Mr Wind Up

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

53 Excellent

About Mr Wind Up

  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. It is possible to take production inhouse. It is also more expensive. Selling direct to consumers also limits exposure to a wider base.
  2. Citing falling circulation misses the point that most of these rags are now geared towards online offerings. The DM is the largest in the world. The point people are making here is that decision makers are using their union ties to embellish union nnews and restrict RL news. This doesnt need to happen by holding secret meetings to conspire against RL. All they need to do is appoint people who cant report on RL as they know nothing about it. As for the rest, theyll just source it from places like AP.
  3. This is a perfect example of misunderstanding what people really mean when they say those things. They are not saying they dont watch RL because it's the same old teams winning it. They are saying they dont watch RL because they dont like it. They are just listing one of any number of reasons to justify their position. Ive heard the same things about football: diving, low scoring, etc. People arent watching it because of those reasons. Instead, they use those reasons as a way to put it down in order to justify to themselves and others that they are right. In other words, they have no interest in ever watching, regardless of whether it becomes more competitive or they stamp out diving. But you dont need to take my word for it. The evidence is out there for all to see. On the one hand, you have a highly competitive NFL that is gaining its international appeal. On the other hand, you have a clique of 10 clubs in football that account for most of international attention. Point? Both models work. The difference is understanding that these things are irrelevant. What matters is that people get to like the sport first and foremost. They dont come to that conclusion based on competitiveness. Most kids that develop passion for sports dont approach things like that. As for the sports they rarely get exposed to and, by definiton, end of disliking? As adults, they come to rationalise their behaviour by saying things like: it's the same old faces winning it.
  4. I think there needs to be a distinction between 'doing a good job to capture an audience' and 'doing a job for an existing, captive audience'. United has 72 million Facebook followers. Whatever they do, it's going to look like they're doing a good job of promoting themselves. In reality, all they've needed to do is be successful on the pitch, and their social media following has followed easily. No different in Australia with cricket. As one of the major national sports, they need to do far less to attract people through promotion. The game sells itself, and the social media side follows. The mass media gives them free exposure/promotion/advertising. The only way less popular sports can combat this is to spend money to promote, whereas the established big sports barely have to lift a finger.
  5. For what it's worth, I don't for a second believe what this guy is saying regarding the shirt sponsorship ("trust me" isn't evidence of anything), but it's not difficult to top premier league kit deals. Middlesbrough and Watford for example are only £1m a year each.
  6. Once we sort out plane speeds, SL/NRL merger will be he way forward. I envision a unified world league that, at first, is largely made up of English and Aussie clubs. I think everyone wants Toronto to succeed. Maybe a few less want Toulouse to succeed, but on the whole most would.
  7. This thread is enough to give someone a brain aneurism. It's basically walls of text of people conflating objectivity with subjectivity. As a football fan first and foremost, even the most boring of games still appeal to me more than other sports. Id watch third division football over state of origin. Saying something is objectively better is true for you, for people who share your opinion, and thats about it. The best way to think of it is like this: think of how much you really, really love your favourite sport, and then imagine someone else feeling the same way about another sport. It's a simple concept, but one a few people in this thread seem to struggle with.
  8. It makes little sense to compare football in the US pre-94 to RL pre-2025. What similarities can anyone draw? Apart from the FIFA world cup selling itself, the US already had tradition of solid attendances up to that point. The NY Cosmos alone had 65 occasions on which they drew over 40,000. As as MWP mentioned, millions of kids playing the game. None of these things are present in US RL at the moment. None of that is to say that they can't host a successful WC with sold out stadiums. But to base this on the idea that 'yeah football did it so it'll be a lark' or 'Americans can't tell the difference between countries so it doesn't matter who plays' is the wrong way of thinking about it.
  9. Or they see Georgia for what it is: a poor, tiny country that doesn't add much value to the Six Nations.
  10. That's what they said last time too. Except that the stuff no one watches isn't what Sky is spending significant amounts of money on (unlike Super League). If they're getting those properties on the cheap, and one suspects they are, then it is the mid-tier sports properties (those they're spending tens and hundreds millions on) that are at most risk of seeing cuts.
  11. The people that attend football matches in the US don't go because they recognise the city names. They go because those are the big brands. What does Arsenal or Chelsea represent?
  12. Agree. It's not as if they're going to come out and say 'we can't wait to spend even more money on it'. The proof in the pudding will be what happens when it's time to bid. Just wonder if there will be another major broadcaster that comes in to join the race this time around (Google? Facebook? Who knows?) You can watch it on computer or TV as well, not just phones.
  13. You're thinking of the NFL. No such rule exists in Australia, and you can watch every NRL/AFL game live.
  14. Northampton average 15,000. Their stadium is nowhere near that big. Leicester have averaged around 21-22,000 in recent years. Either way, SamM's point seems to be that club union has failed because it's not as big as football. I can't come to any other conclusion.
  15. Just added up the number of events on Sky Sports channels 1-5 + BT Sports 1-3 that averaged over 200,000 viewers. I capped it at 200k because it would've taken forever to compile otherwise. I've divided it by sport. Keep in mind that cricket might have five days of above 200K viewers, but I've counted that as five different instances, instead of just the one game. Anyway, it makes for interesting reading. Football - 199 Cricket - 66 Darts - 15 Moto GP - 10 Union - 8 Golf - 5 Formula 1 - 5 Rugby League - 1 Boxing - 1 Tennis - 1 UFC - 1 Does this say anything about the argument that Sky Sports is underpaying? Obviously there are a lot of RL matches that average between 100k and 200k, which aren't reflected in this.