AFL to take the NRL's lead and take a game to the US?

[76woodenspooners]

Financial Review:

“The NRL’s intent is to capture more of the hundreds of thousands of Australians living in the US to pay $US160 for the NRL’s subscription app, Watch NRL. It now has 3000 US users.

If we can get 1 per cent of the market in America ... that’s 3 million subscribers,” Mr Peter V’landys said following the release of the NRL results last week. “It’s a big strategy, it’s a big risk. It could be a game changer.”


7 News;

“The bold plan to launch the 2024 NRL season in Las Vegas is on.

The NRL will reportedly throw $200 million at the venture and the first piece of the puzzle has been placed.“

They’re 2 sources I’m leaning in to with my opinion.

He’s a fool.

Not even NFL, Baseball, basketball, or UFC would be able to get anywhere near 1% of the US population to fork out $160 on a subscription app to their sport. What makes him think the NRL could do it?

And if he truly believes that rot, why doesn’t he do this in India or China, where that “1% of a big number is a big number” fallacy has burnt fools for decades?

 

[3207]

He’s a fool.

Not even NFL, Baseball, basketball, or UFC would be able to get anywhere near 1% of the US population to fork out $160 on a subscription app to their sport. What makes him think the NRL could do it?

And if he truly believes that rot, why doesn’t he do this in India or China, where that “1% of a big number is a big number” fallacy has burnt fools for decades?

Because India or China don’t have a remarkably similar product.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Who says the broadcast deal has to be lucrative in the next 15 years?

Why can’t that deal come 15 years down the track?

The NRL Commissioner ran to every media outlet that would listen and gave a laughable estimate of what a new broadcast deal in the US could soon be worth.

Who says this has to be a pure money making exercise? The Gold Coast and the Giants aren’t a money making exercise but they’re worth the investment now - and in the future.

Of course it's about money. GC and GWS are in two states where great longterm growth of Australian rules football is highly realistic (especially considering the trajectory of the Swans and Lions). Not at all comparable to the NRL or AFL playing matches in the US.

Well for starters, no one actually knows what the figure is that has been spent.

So far we have had the number $200,000,000 bandied about, we have had ‘my mate in Sydney told me’ and we have had ‘Eddie is friends with Peter’ and we have had a comparison made with a deal between an Indian cricket broadcaster for a sport that is played across 10 other countries at some sort of franchise and international elite level.

It’s not exactly a NASA level analysis at this stage, is it.

So it seems fair that some posters, unbiased, or otherwise, are actually prepared to wait and see what come of it and accept that if nothing else it has been a success on a PR level.

Probably just use some common sense. 50k TV viewers in America for the double-header. Pretty obvious the money spent on this venture would be better off put into realistic growth markets like VIC, WA & SA (not unlike the AFL's push into NSW & QLD).

 

[3207]

Probably just use some common sense. 50k TV viewers in America for the double-header. Pretty obvious the money spent on this venture would be better off put into realistic growth markets like VIC, WA & SA (not unlike the AFL's push into NSW & QLD).

All of those states had their own teams and they weren’t deemed worthy of inclusion post-merger.

It’s not like the code hasn’t tried in those markets.

Why not go balls deep on a big market and see what come off?

It’s their money they’re losing.

 

[basashi]

These events have no realistic chance at expanding the game. They are there to "energise the base" and they are very good at it.

 

[The Golden Glenferrie]

NRL needs to start feeding Mailata's to the NFL. Only way it gets any traction

 

[WillHayward]

Everyone here trots this line out - without telling me how they go about it.

Well sportsbet is Irish owned. Id say he'd arrange meetings with execs from US betting houses and with some of the professional punting groups. And the venue owners as well. There is one reason and one reason only why hes doing it in Vegas.

 

[76woodenspooners]

There is one reason and one reason only why hes doing it in Vegas.

Indeed.

For the junket.

 

[WillHayward]

He’s a fool.

Not even NFL, Baseball, basketball, or UFC would be able to get anywhere near 1% of the US population to fork out $160 on a subscription app to their sport. What makes him think the NRL could do it?

And if he truly believes that rot, why doesn’t he do this in India or China, where that “1% of a big number is a big number” fallacy has burnt fools for decades?

I still think its all about gambling revenues. I agree with you - There is absolutely no chance of gettting 1% of the subscriber viewing market. Like zero.

‘Max-bet this thing all night long’: The Las Vegas casino owner who says it’s all coming up NRL

As restrictions around sports betting tighten in Australia, the NRL is looking to the new frontier for gambling gold.

www.smh.com.au

DraftKings director of sportsbook operations, Johnny Avello, reckons the NRL isn’t wasting their time in trying their hand in the US market.

But, as a kid from New Jersey who started in this town in 1979 rolling dice and is now considered an industry legend, he’s realistic.

“It’s worth the shot,” he says. “It’s possible to gain some share. The NRL is our most popular rugby league that we book here in the USA, but the handle is small. The bettors are still learning about it. When you look at the rugby [sic] interest in America, it’s low. Only 3000 Americans are signed up on the NRL .

 

[Aussie in exile]

Indeed.

