• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

2019 TV ratings and crowd numbers

S

Show-n-go

Guest

Excuse the pun but that’s a cheap cop out

The majority of the promo I’ve seen for the women’s origin has been via social media, cheap af and they absolutely nailed it

The interaction, the quality, the quantity, the stories they tell, the manufactured hype and suspense.........all very cheap and easily done
 

WorkingClassRugger

Simon Poidevin (60)


As show-n-go suggests the money argument is a cop out. Rugby Australia and the Unions have marketing departments who's job is among other things to develop strategies to promote the game but all them seem capable of is the stock standard game day programme.

Same for the respective media departments. Rugby Australia's goes no further than the web site. That's it. They are provide content if you like or subscribe. Nothing in an attempt to reach wider audiences.
 

The Honey Badger

Jim Lenehan (48)
I would have thought the Junior Wallabies would get some airtime in the mainstream media. Bit Its all about women's soccer and cricket and Soo.
 

Strewthcobber

Mark Ella (57)
86k for Brumbies V Sharks
72k for hurricanes v Bulls

League tests
Samoa v PNG 148k
Fiji v Lebanon 167k
New Zealand v Tonga 209k
NZ women v Samoan women 38k
 

Aurelius

Ted Thorn (20)


Oh, c'mon. If greater money spent = greater interest then Clive Palmer would be running the country.

Besides, any time private ownership (ie private money) has been mooted as a solution to Australian rugby's problems you've gone on about how "the game isn't for sale."

Anyway, the Force got 12.5K or thereabouts for their last game. I don't think the marketing for it was huge, but it included Joe Camilleri as the pre-game entertainment so it was certainly a lot more creative than what the suits at Rugby Australia have apparently come up with.
 

RebelYell

Trevor Allan (34)
This is one of my greatest frustrations.

In the digital age, even organisations without big marketing budgets can have an impact with clever social strategies and great content which achieves traction via social media channels as people want to engage with it, share it, comment on it etc.

The best thing I can say about Rugby AU's digital strategy is that it is better than SANZAAR's.

SANZAAR's official Super Rugby and TRC accounts are embarrassing; posting content that's full of errors (eg 'Joe Maddocks' as a top try-scorer), not time-sensitive (posting a result on Instagram 12 hours after the game finished) and not dynamic - all the same graphics every time, with score dropped over the top. No video, no clever photo-shopping, nothing thought-provoking whatsoever. Let alone video clips during games to convince people scrolling through social media to turn on the match where the amazing try, or huge tackle, just occurred. They're a genuine joke and to blame lack of money/resources is not good enough.

As for Rugby Australia, they're trying - but unfortunately, their voice (and that of rugbycomau) just comes across as so pale, male and stale. I didn't believe that our game was mature enough for an 'independent' media outlet in Rugby.com.au, and I appreciate that the journos and social media admins probably cop a lot of (incorrect) abuse from people who don't differentiate that they are meant to be a media outlet, but the reality is that their content is so vanilla/plug and play that it's only redeeming feature is that it isn't behind a paywall. And that's not a criticism of the journos - they're doing what they're told, by the people that employ them, I would assume. They never get to break any news, and can never be critical of Rugby Australia despite the appalling job they are doing running the game, so their credibility is shot as a result...
 

waiopehu oldboy

Nathan Sharpe (72)
~14K at the Christchurch QF which has Crusaders CEO in two minds whether it's worth installing another 2K seats for the SF esp as they're up for a A$100K payment to the 'canes on top of A$75K to Clan for QF & potentially A$125K to the Final visitors.
 

Brumby Runner

Tim Horan (67)
These payments to the visiting sides are interesting. Anybody know how much the Jags have to pay the Brumbies? Or is it a set amount of $100k for a semi? Is that enough to cover costs?
 

Braveheart81

James Horwill (77)
Staff member
These payments to the visiting sides are interesting. Anybody know how much the Jags have to pay the Brumbies? Or is it a set amount of $100k for a semi? Is that enough to cover costs?


