Play Nice 2022 Non AFL Crowds/Ratings/Finance/Development thread

[Bjo187]

It is time all Australian Football supporters and media started to reclaim our rightful name and not let soccer try to dilute it from its pure Australian origins!

Agree with this, I was pleasantly surprised to see Gillon use the term 'Australian football' a good 3 or 4 times in his Tasmanian interviews the other day.

Hopefully the heavies at AFL house have finally cottoned on that the Australian identity of our game is being withered away by their insitence of marketing the sport as 'AFL' everywhere they go and that British association football has somehow stolen the term 'Australian football' from under their noses.

 

[martyparty]

Gaelic footy has no elite comp that could be compared with the AFL.
Despite this it fills Croke Park for the GF with 80k crowds.

Keep an eye out for our latest recruit, Mark Keane, refreshed from a year of Gaelic footy and Hurling. Thanks Pies

 

[Kwality]

THere would be more than double the number of Australian women playing football in the AFLW than play soccer whether in Australia or overseas sem-professionally / professionally. I.e. the difference would be proportionally greater than the men

The point being AFLW attract the best players, soccer does not (men & women) & this is reflected in the local game.

 

[Kwality]

Aucklander ,there you go mate, just checking and signing off for the night. One article on selwood having a baby, mentioning in there he is his now at storm of course (very important), then your triple up nrl articles. Very important stuff too, Johns has an opinion, Gus sends a text message.

View attachment 1615180View attachment 1615182
View attachment 1615184

Are you aware the purpose of this free/clickbait site is to drive traffic to paid sites. IF it wasnt doing its job, it would cease to exist.
You are using the site for a different purpose & drawing dubious conclusions.

 

[Bjo187]

Are you aware the purpose of this free/clickbait site is to drive traffic to paid sites. IF it wasnt doing its job, it would cease to exist.
You are using the site for a different purpose & drawing dubious conclusions.

Oh ok, so they don't make money off news.com.au from all the adds on there and it being a top 5 visited website in Australia? I understand.

 

[Kwality]

Oh ok, so they don't make money off news.com.au from all the adds on there and it being a top 5 visited website in Australia? I understand.

Without knowing the advertising rates, how would we know.
Ever heard the term 'loss leader'?

 

[kranger]

Edit:

Rugby Union Results & Attendances | Austadiums

List of latest Rugby Union results including attendance figures.

www.austadiums.com

First week of games in the Australian part of the Super Rugby.

Still waiting on the Townsville crowd.

 

[The_Wookie]

 

[The Educator]

That's actually a pretty useful breakdown of cost categories

2019 makes for a great baseline comparison - not only because it preceded covid but also as the increase in profits ($34 million) roughly corresponds to the increase in revenue ($32.5 million)

The payments to clubs and players increased by over $54 million. Essentially, most other categories contributed to the redistribution of revenues to clubs and players. Including:

-event, game and sponsorship down $21.6M
-football down $4.6M
-community and player welfare down almost $9M (over half!)
-integrity and salary cap down $400K (10%)
-administration only down $400K
-finance-related costs down about $5M (probably due to lower borrowing costs?)
-states and affiliates down over $12M
-development down $5.5M

Someone with a better NRL knowledge would be able to offer more insight but it certainly does point to a substantial reallocation of the games wealth to clubs and players

 

[Prince Imperial]

Someone with a better NRL knowledge would be able to offer more insight but it certainly does point to a substantial reallocation of the games wealth to clubs and players

The money hasn't gone to the players. The salary cap per team in 2019 was the same as in 2022 ($9.6m), V'landys has fully looked after the owners of the NRL teams who are either wealthy poker machine businesses and/or wealthy men.

 

[Gigantor]

Once again, worth reminding ourselves that NRL clubs/franchises have a different structure than what exists in the AFL, in particular, amongst the Victorian clubs.
With the Victorian AFL clubs, there is a single entity: the football club, member-owned, owns and runs everything, and runs a team in the AFL, etc.

