View Full Version : Expansion NRL - Sydney clubs on death row
RussellEbertHandball
22 May 2008, 01:23
A bit dramatic, but the NSW government increased pokies tax and smoking bans is hurting the Leagues (licensed) clubs which means they are giving smaller grants, up to $2mil less, to the football clubs.
Sydney clubs on death row (http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/sport/nrl/story/0,26799,23732384-5006066,00.html)
By Josh Massoud | May 21, 2008 12:00am
NRL boss David Gallop has stunned the league world by revealing several Sydney clubs are on death row.
With the city at fever pitch ahead of tonight's Origin opener at ANZ Stadium, Gallop delivered the sobering news that Sydney can no longer support nine teams under the current economic and political climate.
Yesterday's meeting of all 16 club CEOs was presented with depressing figures that illustrate the receding bottom lines of leagues clubs.
The NSW Government's 40 per cent poker machine tax and the introduction of smoking bans has led to a 10 per cent decay in revenue across all NRL-aligned clubs this financial year. Chillingly, last month's earnings were down 14 per cent on those recorded for April 2007.
Rising taxes and shrinking revenues have crunched outfits that are traditionally reliant on leagues club grants to survive.
After farewelling $2 million from their grant this year, St George Illawarra are bracing for another painful cut in 2009. Parramatta and Penrith are both eying $500,000 cuts, as are the Roosters.
Having fielded wholesale concerns yesterday, Gallop emerged with a firm belief the situation is "nearing crisis point''.
"The message is coming through in no uncertain terms that some Sydney clubs will die if things don't change,'' Gallop said. "It's a matter that has been raised on any number of occasions but we are fast approaching a time when government needs to confront just how severe the situation is becoming.''
Although Gallop didn't name the clubs most at risk, it is believed the NRL holds grave concerns over the sustainability of St George Illawarra, Cronulla and Penrith.
It has been nearly a year since Gallop appealed in writing to NSW premier and Dragons fan Morris Iemma about the issue. NRL insiders claim Iemma's office has been silent ever since, although Parramatta boss Denis Fitzgerald has spoken to his deputy John Watkins.
All Sydney-based NRL bosses held a preliminary meeting about the pokies tax at Canterbury Leagues Club on Monday morning to thrash out a relief package.
Their suggestions will be parlayed into a landmark summit of all NSW-based leagues clubs on Friday, to be hosted by Parramatta.
It is understood the clubs will approach the government for a partial rebate based on charter spending, including football club grants.
Iemma is in China this week and does not return until Friday. With no guarantees, Sydney clubs yesterday discussed alternative means of raising money and cutting costs to alleviate the black hole.
Moving more games to the Central Coast's Bluetongue Stadium - which offers attractive hiring terms - appears to be one of the most popular options.
Sydney clubs have also discussed moving home games against Queensland-based sides to Suncorp Stadium, with the Bulldogs agreeing to play the Cowboys in Brisbane later this year.
Not sure how much is exaggerated to stir up a government response but sounds like they have to take actions that a few of the low drawing, revenue poor, Vic based AFL clubs have had do over the last decade.
RussellEbertHandball
22 May 2008, 01:29
And from the SMH
Sydney clubs will die, warns Gallop (http://www.leaguehq.com.au/news/news/sydney-clubs-will-die-warns-gallop/2008/05/20/1211182802049.html)
Brad Walter | May 21, 2008
NRL chief executive David Gallop has warned that some Sydney clubs face extinction.
Gallop made the dire warning at a meeting of NRL club chief executives in Sydney yesterday that focused on finding ways to boost the game's finances. But as the CEOs discussed issues such as increasing memberships, the majority of Sydney clubs confirmed that funding from their leagues clubs was nearing crisis point as a result of the NSW Government's increased poker machine tax.
"We are working with the leagues club industry to provide clear projections but the message is coming through in no uncertain terms that some Sydney NRL clubs will die if things don't change," Gallop said. "It is a matter that has been raised on any number of occasions but we are fast approaching a time when government needs to confront just how severe the situation is becoming. It won't just affect NRL supporters but will rob thousands of kids of an affordable chance to get out and play sport."
St George Illawarra have already been affected by a cut of $2 million to their annual leagues club grant and a number of other clubs face similar cutbacks.
The grim financial picture is not likely to result in the CEOs agreeing today to proposals to increase the payments to Origin players from $12,500 to $20,000 - or to play representative fixtures on weekends free of club games.
NSW coach Craig Bellamy and captain Danny Buderus yesterday said the strain being placed upon the game's elite players was forcing them out of the NRL at an earlier age.
"These guys that play Origin, they play 24 real tough games, then probably their teams are in the semi-finals and then they go on tours at the end of the year, that's so hard on our elite players - those players get burnt out before their time," Bellamy said. "It ends up costing them financially because it cuts one or two years off their career."
Meanwhile, Bulldogs coach Steve Folkes and North Queensland's Ian Millward have been linked to the Hull job after former Manly boss Peter Sharp parted company with the Super League on Monday. Folkes, who will be replaced by brother-in-law Kevin Moore at the end of the season, has an agent in England trying to find him a post, while Millward is believed to have been targeted by Hull.
<snip>
Glory and Fame
22 May 2008, 01:35
It's just the poker machine lobby crying wolf and having a whinge. When pokie palaces cry poor, it's hard to take it seriously.
If that's the only danger NRL clubs are under, they've got nothing to worry about.
stmookeyj
22 May 2008, 01:39
If the AFL club is reliant on this income long term (they'll get assistance from the league at least in the short term) then wouldn't that spell trouble for them too? They'll also need money from somewhere other than the AFL.
RussellEbertHandball
22 May 2008, 01:43
Yeah I know it's the pokie lobby, but some of the Sydney RL clubs are pretty dependant on Leagues clubs grants. Look at the 2006 financials of the NRL clubs in this article.
Get rich or die tryin' (http://www.leaguehq.com.au/news/news/sydney-clubs-feel-the-squeeze/2007/07/27/1185339261724.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2)
Scaremongering. Clubs are getting off their collective butts and finding other revenue sources eg. property/retail etc. Souths, Cronulla, Balmain, Manly are just a few who have gone down this path.
The only thing that will kill league is the inept management ruining the game. Look at Parramatta, Fitzgerald has run the show there for over 30 years. I would think it is time for some new ideas.
erpel9999
22 May 2008, 02:38
Yeah I know it's the pokie lobby, but some of the Sydney RL clubs are pretty dependant on Leagues clubs grants. Look at the 2006 financials of the NRL clubs in this article.
Get rich or die tryin'
some interesting figures there.
2006 average home attendances
brisbane - 31,208 Gate takings: $10 million
newcastle - 21,848 Gate takings: $3.4 million
north queensland - 19,681 Gate takings: $3.13 million
wests tigers - 18,883 Gate takings: $1.5 million
bulldogs - 18,041 Gate takings: $1.3 million
storm - 10,853 Gate takings: $549,000
some huge variations,
nq average only 800 more people yet double the tigers takings.
it's obviously expensive to go the footy in brisbane
melbourne suffer from being the only team with an entrenched membership culture, thanks to the afl. if half the people attending each week use a membership, it obviously affects gate takings.
RussellEbertHandball
22 May 2008, 02:46
some interesting figures there.
