|
|
Post by sportsmad on Sept 22, 2009 17:48:53 GMT 10
news on public sales for the sydney game. ticket sales had surpassed 55,000 as of early this afternoon
|
|
jim
Marquee Player
Posts: 1,150
|
Post by jim on Sept 22, 2009 19:16:34 GMT 10
If the ANZ games doesn't get atleast 75,000 it's disgraceful. Is there much advertising and promotion in Sydney sportsmad?
For the Storm I would guess just over 30k, if they were smart they'd set up a booth outside the AFL Grand Final for half price tickets or something like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by sportsmad on Sept 22, 2009 20:12:11 GMT 10
in terms of actual promotion by the NRL theres not that much, but then again they dont really need to. the daily telegraph has really taken this game and ran with it. pages are dedicated to this game everyday. today there was a couple of giant posters of the teams in the tele + an sms competition where u could win double passes to the game. first thing in the sports reports on the news here is the fitness of daniel mortimer , how kimmorley with go and thigns about the game. so interest is very high. 55k is very impressive. i guess we'll see tomorrow how demand will hold up but a sellout is a real possibility.
|
|
|
|
Post by sportsmad on Sept 23, 2009 6:27:32 GMT 10
|
|
|
|
Post by sportsmad on Sept 23, 2009 14:41:02 GMT 10
66,000 sold as of 1pm today
|
|
|
|
Post by Druzik on Sept 23, 2009 23:00:11 GMT 10
Wow... and maybe add an extra 10 as walk ups, they may get that 75k they wanted!
|
|
beez
Reserve Grade
Posts: 250
|
Post by beez on Sept 24, 2009 10:26:22 GMT 10
what does he say about expansion? He wants to see league as a truely national game in Australia & says if he was in charge he'd be working his ass off to get teams into Perth, Adelaide, & perhaps Darwin. He says Gallop & co are happy we're they're at & there needs to be more forward thinking, basically the NRL needs to set its sights higher. |
|
|
|
Post by sportsmad on Sept 26, 2009 11:54:32 GMT 10
i tihnk we all want to see that. i dont think the AFL policy of two teams in each city is needed long term either. theres a clear gap between the cities that have two teams for the AFL. Fremantle averages significantly less than West Coast in Perth whilst Port Adeliade strugles to crack the 20k mark , which by AFL standards is about half the average in AFL states. this makes things a lot easier for the NRL long long term. Nz however, need to ahve 3 teams in the next 20 years IMO.
a crowd just a couple hundred shy of teh 75,000 mark watched the dogs v eels match last night with the eels coming out victors and the first team into the GF. i couldnt see a spare seat in the place though, it looked amazing. there was a special one hour news buliten live from the game before it on channel 9. the build up was like nothing ive seen in a long time
|
|
|
|
Post by arh21980 on Sept 26, 2009 18:26:46 GMT 10
i tihnk we all want to see that. i dont think the AFL policy of two teams in each city is needed long term either. theres a clear gap between the cities that have two teams for the AFL. Fremantle averages significantly less than West Coast in Perth whilst Port Adeliade strugles to crack the 20k mark , which by AFL standards is about half the average in AFL states. this makes things a lot easier for the NRL long long term. Nz however, need to ahve 3 teams in the next 20 years IMO. a crowd just a couple hundred shy of teh 75,000 mark watched the dogs v eels match last night with the eels coming out victors and the first team into the GF. i couldnt see a spare seat in the place though, it looked amazing. there was a special one hour news buliten live from the game before it on channel 9. the build up was like nothing ive seen in a long time I also agree with what you said but not 3 teams. Another team in New Zealand either Wellington or Canterbury. |
|
|
|
Post by sportsmad on Sept 27, 2009 10:13:53 GMT 10
thats interesting. why not 3 teams long term? a team exclusively for wellington and a south island team. theres plenty of juniors thats for sure. i just think that if the NRL is going to have a base in NZ they cant just go in there and decimate the domestic league and then force most of the locals looking to actually play in the NRL to go live in Australia.
a crowd of just over 27,000 attended the Melbourne game last night. not bad for straight after the AFL GF. shows how far theyve come because this was a huge test for the club. the atmosphere looked great. melbourne were just phenomonal. i havenet seen a better team since i can remember IMO. Parra v Melbourne GF. i cant see Melbourne losing. they have no suspensions for this years big one.
|
|
jim
Marquee Player
Posts: 1,150
|
Post by jim on Sept 27, 2009 13:55:12 GMT 10
thats interesting. why not 3 teams long term? a team exclusively for wellington and a south island team. theres plenty of juniors thats for sure. i just think that if the NRL is going to have a base in NZ they cant just go in there and decimate the domestic league and then force most of the locals looking to actually play in the NRL to go live in Australia. a crowd of just over 27,000 attended the Melbourne game last night. not bad for straight after the AFL GF. shows how far theyve come because this was a huge test for the club. the atmosphere looked great. melbourne were just phenomonal. i havenet seen a better team since i can remember IMO. Parra v Melbourne GF. i cant see Melbourne losing. they have no suspensions for this years big one. To put things in perspective, if the Swans had a game 3 hours after the NRL Grand final i doubt they would crack the 20k. 27k is very good and a GF win to Melbourne would be a great alunch for the Storm to be able to average 15-20k in their new stadium next year. |
|
|
|
Post by Ryan N on Sept 27, 2009 14:51:27 GMT 10
Problem, Parramatta is going to sluaghter them!
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan N on Sept 28, 2009 9:39:00 GMT 10
i tihnk we all want to see that. i dont think the AFL policy of two teams in each city is needed long term either. theres a clear gap between the cities that have two teams for the AFL. Fremantle averages significantly less than West Coast in Perth whilst Port Adeliade strugles to crack the 20k mark , which by AFL standards is about half the average in AFL states. this makes things a lot easier for the NRL long long term. Nz however, need to ahve 3 teams in the next 20 years IMO. a crowd just a couple hundred shy of teh 75,000 mark watched the dogs v eels match last night with the eels coming out victors and the first team into the GF. i couldnt see a spare seat in the place though, it looked amazing. there was a special one hour news buliten live from the game before it on channel 9. the build up was like nothing ive seen in a long time I also agree with what you said but not 3 teams. Another team in New Zealand either Wellington or Canterbury. No, I think the NRL should be Australian based. New Zealand needs a good strong domestic league, maybe semi-pro or something. As for expansion, I think we could go for a country team, playing out of Tamworth. Canberra can cover that southern area of NSW etc. and Tamworth could then cover the northern area. Just an idea. Despite what the media tells people the game is still popular out there. However I think we should have Central Coast (only if they play a fair few games at North Sydney still) and Western Australia. Queensland is also crying out for another team so if not Central Coast then there is the next spot. However, I don't think we should miss out on the opportunity with the Reds. |
|
|
|
Post by sportsmad on Sept 28, 2009 17:15:07 GMT 10
hmmm , its an interesting debate; how many teams should NZ have. i favour 3 as i think the damage has already been done by having an NRL team in NZ.
|
|
|
|
Post by sportsmad on Sept 28, 2009 17:17:09 GMT 10
gotta disagree with a team in tamworth though. Wellington have my first vote then Perth. Perth have a very strong case for inclusion. i think Perth and central coast will get the nods. i really hope its not 2 teams that are both in nsw or qld. we need to have at least one team out of our comfort zone
|
|
