AFL says thank$ Sydney

[Doctor Jolly]

Despite playing a no-name team from Melbourne, the swans final was the highest TV rating national sporting event this weekend. Beat all other finals, with 2nd going to the friday night footy final, some 85,000 viewers behind.

And a good 300,000 more than the best NRL.

Sydney need a 2nd team? Yes indeedy.


Friday nights final looks like more of the same. The AFL are praying Sydney keeps wining deep into the finals.

 

[JuDDysthacaptain]

The majority of viewers were from Victoria which explains why it was the top rating sporting event nationally, if i'm not mistaken there was only around 185,000 viewers from Sydney which is pretty dismal considering how bad the crowd was.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

The majority of viewers were from Victoria which explains why it was the top rating sporting event nationally, if i'm not mistaken there was only around 185,000 viewers from Sydney which is pretty dismal considering how bad the crowd was.

With 10x the teams, Victoria should have 10x the viewers. Especially when 2 vic teams are playing each other on friday night.

Imagine the ratings when 2 Sydney teams play in the final.

Sydney punches well above it weight.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

With 10x the teams, Victoria should have 10x the viewers.

even though they don't have 10x the population?

 

[OzBomber]

With 10x the teams, Victoria should have 10x the viewers. Especially when 2 vic teams are playing each other on friday night.

Imagine the ratings when 2 Sydney teams play in the final.

Sydney punches well above it weight.

No, you'd think that Sydney would have 10x the viewers, because they all support the one team.

 

[remster]

Despite playing a no-name team from Melbourne, the swans final was the highest TV rating national sporting event this weekend. Beat all other finals, with 2nd going to the friday night footy final, some 85,000 viewers behind.

And a good 300,000 more than the best NRL.

Sydney need a 2nd team? Yes indeedy.


Friday nights final looks like more of the same. The AFL are praying Sydney keeps wining deep into the finals.

explains why there was bugger all people at the game what a lousy attendance for a final at what sydney siders say is aussie,s best stadium yes we need 2nd team in sydney my arse

 

[Doctor Jolly]

even though they don't have 10x the population?

I've always been in favour of reducing vic teams as you seem to be suggesting.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

No, you'd think that Sydney would have 10x the viewers, because they all support the one team.

All of Sydney support the swans do they?. geez they must be printing money with 4 million members!

Best leave the thinking to those with a brain.

 

[Mister Football]

explains why there was bugger all people at the game what a lousy attendance for a final at what sydney siders say is aussie,s best stadium yes we need 2nd team in sydney my arse

Sydneysiders hate Telstra Stadium.

 

[OzBomber]

The funny thing about Victoria is we still get great crowds AND great tv ratings. The Sydney game last night wasn't even the highest rated in it's time period in NSW.

 

[aneale]

Despite playing a no-name team from Melbourne, the swans final was the highest TV rating national sporting event this weekend. Beat all other finals, with 2nd going to the friday night footy final, some 85,000 viewers behind.

And a good 300,000 more than the best NRL.

Sydney need a 2nd team? Yes indeedy.


Friday nights final looks like more of the same. The AFL are praying Sydney keeps wining deep into the finals.

Yeah but only 186,000 of those were ACTUALLY from NSW. An yeah the AFL are praying they need to recoup the massive loss they incurred by having so few turn up to a stadium that size, and thats just the financial loss. There is all the associated losses with such a performance.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Yeah but only 186,000 of those were ACTUALLY from NSW. An yeah the AFL are praying they need to recoup the massive loss they incurred by having so few turn up to a stadium that size, and thats just the financial loss. There is all the associated losses with such a performance.

- 186K in Sydney, not NSW.
- Swans are almost a national brand. Big presence in Melbourne as well as Sydney.
- NRL survive with 10,000 paying $10, or sometimes for free..crowds at ANZ. If the AFL lose with 19K paying $60 average, then they need to look at the contracts.

 

[aneale]

- 186K in Sydney, not NSW.
- Swans are almost a national brand. Big presence in Melbourne as well as Sydney.
- NRL survive with 10,000 paying $10, or sometimes for free..crowds at ANZ. If the AFL lose with 19K paying $60 average, then they need to look at the contracts.

Thats the NRL. poor brand, poor product.

 

[red+black]

I've always been in favour of reducing vic teams as you seem to be suggesting.

we did. we gave you one.

 

[CJisJC]

we did. we gave you one.

we'd offered them North Melbourne too, but they didn't want them... talk about gratitude

 

[The Casey Cat]

Sydneysiders hate Telstra Stadium.