2006 average home attendances
storm - 10,853 Gate takings: $549,000
melbourne suffer from being the only team with an entrenched membership culture, thanks to the afl. if half the people attending each week use a membership, it obviously affects gate takings.
The RL posters can better inform you but form another thread I think News Ltd collect all of the storms marketing revenue direct then transfer it to them, so that's why it looks like 90%+ of revenue comes from News Ltd. Not sure if the same thing is done with season ticket revenue.
Then again if this is only game day gate takings revenue, then you are right about the membership structure of the different cities.
erpel9999
22 May 2008, 04:38
The RL posters can better inform you but form another thread I think News Ltd collect all of the storms marketing revenue direct then transfer it to them, so that's why it looks like 90%+ of revenue comes from News Ltd. Not sure if the same thing is done with season ticket revenue.
Then again if this is only game day gate takings revenue, then you are right about the membership structure of the different cities.
it was just game day i was referring to.
The storm financial details have always been vague/incomplete.
this article says they have no listed sponsors, yet they have one of the most lucrative jersey sponsorships in the country (both codes)
maybe one day we will find out how they are really going...
finders
22 May 2008, 05:57
Only 67,000 at ANZ if you can believe the figure at the SOO last night for the "greatest game of the season" = not looking good when the thugby cant even sell out their showpiece game anymore.
BTW why the ____ is this shit of an interstate game featuring NSW and QLD on FTA TV in MELBOURNE?
littleduck
22 May 2008, 10:20
Only 67,000 at ANZ if you can believe the figure at the SOO last night for the "greatest game of the season" = not looking good when the thugby cant even sell out their showpiece game anymore. Yeah, a bit disappointing when you only get 67,000 to an 82,000 seat stadium. State of Origin should sellout regardless. However, Queensland have the opportunity now to win at Lang Park in 3 weeks and force a decider at Homebush in Sydney. That would be a guaranteed sellout, even in Sydney.
BTW why the ____ is this shit of an interstate game featuring NSW and QLD on FTA TV in MELBOURNE?
The ratings will tell you why. It also went to LIVE to Adelaide and Perth.
fishmonger
22 May 2008, 11:03
BTW why the ____ is this shit of an interstate game featuring NSW and QLD on FTA TV in MELBOURNE?
a) because a lot of people want to watch it. In case you haven't noticed there has been a huge influx of NSW and QLD interstate migrants to Melbourne in the past 5 years.
b) there was nothing else on.
Only 67,000 at ANZ if you can believe the figure at the SOO last night for the "greatest game of the season" = not looking good when the thugby cant even sell out their showpiece game anymore.
And the AFL couldn't sell out its "once in 150 years" showcase either. (personally, I think if it was Vic vs SA they would have, but the AFL is so keen to emulate the rugby league and American showcases that it needed its own Pro-Bowl of only two teams of the best players. if only they knew that they only had the support of one team :rolleyes:)
Personally, I enjoyed watching the first Origin match. A bit of a walkover as far as the Maroons are concerned, but they will regather. They are missing Lockyer and Inglis only showed glimpses of what he is capable of. It was a bit boring in the middle of the match, but there were some great moments.
gostk86
22 May 2008, 11:05
ticket prices were shocking thats why people didnt turn up, BTW 67 000 last time i looked was a big number
The ratings will tell you why. It also went to LIVE to Adelaide and Perth.
Actually, from the looks of it, the game was beaten in the ratings in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth by just about everything. Carson, House repeats, Ugly Betty, Spicks and Specks, The New Inventors, all rating higher in those cities.
Although in fairness, it did come close to beating Carson in Melbourne.
littleduck
22 May 2008, 11:39
Actually, from the looks of it, the game was beaten in the ratings in Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth by just about everything. Carson, House repeats, Ugly Betty, Spicks and Specks, The New Inventors, all rating higher in those cities.
Although in fairness, it did come close to beating Carson in Melbourne."from the looks of it"
what the 'ell are you looking at????
Freo Big Fella
22 May 2008, 14:33
"from the looks of it"
what the 'ell are you looking at????
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=445502
119,000 in Perth. Beaten by Spicks and Specks (145,000), The New Inventors (125,000), Ugly Betty (129,000) and a House Repeat (162,000) AND Big Brother with the queer eye bloke (138,000).
84,000 in Adelaide. Beaten by the same things it was beaten by in Perth by similar margins.
283,000 in Melbourne. Drubbed by spicks and specks (425,000), beaten by House (368,000), Ugly Betty (289,000), Big Brother (294,000).
Looking like a bit of a blunder from Nein. Especially in Perth. Will probably go back to being beaten by the IPL at midnight for games two and three.
If the propaganda is true, a few Rugby League clubs going to the wall in Sydney could be a good thing for a new West Sydney Aussie Rules team. Less competition, possibility to pick up disenfranchised RL supporters, loss of local team association etc. Now I'm not saying that there will be wholesale conversions from League supporters to AFL supporters, but less RL teams in Sydney should be looked at as a positive thing for a West Sydney team - not negative. Patrick Smith's arguement is from the wrong point/ or atleast negative point of view.
littleduck
22 May 2008, 15:22
119,000 in Perth. Encouraging signs and such audience will be used by WARL surely towards justifying their re-admission to the NRL football competititon.
Beaten by Spicks and Specks (145,000), The New Inventors (125,000), Ugly Betty (129,000) and a House Repeat (162,000) AND Big Brother with the queer eye bloke (138,000). What did you expect?
84,000 in Adelaide. Beaten by the same things it was beaten by in Perth by similar margins. Production costs were $nil for this broadcast, so it was all extra exposure for sponsors and all profit for 9.
283,000 in Melbourne. Drubbed by spicks and specks (425,000), beaten by House (368,000), Ugly Betty (289,000), Big Brother (294,000). AFL would love to get 283,000 in Sydney for anything they dish up.
Looking like a bit of a blunder from Nein. Hardly.
Especially in Perth. Hardly, considering the recent high profile push from the west for re-admission.
Will probably go back to being beaten by the IPL at midnight for games two and three.Good chance it will be LIVE again too.
Doctor Jolly
22 May 2008, 15:24
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=445502
119,000 in Perth. Beaten by Spicks and Specks (145,000), The New Inventors (125,000), Ugly Betty (129,000) and a House Repeat (162,000) AND Big Brother with the queer eye bloke (138,000).
84,000 in Adelaide. Beaten by the same things it was beaten by in Perth by similar margins.
283,000 in Melbourne. Drubbed by spicks and specks (425,000), beaten by House (368,000), Ugly Betty (289,000), Big Brother (294,000).
Looking like a bit of a blunder from Nein. Especially in Perth. Will probably go back to being beaten by the IPL at midnight for games two and three.
Ouch, those figures are bad.
What is it with RL in Sydney at the moment. Declining crowds, declining ratings. You'd think the 100 year thing would be a boost.
littleduck
22 May 2008, 15:34
Ouch, those figures are bad. How so?
What is it with RL in Sydney at the moment ... You'd think the 100 year thing would be a boost.Something is amiss in Sydney I agree, but who knows what it might be. It could be the tough economic conditions and the resultant decline in discretionary spending for Sydneysiders who have to pay higher interest rates on their expensive houses and and higher petrol prices. I think this might have something to do with it.
