Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789101112 LastLast
Results 97 to 108 of 139

Thread: Swans vs Giants - general match discussion

  1. #97
    Wow - I live in the west and have supported Sydney for over 30 years and drive across the Anzac Bridge to the SCG for every home game.

    I recall Swans players coming to our local footy club on cold Thursday nights for years to try and boost support for AFL which was really struggling to gain support in the 80' and 90's.

    GWS were created by the AFL to stop Sydney becoming too powerful and also to even up the team numbers so there was not a bye each weekend.

  2. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by royboy42 View Post
    Briefly off topic,but..my brother went to every Fitzroy game in Victoria for 35 years....never went to another AFL match from the day the Lions died. Boss of Brisbane on the Footy Show after the 'merge' was announced, made dreadful, disrespectful comments about Fitzroy..that cost the merger thousands of old Royboys who were prepared to accept Brisbane as partners. Reluctant acceptance of the move turned to active hatred of the Brisbane Bears..He had a lot to answer for.
    Geez, sometimes you've just got to move on.

  3. #99
    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    Geez, sometimes you've just got to move on.
    Move on?! ANZ, McVeigh? Pot. Kettle. Black.

  4. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by 09183305 View Post
    Move on?! ANZ, McVeigh? Pot. Kettle. Black.
    Have I not accepted ANZ, especially now that GWS can service the west's needs?.

    McVeigh: one swallow does not a summer make. I.e. he's had one half decent game this year.

  5. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    Have I not accepted ANZ, especially now that GWS can service the west's needs?.
    Indeed you did ... after strangling the life out of the grand old girl ... but credit where credit's due

    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    McVeigh: one swallow does not a summer make. I.e. he's had one half decent game this year.

  6. #102
    Never mind soccer, rugby or any of those other boring games. I went to my first ice hockey game the other day and LOVED it! It's definitely the next big thing. I'm going to invest in an ice rink.

  7. #103
    Quote Originally Posted by KTigers View Post
    On this subject of the value of sports TV rights, there was a news report a couple months ago where bankers
    were urging Channel 9 to drop their cricket coverage because they were losing between $30M and $40M a year on it.
    Channel 10 is basically insolvent so you wouldn't imagine they will be putting their hand up for it.
    Free to air TV is clearly struggling everywhere, print newspapers won't last much longer, and the whole media
    landscape is much more fragmented because of all the new technologies coming in. And so the way media pays
    for sport rights will change substantially, if indeed they pay for it at all down the track. It wasn't so long ago
    that new technologies meant people had the choice whether they paid for music, and mostly they decided against it,
    and the traditional record industry was wiped out. The music industry and footy will continue but the way it is
    monetised is and will be substantially different, and not everyone will be happy about it.
    Actually, media fragmentation has made sports broadcast rights more valuable. It draws a mass audience and engaged viewers across the demographic spectrum in a way that is increasingly difficult.

  8. #104
    Am I the only one that hope we play in the white strip as the Giants will certainly play in their mostly orange home strip?
    I find it hard to differentiate between red and orange on the tv.

  9. #105
    Go Swannies! Site Admin Meg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In the Brewongle
    Posts
    4,717
    Quote Originally Posted by YvonneH View Post
    Am I the only one that hope we play in the white strip as the Giants will certainly play in their mostly orange home strip?
    I find it hard to differentiate between red and orange on the tv.
    I agree.

  10. #106
    Quote Originally Posted by KTigers View Post
    On this subject of the value of sports TV rights, there was a news report a couple months ago where bankers
    were urging Channel 9 to drop their cricket coverage because they were losing between $30M and $40M a year on it.
    Channel 10 is basically insolvent so you wouldn't imagine they will be putting their hand up for it.
    Free to air TV is clearly struggling everywhere, print newspapers won't last much longer, and the whole media
    landscape is much more fragmented because of all the new technologies coming in. And so the way media pays
    for sport rights will change substantially, if indeed they pay for it at all down the track. It wasn't so long ago
    that new technologies meant people had the choice whether they paid for music, and mostly they decided against it,
    and the traditional record industry was wiped out. The music industry and footy will continue but the way it is
    monetised is and will be substantially different, and not everyone will be happy about it.
    That was a deliberate leak of a Channel 9 conducted consultancy piece. They want to keep the cricket, but pay the same as the previous rights and also get the BBL included.

    Viewing methods haven't changed too much. It's more the patterns. As people watch less long form live content, how will the rights payers continue to find/drive value in their new asset.

    The comment about fragmented sports rights is true. Having FTA, Pay TV & Telco all involved in a single sport drives up the revenue. Look at the Optus and EPL deal as how to never, ever do sports rights deals.

  11. #107
    Senior Player Matty10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Southbank, VIC
    Posts
    1,323
    Quote Originally Posted by KTigers View Post
    Channel 10 is basically insolvent so you wouldn't imagine they will be putting their hand up for it.
    The failure of Channel Ten was due, in large part, to its butchering by Murdoch in order increase the profitability of Fox Sports. Once he came on board they turned the dedicated sports channel One (a direct competitor of his pay TV company) into a crap movie channel (mixed with other garbage no one wanted to watch) and dumped AFL.

    Live sport is the one thing that media companies can still bank on - if you lose that you lose relevance and the certainty of a dedicated audience. There will always be big money in high profile sport.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #108
    Regular in the Side WauchopeAnalyst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mid North Coast
    Posts
    834
    Remember that NBC owned the NFL TV rights until Fox arrived and they never go it back.

    NBC misread the situation and thought they couldnt cope to pay for the rights but it was their biggest asset and they let it go.

    Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789101112 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO