I'm quite surprised the alcohol advertising has lasted as long as it has...especially with the back lash around it's negative social affects...the crackdown on social drunkenness, the lowering of the alcohol content in in ARTDs (most 375ml can's have gone down to I think its 5.0% ABV from 6.0%), the bringing in of earlier lockouts/curfews at venues, plastic cups, alcohol free periods after midnight etc, plus the seemingly constant spotlight on NRL players acting out through alcohol...drink driving, assault allegations etc.
-
Join ccmfans.net
ccmfans.net is the Central Coast Mariners fan community, and was formed in 2004, so basically the beginning of time for the Mariners. Things have changed a lot over the years, but one thing has remained constant and that is our love of the Mariners. People come and go, some like to post a lot and others just like to read. It's up to you how you participate in the community!
If you want to get rid of this message, simply click on Join Now or head over to https://www.ccmfans.net/community/register/ to join the community! It only takes a few minutes, and joining will let you post your thoughts and opinions on all things Mariners, Football, and whatever else pops into your mind. If posting is not your thing, you can interact in other ways, including voting on polls, and unlock options only available to community members.
ccmfans.net is not only for Mariners fans either. Most of us are bonded by our support for the Mariners, but if you are a fan of another club (except the Scum, come on, we need some standards), feel free to join and get into some banter.
Some interesting figures from FFA
- Thread starter midfielder
- Start date
Mini In Bay 6
Well-Known Member
I don't think a national Rugby league comp is going to fall over without news - there was a rather succesful one before news and it had no problem running during reccessionary times.
If anyone who should be shitting bricks it's Union. They have no domestic comp and cant afford another one, they're haemoraging money because of player payments and if no agreement is reached they'll lose their Super 14 franchises and what little exposure they have left. It's they who'd be back to to provincial comps, not League.
On the TV front, I say throw a single game out to FTA and a highlights package. But show the match on hourly delay so the host broadcaster can flog it full of ads, while fox can show the game live and ad free. Friday night it would be slaughtered by the other codes, Sunday night is big ratings night so it won't get a start there, but 8:30 saturday night is good - it gives good exposure and can be used to let people get a taste to go to the games or buy a fox sub - of which more money will come to the game in turn.
Upon further expansion to 14 or 16 teams I would increase the games to two, but again delayed. Then when the comp splits into divisions, i'd flog the second division to FTA and keep the premier league on Fox. Fox gets the best content and the best teams and therefore pays top dollar, FTA gets more content to pack full of ads and the second division sides would get a leg up in exposure, leading to better rates off their sponsors.
That is of course there is a buyer. TV don't look so healthy at the moment.
If anyone who should be shitting bricks it's Union. They have no domestic comp and cant afford another one, they're haemoraging money because of player payments and if no agreement is reached they'll lose their Super 14 franchises and what little exposure they have left. It's they who'd be back to to provincial comps, not League.
On the TV front, I say throw a single game out to FTA and a highlights package. But show the match on hourly delay so the host broadcaster can flog it full of ads, while fox can show the game live and ad free. Friday night it would be slaughtered by the other codes, Sunday night is big ratings night so it won't get a start there, but 8:30 saturday night is good - it gives good exposure and can be used to let people get a taste to go to the games or buy a fox sub - of which more money will come to the game in turn.
Upon further expansion to 14 or 16 teams I would increase the games to two, but again delayed. Then when the comp splits into divisions, i'd flog the second division to FTA and keep the premier league on Fox. Fox gets the best content and the best teams and therefore pays top dollar, FTA gets more content to pack full of ads and the second division sides would get a leg up in exposure, leading to better rates off their sponsors.
That is of course there is a buyer. TV don't look so healthy at the moment.
FFC Mariner
Well-Known Member
Or do the FFA make the quantum leap to next gen in viewing and just do ppv via the net when the next contract comes around.
In 5 -10 years its how we will watch pretty well all sports (and most prime time too) as the owners of the product use technology to cut out the tv company (incl pay tv)
In 5 -10 years its how we will watch pretty well all sports (and most prime time too) as the owners of the product use technology to cut out the tv company (incl pay tv)
FFC Mariner
Well-Known Member
I think one of the US Baseball teams has taken ownership of its own product to get past the tv companies and access its audience in the US and Asia - just cant remember which one
FFC Mariner said:
Worst idea ever. We NEED people to see the game. PPV means only fans will watch the game, and lots wont pay, as is the same result as on fox. Roos matches would have far more publicity if on FTA. Thank God for world cup rights being FTA.
But until we have football all cycle round on FTA most people will see fottball as a one month in 4 years sport.
FFC Mariner
Well-Known Member
Cant fight progress - will happen
dibo
Well-Known Member
from one view, it will allow returns to accrue to rights holders more accurately on the basis of demand.
there is a cost in producting the content, but the higher demand will accrue in higher returns to the owners of more valuable products. this could have very nasty effects at the bottom end.
