That's incorrect, I'm much more of a soccer fan than the new-dawner-skips you find on forums like this.

Yet you only share your opinion when AFL is concerned.

Righto m8

Mate we have been drumming this point for a long time but he wont listen. He believes all viewers act in the same logical way that he views tv and its programs. In his eyes all viewers all act in the exact same rational manner.

Unfortunately for him i have witnessed first hand people act in the exact opposite manner, and thats why my views (like many others on here) believe that there are lazy neutral viewers out there, which certainly has an effect on the overall ratings figures especially on larger fta networks.

Yeah just like I said mister football. The epl outrated the afl final in Sydney and Brisbane. Your deflection to other unrelated matches doesn't hide what a shocking result that is for 'Australia's game'.

As for the Sydney afl derby in a finals that the AFL have spent 100s of millions over the years on building up to (money between the two sides) - time will tell if a little sokkah home and away game pulls a bigger crowd than that. Would be a monumental slap in the face.

On fta in Sydney more than double the viewers for EPL. In Brisbane it was roughly double.

Lucky the afl bean counters had Melbourne and Adelaide.

Mr f, you're a c... Also in the ratings. Great for the deny but as night follows day the aleague will outrate the role over a season. Don't worry guys. And fuck the casual channel surfers. There's enough of us, and our kids, to win. When the Anglo prawn sangers and 5aa rinse wash die, massive dip in the afl fat.

Waz you are talking about TV shows. TV shows barely exist outside of the TV

They don't get coverage on the news or in newspapers. They don't get coverage on the radio. They don't even play in front of 40,000 people

When the Olympics was on and channel 7 was drumming its next lineup at every opportunity, these shows would most likely attract more of an interest than if they were being shown on SBS. More knowledge and more awareness.

Football is reality. The broadcast simply complements it. If Justin Beiber toured here we couldn't kill his ratings by showing the concert on SBS. Some people will buy tickets. Those who cant but are interested would watch it. If it was on 7 and I was channel surfing and saw that little rodent murdering popular culture I would keep flicking. I wouldnt become a fan just because I "trust" 7 or decide it should be reputable

If the difference between SBS2 and SBS1 is 100k viewers, then why did AU v MV rate 175k on both channels? Why were the total ratings after 10 games exactly the same? Why didn't we see 175k on one channel and 275k on the other?

The facts don't support the hypothesis but you believe it anyway

To your final point: You have been sucked in by FFA feel good press releases. The obvious answer is that the A League is on FTA where as the EPL was exclusive Fox. Hence double the audience. Now that the EPL is also on FTA, lets ask for a comparison at the end of the football season...

A learning from the above is don't drink and post!

Soccer fans on this forum might be interested in a new article on the roar which talks about the next TV deal.

@ bluebird.

"Sucked in by FFA press releases" lol, you obviously haven't read anything I've ever said about the FFA in the past then :)

I promise i havent looked at it yet but i can bet that the tone of the article will be a negative/concerning/ belittling piece, and probably no doubt provide light on how far behind they are to the afl or some crap like that. The tone.qont be reaussuring thats for sure because i just get this sense that you wouldnt have posted this unless it was to have another jab. 
But ill check it out and report back.

It'a a very positive piece.

This has been explained to you before. The move to SBS1 was the saving grace for viewing numbers that season keeping them somewhat respectable and in line with (and actually above) the year before. This was despite there being much less buzz about the competition than the year before (ADP, Wanderers, etc.). Yes, moving to SBS1 it stayed at 175k instead of becoming 275k, however if it still had been on SBS2 that year, it probably would have been 75k instead of 175k. The move back to SBS 2 the year after resulted in a disproportionately large decline because SBS1 had prevented the natural decline which would have occurred had it not changed to the main channel that year.

But please, feel free to ignore this once again and carry on with your own agenda.

Buzz rothfield saying FFA trying for/could get half a billion $...

Not sure what he or they are smoking. Even a small increase on the current value is an achievement, considering at the the end of the day the league is just here to develop players for one of the bigger leagues in the world. 

Over 5 years. Definitely achievable and would be a great result. Not sure I agree with locking it in for 5 years though...

It's a Roar opinion piece. Pretty much just like any of us posting in a thread about TV rights, expansion or pro/rel. You take it as an opinion and nothing more.

Source? Coyldnt see anything on his twitter or opinion column.

Half a billion spread over 10 years is a real possibility.

Would give the A-League long term certainty.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/subscribe/news/1/index.html?sourceCode=DTWEB_WRE170_a_GGL&mode=premium&dest=http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/teams/whats-the-buzz-referee-blunders-drive-switchoff-as-afl-knockout-nrl-on-friday-night/news-story/e23cd67b733e399a4fe64e4af16537f5&memtype=anonymous

Has anyone got access ?  I'm not paying for it.

That's actually poor

We currently get $400m over 10 years. The extra $10m means the same 10 clubs get $3.5m a year. But presumably the FFA would want more of a slice of the pie so it could mean $3m for 10 clubs, $20m for the FFA, and no expansion for 10 years. Given that the model we have chosen is cost intensive where smaller clubs are already wanting $5m from the FFA to be viable, it doesn't make for a pretty 10 years

If it was me I wouldn't sign anything less than $100m a year for longer than a 5 year period. I would also use now as the opportunity to revamp the cost model because whichever way we go with the next TV deal we'll be stuck with

I was travelling on the weekend, and by sheer coincidence, I've got that hard copy of the DT in my hands right now - but I can't see anything in there about the FFA or a TV deal.

I've got page 49 open right now, there's a This is Your Life on Dylan Shiel, picture of him in a Big V jumper.

AT the bottom of page 49 there's a section titled:  "Referee blunders drive NRL switch off".

On the left there's a picture of a TV with Channel 9 and Fox ratings totalling 990,000.

On the right hand there's a picture of a TV with Channel 7 and Fox and ratings totalling 1,317,000.

I quote:

Friday night was a knockout victory for the AFL over rugby league.

NOt only did Geelong and Hawthorn double the NRL attendance figure but they also smashed the Broncos and Titans in the television ratings released yesterday morning.

All up, the AFL had more than 1.3 million viewers on Channel 7 and Fox Sports for the MCG blockbuster.

The Broncos-Titans game got only 990,000 on Channel 9 and Fox Sports.

might only be online

Apologies, just found it at the bottom of page 48.

Price Escalates

Australian soccer officials are loving the debacle of Optus covering the English Premier League.  It means the A-League is now a more valuable product which is why they are chasing about $500 million over five years from Fox Sports for their next TV deal.

The fact superstar Tim Cahill is scoring goals for Australia and has joined Melbourne City will also add extra millions to the deal because of his incredible popularity.

https://twitter.com/DeanRosario/status/775181971337076737

He's cut it from somewhere. 

The first time you've apologised for wrong information. You should just have a disclaimer at the end of your posts.

Don't be a smart arse, we all know that $50m per year for the next 10 years would be catastrophic. Just by applying simple effect of inflation alone for the 10 years would hamper the outcome. When the current deal was signed 3 years ago it was deemed suitable. Now based on increased costs coming from all areas, that figure won't do. $50m would mean a huge contraction and would certainly put the end of any chance the FFA setting up a second tier with some funding provided their way.

is that all ?

What does this have to do with the broadcast deal that FFA is going after?

Yes yes we all know after reading the article that Afl beat Nrl in the ratings. You should feel so utterly proud and happy. But unfortunately for you once again, this has nothing to do with Football and the deal they are after.