For the junket.

And in the past I've been on them and loved it, and a majority of people do.
Something for nothing, and never look a gift horse in the mouth

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I still think its all about gambling revenues. I agree with you - There is absolutely no chance of gettting 1% of the subscriber viewing market. Like zero.

But as posted earlier in this thread:

To be clear, the NRL very likely aren't getting a cut of any gambling money from the US.

They have no jurisdiction to charge product fees to US betting companies, like they do Australian betting companies.

They're hoping gambling takes off so they can then flog broadcast subscriptions, so the potential payoff is actually one further step away.

Vlandys could attempt some sort of deal where he demands product fees from global operators, using their Australian operations as leverage. I'm not sure that's realistic - betting companies obviously despise product fees and aren't going to set that kind of global precedent for the sake of some small Australian sport.

This is correct.

AFL, NRL, even Football Australia, Rugby Australia etc. gather some revenue from the fact that government legislation forces regulated Australian betting on domestic competitions to pay a fee to the governing body.

Ostensibly this money is to fund the integrity departments and to regulate the betting itself. Which is true to an extent, the AFL and NRL does pay people whose job it is to e.g. actually look at the data for e.g. the Jaidyn Stephenson case. Not to mention to fight the (admittedly low in a global context) risk of match-fixing that increased gambling can facilitate.

Issue is that there's no actual regulation in terms of the fees that they can charge. When V'Landys came in he realised that he could increase the fees to bookmakers and make tens of millions of dollars more simply because there was nothing the betting companies wanted to offer the NRL. Keep in mind that the NRL additionally wanted to add an additional fee onto their major matches:

NRL hits bookies with Origin, grand final super tax

The NRL and bookmaking giants are at loggerheads over a premium tax on State of Origin and grand finals which could net the code an extra $1 million a year.

www.smh.com.au

V'landys takes aim at Betfair over NRL commission spike

ARL Commissioner Peter V'landys has slammed Betfair as an organisation selling their product with a "model based on fallacy and spin".

www.smh.com.au

Putting aside the fact that squeezing out the bookmakers, who then need to eat into the margins, advertise more aggressively and offer higher-margin products is a dumb business move as it's likely accelerated the social desire to limit the extent of gambling and advertising in Australian society politically, it's just not something you can replicate in the US.

There's no government legislation forcing product fee payments except for in one or two of the smallest of the 30+ states that have legalised it (and even that's just paying for official data to settle results, not to actually pay a fee on all transactions)

Take this article from the Guardian:

How the NRL expects to cash in on its controversial Las Vegas long-shot | Jack Snape

Rugby league is chasing a sliver of the rapidly expanding US sports betting sector with its five-year deal in Sin City

www.theguardian.com

“It’s not as simple to just go and apply that product fee regime [in the US],” Swanell says. “A lot of it comes down to, if there’s demand for the product, there’s demand for the vision, there’s demand for the data, there’s demand for information etcetera. That’s what operators would pay for, they would say ‘OK, well, we’re really keen on this content’.”

This is from Pointsbet CEO. He is correct. The word "if" and "would" in those statements are doing a lot of heavy lifting though.

However, it's proven that there's no demand for the product/vision (50k viewers in America on TV), there's no demand for the data (there's no benefit for US based operating companies to utilise official NRL data given how low the turnover was, they can still legally pay out anyone who bets on the match winner by just googling the match results), and demand for information etc. is just if gambling companies would pay the NRL website for match previews, live scores, whatever.

Even if the NRL turnover in the US doubles, triples, increases 10-fold, it hardly makes a dent in the US' bookmakers operations that they'd fundamentally change how they operate in regard to the sport and therefore pay money to the NRL to try and further heighten that NRL increase. It's not as if US bettors are ringing customer service and saying "gee I watched the NRL last week and wouldn't it be good if you had the live scores up on the gambling website along side the game? Or you used official NRL stats to put up player metres run statistics for me to bet on?", even if they did theoretically have a first-time gamble on the sport last week.

Lastly, even if there is such interest, the time zones simply don't allow it. Nobody is awake at 4am when half the matches are played.

 

[Gavin Excell]

It's a flimsy gimmick which seems to be the hallmark of football administrators

 

[M Malice]

Still a long long long way to go... never ever going to happen, USA broadcast viewership numbers for the Rugby League.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/mar/06/nrl-in-las-vegas-tv-ratings-rugby-league-2024#:~:text=The%20NRL's%20Las%20Vegas%20showcase,prime%20time%20on%20Saturday%20night.

The NRL’s Las Vegas showcase has failed to win over American viewers, after ratings showed just 61,000 tuned in to see the Rabbitohs take on the Sea Eagles in prime time on Saturday night.

The NRL has emphasised the sport’s goal in going to the US was to increase television audiences, sell subscriptions to its Watch NRL platform and build American gambling revenues.

However the ratings for this year’s season launch – which also show 44,000 for the later Roosters versus Broncos game – suggest the league has work to do.

 

[Roddy]

Success based on what metric?

Empty hype.

 

[Bjo187]

Because India or China don’t have a remarkably similar product.