Freo Big Fella
22 May 2008, 16:08
Encouraging signs and such audience will be used by WARL surely towards justifying their re-admission to the NRL football competititon.
In what is arguably the most high profile prime time slot of the week, for what is supposed to be the showcase of the sport in this country it's a pretty terrible peformance.
Outside the minds of you and your feeble ilk who seem to have taken up residence on this board, 119,000 is a pretty crap showing.
What did you expect?
Better than crap, considering it's the NRL's biggest yearly event.
Production costs were $nil for this broadcast, so it was all extra exposure for sponsors and all profit for 9.
They can probably put Ramsey or a CSI repeat on and get a better ratings peformance judging by the interest the bulk of South Australians showed.
AFL would love to get 283,000 in Sydney for anything they dish up.
I expect they'd be pretty alarmed if one of their showcase games put in as terrible a performance in Sydney as the NRL did in Perth last night.
Hardly.
Hardly, considering the recent high profile push from the west for re-admission.
Look out Western Force! Once their highest profile game of the year beats House, Carson and Adam Hills, the Reds are coming for you!:rolleyes:
Good chance it will be LIVE again too.
Don't get your hopes up. Nein Perth are nothing if not reactionary.:)
How so?
Something is amiss in Sydney I agree, but who knows what it might be. It could be the tough economic conditions and the resultant decline in discretionary spending for Sydneysiders who have to pay higher interest rates on their expensive houses and and higher petrol prices. I think this might have something to do with it.
Yeah, to take a family of 4, to sit in the nosebleeds (ie all that was left), would put you back over $400, without taking transport, food and anything else you wanted to buy at the ground.
Considering the tough economic times here, no surprise that many can't afford that.
That said, the 2m+ (only including the 5 cities), was the most watched program of the year.
Funny enough, the Perth number will be bigger than any number that the Swans can get in their own city in 2008.
Well done Perth, well done Adelaide.
erpel9999
22 May 2008, 16:25
I expect they'd be pretty alarmed if one of their showcase games put in as terrible a performance in Sydney as the NRL did in Perth last night.
HALL OF FAME TRIBUTE MATCH Ten 1,317,000 112,000 676,000 101,000 204,000 225,000
213,000 in sydney and brisbane combined. whens the inquiry?
at least nrl has showcase games
catters05
22 May 2008, 16:34
Back onto the Sydney clubs.
Maybe rather then move the clubs.
The NRL could setup a division thing for NSW clubs, where 6-8 make the NRL, but the others play in the NSW League and have it setup so that clubs will be rewarded for making it.
And this could give Newtown Jets, North Sydney Bears etc to jump in.
Therefor setup so fans can get to local games for NSWRL and then the clubs on top play in the NRL and then the top 2 teams of NSWRL play off against bottom 2 NSW teams of NRL for spot.........or something.
Rather then moving the clubs?
littleduck
22 May 2008, 16:40
In what is arguably the most high profile prime time slot of the week, for what is supposed to be the showcase of the sport in this country it's a pretty terrible peformance. If you expected better from Perth, I share your disappointment.
Outside the minds of you and your feeble ilk who seem to have taken up residence on this board, 119,000 is a pretty crap showing. Fair enough, but its not too dissimilar to a Swans blockbusters in Sydney. Nobody suggests that Swans should not be on air in prime time despite their abysmal ratings for all their games because sometimes its just important to be on air and flying the AFL flag. The same applies for RL in Perth. If reports about the return of a Perth NRL team are serious then its important for RL to be on air in prime for its big games and flying the flag. Thus, you can judge success in both instances by virtue of being on air and flying the flag. Melbourne Storm would love to be on air in prime time flying the flag.
Better than crap, considering it's the NRL's biggest yearly event. It's the first time in years its be on prime time in Perth.
For you to be judging the audience as crap, you must have a ratings figure in mind that would be par for the course in your mind?
They can probably put Ramsey or a CSI repeat on and get a better ratings peformance judging by the interest the bulk of South Australians showed. Same for 7/10 in Sydney on Swans telecats in Sydney for Saturday Night AFL.
I expect they'd be pretty alarmed if one of their showcase games put in as terrible a performance in Sydney as the NRL did in Perth last night. Tribute Match was a showcase game attracting 70k to the G. Ratings in Sydney were abysmal and interest nonexistent.
Look out Western Force! Once their highest profile game of the year beats House, Carson and Adam Hills, the Reds are coming for you!:rolleyes: You're rubbishing RL's prime time ratings performance in Perth, but the Western Force have never been on FTA and can't even get on air for a midnight running.
Don't get your hopes up. Nein Perth are nothing if not reactionary.:)If they think a Perth NRL team is on the horizon they will be falling over themselves to show it !!!!!!!!!! They dont have AFL, so NRL is their only hope for high profile football.
Ouch, those figures are bad.
What is it with RL in Sydney at the moment. Declining crowds, declining ratings. You'd think the 100 year thing would be a boost.
The ratings in those cities weren't that that bad. Not good, but not abominable. Although it did have the bejesus promoted out of it here in Perth, every ad break for the last 5 days on 9 has contained a SoO promotion.
It's probably borderline whether those ratings will encourage 9 to keep the game on in prime time. And it's certainly better than the 12,000 audience NRL on Sunday arvo pulls in Perth every week.
Funny enough, the Perth number will be bigger than any number that the Swans can get in their own city in 2008.
so let me get this straight
the swans come 4th 22 times a year in sydney. they came 5th once for 15 minutes during a half time break, and RL trolls still talk about it as the biggest disaster in the history of sydney sport
meanwhile, the RLs all star game comes 5th for the entire match, and its Well done Perth and well done Adelaide.
you rugby league trolls really are capable of some utterly amazing leaps of logic to push your agenda and paint your own code in a positive light and the AFL negatively.
the biggest event in your code just got done by the equivalent to iron chef for the entirety of the gameplay and you guys are calling it a win.
unbelievable.
Same for 7/10 in Sydney on Swans telecats in Sydney for Saturday Night AFL.
What the hell are you on about ld? When 10 aren't showing the Swans on saturday night, their replacement programs generally don't do any better.
fabulousphil
22 May 2008, 16:50
I think the ratings were ok for Perth.... got invited to a mates place to watch but had early start and did not go.
IMO the only way for RL to get a national team is for the force to go under and whilst alot of kiwis will follow the league most poms and south africans only follow the rah rah.
Most people who are actually from Perth dont follow either rugby code but with huge immigrant populations of kiwis, poms and SAfricans one of the rugby codes has enough support and ATM it is the force.
IMO not enough support for both codes ATM
ringleader
22 May 2008, 16:59
What the hell are you on about ld? When 10 aren't showing the Swans on saturday night, their replacement programs generally don't do any better.
So 10 come 4th every week?
You got some ratings figures to back this up?
So 10 come 4th every week?
You got some ratings figures to back this up?
From the rare times that the individual figures are published from Sydney, yes. And it's sometimes commented on by media analysts.
Go and look them up for yourself, if they're available then you can usually find them on www.mediaspy.org/forum.
And to the previous poster that suggested it, Swans telecasts don't come 4th every week. When they're on Saturday or Sunday arvo, they generally come 1st or 2nd.
littleduck
22 May 2008, 17:26
I think the ratings were ok for Perth.... got invited to a mates place to watch but had early start and did not go.
