Nothing, they just turned up and took them. This is what i am gettingat, and i think it was bring back the bears who understands what i am talking about, he explained it clearly on another post. Now someone said i have broguht this up 10 times, i have to, just to get through to everyone. I have said 10 times the cap is ok, ok, ok. This has nothing to do with the cap, it is about rewarding clubs for having the burden of bringing through juniors. If i had my way, i would get rid of the juniors, every big powerhouse club would be better off killing off the juniors and just poaching, this is what i am getting at, the Broncos could then poach from anywhere, Melbourne,. NZ Perth, even England and France. And this is the hidden damage being done to powerhouse clubs.
oikee
Guest
No worries Eaglejack, just keeping everyone on their toes. Cheers.
Australian Rules
Guest
Let's take a look at 2 big games recently: FRI night game: Broncos v Storm - 18k in MEL (Gem), 302k in BRIS (9) SAT night game: Swans v Hawks - 85k in SYD (7M), 348k (Fox) haha keep at it chief...don't let the facts get in the way of your "war"