I've voiced my preference a ton of times....here is a view on the marketing of the game.

If you were marketing basketball, what would be the top things you would focus on?

Here is a quick (and undoubtedly wrong list, in no particular order):

- a great quality league
- great quality athletes
- a night of entertainment
- its a truly international game we are internationally competitive at
- superstar imports
- the pinacle of one of australia's biggest participation sports

Where do you think 'we play 48 minutes' vs we play only 40 rank on the list of things they would focus on.

Why does it matter what the scoreline is as long as the game is good?

Again, my best analogy is the movies... do you actually get up and complain at the end of the movie cause it only went for 90 minutes whereas the last one you saw was 105 minutes?

Strategically BA have, IMO, made a really good call. Strategically its better for TV, strategically its better for our potential international competitiveness (both coaches and players btw). We want our governing body making strategically good calls and i reckon they've made a great, long term, strategic call.

HO - good to see a positive post from you.

i also like the 40 min game,it is certainly keeping every one honest!!

First time at a game this year and thought the 40 min time allocation was spot on the money. I would not have wanted to sit through another 8 minutes of regular time after what I saw tonight.

Agree that it doesn't have a negative effect in regards to marketing. But personally, I prefer 48, for no real other reason than the fact it's more basketball. Honestly, I do feel a bit short-changed when I go home at 9.

So yeah, it might be better for attracting new fans (through TV), but I don't think it's better for the already established basketball fans. Although it looks like some of you like it so maybe it is...

X dont go home at 9 go up and celebrate, between Brett, Scotty, Silver Fox and whatever players talk it's good fun and getting a good club feel to it.

I like 40 min if we are in front, if we are not then give us another 8 ?? Seriously don't mind 40 but hell it seems to go so quick

Didn't think I was gonna like it all, after thinking Lightning games went so quick, last season.
Anyways - after all that happened thru this looong winter,and taking new fans to games - 40mins seems just right for them and me.

"X dont go home at 9 go up and celebrate, between Brett, Scotty, Silver Fox and whatever players talk it's good fun and getting a good club feel to it."

Yeah Robbo I do go up after as well, but still...

Like your idea ;)

HO, your movie comparisons are spot on. 90 minutes or 105 minutes, does anyone really care? Yes, I do. Might explain why I have a fetish for Kevin Costner movies which generally go for more than 180 minutes but that's a topic for another day.

IMO, the NBL got this wrong but kudos to them for having the balls to make a difficult decision. Proof is in the pudding and so far, they appear to be right - the games are closer and more entertaining.

HO - agree with most of your points but IMO your point 3 is hampered by the reduction in game time.

At Blaze games I can walk in at 725, grab a beer and my be in my seat for final warmups, then watch the entire game and be home before 930.

It just seems that with the shortened format basketball is something you do as 'part' of a night out whereas in the past I have always thought of the game as 'being' the night out.

Doesnt personally bother me though to be honest as Ill be at the games no matter what but I have heard of others mentioning the above as a negative (especially considering tickets are still priced the same as previous years)

sorry statman, i wasn't arguing that 40 minutes is better for entertainment. I was just asking what a marketer would focus on if they were trying to promote the nbl.

All i am saying is that if i was trying to market the NBL 40 vs 48 minutes is something you would never talk about. I would never promote 48 minutes of action if that was the format as a key plank in my marketing campaign - it would be about athletes and stars and rivalries etc.

Your comments are interesting though. I once attended a Spanish league game in Madrid (shit I am old). The game (from memory) was mid week and started at like 5:45pm. Done and dusted by 8pm and then you could easily go out afterwards. The 40 minute format worked great for this - might be worth thinking about for new years eve games and the like here.

Yeah agreed HO - there are a millin things you focus on before playing time is even considered.

As you mentiond the compact time frame needs to be exploited on some occasions. NYE is a classic example and also in QLD the early Wed night fox games. 2 weeks ago we went out for a meal after the game and it worked well. It still amazes me though how many restaurants in Broadbeach (less than 5 mins walk from teh GCCC) have no idea there is a game on.

People wanting a bite to eat before the game would be the perfect customers as they are in and out before the normal restaurant busy time. IMO the club could get together with a couple of restaurants and 'value add' to the actual game experience, make it a full night out with a special meal deal before the game, exciting game, and then finish of with drinks at MooMoo (already a sponsor but IMO not promoted enough as 'the' place to go after the games for a bevvy and to mingle with other fans)

Why get a deal with a restaurant when they have the bistro upstairs which is great to relax and have a beer and parmy beforehand, as for tickets still being the same price I guess the cost of running the game nights and all other issues have not gone down because of the 8 min.

