A.F.L. Thread II

[Ausage]

How often have you seen AFL being front and back page news in Sydney/Queensland newspapers before Hunt?

Now, say you worked for a company, how much would a full front and back page advertisement in an emerging market cost your company?

Hunt's contract is around $700k a season for three seasons. It's already been costed that over the three days after he was signed he provided the AFL with $7.5 million worth of publicity.

So how is this debateable?

The Hunt/Folau signings got AFL front and back page coverage for a day or maybe two IIRC (at least in Sydney). Did it make the front and back page in Melbourne/Adelaide/Perth? If so the NRL got as much coverage out of it as the AFL did and it didn't pay a cent.

Weighing up the benefit goes back to whether you think any publicity is good publicity. We're not talking about a full page advertisement here, we're talking about an attack on a code of football that's loved by the majority of sports lovers in these states. Those people are more likely to see it as an aggressive move into the game that they love. I know that's how I and others that follow the game saw it. These people are less likely to follow the AFL, not more likely, so imo the debate should be about whether it's a net negative. The others either knew what the game was, or didn't care and still don't.

IMO the code would have been better off taking the long term approach like they did with the Swans but equip them to be able to achieve success better than they did the Swans. Get a game in the city each weekend, get the derbies happening and whatnot, focus on producing a product that people want to watch, and wait for crowds to come like they did with the Swans.

 

[benchmark00]

lol such an NRL mentality.

And I must lol at an NRL supporter questioning the AFL's expansion techniques.

ftr: Hunt news worth $7.5m | AFL | Fox Sports

The AFL have dominated this. In no way have NRL got the same publicity out of it that AFL has. The AFL have shown they can easily buy two of the best plays NRL have to offer. How is this beneficial for NRL again?

 

[Jono]

The Hunt/Folau signings got AFL front and back page coverage for a day or maybe two IIRC (at least in Sydney). Did it make the front and back page in Melbourne/Adelaide/Perth? If so the NRL got as much coverage out of it as the AFL did and it didn't pay a cent.

Weighing up the benefit goes back to whether you think any publicity is good publicity. We're not talking about a full page advertisement here, we're talking about an attack on a code of football that's loved by the majority of sports lovers in these states. Those people are more likely to see it as an aggressive move into the game that they love. I know that's how I and others that follow the game saw it. These people are less likely to follow the AFL, not more likely, so imo the debate should be about whether it's a net negative. The others either knew what the game was, or didn't care and still don't.

IMO the code would have been better off taking the long term approach like they did with the Swans but equip them to be able to achieve success better than they did the Swans. Get a game in the city each weekend, get the derbies happening and whatnot, focus on producing a product that people want to watch, and wait for crowds to come like they did with the Swans.

Nah, the world has moved on from the old Sydney Swans model.

They knew they had a TV rights deal coming up, and they had to have something substantially better than they had on the table at the last meeting.

They presented Gold Coast with Hunt, and Greater Western Sydney with Folau.

They received over $1 billion.

The move is a financial success. It's not really in doubt.

 

[benchmark00]

And btw, over the 6 or so years I've lived in NRL territory I've notice a huge shift in mentalities.

This is in an area which has never ever produced an AFL player before. More and more people are turning to AFL, whether you like it or not.

The new broadcast deal which will deliver more live AFL games to NSW than NRL games will underline this. If the AFL continue like this and NRL continue how they are going, NRL will be a minority sport in NSW within 20 or so years like it is in five other states and territories.

 

[Spikey]

The current deal shows more live AFL games on FTA than NRL anyway. If Sydney plays on Sat. Night - like this week - we can have up to 3. NRL only ever has one game live. And the deal is only gonna get better. Will NRL coverage on FTA get better? maybe. but i wouldn't be too hopeful... btw I'm in the inner west and I knew more kids who played AFL than kids who played NRL growing up (order goes 1. Football 2. Cricket. 3. AFL. 4. Rugby fwiw)

 

[benchmark00]

The current deal shows more live AFL games on FTA than NRL anyway. If Sydney plays on Sat. Night - like this week - we can have up to 3. NRL only ever has one game live. And the deal is only gonna get better. Will NRL coverage on FTA get better? maybe. but i wouldn't be too hopeful... btw I'm in the inner west and I knew more kids who played AFL than kids who played NRL growing up (order goes 1. Football 2. Cricket. 3. AFL. 4. Rugby fwiw)

Well yeah, you're right.