IMO the only way for RL to get a national team is for the force to go under and whilst alot of kiwis will follow the league most poms and south africans only follow the rah rah.
Most people who are actually from Perth dont follow either rugby code but with huge immigrant populations of kiwis, poms and SAfricans one of the rugby codes has enough support and ATM it is the force.
IMO not enough support for both codes ATM
Why do you believe support is mutually exclusive?
fabulousphil
22 May 2008, 17:52
Why do you believe support is mutually exclusive?
Had the reds been here .... the super 14 team would have gone to Melbourne.........my gut feel is that both rugby codes would not survive here together at the highest level.
ringleader
22 May 2008, 18:04
From the rare times that the individual figures are published from Sydney, yes. And it's sometimes commented on by media analysts.
Go and look them up for yourself, if they're available then you can usually find them on www.mediaspy.org/forum (http://www.mediaspy.org/forum).
And to the previous poster that suggested it, Swans telecasts don't come 4th every week. When they're on Saturday or Sunday arvo, they generally come 1st or 2nd.
So that's a no and the Swans do come 4th. Their last Sunday arvo game only got 78k and was beaten by Gilmore girls
What Australia watched, Sunday
Description Total Sydney Melbourne Brisbane Adelaide Perth
1 SEVEN NEWS - SUN Seven 1,586,000 463,000 540,000 346,000 237,000
2 LOGIE ARRIVALS Nine 1,570,000 511,000 521,000 257,000 131,000 149,000
3 LOGIE AWARDS Nine 1,502,000 454,000 549,000 215,000 138,000 145,000
4 60 MINUTES Nine 1,398,000 425,000 387,000 244,000 175,000 167,000
5 NINE NEWS SUN Nine 1,384,000 391,000 370,000 261,000 231,000 132,000
6 GLADIATORS Seven 1,276,000 327,000 436,000 218,000 154,000 141,000
7 AUSTRALIA: LAND OF PARROTS ABC 1,264,000 336,000 383,000 250,000 136,000 159,000
8 BIG BROTHER - GATECRASHER Ten 1,160,000 409,000 329,000 168,000 121,000 133,000
9 ABC NEWS-SUN ABC 1,111,000 284,000 368,000 202,000 130,000 127,000
10 GREY'S ANATOMY Seven 1,074,000 337,000 292,000 174,000 117,000 154,000
11 POLICE FILES - UNLOCKED Seven 998,000 260,000 300,000 169,000 125,000 145,000
12 ABC NEWS UPDATE ABC 938,000 281,000 265,000 155,000 101,000 135,000
13 MY NAME IS EARL Seven 938,000 267,000 269,000 150,000 130,000 123,000
14 BIG BROTHER SUN Ten 929,000 304,000 268,000 156,000 96,000 105,000
15 BROTHERS & SISTERS Seven 786,000 258,000 230,000 122,000 73,000 103,000
16 EAST OF EVERYTHING ABC 781,000 261,000 217,000 127,000 75,000 100,000
19 STAR WARS III - REVENGE OF THE SITH Ten 622,000 157,000 196,000 115,000 83,000 70,000
23 MERCURIO'S MENU Seven 481,000 261,000 106,000 115,000
25 NINE'S SUNDAY FOOTBALL Nine 456,000 266,000 174,000 16,000
26 SEVEN'S AFL: RND 7: MELBOURNE VS FREMANTLE Seven 455,000 9,000 261,000 13,000 172,000
28 GILMORE GIRLS Nine 354,000 95,000 122,000 35,000 46,000 56,000
29 THE SIX BILLION DOLLAR EXPERIMENT SBS 345,000 118,000 89,000 56,000 45,000 36,000
41 SEVEN'S AFL: RND 7: SYDNEY VS WESTERN BULLDOGS Seven 206,000 78,000 Not shown 51,000 77,000 Not shown
Freo Big Fella
22 May 2008, 18:07
Fair enough, but its not too dissimilar to a Swans blockbusters in Sydney. Nobody suggests that Swans should not be on air in prime time despite their abysmal ratings for all their games because sometimes its just important to be on air and flying the AFL flag. The same applies for RL in Perth. If reports about the return of a Perth NRL team are serious then its important for RL to be on air in prime for its big games and flying the flag. Thus, you can judge success in both instances by virtue of being on air and flying the flag. Melbourne Storm would love to be on air in prime time flying the flag.
What a load of old cobblers, especially from someone so quick to repeatedly trot out the odd dissappointing Saturday night ratings figure for the Swans.
It's the first time in years its be on prime time in Perth.
Nein promoted the hell out of it, and gave it pride of place in the most competitive night of the week. They were clearly expecting better.
For you to be judging the audience as crap, you must have a ratings figure in mind that would be par for the course in your mind?
Not an exact figure, but I'd have certainly expected better than 4th overall in Melbourne and 5th overall in Perth, considering the fact that it's pretty much the NRL's prime event of the year.
Same for 7/10 in Sydney on Swans telecats in Sydney for Saturday Night AFL.
Massively publicised representative game v regular home and away game?
Got any other stupidly spurious comparasigns?
Tribute Match was a showcase game attracting 70k to the G. Ratings in Sydney were abysmal and interest nonexistent.
Closer, but still doesn't mean much in the long run considering it was simply a Victorian masturbation event.
If they think a Perth NRL team is on the horizon they will be falling over themselves to show it !!!!!!!!!! They dont have AFL, so NRL is their only hope for high profile football.
Considering that it appears very few people in Perth appear to give a shit about the NRL, given the flop that last nights telecast was, I think they'll be keeping their options open.
so let me get this straight
the swans come 4th 22 times a year in sydney. they came 5th once for 15 minutes during a half time break, and RL trolls still talk about it as the biggest disaster in the history of sydney sport
meanwhile, the RLs all star game comes 5th for the entire match, and its Well done Perth and well done Adelaide.
you rugby league trolls really are capable of some utterly amazing leaps of logic to push your agenda and paint your own code in a positive light and the AFL negatively.
the biggest event in your code just got done by the equivalent to iron chef for the entirety of the gameplay and you guys are calling it a win.
unbelievable.
You are right, League will probably get 4 good audiences all year in Perth and Adelaide (3 SOO and the GF). Apart from that, there will be nothing.
Not too bad for 2 cities that don't even have a team.
You are right, League will probably get 4 good audiences all year in Perth and Adelaide (3 SOO and the GF). Apart from that, there will be nothing.
Not too bad for 2 cities that don't even have a team.
Not really as AFL is broadcast in many places which dont have a team like Darwin and Tasmania.
littleduck
22 May 2008, 18:33
What a load of old cobblers, especially from someone so quick to repeatedly trot out the odd dissappointing Saturday night ratings figure for the Swans. Well they are considering the investment AFL make in Sydney, but I don't follow on and argue therefore that the Swans should not be on air. The AFL need the Swans on FTA to continue its Sydney expansion.
Nein promoted the hell out of it, and gave it pride of place in the most competitive night of the week. They were clearly expecting better. I don't know what they expected, but iIf expectation was higher then they must have had good reason to beleive they would achieve a higher official audience which in itself suggests good things.