It's a set amount so the same for each visiting quarter final team, then an increase to each semi final team and then more still for the finalist.

It's a reflection that it costs money to play an away final and the home team makes money out of hosting the game.

I am sure it would not cover costs for a trip to Argentina.
 

The Honey Badger

Jim Lenehan (48)
633k for the women's origin on nine and 152k on Fox.


Anyone who thinks FTA days are numbered needs to have a good look at these numbers.

Rugby has forever been hidden behind a paywall. We are never going to grow our market and attract casual viewers.

Doesn't matter how many people subscribe to Kayo. Kayo will do nothing for the casual viewer numbers. Hard core sports viewers will subscribe only and they know what they want to watch. The hard core rugby supporters like myself already subscribe to Fox.

Don't know how they do it, or on what station, but an FTA deal needs to be done for at least some of the content.

Maybe play 1 Aus match on Monday night, that doesn't go head to head with any other code. That surely would be attractive to an FTA broadcaster on a main station.
 

Froggy

Nev Cottrell (35)
State of Origin in Perth, no significant Rugby League presence at all, drew 59k to the game! Sure, a lot of people came from the eastern states, but they came!!! We can't get them to cross the fucking harbour bridge!
There is just so much to be done, I get the feeling Raeline knows that but just hasn't an idea where to start. Sure, it will cost money (and we don't have much of that) but it will also require marketing and business turn-around skills that certainly aren't on this current board. I don't want to join so many in rubbishing the people on there, I'm sure the majority of them are genuinely doing their best, they just don't know what to do.
 

Silverado

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
State of Origin in Perth, no significant Rugby League presence at all, drew 59k to the game! Sure, a lot of people came from the eastern states, but they came!!! We can't get them to cross the fucking harbour bridge!
There is just so much to be done, I get the feeling Raeline knows that but just hasn't an idea where to start. Sure, it will cost money (and we don't have much of that) but it will also require marketing and business turn-around skills that certainly aren't on this current board. I don't want to join so many in rubbishing the people on there, I'm sure the majority of them are genuinely doing their best, they just don't know what to do.
To be fair, state of origin in the pinnacle of NRL and most NRL clubs get lousy crowds to home games. I'd be more inclined to compare a Bledisloe Cup, which is still the peak of our game, to SOO rather than Super Rugby games.
 

Froggy

Nev Cottrell (35)
Last year the Bledisloe, in Sydney, the heart of rugby, drew 66,000, barely more than SOO in Perth, at the opposite end of the country. For true like-for-like, last year's NRL grand final drew $82k. Their weekly club matches last year averaged 16.6k, against Super's 10k, and they have a lot more of them. NRL is, in my mind, a much less attractive product, very predictable and one dimensional, with no genuine international competition. These days the only games I watch are SOO and the GF.
However, it has massive brand loyalty, unlike our game. Rugby is certainly a good enough game to have that sort of following and more, but to build that is a huge job.
 

D-Box

Jim Clark (26)
The Bled cup should beat SOO at Optus as they are dropping in the extra seats on the boundary that weren't there for the league.
 

hoggy

Vay Wilson (31)
Last year the Bledisloe, in Sydney, the heart of rugby, drew 66,000, barely more than SOO in Perth, at the opposite end of the country. For true like-for-like, last year's NRL grand final drew $82k. Their weekly club matches last year averaged 16.6k, against Super's 10k, and they have a lot more of them. NRL is, in my mind, a much less attractive product, very predictable and one dimensional, with no genuine international competition. These days the only games I watch are SOO and the GF.
However, it has massive brand loyalty, unlike our game. Rugby is certainly a good enough game to have that sort of following and more, but to build that is a huge job.


Rugby can start to build a following like the two other football codes, but it will never do it with Super rugby and the structural issues that the primacy of Test rugby puts on your domestic calendar.
 
Top