: Sun Mar 08, 2009 3:44 pm  

dally messenger wrote:

yes it is.

its just that RL admins dont know how to bargain.

Do you honestly believe that?

: Sun Mar 08, 2009 3:50 pm  

dally messenger wrote:

wait till 2012 and when im proven right think back to my comments.

we got a fair increase last time but AFL got loads more.

we should get at least what AFL get now given we have higher TV ratings.

that would mean $90 million more pa.

which if you take out $10 million for 2 new clubs, $30 million for other stuff like development offers, CRL, QRL etc leaves $50 million for a higher salary cap.

$50 million / 16 clubs = 3.125 million extra per club
current SC = 4.25 million

which would imply a new salary cap of over 7 million.

if we cant get at least what AFL gets now given origin and foxtel ratings, then gallop has to go

If GAllop manages to get a deal worth $90mill a year more I'll eat my hat and become a Force member! Never going to happen with News/Ch9 having such an influence on teh NRL. They didn't go to open market last time and I see nothing to suggest they will this time. Gallop has already started making noises that he thinks the NRL is getting what it deserves and AFL gets more because of its national profile.

: Mon Mar 09, 2009 12:27 pm  

Wellsy13 wrote:

Do you honestly believe that?

yep

: Mon Mar 09, 2009 12:29 pm  

JB Down Under wrote:

If GAllop manages to get a deal worth $90mill a year more I'll eat my hat and become a Force member! Never going to happen with News/Ch9 having such an influence on teh NRL. They didn't go to open market last time and I see nothing to suggest they will this time. Gallop has already started making noises that he thinks the NRL is getting what it deserves and AFL gets more because of its national profile.

well see next time. if we dont get what AFL are getting now, and they get another increase then yeah, gallop will have failed.

he has mentioned the idea that they will be splitting up the game between different broadcasters like AFL does.

the biggest problem is the connection between foxtel and 9 not paying market value

ever since they got together after the SL war, theyve had a very nice deal going keeping the rights down

the success of monday night football will interest FTA TV so bidding against foxtel will help the rights

: Mon Mar 09, 2009 1:21 pm  

dally messenger wrote:

TV deal which is worht a hell of a lot more than now leading to a much higher salary cap around $7 million per club

$7 Million?

Put the bong down

: Mon Mar 09, 2009 2:06 pm  

dally messenger wrote:

well see next time. if we dont get what AFL are getting now, and they get another increase then yeah, gallop will have failed.

he has mentioned the idea that they will be splitting up the game between different broadcasters like AFL does.

the biggest problem is the connection between foxtel and 9 not paying market value

ever since they got together after the SL war, theyve had a very nice deal going keeping the rights down

the success of monday night football will interest FTA TV so bidding against foxtel will help the rights

Only hope is IF we get two new teams, IF we split the package more, IF we go to open market amnd IF News actually pay the game what it is worth. I'm not holding my breath!

: Mon Mar 09, 2009 3:02 pm  

dally messenger wrote:

yep

So it's all about how many watch the game then? Demographics has nothing to do with it then? Or geographical spread of the market? Just how many people watch.

OK, Dally.

: Mon Mar 09, 2009 4:21 pm  

JB Down Under wrote:

Only hope is IF we get two new teams, IF we split the package more, IF we go to open market amnd IF News actually pay the game what it is worth. I'm not holding my breath!

well the club you want back in the NRL brought news in the first place.

if it had been left to the ARL it wouldnt have turned out this way

news ltd lost $500 million on RL in Oz and they need to make that up before they leave the game.

despite being the number 1 product on Foxtel, they pay AFL more per game than RL.

when asked why, the Foxtel boss said he was basing the AFL on potential viewers whilst RL was based on actual viewers

: Mon Mar 09, 2009 4:22 pm  

Wellsy13 wrote:

So it's all about how many watch the game then? Demographics has nothing to do with it then? Or geographical spread of the market? Just how many people watch.

OK, Dally.

demographics are fairly similar.

indeed studies have shown in RL vs RU that the demographics dont vary too much on TV for club games.

indeed it costs more to advertise during SL games than the GP.

do your research

: Mon Mar 09, 2009 4:23 pm  

hindyscrack wrote:

$7 Million?

Put the bong down

parra fun huh?

makes sense from that reference