Robbo, agree that the Sixers have a good thing going with the Apollo restaurant upstairs. My comments were in regards to GC Blaze home games and the restaurants close by in Broadbeach.

My apologies, but maybe some Gold Coast fans can come up to the bistro on Sat night

Biggest league in the world still has 12minute quarters, seems the marketability arguement gets shut down pretty damn quickly then huh...

When they went to 40 minutes they told us the game will be faster, more exciting and cost more for 8 minutes less viewing (which is almost an extra quarter so quiet a bit of time)
From the games Ive seen the game isnt any faster, isnt more exciting and yes it costs more for less(bad marketing that is).

So were better for TV....how many games are televised again, isnt it LESS than last yrs 12min quarters. Still no free to air. If they did this for a TV contract I could stomach it, otherwise waste of an idea.

Skud, again, you've missed the point. its not whether 48 minutes it marketable. Its whether you would really choose 48 minutes as a key part of your marketing strategy.

You know.... 'Come to the game, it runs for 48 minutes"

or 'Come to the game, see the premier imports in the NBL go head to head'.

or "come to the game, see Adelaide hate on Perth" etc etc.

As for your other marketing points, I'll ask you the same question i;ve asked others. Do you REALLY, (tell the truth) walk out of a great 90 minute movie that cost you $16.50 to see and say "thats not as good as the one I saw last week" (which also cost you $16.50) because it was 16 minutes shorter? Really????? Or do you genuinely rate the movie on its own merits?

The NBL did not go to 40 minutes in the review because of this years TV deal (which is showing more games by the way) - it went that way because it makes it a more attractive product to TV and because it improves significantly our chances of being ready for international competition - both of which must be seen as long term goals.

And don't get started on the biggest league in the world....that would be the one where the majority of clubs are losing significant money, which has dropped significantly in TV ratings in its own country, and which is facing plummeting merchandise revenue in core markets ... that one? That biggest league in the world? As in the one in America?

Anon507 - presuming you are the foreposted Skud, here is a response for you.

The NBA's TV ratings have been in decline for many years. Similar their merch performance, little to do with the GEC I'm afraid. They've closed major market offers in Australia, Europe, Asia....

The NBA has lost massive ground to NFL over the last 10 years.

Size does not make it succcessful. For all the popularity you claim it is not a money making proposition for the owners!

More importantly, u need to establish a link between its "success" and the 48 minute game, you have not done that. Would it be less successful if it was 40 minutes?

here is your premise:

The NBA has 48 minute games
The NBA is the biggest league in the world

here is your conclusion:

48 minute games make leagues successful.

Just think about that for a minute, the NBL has been 48 minutes since the early 80's and has struggled - looks like your premise and conclusion just failed - really badly.

How does someone who says "dun" instead of "don't" expect to win an argument with HO?

That would be the same guy who says the nba is struggling because of the Global economic crisis and then in his next thread argues it is bigger globally than ever before.
But the NBL has not been exciting between beating Townsville on the buzzer and 2 games in a row into OT it is obvious we need some excitement.
I dunno ???

#255514

FYI, the NFL tv deal dwarfs the NBA one. From memory they both expire in 2012 and the NFl gets something like 2.2 billion that year - the NBA under 1 billion.

Baseball gets the most aggregate crowds, with an average in the 30k mark - NFL's average well over that. I think that last year had an aggregate 18 million attend games and the NBA 21 million or thereabouts. The difference is the NBA teams host 41 games while the NFL teams host just 8.

NFL's online network smashes the others of the big four in season in the US.

Have watched bits and pieces of a few NBA games on OneHD so far this season, but not a full game. Funnily enough, they just seem to go forever and I end up skipping through.

Must admit I just want to see longer games! 40 minutes goes way too fast, before you know it it's all over and time to go.

I do not really miss the 8 minutes enough to scream and shout about it. However, my girlfriend, who is only a luke-warm fan of basketball, thinks that it is much better. She even commented that the last 10 minutes of playing time in the overtime game against Cairns dragged. I tend to agree with her, with overtime, if felt like a very long game, particularly because there would have been about 6 time outs in that last 10 minutes of game time.

Isaac, NBA games drag because of the additional 20 second timeouts. Too many breaks in play, get rid of them.