Not an exact figure, but I'd have certainly expected better than 4th overall in Melbourne and 5th overall in Perth, considering the fact that it's pretty much the NRL's prime event of the year. I'm glad you have high expectations of SOO interest in Adelaide and Perth.
Got any other stupidly spurious comparasigns? Most likely.
Closer, but still doesn't mean much in the long run considering it was simply a Victorian masturbation event. A Victorian circle jerk you say?
Considering that it appears very few people in Perth appear to give a shit about the NRL, given the flop that last nights telecast was, I think they'll be keeping their options open.You failed to consider my reason for SOOII and SOOIII also being LIVE into Perth.
Hodgepodge
22 May 2008, 18:37
Good news that league is dying, the new teams in GoldCoast and West Sydney will help speed up the process. Everybody wins.
You are right, League will probably get 4 good audiences all year in Perth and Adelaide (3 SOO and the GF). Apart from that, there will be nothing.
Not too bad for 2 cities that don't even have a team.
thats nothing like what i said.
i guess if coming flat last for your showpiece games qualifies as a good audience, i guess you would classify H+A swans ratings in sydney as gangbusters
duck is quite right, the important thing is that its on and the flag is being flown, 100000 people in perth watched it, and anyone who wanted to could. (also, we had more top level sport on TV and we were spared another australian soap with miserable acting, CSI:conservative bullshit, yet another reality show or whatever other ____ing bullshit was gonna be on)
its not important to the code that the ratings were miserable. its important to the broadcasters, sure, but not to the code, as long as they are good enough to stay on the TV, then thats fine.
this is the exact situation the swans are in in sydney.
Eel_storm
22 May 2008, 18:52
A bit dramatic, but the NSW government increased pokies tax and smoking bans is hurting the Leagues (licensed) clubs which means they are giving smaller grants, up to $2mil less, to the football clubs.
Not sure how much is exaggerated to stir up a government response but sounds like they have to take actions that a few of the low drawing, revenue poor, Vic based AFL clubs have had do over the last decade.
Maybe Paramatta can merge with the Storm. They can be the Electric Eels.
So from my understanding the clubs in danger are
Canterbury Bulldogs
Cronulla Sharks
Manly-Warringah Sea Eagles
Penrith Panthers
St George Illawarra Dragons
Eel_storm
22 May 2008, 19:18
This is what they get for stealing all our players for the State of Origin games
Father Jack
22 May 2008, 20:38
Why is everyone going on about ratings when this thread is meant to be about the health of Sydney NRL clubs?
genghiskhan
22 May 2008, 20:48
Had the reds been here .... the super 14 team would have gone to Melbourne.........my gut feel is that both rugby codes would not survive here together at the highest level.
I agree with you. The two of them compete against each other for the corporate dollar, fans, and players.
Also, given their history and similarity, most people follow one or the other but not both. I can only see one surviving long term. In the past, union survived only because it was amateur.
thats nothing like what i said.
i guess if coming flat last for your showpiece games qualifies as a good audience, i guess you would classify H+A swans ratings in sydney as gangbusters
duck is quite right, the important thing is that its on and the flag is being flown, 100000 people in perth watched it, and anyone who wanted to could. (also, we had more top level sport on TV and we were spared another australian soap with miserable acting, CSI:conservative bullshit, yet another reality show or whatever other ____ing bullshit was gonna be on)
its not important to the code that the ratings were miserable. its important to the broadcasters, sure, but not to the code, as long as they are good enough to stay on the TV, then thats fine.
this is the exact situation the swans are in in sydney.
No it isn't the same, because the Swans play the game in Sydney, and have for quite some time.
There is no NRL team in Perth or Adelaide.
Last in the slot or not, it certainly surprised me that so many watched the game. All that means is that there are some people that may watch the game if they where given a choice........which is where they would be the same as those that watch the Swans on the box.
No it isn't the same, because the Swans play the game in Sydney, and have for quite some time.
There is no NRL team in Perth or Adelaide.
Last in the slot or not, it certainly surprised me that so many watched the game. All that means is that there are some people that may watch the game if they where given a choice........which is where they would be the same as those that watch the Swans on the box.
Or perhaps like an AFL grand final?
Eel_storm
22 May 2008, 21:32
The ratings would be a lot higher if the program was on at prime time, which i am guessing it is not.
gostk86
23 May 2008, 10:58
Souths look like they will relocate to Perth.
Sharks will fold or reloate to Adelaide.
Central Coast will get a new team
Dragons will relocate to Woolongong full time
Sunshine Coast will get new team
West Tigers to play at Campbelltown 9/12 home games
Souths look like they will relocate to Perth.
Sharks will fold or reloate to Adelaide.
Now do you think they could survive the move ?
What minium level of support do you think they'd need .
.
littleduck
23 May 2008, 15:46
Souths look like they will relocate to Perth. No they don't.
Sharks will fold or reloate to Adelaide. Why?
Central Coast will get a new team NSW have enough teams already.
Dragons will relocate to Woolongong full time Maybe, but WIN isn't really big enough for every game.
Sunshine Coast will get new team Maybe. Good idea.
West Tigers to play at Campbelltown 9/12 home games
What about Leichardt? Millions were spent upgrading this ground in recent years.
littleduck
23 May 2008, 15:47
Now do you think they could survive the move ?Yes.
What minium level of support do you think they'd need .
.Sufficient corporate support from the outset. Fan support and bums on seats eventually.
RussellEbertHandball
23 May 2008, 17:32
Hey ld when is Brisbane going to get a second NRL team? Are the Redcliffe Dolphins still trying to get in? Do they have the financial muscle to put together a team and to generate a big enough supporter base and revenue streams? You would think the Qld government and its Major Sports Facilities Authority would want a game at Suncorp every week.
Is there any team in The QRL who could do a Port and go it alone to advance from the QRL to the NRL or is there an area where maybe a couple of teams could go for a joint licence bid, a bit like Freo did?? I know that East and South Feo didn't put together a bid but the WAFC went for a distinct area separate from the heart of Perth and drew on the footy culture of the area ie East and South Freo teams as well as align a couple of other WAFL to it, ie in the early days it was a mini Claremont with Neesham's influence.
You would think any second team needs something like that rather than the South Qld Crushers who seemed to only draw on fans who were anti-Broncos. You have to have a more natural constituency than just looking for those who are anti the Broncos to last. There has to be some natural connection to the new team.
hey rugby league trolls, and LD, what are the chances of a sydney team actually folding? is this all just deathriding and scaremongering or what?
it seems to me from outside the code as just more bollocks of the "they will soon merge with rugby union" bullshit...
but then again, NRL clubs have died before. obviously all the clubs are trying to replace missing revenue from the pokie and smoking taxes with other streams, but football clubs are not known for their sterling managment skills, and you would expect every club to have varying levels of success.
will the government or NRL step in to prop up these clubs should they start going to the wall?
what is actually likely to happen?
will the government or NRL step in to prop up these clubs should they start going to the wall?
Morris Iemma is a Rugby League fan so im sure if the NRL clubs approach him he will give them what they want. I personally dont see any Rugby League clubs folding.
Sufficient corporate support from the outset. Fan support and bums on seats eventually.
Quantitative reply Please . Anybody can say "sufficient" .