[skip to the last line if you don't like algebra]
assume all prices are held equal (covering costs) at p, the mariners will receive x subscribers at price p, and victory will receive y subscribers at price p.
let costs be equal across all clubs at = c, the return on the rights for the mariners will be:
rm = xp - c
return to the mariners = [number of mariners subscribers x price of subscription] - costs
the return on the rights for victory will be:
rv = yp - c
return to the victory = [number of victory subscribers x price of subscription] - costs
working on the not at all ridiculous assumption that melbourne will have more subscirbers, let's say for argument's sake it's 4 times as many, the return to melbourne will be 4 times the mariners return before accounting for costs. given the costs will consume a fixed proportion of revenue, the proportion of the after cost return could be much higher.
y = 4x
victory subscribers = 4 x mariners subscribers
rv = 4xp - c
return to the victory = [4 x number of mariners subscribers x price of subscription] - costs
if c = xp, rm = 0.
if costs = mariners subscribers x price, the return to the mariners will be zero.
if costs are equal to what we receive in subscriptions, they will keep none of our subscription revenue.
on the other hand
rv = 4xp - c.
return to victory = 4 x mariners subscriptions x price - cost
if c = xp, rm = 3xp.
if costs are equal to what we receive in subscriptions, they will keep three quarters of their subscription revenue.
[/algebra]
if we have individually sold subscriptions by team without some sort of socialisation, the victory (and any other big clubs) will hammer us.
there is a cost in producting the content, but the higher demand will accrue in higher returns to the owners of more valuable products. this could have very nasty effects at the bottom end.
[skip to the last line if you don't like algebra]
assume all prices are held equal (covering costs) at p, the mariners will receive x subscribers at price p, and victory will receive y subscribers at price p.
let costs be equal across all clubs at = c, the return on the rights for the mariners will be:
rm = xp - c
return to the mariners = [number of mariners subscribers x price of subscription] - costs
the return on the rights for victory will be:
rv = yp - c
return to the victory = [number of victory subscribers x price of subscription] - costs
working on the not at all ridiculous assumption that melbourne will have more subscirbers, let's say for argument's sake it's 4 times as many, the return to melbourne will be 4 times the mariners return before accounting for costs. given the costs will consume a fixed proportion of revenue, the proportion of the after cost return could be much higher.
y = 4x
victory subscribers = 4 x mariners subscribers
rv = 4xp - c
return to the victory = [4 x number of mariners subscribers x price of subscription] - costs
if c = xp, rm = 0.
if costs = mariners subscribers x price, the return to the mariners will be zero.
if costs are equal to what we receive in subscriptions, they will keep none of our subscription revenue.
on the other hand
rv = 4xp - c.
return to victory = 4 x mariners subscriptions x price - cost
if c = xp, rm = 3xp.
if costs are equal to what we receive in subscriptions, they will keep three quarters of their subscription revenue.
[/algebra]
if we have individually sold subscriptions by team without some sort of socialisation, the victory (and any other big clubs) will hammer us.
FFC Mariner
Well-Known Member
I suspect thats why we will see the Manures, Real Madrids go first. THEY dont want any form of collective bargaining because they dont need it.
Luddites beware, this issue is getting lots of airplay overseas and the technology exists to turn your TV set into a part of your home network so its easily doable now.
Imagine if you owned a movie catelogue...........................
Luddites beware, this issue is getting lots of airplay overseas and the technology exists to turn your TV set into a part of your home network so its easily doable now.
Imagine if you owned a movie catelogue...........................
dibo
Well-Known Member
FFC Mariner said:
i agree with you that streaming and club subscriptions will happen (already is to an extent), but the FFA have to be able to remain bigger than the clubs in the sense that they've got to ensure first rights to negotiate media deals collectively as a condition of participation in the league. i don't really like their chances without FIFA waving a big stick.
FIFA will need to protect their members' (i.e. national associations) rights to media revenues against the clubs, because otherwise we've got a world series cricket situation brewing where the G14 will run roughshod over associations in UEFA and the holes that allow them to do so will mean every other national league will suffer as a consequence. the problem is i don't see how they can do it.
the death of more than a century of league football is, of course, the natural end point of that process which began with the murdoch financed rebellion of clubs against the english FA that created the EPL.
FFC and craig foster were right, rupert murdoch and england (respectively) will destroy football.
FFC Mariner
Well-Known Member
Rupert Murdoch is the evil face of capitalism - fit to line up alongside Adam Smith and Cecil Rhodes.
midfielder
Well-Known Member
dibo said:
Good that you did .. but it would have been a tad easier to say Melbourne has more people than the CC .. headache after trying to read it all.
Online statistics
- Members online
- 32
- Guests online
- 373
- Total visitors
- 405