In the NRL, especially amongst the NSW based clubs, as a general rule, there's a pokies venue called "the club" - generates massive profits, and these clubs own a license to run a football team, which is an altogether separate entity. The pokies club agrees to help fund the football team (but is not actually legally obliged to do so).

Every now and then, some pokies palace will have a board publicly complaining that they don't want to be putting $x million into the football team.

It's true, at some point in the dim, dark past, there was a direct link between the pokies palace and the football team, in the sense that the existence of one helped build the other, and vice versa, but most of these corporations have expanded to run a massive range of "leisure" activities, to such a degree, that the football team in nothing more than an after thought and is a tiny percentage of their operations.

 

[The Educator]

The money hasn't gone to the players. The salary cap per team in 2019 was the same as in 2022 ($9.6m), V'landys has fully looked after the owners of the NRL teams who are either wealthy poker machine businesses and/or wealthy men.

That's a good point. If the Salary Cap (payments to players) hasn't been increased yet, all else being equal, it must just be an additional increase to the clubs. I have read V'Landys say that extra money has been returned to players that they gave up during covid though (I wonder if that is a factor?)

The AFL's increase to clubs since 2019 was about $30m, which roughly just maintained their share of central revenues. This despite the AFLW expanding from 10 to 18 teams (with a double season), and substantial increases in AFLW salary / running costs. Also, club profits have gone from $55m in 2019 to approaching $130M this year

Even if they reverse it some extent, the AFL's slashing of the soft cap was inspired in terms of the games financial health.

 

[The Educator]

AFL broadcasting revenue ie all mediums, jumped from $264m to $381m between 2016 and 2017.

Your post made me look up the NRL deal for 2018-2022, it was $1.8bil + NZ and radio deals which were negotiated after Oz component. It increased by 70% up from $1.025bil for 2013 -17 years which was also before NZ and radio component. The NRL 2023-27 deal is around $2.3bil.

Post 2024 when the TV and media deals align the difference will be, probably $150m due to broadcasting revenue ( between 2025 and 2027 years as NRL did a 2023-27 deal for just over $2bil), plus $100-$120m a year due to Docklands and $100m+ from other revenue streams.

2023 and 2024 there wont be a huge gap in TV/media differences maybe $50m so the difference will be around $280-300m for those couple of years.

I have had a look at the NRL annual reports for 2020 and 2019 to unpack the shift in how they set out their revenue note during those years.

In the 2019 annual report, the NRL reported $325M in broadcast revenue and a further $24.5m in contra. Roughly $349 million (which increased by 2.2% on 2018 which I assume was the inflater in the contract). There was also $84 million in "wagering and sponsorship" and $24 million in "digital revenue".

The following year, after the change in reporting, 2019 now presented a "licensing" revenue of $403M. According to note 2.O. this includes all of the $349M broadcast revenue, its wagering revenues and merchandise licensing.

In 2020 this figure dropped over $70M to to $332M. In 2021 it had bounced back to $405M and in 2022 it was $410M. My suspicion is that increased wagering revenue offset $25(?)M a year that 9 reported they would save.

The "AFL's broadcasting and AFL media" only dropped $45M in 2020 but then only recovered $14M in 2021 (still $31M below 2019). We don't know the actual figure in 2022 yet but it certainly seems as though V'Landys reference was accurate that the AFL had spread its losses more whereas (presumably with foxtel which would explain why VLandys knew) the NRL had taken the hit in the 2020.

Anyway, what I am getting to is that I find it hard to see how that NRL figure increases by more than $50M under the new deal starting next year (and will probably more like $35M....i.e an increase from SKY and 9). Unless the contra was massively higher in the renegotiated 23, 24 deal,or 22 had a much greater recovery of revenues than 2021, then you would anticipate the AFL's broadcast revenues to increase by up to $70M in 2023.

I am going to stick with an overall gap of $350M in 2023.