What is sufficient ?
.
Here is the reason RL is struggling financially.
This is an excerpt from a Phil Gould article in the Sydney Morning Herald from February 2007:
How NRL dug itself into a hole
February 16, 2007
Phil Gould: How bungling NRL got stuck in the middle
Knock-on effect: why money may be streaming away from rugby league
Roy Masters: TV pays top-rating NRL half as much as AFL
League: TV or not TV is the question
So, where does all the money go?
"AFTER nine years and hundreds of millions of dollars being pumped into the NRL through so-called record broadcast-rights deals, how much money does the NRL have in the bank? I am reliably told next to nothing.
OK, then. After signing its latest broadcast-rights deals and (hopefully) a new naming-rights contract with Telstra, how much does the NRL plan to have in the bank in five years? Same answer.
By way of comparison, the highly impressive AFL Futures document not only gives us 100 per cent transparency on revenue and expenditure, it also displays budgets for retained revenue in future planning accounts for hundreds of millions of dollars.
And get this: the AFL also plans to own the Telstra Dome in Melbourne by 2025. How does it do that when it provides only a handful of the top-100 pay-TV shows each year compared to the NRL, which provides 73 of the top 100?
Why is the AFL deal so much better than the NRL deal? Because the NRL is kept on an intravenous drip. It gets enough to cover expenditure and little more.
The NRL is earning far less than it should be from pay-TV, internet and mobile-phone rights. The fact the game is half-owned and almost totally controlled by News Ltd has created a huge conflict of interest when it comes to the NRL's ability to maximise revenue from all-important broadcasting assets.
The magnitude of the new AFL pay-TV rights deal announced this week has finally delivered the knock-out blow; it puts the NRL deal to shame.
In the past two weeks, Herald columnists Roy Masters and Andrew Stevenson have revealed startling facts about the finances and workings of the NRL that should have grabbed everyone's attention.
These revelations have not only highlighted the conflict of interest created by having a media company such as News Ltd half-own the NRL, but the fact that the current NRL management is either reluctant, or perhaps even powerless, to challenge it.
News Ltd clearly has the superior negotiators when it comes to formulating important contracts but there's no doubt this is also to the detriment of the game and all other participants.
News Ltd knows how much money the NRL needs to cover the cost of running its competition. News Ltd also knows there's little likelihood a rival pay-TV offer would ever be accepted. So the NRL can only ever hope to negotiate enough money to cover its operating costs plus a small profit, which is then later divided between needy recipients.
If News Ltd didn't own half the game, would the NRL be able to negotiate better deals for its broadcasting rights? News Ltd doesn't own the AFL, and the AFL pay-TV deal has smacked the NRL deal for six.
Further, the growth of subscribers to Foxtel and Austar has been significantly driven by rugby league viewers in all states of Australia. So why does the NRL get the lesser deal?
One month from the kick off to the 2007 season, the NRL hasn't finalised a naming-rights contract with Telstra because of a massive bungle over ownership of the game's intellectual property assets.
The NRL is sweating on some good news from Telstra so it can put this mess behind it. However, the new deal will be nowhere near as great as it is reported to be.
The magical figure of $90 million being touted by the NRL will also include a huge amount of contra advertising and production costs to broadcasters rather than actual money to the NRL.
I found it hypocritical for the NRL to cast aspersions on the AFL pay-TV deal by saying the AFL figure included significant advertising and production costs when the NRL itself failed to mention its own deals are constructed the same way.
The NRL is struggling to save face. The rugby league public, and many of its stakeholders, are going to take far more convincing that an administration with such conflicting interests can adequately ensure the game's potential revenues are not being substantially eroded.
RussellEbertHandball
23 May 2008, 22:02
Haha, I saw the discussion on the NRL footy show last night about what is happening with the salary cap and losing players to Union or England.
None of them had the brains or guts to say that the NRL TV deal is corrupt. Until 7 and 10 know that the bidding process is fair and News Ltd are excluded from vetoing any deal, then why are they going to waste their time bidding and therefore driving up TV rights in the process.
Why didn't Matthew Jones or Fatty or Gus have the balls to say that 9 doesn't pay enough? Why didn't they say that News vetoed a Ch 7 deal that would have meant $50mil more over 6 years? Why didn't they have the guts to say that Fox Sports rips off the game? They make $80mil profit last year most of it off the back of the NRL games. Fox Sports is half Packer and half Murdoch. Parker's private company only owns 38% of the 25% of Ch 9, the other 75% owned by private equity group. Why be scared of upsetting him?
Foxtel owns the TV rights for the AFL therefore if a loss is to be made then, Telstra bears 50% loss and Packer and Murdoch only 25%. Yet Packer and Murdoch get all the profits out of the NRL rights as Fox Sports not Telstra own the rights. People inside the game have to have the guts to say that News Ltd is ____ing up the game. Until they have the guts then the game is stuffed. You can't have too much sympathy if the insiders are going to deliberately or stupidly bury their heads in the sand.
catters05
23 May 2008, 22:09
Are Souths in trouble with Crowe and the other guy looking like not investing as much into them anymore.
No, it's a media beat up. Souths, like Saints, Parra, Cant etc sell papers.
REH no fair minded league fan will ever argue that rugby league is run well, it's a disgrace the way the game is. The only positive is that we are NOWHERE near our potential in terms of growth, unlike the AFL.
In terms of management I have no problem in admitting AFL is a million times better run than RL.
RussellEbertHandball
24 May 2008, 00:40
No, it's a media beat up. Souths, like Saints, Parra, Cant etc sell papers.
REH no fair minded league fan will ever argue that rugby league is run well, it's a disgrace the way the game is. The only positive is that we are NOWHERE near our potential in terms of growth, unlike the AFL.
In terms of management I have no problem in admitting AFL is a million times better run than RL.
Somebody, or some group has to take charge and run thru the administrators just like Artie Beetson, Les Boyd, the brick with eyes or Shane Webcke would run thru an opponent. The garbage conflicts of interest that the powers that be have got away with for so long, is a joke. Until you RL supporters rage up, they will continue to get away with the some garbage. You need an act of football terrorism to wake them up. A football September 11 or Pearl Harbour to wake them up from their slumber and say never again will things be run so poorly. It has to come from the fans.
I hear you. It's time for News Ltd and the boys club to FO!
If it was soccer the government would have an inquiry.
REH, people in the game ARE saying that the news limited structure are pissed off and are saying that news is ____ing up the game, roy masters writes an article of the same stuff every couple of weeks.
the footy show obviously cant have a go because they are employed by 9, but everyone else can and many do everything they can
one problem is that it is complex, it takes a good couple of these articles before you can even understand the whole foxtel, fox sports, telstra, news, NRL ownership and rights structure. iv been following this stuff for years and and i still struggle with it. getting people pissed off and mobilized in this situation is difficult, when most people just want to watch the footy.
but beyond that, say you did get the whole footballing public pissed off at the rape of the game going on...what are they going to do then? public boycotts are never, ever practical or far reaching enough, and you can be sure that news wouldnt get out of there without a mother____er of a fight... the risk is they will break off again, take the broncos and the storm, take the best players and clubs in sydney, invade poland and start the second superleague war. and NOONE on the NRL side will risk that again, not until the game is 200 years old
say they break off and merge with the super 14, they start playing union, they leave league with news and get the rights to their game back... well that worse than death as far as many of them are concerned. thats WORSE than disaster. they would rather take it up the ass from news than go back to playing union again.
theres nothing they can do, so they are stuck with it, the NRL will forevermore be a subsidiary of news, will be drip fed and starved, and will always be hamstrung for cash
If that is the c, you might as well hand it over to the AFL because legue will become nothing more than a filler for pay TV. How on earth did the game become a victim of such greed and short sightedness? Damn it's frustrating.