NRL on FTA will never be big because the game is owned by News Limited, who own Fox, so it's against their interests.

 

[Ausage]

lol such an NRL mentality.

And I must lol at an NRL supporter questioning the AFL's expansion techniques.

Who said I was asserting that the NRL had expanded properly in the past? The NRL administration has ranged between adequate and a shambles throughout it's history. That's not what we're debating.

ftr: Hunt news worth $7.5m | AFL | Fox Sports

The AFL have dominated this. In no way have NRL got the same publicity out of it that AFL has. The AFL have shown they can easily buy two of the best plays NRL have to offer. How is this beneficial for NRL again?

All that says is that the AFL got tons of media coverage in the days after the signing, and that the AFL calculated that it was worth 7.5 million. It says nothing about how that figure was calculated. You need to remember that while it was publicity, there was a huge amount of people that saw it as very bad publicity. That's not the same as pure interest in the sport. I'd be willing to bet that report didn't take into account the people who get turned off the AFL as a result of the move.

Last but not least, it doesn't need to be beneficial for the NRL. They're not paying a cent.

Anyway this argument is stupid because no one is going to be able to prove a thing. Some bulldust report isn't going to convince me, and my theorycraft isn't going to convince you.

Nah, the world has moved on from the old Sydney Swans model.

They knew they had a TV rights deal coming up, and they had to have something substantially better than they had on the table at the last meeting.

They presented Gold Coast with Hunt, and Greater Western Sydney with Folau.

They received over $1 billion.

The move is a financial success. It's not really in doubt.

The problem I have with this is that you've instantly equated the signing of Folau and Hunt being essential for the inclusion of two new teams. Why is that the case?

They got a great result in the TV rights deal because the game rates the house down in the states that Foxtel wants to convert, they're producing an extra game for those fans to watch and because they are a strong league administratively. They would have gotten that with or without NRL players.

I get the feeling we're not going to see eye to eye on this one, but frankly as one of the people a move like this was supposed to convert (an NRL fan with an interest in AFL) the move made me absolutely sick. I don't tune in to the sport any more as a result.

 

[benchmark00]

But you're posting in an AFL thread about it?

That's the essence of it. The move has got NRL people talking about AFL when they normally wouldn't (not neccessarily talking about you ftr). The battle is 75% won.

 

[Ausage]

And btw, over the 6 or so years I've lived in NRL territory I've notice a huge shift in mentalities.

Most of that came off the back of those cracking finals in 05 and 06. In other words, good product. My point is that producing good sport is what will bring Sydneysiders through the gates, not declaring war on the dominant sport in the city.

As to the rest, well I could spout some biased delusions if you like, but I'd prefer to be a bit constructive and reasonable.

But you're posting in an AFL thread about it?

That's the essence of it. The move has got NRL people talking about AFL when they normally wouldn't (not neccessarily talking about you ftr). The battle is 75% won.

Actually, that's the essence of my point as well. How much revenue is my "interest" in AFL generating for the code? I'm taking a few minutes of my time to post of a forum, but am I more or less likely to go to a game, or even watch it on TV?

As someone who got swept up in the hype of 05 and went to probably 10 Swans games live while watching as many as I was able on the box between 05 and 09 I can tell you the AFL has lost the interest that will generate money with many people in this city.

 

[benchmark00]

Most of that came off the back of those cracking finals in 05 and 06. In other words, good product. My point is that producing good sport is what will bring Sydneysiders through the gates, not declaring war on the dominant sport in the city.

As to the rest, well I could spout some biased delusions if you like, but I'd prefer to be a bit constructive and reasonable.



Actually, that's the essence of my point as well. How much revenue is my "interest" in AFL generating for the code? I'm taking a few minutes of my time to post of a forum, but am I more or less likely to go to a game, or even watch it on TV?

As someone who got swept up in the hype of 05 and went to probably 10 Swans games live while watching as many as I was able on the box between 05 and 09 I can tell you the AFL has lost the interest that will generate money with many people in this city.

And it will attract many more than it has turned away, I can assure you of that.