 

[Bjo187]

The NRL's contra element must have gone up ten fold in the past 2 years, especially into Melbourne. To give you an example, every episode of married at first site (yes I do watch it) has a 30 second commercial during absolute prime time. Which an ad like that is a good 25k each time. They have even gone to the point of advertising certain players, like papahues had an ad all to himself, plus their game this week was advertised multiple times last night, plus had the water bubble at the bottom of the screen when the show was actually back on. Last year the play NRL ad was played a million x on ch9 into Melbourne too. Years prior advertising was minimal, so a massive increase into Melbourne.

Something I do notice, ch9 and their add production is so much better than 7s, in fact, their promotion of the nrl game in general is much better since their new tv rights deal, despite what others on here may wish to think.

Edited for my friend Our Game

 

[Our Game]

The NRL's contra element must have gone up ten fold in the past 2 years, especially into Melbourne. To give you an example, every episode of married at first site (yes I do watch it) has a 30 second commercial during absolute prime time. Which an add like that is a good 25k each time. They have even gone to the point of advertising certain players, like papahues had an add all to himself, plus their game this week was advertised multiple times last night, plus had the water bubble at the bottom of the screen when the show was actually back on. Last year the play NRL add was played a million x on ch9 into Melbourne too. Years prior advertising was minimal, so a massive increase into Melbourne.

Something I do notice, ch9 and their add production is so much better than 7s, in fact, their promotion of the nrl game in general is much better since their new tv rights deal, despite what others on here may wish to have you believe.

Sorry but it is Ad as in advertising not Add.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I have had a look at the NRL annual reports for 2020 and 2019 to unpack the shift in how they set out their revenue note during those years.

In the 2019 annual report, the NRL reported $325M in broadcast revenue and a further $24.5m in contra. Roughly $349 million (which increased by 2.2% on 2018 which I assume was the inflater in the contract). There was also $84 million in "wagering and sponsorship" and $24 million in "digital revenue".

The following year, after the change in reporting, 2019 now presented a "licensing" revenue of $403M. According to note 2.O. this includes all of the $349M broadcast revenue, its wagering revenues and merchandise licensing.

In 2020 this figure dropped over $70M to to $332M. In 2021 it had bounced back to $405M and in 2022 it was $410M. My suspicion is that increased wagering revenue offset $25(?)M a year that 9 reported they would save.

The "AFL's broadcasting and AFL media" only dropped $45M in 2020 but then only recovered $14M in 2021 (still $31M below 2019). We don't know the actual figure in 2022 yet but it certainly seems as though V'Landys reference was accurate that the AFL had spread its losses more whereas (presumably with foxtel which would explain why VLandys knew) the NRL had taken the hit in the 2020.

Anyway, what I am getting to is that I find it hard to see how that NRL figure increases by more than $50M under the new deal starting next year (and will probably more like $35M....i.e an increase from SKY and 9). Unless the contra was massively higher in the renegotiated 23, 24 deal,or 22 had a much greater recovery of revenues than 2021, then you would anticipate the AFL's broadcast revenues to increase by up to $70M in 2023.

I am going to stick with an overall gap of $350M in 2023.

NRL call that licensing revenue not broadcasting revenue so I suspect its a lot more than just the TV and mobile media rights.

From Roy Master article re 2020 NRL annual result announcement.

NRL’s neck-to-knee financials can’t conceal broadcast revenue hit

ARLC boss Peter V’Landys appears to be trying to shield the discount given to broadcast partners in 2020. But a few simple calculations paint a clearer picture.

www.smh.com.au

For the first time since 2012, the accounts for the financial year ended October 31, 2020, do not reveal income from broadcasting.

Instead, total revenue is shown as $417.273 million, rather than divided into broadcast and non-broadcast revenue, as it was in 2019........... .... However, it is possible to tease out the NRL 2020 broadcasting income by examining the cost of non-broadcast revenue.

The margin for non-broadcast revenue is historically around 50 per cent. In 2020, the costs of earning (accountants call this COGS – Cost of Goods Sold), the non-broadcast revenue, was $65.445 million, listed in the financials as “Event, Game and Sponsorship”.

