Still a very poor crowd which ever way you try to spin it for Sydney with 5 million population and supposedly the home of soccer in Australia
Play Nice 2018 Non AFL Admin, Crowds, Ratings, Participation etc thread
- Thread starter Cmarsh
- Start date
- Tagged users None
It rated 29k as well.
The T20 International Aust v NZ also got only 26,000 last night another poor effort from Sydney cricket fans.
Its you who is doing the spinning .... stick to the facts for a change.
For a city of 4.6mil, the last Melbourne stars BBL game had a pretty poor crowd too. (but dont mention the war
)
Aucklander
The Ultimate Warrior
Thems are the facts brother!The ALeague is on the nose this season and they need to do something pretty quickly to stop the slide.
Is mediaweek now trolling the A League?
With the exception of one of the NBA games, all of these things outrated the Adelaide-Glory game (and Sydney-Wellington the previous night). They don't usually publish the numbers for those sorts of programs.....
With the exception of one of the NBA games, all of these things outrated the Adelaide-Glory game (and Sydney-Wellington the previous night). They don't usually publish the numbers for those sorts of programs.....
- Moderator
- #84
Revenue would be great. But I think it is costing them quite a lot to play out of Wembley. 15 mil(pound) per year i think.
not sure how that compares to other leases.
- Moderator
- #85
wow. I really didn't know your opinion on the A-league. I think this is the first time you have posted your thoughts about its death.
Nobody is saying it will die just become less important on the Australian sporting landscape.
A bit like the failed National Soccer League before it. In fact it is starting to get down to those depths.
Of course there is a place for soccer in Australia just not where the soccer urgers by right think it should be.
- Moderator
- #87
Any FTA in that listing?
NBC, CBS
- Moderator
- #90
NRL will be a $500m business, but less profitable in next five years
by John Stensholt
The NRL will become a $500 million business for the first time this year, but its next five years will be less profitable overall than the previous period.
http://www.afr.com/business/sport/n...profitable-in-next-five-years-20180208-h0vr8b
For comparison - $354 million is less than the AFL earnt in 2011 ($382m) in terms of revenue. The AFL will likely clear well over $700 million in 2017 (but its tv deal starts in 2017, as opposed to 2018 for the NRL)
by John Stensholt
The NRL will become a $500 million business for the first time this year, but its next five years will be less profitable overall than the previous period.
More money will flow to the competition's 16 clubs as a result of a controversial funding deal agreed to last year and the league will also spend more than $20 million annually on a new digital media business.
The NRL, which announced a $3.7 million net loss for 2017 on Thursday, insists though that its balance sheet will emerge stronger and that it would have $100 million in cash assets by 2022 as a result of its new record $2 billion broadcast deal with Nine Entertainment Co and Fox Sports that begins with the upcoming 2018 season.
NRL chief financial officer Tony Crawford told The Australian Financial Review that the NRL will average surpluses of about $3-5 million annually through to 2022, including a profit of about $40 million this year, compared to an average of $10.5 million annually in the previous five-year cycle.
He said the league's revenue was budgeted to reach $500 million for the first time this year due mostly to an increase in broadcast income, but the NRL had moved to distribute more revenue to its clubs than it had between 2013 and 2017.
"I think this will result in the game being in a very strong position financially," said Mr Crawford. "In the previous cycle we probably held some back to improve the financial health of the game ... and now we will be able to distribute more in the next cycle."
The league is hoping the additional distributions to the clubs will stem the losses each make annually, save for the perennially profitable ASX-listed Brisbane Broncos.
Though the NRL has moved to liquidate its sustainability or future fund, the league had about $90 million in cash assets on its balance sheet at the end of October. Mr Crawford said the NRL is budgeting to add about $15 million to its reserves by 2022, by which time it should have more than $100 million in savings.
Revenue hit a record $354 million in the year to October 31, 2017 and the NRL was able to record a small loss after claiming to find about $14.2 million in savings compared to the larger loss it had budgeted.
But $5.8 million of that saving was expenses for the digital business which will instead to be borne in the 2018 financial year, while the league was also able to strip out about $3.6 million in administrative costs and find other savings such as less travel and licensing expenses.
The league's cost savings also meant it did not need to borrow $30 million to help alleviate a short-term cashflow issue, as had been rumoured late last year.