Don't give a s**t. Do you hate finals? Had no problem with Telstra in years gone by for other finals (60k v Freo, 40k v WC in worse conditions than Saturday). Disgusting turn out and that Sydney TV audience is not that impressive at all. Sydney as a club seem get weaker by the year (attendance and membership wise) despite being pretty good on field but we need to throw another team up there?

 

[Vince Van Mackay]

Despite playing a no-name team from Melbourne, the swans final was the highest TV rating national sporting event this weekend. Beat all other finals, with 2nd going to the friday night footy final, some 85,000 viewers behind.

And a good 300,000 more than the best NRL.

Sydney need a 2nd team? Yes indeedy.


Friday nights final looks like more of the same. The AFL are praying Sydney keeps wining deep into the finals.

You're 10 x dumber than a fence post.

 

[THRILLHO]

I dont understand all the Stadium Australia hate. Ive been out there a few times and have had no real concerns. Only two issues for me, the bus from UNSW to central and the lack of choice with pubs once out there, but Im not really a huge drinker at the footy anyway.

 

[BK Eaglesfan]

With 10x the teams, Victoria should have 10x the viewers. Especially when 2 vic teams are playing each other on friday night.

Imagine the ratings when 2 Sydney teams play in the final.

Sydney punches well above it weight.

Amusing logic, given that it could be argued that supporters of 9 Victorian clubs had little interest in what Sydney and the Kangaroos were up to.

The turn out at the game was rubbish, and no matter how you try and spin it, 186 000 watching on TV in a population of around 4 - 4.5million is poor.

 

[Chops_a_must]

You're 10 x dumber than a fence post.

x2...

 

[aneale]

I dont understand all the Stadium Australia hate. Ive been out there a few times and have had no real concerns. Only two issues for me, the bus from UNSW to central and the lack of choice with pubs once out there, but Im not really a huge drinker at the footy anyway.

Nor why it even matters. Thats like Eagles supporters not going to a game because they scheduled it at the WACA rather than at Subi. It's all getting a bit precious when the reason you don't go is the weather and 'we don't like that ground'. I was never a fan of Vic Park or the Western Oval either doesn't mean you don't go.

 

[Max zero]

With Sydney and Brisbane doing well the 2007-2011 TV rights deal is up $260 million from $500 million 2001-2006.

$260 million pays for a lot of empty stadiums.

Covers the CBF nicely as well...

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Amusing logic, given that it could be argued that supporters of 9 Victorian clubs had little interest in what Sydney and the Kangaroos were up to.

The turn out at the game was rubbish, and no matter how you try and spin it, 186 000 watching on TV in a population of around 4 - 4.5million is poor.

If Sydney had 10 teams in the AFL, then 186K would be poor. Very poor.

But 186K is more than Perth or Adelaide got, and they seem to have got 2 teams each. Who is paying for those ?

Fact of the matter is, the number of teams in an area needs to proportional to the TV audience. On this fact, Sydney deserves another team, and Melbourne needs to lose a few.

It doesnt matter if it was beaten by "The Bill". Come next TV rights, 10 can put the AFL into Sydney on its 2nd digital channel, if its so concerned about beating the other stations, over making a tidy profit. What I'm saying is, next TV rights will have more bandwidth than content.

 

[bushranger58]

If Sydney had 10 teams in the AFL, then 186K would be poor. Very poor.

But 186K is more than Perth or Adelaide got, and they seem to have got 2 teams each. Who is paying for those ?

Fact of the matter is, the number of teams in an area needs to proportional to the TV audience. On this fact, Sydney deserves another team, and Melbourne needs to lose a few.

It doesnt matter if it was beaten by "The Bill". Come next TV rights, 10 can put the AFL into Sydney on its 2nd digital channel, if its so concerned about beating the other stations, over making a tidy profit. What I'm saying is, next TV rights will have more bandwidth than content.

I'm afraid to say that I agree with you here on this one. As it make so much sence.

 

[Max zero]

There is a reason why GC17 is being 'rushed' for 2011.

It will be the last year of the current TV deal. The AFL are hoping (rightly I think) that the GC17 team should have decent (not spectacular) TV ratings/support for their debut year.

They can then take those ratings with them into negotiations for the 2012+ TV rights.

Demetriou knows that the running costs of the GC17 club should be comfortably covered by increased TV rights revenue.

I suspect the 2nd Sydney team's entry will be similarly managed.