This is the amount of money spent on putting on the show. To establish the non-broadcast revenue number, you simply multiply the COGS of $65.445 million by two, meaning the non-broadcast revenue was around $130.89 million.

Subtracting $130.89 million from the published total revenue of $417.273 million, reveals broadcast revenue to be $286.383 million, or $274.865 million if JobKeeper is excluded.

Pre COVID-19 broadcast revenue for 2020 was estimated to be $330 million, meaning the NRL gave broadcasters an approximate $50 million to $60 million discount.

So if Roy is accurate then that is why you see such a huge gap. The AFl is collecting approx $880m cash from media/TV deal in 2023-24 and $66m in contras given the regularly reported $946m figure for these two years.

If the NRL is getting $400m cash in 2023-24, then this is why I said the AFL in 2023-24 is only going to get about $50m more than the NRL in 2023-24 from TV and then $150m more in 2025-27 years.

 

[Bjo187]

NRL call that licensing revenue not broadcasting revenue so I suspect its a lot more than just the TV and mobile media rights.

From Roy Master article re 2020 NRL annual result announcement.

NRL’s neck-to-knee financials can’t conceal broadcast revenue hit

ARLC boss Peter V’Landys appears to be trying to shield the discount given to broadcast partners in 2020. But a few simple calculations paint a clearer picture.

www.smh.com.au

For the first time since 2012, the accounts for the financial year ended October 31, 2020, do not reveal income from broadcasting.

Instead, total revenue is shown as $417.273 million, rather than divided into broadcast and non-broadcast revenue, as it was in 2019........... .... However, it is possible to tease out the NRL 2020 broadcasting income by examining the cost of non-broadcast revenue.

The margin for non-broadcast revenue is historically around 50 per cent. In 2020, the costs of earning (accountants call this COGS – Cost of Goods Sold), the non-broadcast revenue, was $65.445 million, listed in the financials as “Event, Game and Sponsorship”.

This is the amount of money spent on putting on the show. To establish the non-broadcast revenue number, you simply multiply the COGS of $65.445 million by two, meaning the non-broadcast revenue was around $130.89 million.

Subtracting $130.89 million from the published total revenue of $417.273 million, reveals broadcast revenue to be $286.383 million, or $274.865 million if JobKeeper is excluded.

Pre COVID-19 broadcast revenue for 2020 was estimated to be $330 million, meaning the NRL gave broadcasters an approximate $50 million to $60 million discount.

So if Roy is accurate then that is why you see such a huge gap. The AFl is collecting approx $880m cash from media/TV deal in 2023-24 and $66m in contras given the regularly reported $946m figure for these two years.

If the NRL is getting $400m cash in 2023-24, then this is why I said the AFL in 2023-24 is only going to get about $50m more than the NRL in 2023-24 from TV and then $150m more in 2025-27 years.

View attachment 1617444

View attachment 1617443

Good breakdown. However assuming nrl is getting 400 mill cash and Gill said the afl cash in 25 onwards is over 600 mill, then wouldn't the gap be over 200 mill for tv cash from 2025 onwards?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Good breakdown. However assuming nrl is getting 400 mill cash and Gill said the afl cash in 25 onwards is over 600 mill, then wouldn't the gap be over 200 mill for tv cash from 2025 onwards?

Thy aren't getting $600m cash in 2025.

There is a 3.6% compound component after a 14% jump in 2025, announced by 7 to the ASX and I assumed that Foxtel have matched that, as they usually do similar deals re annual increases, in the spreadsheet I did and posted in the relevant thread when the $4.5 bil announcement thread.

That means the cash component is about $520m in 2025 and about $680m in 2031. Add in $55m advertising contra each year. That means there is a $140m difference between year 1 and year 7 of the new deal.