I thought News were going to PO in 2017/18, they basically gave themselves 20 years to get their money back.
Sebastian Balboa
24 May 2008, 13:38
All this public outpouring of frustration at NRL/News Ltd/Ch 9, etc ...
I'm find it terribly difficult to give a sh1t, but, no, I don't. Boo-friggin-hoo!
The other side of the coin is that melbourne storm
would have disappeared years ago without news
.
I think if the AFL end up buying ANZ Stadium, then the NRL would be concerned and indeed be in a bit of strife. The AFL is cashed up and has invested it's money properly where the NRL hasn't. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next 12 to 18 months.
Ricardo
24 May 2008, 19:56
All this public outpouring of frustration at NRL/News Ltd/Ch 9, etc ...
I'm find it terribly difficult to give a sh1t, but, no, I don't. Boo-friggin-hoo!
Its sad is what it is, the clubs potentially 'dieing', i don't feel sad for the fact of the new smoking and pokie laws, i feel sad for the fans of these clubs that are on struggle street.
It is almost inevitable that Sydney NRL clubs will either die, merge or relocate, like it is with Melbourne based AFL clubs, doesn't mean its a good thing.
Hopefully they can push hard to sell more memberships/season tickets, venture into other business opportunities and build from there.
The other side of the coin is that melbourne storm
would have disappeared years ago without news
As would the Swans if they hadn't been bailed out.
Glory and Fame
24 May 2008, 22:52
Are Souths in trouble with Crowe and the other guy looking like not investing as much into them anymore.Souths were insolvent when Crowe and Holmes a Court bought them. They'd already been kicked out once and were on the verge of being kicked out again.
They're stuggling on the field at the moment, but financially they're probably in the best shape they've ever been.
As would the Swans if they hadn't been bailed out.
It's history now that the Swans were bailed out with part of the money that
they themselves generated . Cut to the present .
Are the Storm still a millstone or what ?
.
AuckMel
25 May 2008, 09:52
Are the Storm still a millstone or what ?
.
Nope.
With virtually no back up from the press and especially 9, they've managed to generate enough interest to suggest with the right support, the code and them will grow in the future.
Nope.
with the right support, the code and them will grow in the future.
OK , so they're still not making a profit .
That's what I thought .
:(
AuckMel
25 May 2008, 17:59
OK , so they're still not making a profit .
That's what I thought .
But not what you asked. :rolleyes: :( :eek:
If that is the c, you might as well hand it over to the AFL because legue will become nothing more than a filler for pay TV. How on earth did the game become a victim of such greed and short sightedness? Damn it's frustrating.
I thought News were going to PO in 2017/18, they basically gave themselves 20 years to get their money back.
indeed, they said that, but fairly recently in a masters article they said that they are quite happy with the way things are and they arent going to be getting out of league anytime soon.
and honestly, do you see them just giving it up and walking away?
No, unfortunately though I pray.
Nope.
With virtually no back up from the press and especially 9, they've managed to generate enough interest to suggest with the right support, the code and them will grow in the future.
No press back up?
You have NFI. The Hun run one page of news on RL each day, regardless on wether or not there is anything to fill it with.
And they run 10-15 pages on AFL on a bloody Wednesday. What on earth could have happened to fill that many pages on a Wednesday!!!
Mind this is a newspaper that ran more pages on the Wayne Carey/North Melbourne split than September 11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:eek::eek::eek::eek:
No, unfortunately though I pray.
2017 will be the key...if league is to break the shackles it will be then. the clause in the agreement says "when we have recovered costs or been in the sport 20 years, whichever comes sooner"
now, they wont ever admit to having recouped their money, even though they have probably made it 10 times over by now, so the only oppurtunity to get them out will be in 2017.
if they still own half the sport in 2020, then thats it, you guys are ____ed forever.
They obviously have a hidden agenda. I believe they are driving league down to position it as a pay TV filler at a cheap rate. They aren't interested in the administration and growth of the game.
This is to AFL's benefit. Possibly a reason why the AFL need to get things done by 2012 as I think News could (hoping really) exit league in 2012 at the next deal. I base this purely on the fact every contract they are doing is ending at this time. Also this deal will see them through to 2017.
As was previously said if this doesn't happen then we are truly stuffed.
littleduck
25 May 2008, 21:26
I hear you. It's time for News Ltd and the boys club to FO!
If it was soccer the government would have an inquiry.
And leave it all to the ARL??? You are kidding yourself.
littleduck
25 May 2008, 21:30
It's history now that the Swans were bailed out with part of the money that
they themselves generated . Cut to the present .
Are the Storm still a millstone or what ?
.
Applying your so-called logic, you don't think a Melbourne team represented in the NRL adds value to overall broadcast rights revenue that indirectly justifies their existence?
littleduck
25 May 2008, 21:32
They obviously have a hidden agenda. I believe they are driving league down to position it as a pay TV filler at a cheap rate. They aren't interested in the administration and growth of the game.
This is to AFL's benefit. Possibly a reason why the AFL need to get things done by 2012 as I think News could (hoping really) exit league in 2012 at the next deal. I base this purely on the fact every contract they are doing is ending at this time. Also this deal will see them through to 2017.
As was previously said if this doesn't happen then we are truly stuffed.
I'd rather have a global media conglomerate on my side than against me.
Applying your so-called logic, you don't think a Melbourne team represented in the NRL adds value to overall broadcast rights revenue that indirectly justifies their existence?
Well if it does why are we getting ripped off.
I'd rather have a global media conglomerate on my side than against me.
What bloody benefit have they brought to RL. Ever since they tried getting their grubby hands on the game in the 90's we have gone from one disaster to another.
littleduck
25 May 2008, 22:18
Well if it does why are we getting ripped off.
What bloody benefit have they brought to RL. Ever since they tried getting their grubby hands on the game in the 90's we have gone from one disaster to another.
They would never have gained 50% ownership if the Arko and Quayle led ARL administration was doing its job well in the early to mid 90's. The reality is that poor decision making at the ARL in the early to mid 90's gave rise to Super League and the subsequent damage to the game in the late 90's and early 00's.
AuckMel
25 May 2008, 22:33
No press back up?
You have NFI. The Hun run one page of news on RL each day, regardless on wether or not there is anything to fill it with.
Are you blind?
I said "virtually" no press support and especially from 9. The papers have improved, but only marginally. 9 have been absolute crap, but at least they seem to be finally having a go even if it is if only with SOO.
NRL chief executive David Gallop has rekindled the possibility of more mergers after warning during the week that Sydney clubs are facing extinction. Gallop told Sydney's financially stricken clubs to consider merging or die, dangling the $8million amalgamation carrot in front of CEOs at the two-day conference during the week.