NRL Digital, encompassing a new central news website, and sites and apps across the competition's 16 teams, went live last October, in a sweeping change designed to take control of and better commercialise its online assets.
http://www.afr.com/business/sport/n...profitable-in-next-five-years-20180208-h0vr8b
For comparison - $354 million is less than the AFL earnt in 2011 ($382m) in terms of revenue. The AFL will likely clear well over $700 million in 2017 (but its tv deal starts in 2017, as opposed to 2018 for the NRL)
The woes of the A-League have come to the attention of News Ltd - without any apparent solutions in the immediate future - http://www.news.com.au/sport/footba...e/news-story/a938505058d342ba60f2621affbb7579
"IT’S the sporting competition that most Australians don’t even know is happening and less and less people are watching. And it’s in crisis. ..."
"IT’S the sporting competition that most Australians don’t even know is happening and less and less people are watching. And it’s in crisis. ..."
Its bigger than just the A-League, some one has to pick up the losses. Personally I think Aus soccer has to rejig its very existence.
Just as junior participation in 90s didnt lead to success for the NBL*, junior participation is totally irrelevant for the game of soccer, not is it relevant to the AFL comp in NSW & Vic for Aussie rules.
Other sports can learn from the resurrection of basketball.
- Moderator
- #93
The outlier in this is AFLW. There is a tangible link between the establishment of the national womens comp and the explosion of womens and girls teams at grassroots. Its part of why the NRL is also going to adopt a top down approach from next year.
http://www.afr.com/business/sport/n...profitable-in-next-five-years-20180208-h0vr8b
For comparison - $354 million is less than the AFL earnt in 2011 ($382m) in terms of revenue. The AFL will likely clear well over $700 million in 2017 (but its tv deal starts in 2017, as opposed to 2018 for the NRL)[/QUOTE]
Take away the TV component of the NRLs income and the AFL is miles ahead with very strong income steams at all levels. Sponsorships,Memberships,Gate takings and Merchandise Also owning Docklands Stadium 100 % is another big advantage the AFL has.
For comparison - $354 million is less than the AFL earnt in 2011 ($382m) in terms of revenue. The AFL will likely clear well over $700 million in 2017 (but its tv deal starts in 2017, as opposed to 2018 for the NRL)[/QUOTE]
Take away the TV component of the NRLs income and the AFL is miles ahead with very strong income steams at all levels. Sponsorships,Memberships,Gate takings and Merchandise Also owning Docklands Stadium 100 % is another big advantage the AFL has.
- Moderator
- #95
Yep, the explosion in womens sport has a different dynamic - the AFL has used its grunt to get max coverage in the traditional States, but its harder to know how its cutting through on in Q & NSW.
Its nothing new in soccer & basketball, so I'd suggest that is working in favour of both AFLW & the womans game in NRL - Union is doing its own thing, how can we really know anything there.
Here is an example of where womens soccer in Australia is:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-11/former-australian-coach-takes-over-arsenal-womens-team/9390740
Last edited:
- May 13, 2012
- 15,812
- 5,965
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- Brumbies, Socceroos
Take away the TV component of the NRLs income and the AFL is miles ahead with very strong income steams at all levels. Sponsorships,Memberships,Gate takings and Merchandise Also owning Docklands Stadium 100 % is another big advantage the AFL has.[/QUOTE]
It's silly that the LU crowd try and compare the two as if they are somehow equals, there is a veritable gulf between the two in terms of support and financial muscle.
It's silly that the LU crowd try and compare the two as if they are somehow equals, there is a veritable gulf between the two in terms of support and financial muscle.[/QUOTE]
Without Origin the NRL would lose a big part of its relevance.
- Moderator
- #99
Without Origin the NRL would lose a big part of its relevance.[/QUOTE]
A big "without". Bottom line though it is still by far the dominant code in NSW and QLD by some margin. Take origin out of the broadcast deal and it would still be getting at least 5 times the TV revenues of Union and soccer.
The two things that set the AFL apart from League are:
-much higher attendances and memberships: the impact on revenues of the AFL and more so, the clubs is huge. The AFL makes a packet from the finals where the NRL sells tickets not too far north of regular season. It also has its own premium membership and of course now owns its own stadium
-Commercial / sponsorship: The AFL has a more national footprint which is perhaps a key driver of why it gets greater commercial revenues than the NRL - i.e. it can "sell" a bigger audience to marketers....perhaps it is also perceived as more "class" neutral which makes it a better "image match" with more companies
Similar threads
- Poll