That's why its wrong to talk about about the average $$ per year as the AFL uses that CPI type increase to fund Tassie in 2027, AFLW going fully professional in 2026 and supposedly the highest paid domestic female players in any sports by 2030 and TPP will have a big jump in 2025 and then go up by between 2% and 3% every year after that and the AFL basically funds that by increasing their distribution to clubs to cover that increase.

Edit - I put a spreadsheet of the different deals between 2002 to 2022, the revised 2022 figure plus the new 2023 and 2024 figures in the post linked below, then discussed how the 2025-31 deal works includding the following spreasheet.

AFL announces 4.5billion, 7 year media deal (2025-2031 inclusive)

Nice summary of last 20 years, but leaves out one crucial element: Australian Football has always been bigger than Rugby League. That's the starting point. Another way of looking at it: why did Murdoch take over the two rugbies? Quite simply, because he could. He could never have done that...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Bjo187]

Thy aren't getting $600m cash in 2025.

There is a 3.5% compound component after a 14% jump in 2025 announced by 7 to the ASX and I assumed that Foxtel have matched that, as they usually do similar deals re annual increases, in the spreadsheet I did and posted in the relevant thread when the $4.5 bil announcement thread.

That means the cash component is about $540m in 2025 and about $680m in 2031. Add in $33m advertising contra each year. That means there is a $140m difference between year 1 and year 7 of the new deal.

That's why its wrong to talk about about the average $$ per year as the AFL uses that CPI type increase to fund Tassie in 2027, AFLW going fully professional in 2026 and supposedly the highest paid domestic female players in any sports by 2030 and TPP will have a big jump in 2025 and then go up by between 2% and 3% every year after that and the AFL basically funds that by increasing their distribution to clubs to cover that increase.

Ahh ok, so it's not a flat 600m across each of the 7 year deal, but less at the start and more later.

It likely averages out at about >600m over the 7 years, probably what Gill meant when he said that.

 

[The Educator]

NRL call that licensing revenue not broadcasting revenue so I suspect its a lot more than just the TV and mobile media rights.

From Roy Master article re 2020 NRL annual result announcement.

NRL’s neck-to-knee financials can’t conceal broadcast revenue hit

ARLC boss Peter V’Landys appears to be trying to shield the discount given to broadcast partners in 2020. But a few simple calculations paint a clearer picture.

www.smh.com.au

For the first time since 2012, the accounts for the financial year ended October 31, 2020, do not reveal income from broadcasting.

Instead, total revenue is shown as $417.273 million, rather than divided into broadcast and non-broadcast revenue, as it was in 2019........... .... However, it is possible to tease out the NRL 2020 broadcasting income by examining the cost of non-broadcast revenue.

The margin for non-broadcast revenue is historically around 50 per cent. In 2020, the costs of earning (accountants call this COGS – Cost of Goods Sold), the non-broadcast revenue, was $65.445 million, listed in the financials as “Event, Game and Sponsorship”.

This is the amount of money spent on putting on the show. To establish the non-broadcast revenue number, you simply multiply the COGS of $65.445 million by two, meaning the non-broadcast revenue was around $130.89 million.

Subtracting $130.89 million from the published total revenue of $417.273 million, reveals broadcast revenue to be $286.383 million, or $274.865 million if JobKeeper is excluded.

Pre COVID-19 broadcast revenue for 2020 was estimated to be $330 million, meaning the NRL gave broadcasters an approximate $50 million to $60 million discount.

So if Roy is accurate then that is why you see such a huge gap. The AFl is collecting approx $880m cash from media/TV deal in 2023-24 and $66m in contras given the regularly reported $946m figure for these two years.

If the NRL is getting $400m cash in 2023-24, then this is why I said the AFL in 2023-24 is only going to get about $50m more than the NRL in 2023-24 from TV and then $150m more in 2025-27 years.

View attachment 1617444

View attachment 1617443

I think Roy Master's calculation is pretty spurious. I am not sure why you would assume that the costs of goods sold would necessarily be half of non-broadcasting revenue during the 2020 covid year because it has tended to be historically.