As all nine Sydney clubs fight for additional revenue streams, Gallop claimed mergers had their benefits. The NRL's last merger was between Western Suburbs and Balmain, who came together to form the Wests Tigers in 2000.
"Mergers have had mixed success, from the highly successful Wests Tigers and St George Illawarra through to the Northern Eagles,'' Gallop said. "As in the past, a package where clubs merge remains. It's not an easy exercise, but it does allow fans of both teams to continue to have an active presence in the competition.''
Related Links
Talk of possible mergers will send a collective shudder down the backbone of every rugby league supporter. The NSW Government's 40 per cent poker machine tax and the introduction of smoking bans has led to a 10 per cent drop in revenue across Leagues clubs this financial year. Rising taxes and sinking revenues have debilitated clubs that are heavily reliant on Leagues club grants to survive.
There are no guarantees of survival for South Sydney, Penrith, Cronulla, Manly, Parramatta and the Roosters, prompting Gallop to say: "It's for that reason that mergers are worth considering carefully.''
Gold Coast Titans coach John Cartwright - a former Penrith great - gave strong reasons for the competition to be cut from 16 teams to 12. Cartwright said the NRL's fight to maintain clubs in Sydney was too costly. "I'm just thinking out loud (about) what's best for the game of rugby league, and it's hard to take emotion out of it because it's an emotional game,'' Cartwright said. "I just think the game's figureheads have got to get their minds together and come up with a solution before a club becomes insolvent."
"You don't have to be a genius to work out the pie is only so big and Sydney has nine clubs competing for it. We didn't even have a full house for the first Origin game (on Wednesday night). It's not good for our game, and I think anyone who says it is isn't being fair dinkum. "
"You turn the tele on and you see a game on Saturday, Sunday or Monday night and see that empty far side of ANZ stadium, it's not good for anyone. The bottom line for clubs is maybe it's the only way they can operate, but it's not a good look for our game. I'd hate to see us get to a stage where clubs just fall over through attrition.''
Cronulla Sharks chief executive Tony Zappia said the threat of merging had not yet been considered by his club, declaring it a "last, last resort''. "I understand what John is saying, but would he be saying that if he was trying to work under the current taxes being dished out by theNSW Government?'' Zappia said. "The Queensland and Victorian governments are supportive of their sporting codes, the Gold Coast Titans have a huge advantage over the NSW clubs because of that support. Here at the Sharks, we're busy putting plans in place to ensure our future.''
Gallop also sees relocation as a viable alternative, putting it back on the table as a way of easing the pressures in Sydney.
NSW RL clubs are in big trouble...not as viable as once thought...
It's not one or two clubs but most..:eek:
I'd rather have a global media conglomerate on my side than against me.
on behalf of the AFL, im glad we have media conglomerates paying us rather than owning us
Applying your so-called logic, you don't think a Melbourne team represented in the NRL adds value to overall broadcast rights revenue that indirectly justifies their existence?
Of course it adds value . It's the amount of added value .
Do the financial losses and low ratings for the storm
push them anywhere near the nrl bottom line ?
.
hammo_cheersquad
25 May 2008, 23:11
nrl is running itself to the ground
i applaud the afl for bringing in a new team to sydney
couldntve picked a better time to do so
but what will they be called?
Professor Knowall
25 May 2008, 23:11
on behalf of the AFL, im glad we have media conglomerates paying us rather than owning us
Exactly!!
For all the disheartened NRL supporters here on this AFL forum, the solution to your troubles and angst seems obvious. Just get a divorce from the whole News Ltd RL thing and get fully on board Australain Football. C'mon, you know (we all know) you're very interested in our great Australian game as you have already taken the first step by being part of this AFL forum (and if you haven't yet got a club to follow, the one with black'n'white stripes incites the most passion - one way or the other!).
Then the trials and tribulations of the News Ltd NRL will no longer cause you any grief, as you will finally have found something far better to follow. ;)
jackmac7
25 May 2008, 23:17
Exactly!!
For all the disheartened NRL supporters here on this AFL forum, the solution to your troubles and angst seems obvious. Just get a divorce from the whole News Ltd RL thing and get fully on board Australain Football. C'mon, you know (we all know) you're very interested in our great Australian game as you have already taken the first step by being part of this AFL forum (and if you haven't yet got a club to follow, the one with black'n'white stripes incites the most passion - one way or the other!).
Then the trials and tribulations of the News Ltd NRL will no longer cause you any grief, as you will finally have found something far better to follow. ;)
They would jump on board the new West Sydney team before they commit social suicide adopting Collingwood.:D
That's unless they have criminal records, No teeth or a mullet.
Father Jack
26 May 2008, 00:04
Exactly!!
For all the disheartened NRL supporters here on this AFL forum, the solution to your troubles and angst seems obvious. Just get a divorce from the whole News Ltd RL thing and get fully on board Australain Football. C'mon, you know (we all know) you're very interested in our great Australian game as you have already taken the first step by being part of this AFL forum (and if you haven't yet got a club to follow, the one with black'n'white stripes incites the most passion - one way or the other!).
Then the trials and tribulations of the News Ltd NRL will no longer cause you any grief, as you will finally have found something far better to follow. ;)
I don't think that the type of people that would follow Collingwood are the converts we are after somehow.
AuckMel
26 May 2008, 05:46
Do the financial losses and low ratings for the storm
push them anywhere near the nrl bottom line ?
No. Because like the Swans, who continue to rate like a dog despite the millions pumped into Sydney, the money will be well spent.
littleduck
26 May 2008, 10:10
on behalf of the AFL, im glad we have media conglomerates paying us rather than owning us
True.
Doctor Jolly
26 May 2008, 10:34
No. Because like the Swans, who continue to rate like a dog despite the millions pumped into Sydney, the money will be well spent.
The swans rate the same as any other major sport for the timeslots they have..
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?p=10920422#post10920422
littleduck
26 May 2008, 11:05
Well if it does why are we getting ripped off. Separate issues.
What bloody benefit have they brought to RL. Ever since they tried getting their grubby hands on the game in the 90's we have gone from one disaster to another.News Ltd did not want 50% ownership of the game. News Ltd wanted pay television rights and for the ARL to remain custodians of the game. The ARL did not want this for their own cynical reasons detrimental to the game. The civil war escalated to split competitions. 50% ownership only came about as a result of the peace agreement. Its clear that 50% ownership of the game was never intended.
My point remains though that its better to have News Ltd with you than against you surely, although as broadcast partners and not as part owners.
No.
So it's , NO ,the financial losses and low ratings for the storm
push them over the nrl bottom line ?
Just to clarify .
You know , as you keep on quoting it , the Sydney swans have always
been well above the AFL bottom line and now they're above the
Sydney swans bottom line .
.
AuckMel
26 May 2008, 17:43
The swans rate the same as any other major sport for the timeslots they have..
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?p=10920422#post10920422
LoL
How often does Rugby league appear on FTA tv on a saturday night in Sydney?
I've seen the Swans ratings and they are crap. Some here will tell you it's the product.
AuckMel
26 May 2008, 17:50
So it's , NO ,the financial losses and low ratings for the storm
push them over the nrl bottom line ?
Just to clarify .
Nope. Wrong, just as I already said.
I'd be interested in the ratings you have for the Storm games though. Can you share them with us?