If producing a good sport is all it takes to get Sydney people through the gates, then that's a concession by you that NRL is not a good sport. Their attendances outside finals and SOO are pathetic itbt. The fact that the NRL has failed to try and actively turn this around is a testament to how poorly the code is run.

And yes, if someone is talking about the sport they are more likely to watch the game. That's been established in marketing academia for years.

 

[Ausage]

And it will attract many more than it has turned away, I can assure you of that.

Well that settles it then.

If producing a good sport is all it takes to get Sydney people through the gates, then that's a concession by you that NRL is not a good sport. Their attendances outside finals and SOO are pathetic itbt. The fact that the NRL has failed to try and actively turn this around is a testament to how poorly the code is run.

And yes, if someone is talking about the sport they are more likely to watch the game. That's been established in marketing academia for years.

Two words. Iron Chef.

I know you want this to get into flame war territory. It's not going to. It's not my intention to troll this thread.

We're not going to agree on this. Back to chatting about your sport.

 

[benchmark00]

It's such a rubbish debate. Let's meet back in this thread in 15-20 years time and we'll see who has made greater ground into alien territories.

By that time marc71178 will have 1 billion posts and Burgey will have just celebrated his 125th birthday.

 

[Ausage]

It's such a rubbish debate. Let's meet back in this thread in 15-20 years time and we'll see who has made greater ground into alien territories.

By that time marc71178 will have 1 billion posts and Burgey will have just celebrated his 125th birthday.

Agreed wholeheartedly with the bold actually.

Would probably be about as epic a piece of necrophilia as you're likely to see on teh webz too. (no gifs for that one please spikey)

 

[Jono]

Ausage, why would you boycott the AFL because it is offering NRL players contracts? Would that make you think "****, why are the best players of the league I follow not wanting to stay?" instead.

 

[Jono]

Gold Coast memberships have to also be taken into the equation.

Plus people viewing Swisse multi-vite ads with Hunt taking a speccie in front of the Eiffel Tower

 

[Spikey]

not declaring war on the dominant sport in the city.

NewsLtd papers declared a war on NRL but the AFL haven't. They just want a slice of a growing market. It helps that the two western sydney teams are a shambles* but it's not a war. Did the NRL declare war on Victoria? Of course not....


(both of them are dependent on pokies to make a profit aren't they? if not then ignore.)

 

[Spikey]

it's a joke Trengove has got 3 btw

 

[Spikey]

bastard comes back in time for our match too

 

[Ausage]

Ausage, why would you boycott the AFL because it is offering NRL players contracts? Would that make you think "****, why are the best players of the league I follow not wanting to stay?" instead.

It sure does. I'm as critical of the NRL administration structure as anyone. As I said before the management of the game has ranged somewhere between average and diabolical over the last 30 years, and it stands in particular contrast to the AFL in that regard. The game has a huge amount going for it, but time and time again the administration has been reactive, bumbling and at times downright stupid. Throw in parochial infighting, the Super League war and the inability to purge the game's administration of the toxic influence of an evil media organization (that to my shame I subscribe to) and you have a complete mess.

I boycott the AFL because their actions showed that they want to kill the sport I love, in my and my team's home town no less. That they're corporate rivals doesn't really mean anything to me. I won't support any organization that tries to destroy my sport in my own backyard.

Cue Union followers gutlaughing. It isn't the same though tbf.

 

[Ausage]

The way the figure was most likely calculated by the AFL's PR agency was, like Benchmark alluded to, calculating the size of the report and comparing it to a paid ad in that position of the newspaper. Some argue that it's a bit of a flawed figure and needs to be taken with a grain of salt for various reasons. What it does tell you is that a huge amount of publicity was generated, and I don't think anyone would argue with that.

It's important to note that the strategy isn't to solely generate PR and buzz around Hunt & Folau. That's more like the first prong attack, backed up by extraordinary grass roots initiatives and other marketing campaigns. The AFL know that there is little chance of getting people to immediately jump codes they've passionately followed all their lives but if they put in the ground work now, in 10, 20 years things will really start to take effect.

Your avatar = win.

Anyway I think the second paragraph is going to be a much more powerful tactic that Folau/Hunt. Which is why I have always questioned the need for the signings in the first place.