If there is a huge increase in the TV contract i hope that clubs spend a lot more on junior development as well. Country Rugby League could do with a huge increase in funding as well. the game in the bush is on its knees at the moment.

More likely to be a club grant and salary cap of $6mill per team imo.

I reckon it will be close to $800,000,000 for 5 years.

Cooper can't defend....SBW back in the NRL? We'll see, but I reckon the Frogs will have more cash...it may come down to if an NRL team would let him "box"

I'd fly to Sydney for his first game AGAINST the Dogs


I am with Huddersfield....development and support in Country RL is vital....and after the Reds are in, get a team in Adelaide by the time the next deal comes around......then the NRL might get a deal to match the fumbleballers. IMO that is.

We'll never get more than the fumblers the way it is.

The only way we ever will is if we get another Pay TV operator out here to make Fox pay what the game is worth or risk losing the sport.

Anything over what the AFL got last (780 million) time will set the game up for the fight that's here now, the code has been defending itself with 1 arm tied behind its back for 15 years.

NRL clubs don't need as much money as that other code, so that 780 or whatever it will be will actually go a lot further than their 780 did.

but you also have to take into account that the AFL earns a shed load more $'s outside of its media deal than the NRL does and the clubs also have much greater incomes on the whole.

We need $8-900mill and an expansion plan that takes the game national and into a 2nd NZ city or we will be chasing the AFL forever more.

Does the AFL get more purely because it's shown in the five cities as opposed to the NRL in two?

That's the only logical explanation I can come to as to why a sport that is watched on telly by so many more, gets paid less. Is it the reach?

The article by Roy Masters today clearly sets out the conflicts by News and fully explains why the NRL will get shafted despite being the number one TV product in Australia...

Aren't fox desperate for subscribers in Vic, sa and wa?

It is.

TV ratings put RL miles ahead. Only Kim Williams knows why Fox paid more based on some fantasy which has failed previously ie. better sales in Vic, SA and WA...

Oztam capital city ratings and conflict of interest/poor management of NRL are main reasons. Fox have paid out huge to get every game live as they know it will massively increase their subscriptions in 3 states. They already have large subscriptions in NSW and Q'land at a bargain price so it will be interesting to see who blinks first, Fox or NRL IC.

Miles ahead of what? TV viewing figures show the NRL gets more viewers.....that is correct. To say the NRL is miles ahead is wrong. Where the TV that is tuned into the game, who is watching it, their demographic profile and a bundle of other factors determine who is "miles ahead"

'"

Yep that's true, but the NRL does outsell the other mob in regards to merchandise and our memberships are just starting to take off.

This next deal is the one that can set the NRL up to take it to them, if it's a decent deal and the IC does all the right things, the deal after next years will be the interesting one for both codes.

Seems like AFL and rugby league are set to move up a notch or two. Where does this leave soccer and union? How far is union from being classed as a minority sport?

Already is, has been since 1908.

The only logical explanation is the one relating to the conflict of interest which you seem to ignore...

Yeah the non-existent ones they keep paying overs for...

Hard to respond when you mangle someone's quotes...

Higher than what? Everything is the answer. Rugby league is the highest rating sport in Australian television.

In reality nothing ever changed. The big three sports in Australia have been the same since 1908 as stated: rugby league, cricket and Australian Rules (in no particular order)...

www.smh.com.au/business/foxtel-r ... 1eh74.html Article mentioned earlier. Roy Masters is the best analyst of this stuff in Australia.

www.smh.com.au/business/foxtel-r ... 1eh74.html Article mentioned earlier. Roy Masters is the best analyst of this stuff in Australia.

Eh? Sorry don't get what you're on about geezer. Apparently I'm ignoring something, but I don't know what? Just tell me instead of suggesting something inaccurately.

You're working in Australia at a RL club but you can't see the conflict?

Bahahahaha.

Read the Masters article if you really can't work out what conflict is involved in any discussion involving News Limited and rugby league TV deals.

Concentrate on this bit...
"It has been hard for the NRL to achieve a just price when it has been ruled by News Ltd directors who sit on one side of a table making an offer and then run around the other side of the table to gleefully accept it."

Naa, naa, it doesn't exist.