Remarkably similar but much lesser product, from a country nobody in America actually cares about (by way of a mud patch in North England).

 

[HairyO]

That boundary at right angles?

No worse than the ridiculous shape of the Cattery.

 

[Rotayjay]

The NRL opener was a gimmick, held in the most gimmicky city in the world, Las Vegas. It's a waste of money. We shouldn't be copying anything the NRL does.

 

[WillHayward]

If you dont know this is all about gambling I encourage you to do more research.

Anyone who thinks this is about a broadcast deal needs to ask themselves two simple questions. Why Vegas?? Why Allegiant Stadium?

If you seriously want a broadcast deal you go elsewhere.

NFL votes to allow stadium sportsbooks to be open on game days

The Raiders have partnerships with several gaming companies, but none immediately expressed a desire to open a sportsbook at Allegiant Stadium.

www.reviewjournal.com

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

As the Super Bowl arrives in Las Vegas, Sin City’s $7bn bet to become the US sports capital is paying off

No event signals Las Vegas’s arrival as a US sporting mecca like the Super Bowl, which takes place in the city after an abrupt reversal in philosophy

www.theguardian.com

 

[WillHayward]

Still a long long long way to go... never ever going to happen, USA broadcast viewership numbers for the Rugby League.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/mar/06/nrl-in-las-vegas-tv-ratings-rugby-league-2024#:~:text=The%20NRL's%20Las%20Vegas%20showcase,prime%20time%20on%20Saturday%20night.

The NRL’s Las Vegas showcase has failed to win over American viewers, after ratings showed just 61,000 tuned in to see the Rabbitohs take on the Sea Eagles in prime time on Saturday night.

The NRL has emphasised the sport’s goal in going to the US was to increase television audiences, sell subscriptions to its Watch NRL platform and build American gambling revenues.

However the ratings for this year’s season launch – which also show 44,000 for the later Roosters versus Broncos game – suggest the league has work to do.

Irelevant.

Gambling dollars is now large sums from a few small but very cashed up syndicates.

 

[catters05]

Have a crack at India, money and stadiums already there. Massive population, build that historic cricket connection with Aussie Rules etc.

Or just build up the national comp better to begin with and fix up the state leagues.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

...who gives a F what the Yanks or the Chinese think or watch.

The accountants care.

 

[M Malice]

Have a crack at India, money and stadiums already there. Massive population, build that historic cricket connection with Aussie Rules etc.

Or just build up the national comp better to begin with and fix up the state leagues.

Agree, I am not a supporter at all of the USA or overseas "takeover" narrative but India makes a lot more sense along with Pakistan, England, Ireland and South Africa.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

If they can get an extra $10,000,000 in TV revenue, it will be worth it.

I don’t think they’re going over there trying to be the #1 football code in the country, they’re just trying to get more eyeballs on the product.

It's about gambling ultimately.

But they don't make the money from the gambling itself, as US bookies don't have to pay them a cut like they do here. They make money if punters watch it whilst betting on it.
The NRL is hoping/aiming for this scenario

The average American is never going to sit back in their lounge room and watch the NRL. Will never happen. Same with AFL. So broadcast deals of that nature are not what they're chasing.

They're chasing the 'watch live in the betting app' type broadcast deals where punters looking for something to bet on at 1am will choose an NRL game because they can bet on it and watch it live. The NRL would seek a deal from the bookies to allow them to broadcast the games live in their betting app.

For context, I read this from an article recently..

Some international sports have found a committed – if small – audience of American gamblers, sometimes due to small gaps in the rapidly expanding market. When Colorado opened sports betting in 2020, most competitions were shut down due to Covid. It allowed table tennis – which was still being played at the time – to become one of the state’s most popular sports for gamblers. Three years later and it still attracts more than $13m of bets each month, only narrowly trailing tennis and association football.


I heard Vlandys say that the US bookies had expressed interest in the NRL because of the timezone, as they had a void in the late night/early morning betting slots. Similar to how the TAB started broadcasting racing from the UK and South Africa etc. to give the desperate punters something to bet on at 2am.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

They tried it a few years ago in Denver, shouldn't that have lit the fuse for a big US interest in rugby league already?

They don't need a big interest though. They just enough if an interest for punters to want to bet on it.

It's not about getting the average American to enjoy watching NRL.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Did anyone else find the coverage by Fox really weird?

The commentators were borderline emotional about how much playing in Vegas meant. Like they'd achieved something by being there.

It was so strange.

I mean, the NRL administrators and project teams behind it would have been chuffed that they'd pulled it off from a logistical perspective - but paying a huge sum of money to play at Raiders Stadium isn't exactly something to get emotional over. You write the check, and they let you do it. You don't need to achieve anything to get the right or the honour.

Obviously the presenters would have been instructed to build up the hype and excitement - but it seemed like they genuinely meant it. There was a real 'we've finally made it to the big time' type vibe about their broadcast.

Since when is playing NRL in Vegas to a total audience of about 100k people that couldn't really care less 'the big time'?

It wasn't like an Aussie comedian or something selling out Madison Square Garden, or a local band playing at Wembley or anything.

I found it really strange.