1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The Future According to the ARLC

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by Frogz, Oct 29, 2012.

  1. Frogz

    Frogz Well-Known Member Premium Member

    +1,931 /43
    Here it is..The long awaited blueprint for the future of Rugby League.

    More members...more bums on seats.....I dont think they have been listening to the punters. Like Parramata, 8 home games next season at Parra Stadium...Members are dropping like flies I beleive....Cheaper to just buy tickets to the stand for the 8 games...

    Brisbane Broncos forced down our throats every week on Channel 9

    I must admit I dont have a lot of confidence in this mob....of which some are interims.

  2. bones

    bones Bones Knows

    +9,037 /102
    What is a Lorld Cup?
  3. Dan

    Dan Kim Jong Dan Staff Member Administrator 2016 Tipping Competitor 2017 Tipping Competitor

    +7,729 /120
    and the night time grand final. The single worst idea ever!
  4. The Who

    The Who Well-Known Member Premium Member

    +7,246 /173
    It seems to me that the ARL is confused. They want more fans at matches yet cede control to TV networks who, naturally, are only interested in those who DON'T attend matches.

    If the ARL was serious it would make ticket prices cheaper and schedule matches when fans were most likely to attend. Their last 'brainwave' about playing on a Thursday night is, again, purely for TV audiences, as is Monday night football and the three Saturday night games.
  5. Dan79

    Dan79 Active Member

    +71 /0
    The clubs should get a bigger say in when they play. Obviously that doesn't mean everyone plays Friday night. But there opinion should count. If a club doesn't get it's preferred time slot there should be some incentive to move it. I think there is a bonus for playing Monday nights as it stand. Because it is detrimental to the crowd numbers. I can't see Thursday night football being overly successful. Manly home games belong on Sunday afternoon. Raiders are Saturday night specials and so on.
    • Like Like x 2
    • tookey

      tookey Well-Known Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

      +5,784 /186
      Isn't that what David Lorld tried to organise once?
    • Mals

      Mals Well-Known Member Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

      +1,650 /39
      Exactly if the Commish was serious about more fans attending games we would have:
      Friday x2 games
      Saturday x3 games
      Sunday x3 games

      Only the Friday night games need to overlap in scheduling, with Channel 9 delaying a game anyway.

      Why are Channel 9 against broadcasting on a Saturday night?
    • Chip and Chase

      Chip and Chase True Supporter Staff Member Administrator Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

      +8,573 /80
      If they want to pocket $1bill + for TV rights then you have to expect to pander to the TV networks who are shelling out the money. If they want to maintain control and dictate to the broadcasters then make that a stipulation for the bidding process and be prepared to get less revenue. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

      I sincerely doubt they would generate anywhere near the revenue from bums on seats that they do from broadcast rights, regardless of when the matches are scheduled. NRL fans just don't go to the games, it's a fact.
    • simon64

      simon64 Well-Known Member Premium Member

      +2,542 /32
      C and C is right.

      For the networks, its an investment. They are looking for a return and nothing else.

      But I've been watching the A-League over the first few rounds. They have done a great job increasing crowd numbers. The "local derby" concept has really gathered momentum too. I bet Parramatta watched with envy as they sold out their home ground with 5 days to go before the match.

      Yes, granted they are playing in summer to avoid going head to head with AFL and NRL (I don't count the Super 15....lowest game ever....even worse than AFL). But compared to where soccer once was in Australia with all the ethnic alliances, the administration is doing a pretty good job.

      Now watch David Galloot screw it all up....but that's a whole other episode.
    • Frogz

      Frogz Well-Known Member Premium Member

      +1,931 /43
      And how many gounds hold 20,000 +
    • mmmdl

      mmmdl Active Member

      +105 /2

      The AFL certainly don't seem to pander to the networks anywhere near as much as the NRL do.

      Despite there only being 22 Friday night games last year, they managed to get 14 of the 18 teams on at some stage, with Geelong on the most times, with 8. Yet they also got a good TV deal. So it seems they got to have their cake and eat it too.
    • Phantar

      Phantar Well-Known Member

      +273 /0
      The game is being run by Queenslanders now. It's a vision thing. Just ask ELO:

      It's a vision thing
      It's a terrible thing to lose
      It's a given thing
      What a terrible thing to lose...
    • Peter C

      Peter C Well-Known Member Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

      +1,204 /26
      Channel 9 consider league on free to air on a Saturday night as a graveyard, and FOX's super Saturday is a winner.
      Monday night on FOX is also a huge ratings winner.
      League on FOX on Saturday and Monday night was never going to change.
    • Chip and Chase

      Chip and Chase True Supporter Staff Member Administrator Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

      +8,573 /80
      Your better AFL sides average around 40K crowds. Overall AFL crowd average is around 30K, and that's with GWS and GC dragging the average down. NRL average crowd would be half that. Also AFL membership mentality leaves NRL for dead in terms of numbers. I imagine that their merchandise sales leave ours for dead as well. So the AFL have better revenue streams available to them.

      You must also remember that the AFL auction their broadcast rights on the basis of them setting their own schedule and not giving up that right to the broadcaster. Who knows what that costs them in the washup ? They might be able to have a much better cake if they chose to sell their control of scheduling, but they chose not to.
    • Jono

      Jono Well-Known Member

      +176 /5
      On top of this, their deal was so high for 2 reasons:

      1) FOX raised the price by offering more for the right to show all games on a new channel. This is to get the higher viewers in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth. They already have a crunch on the NSW and Queensland markets, so there was no extra revenue coming in from the NRL rights

      2) Ad break opportunities in the AFL are a lot higher allowing them to make more revenue. In an average game of AFL there are 4 mandatory breaks, plus the times that they go to breaks after a goal is scored. Even if no points were scored in League, or AFL, AFL still gets double the number of breaks that NRL games get (4 for the AFL, 2 for the NRL). Add in the fact that there is on average 10 - 15 goals in an AFL game, compared to an average of say 5-10 tries in NRL and you get the picture.

      The only answer is expanding League into the West, and stopping games being live. Start the telecast as live but every time the ball goes out, go to an ad break. The game will continue at the ground, but it will fall 20-30 seconds behind per ad break. By the end of the game, they will be maybe 5 mins behind the live game. This will also force people to go out to the games if they want the game live....or just avoid your phone until the game is over.

      Expanding into the West gives FOX an opportunity to use League to expand into Perth homes, like they are with the AFL now. It will also allow them to run either 2 live games on Fridays, 2 live games on Saturdays, or a 4pm live game on Nine on Sundays, or even a 730pm game on Sunday nights from the West. And they say expansion should wait...it's one of the reasons the NRL has no say in the broadcasting, and why Gyngall gets to have his pro-Brisbane FTA coverage.

      Lets just hope getting rid of the last rights in this bidding process will allow us to take full control in 5 years from the networks and get the best price.

      If I was the NRL I would have taken 10's bid of $800 million for 4 games. Yes, 4 games wouldn't have been televised but it would have meant that FOX would have come to the table after losing over 100,000 subscriptions on the East Coast, and Gyngall/ Nine would realise they don't have the power and that they need us more than we need them.

    Share This Page