Rather, it is set out in note 2.0 that licensing "includes Media, Wagering product fees and Merchandise Royalties".

So we know that category fell in 2020 by $71M. Given the growth in wagering licensing, I can't see how you could conclude that the loss in revenue is not greater than $71M (rather than $50 to $60M that Roy M guesstimated?) ?

What I am finding it hard to see is where a large increase off that base comes from. We know that nine will only be paying $11.5M extra in 23 compared to 22 because they published as much in their own newspaper

Nine will pay $115 million cash a year, with a further $15 million in contra and other services......The deal compares with the 2018-2022 contract, announced in November 2015, of $115 million in cash plus $10 million in contra, however is an improvement on the COVID-19-adjusted 2022 cost of $103.5 million, plus $15 million in contra."

So $11M from nine, maybe some top up from foxtel (but details sketchy) for the dolphins and an increase from Sky NZ?

If you are correct that the AFL has a contra that has doubled to $33M, then I suspect that means they might be getting around $433M cash in 2023 and $447M in 2024. This would mean perhaps a $53M increase on 2022 (i..e assuming another $14M increase in the broadcast rights cash in 2022 and broadcast cash at about $380M).

The AFL's 2022 base would be relatively lower (compared to its original deal) because the implication would be that the AFL had their discounts spread over the 3 years where as the NRL took its big hit in the first year as part of the reset of its foxtel deal to be paid at the same level from 2021 out to 2027. This is supported by the "bounce back" in licensing revenue in 2021

I am not aware of any credible basis to think that the touted $400M figure of the NRL's new deal is all cash, rather than including contra. Their last deal included $24M in contra. It's more than likely that their new deal includes more than that and highly unlikely it includes less. It certainly includes $5M more contra from channel 9 (see above).

Having said that, as far as the headline revenue figure in the annual report goes, the contra is included (as it is then expended).

So I would guess that the total broadcast value of the AFL will increase about $70M (i.e. $396M to $466M including contra) whereas I still can't see how the NRL increases more than $40M

 

[Bjo187]

I am not aware of any credible basis to think that the touted $400M figure of the NRL's new deal is all cash, rather than including contra. Their last deal included $24M in contra. It's more than likely that their new deal includes more than that and highly unlikely it includes less. It certainly includes $5M more contra from channel 9 (see above).

Having said that, as far as the headline revenue figure in the annual report goes, the contra is included (as it is then expended).

So I would guess that the total broadcast value of the AFL will increase about $70M (i.e. $396M to $466M including contra) whereas I still can't see how the NRL increases more than $40M

This just proves what I've been saying that their level of advertising has gone through the roof compared to a few years ago, so yes I agree Roy is off with his figures, as per usual.

 

[clarkoscluster]

With the rise of online streaming, does anybody know of a reliable online tv guide type setup for live sport in Australia? Something that would include all major sports including FTA, fox and optus/stan/paramount etc? Sometimes there’s events on that I have to research to find where/how they’re being broadcast (eg cycling events on 7mate over summer such as the cadel evens great ocean road race while others are on sbs streaming) and reckon a one stop shop tv guide would be a great idea.

 

[Our Game]

Interesting that the Opening NRL match Parramatta V Melbourne Storm tonight could only pull 17,000 considering the massive blanket coverage the NRL gets in the Sydney media!

 

[Bjo187]

Interesting that the Opening NRL match Parramatta V Melbourne Storm tonight could only pull 17,000 considering the massive blanket coverage the NRL gets in the Sydney media!

The most over advertised and promoted sport in the country by a mile.

 

[largebus]

Interesting that the Opening NRL match Parramatta V Melbourne Storm tonight could only pull 17,000 considering the massive blanket coverage the NRL gets in the Sydney media!

I'd be more surprised if that match got over 20,000.
Unlike footy you gain nothing from being at the ground compared to watching on TV because the action is all in one camera shot. Plus it rains constantly in Sydney so the culture revolves around watching the game at the Leagues club playing pokies rather than going to the game.