When will the AFL see a return on their investment on GWS and Gold Coast?

[Engimal v3]

Currently your team sells 3 games to Tasmania, Hawthorn 4, Melbourne one to the NT etc. North's Melbourne fans could actually be better off even if they played both teams in the Territories each year compared to now.

Also, as now, they would use "home game replacements" to ensure all clubs can still sell 11 games home memberships......



Really? Booh hoo, seriously. This is 3AW levels poor-me Victorian stuff

My North Melbourne home game membership is devalued due to replacement games. Should I be happy about it? Not really understanding the dribble you posted.

 

[The Educator]

My North Melbourne home game membership is devalued due to replacement games. Should I be happy about it? Not really understanding the dribble you posted.

North Melbourne should be grateful they are in the competition. They really should. You bring the least of any club to the competition and should just count your lucky stars that you get to watch your club in the top flight in 2023 in its tradition city unlike Fitzroy, South Melbourne fans and fans of all but one SANFL and WAFL club,

Even now you get access in Melbourne to more games than any non-Vic team

You are not commercially viable without selling games and never will be.

No chance North will or should end up having all its home games back in Melbourne

 

[Walshawk]

A Tasmanian team doesn't grow the game. Gold Coast and GWS do.

But it stops it shrinking. Which is actually more important. It is always cheaper and easier to keep your existing customers rather that try to find new ones.
And so far, there is little evidence to suggest that GWS are growing the game. Most of the growth in Sydney over the past d3cade has been in the Swans territory.

 

[Billy ray]

The replacement games suck though - you always end up sitting in a worse spot than you would have for a North home game.

at least you can literally get their, the same way you would for a normal home game, and at the same venue more than likely. gold coast (or other non-victorian fans) cannot do this. a replacement game would cost me about $500 to attend with flights and accommodation. even if game cost was included in my membership

 

[Engimal v3]

North Melbourne should be grateful they are in the competition. They really should. You bring the least of any club to the competition and should just count your lucky stars that you get to watch your club in the top flight in 2023 in its tradition city unlike Fitzroy, South Melbourne fans and fans of all but one SANFL and WAFL club,

Even now you get access in Melbourne to more games than any non-Vic team

You are not commercially viable without selling games and never will be.

No chance North will or should end up having all its home games back in Melbourne

What the heck are you even on about you absolute melt?

 

[Prince Imperial]

New stadiums in the same spot as older stadiums has little to no impact on attendance. We can already see this with the Eels. More broadly, the NRL are having a post covid uplift like the AFL in Melbourne but off a much lower base. Let's not confuse that with a multi-generational trend.

The Eels form is down from previous years which will be having a sizeable impact. The Storm's move to a new stadium in virtually the same spot has assisted its sustained increase in attendance. I doubt the Perth's stadium location is any better than Subiaco but even taking into account its bigger capacity, the vastly improved facilities would have helped increase Freo's attendances.

Regardless of the size of attendances, clubs generally significantly benefit from improved financial returns from better corporate facilities, premium seating, bar/restaurant sales etc. Its happened all round the world such as Yankee Stadium. The NRL clubs finances are likely to be considerably strengthened from the 3 new stadia and that's a key reason why I made reference to them.

The Giants are a bottom six team. They aren't going to have any rapid improvement in their off field support without actual on-field success. They are playing Fremantle who will bring few fans.

There will probably be an increase in Giants fans and a reduction in the overall crowd figure which will be inflated.

It will get Giants obsessed league and soccer nutters excited but it will be meaningless to whether or not the Giants will be a success in Sydney in 10, 20 or 50 years.

But you know all this.

It's 13 seasons into their existence and the Giants have already enjoyed a sustained period of on field success with 7 finals victories to their name. Tomorrow's attendance will be a further indicator of the success of the project and their future prospects.

No one can accurately predict what their on field results will be over the medium to long term but this is a bloody tough league with 17 (and probably soon 18) fierce competitors. The long periods of success of Hawthorn, Sydney and Geelong are the exceptions rather than the rule.

Their previous period of success was greatly assisted by generous start up concessions, the benefit of which is reducing. Whilst they have a fertile academy zone in the Riverina, Canberra and Broken Hill there is no stay at home factor and they have lost quite a few of their products (Hopper, Steele, Williams, Finlayson, Kennedy) to other clubs. Cameron and Taranto are starring elsewhere. Their small crowds are no doubt a significant factor in players wanting to leave. Apart from the on field impact, this must be demoralising to their fans. Still, they have a competitive list and other clubs aren't going to keep quiet if more concessions are demanded.

On field success is by far the most critical factor for the growth of any club and I reckon its more likely than they not they won't get the magnitude of success to substantially grow the club off field. Anyway, time will tell as they say.

 

[Aussie in exile]

I like it but the Giants are playing 3 games in Canberra up until 2032. They could easily increase Darwin’s number of games if Tassie come in to 4 a year, with Alice Springs getting 2 a year, then give Canberra their own team in 2033.

They should also look at North Queensland, see if they can get 2 games a year in Cairns and 1 each in Townsville and Mackay.

Playing 3 games in Canberra when they should play all their home games in Sydney in my opinion does them no favours

 

[Coolangatta]

Playing 3 games in Canberra when they should play all their home games in Sydney in my opinion does them no favours

Agreed, but that contract won’t expire. Hopefully they won’t continue playing there after 2032.

 

[Gigantor]

There are 140 year old Melbourne clubs whose annual distribution is marginally smaller than that of the Giants.

 

[Prince Imperial]

There are 140 year old Melbourne clubs whose annual distribution is marginally smaller than that of the Giants.

There's at least a $6m gap between them and the Saints and Roos in variable funding.

These clubs also get signage rights distributions from playing at Marvel and AFL club support members distributions as part of their "other" funding. The Saints got $1.3m from the former last year according to their annual report. The AFL would not have had this revenue in the first place without these clubs.

Winners and losers: The 2023 AFL club funding ladder revealed

As the AFL finalises the variable funding for 2023, The Age can reveal what the clubs have been told they will receive. Shedding light on the figures has prompted Collingwood president Jeff Browne to call on the AFL to do something about the funding chasm.

www.theage.com.au

 

[Canberra Pear]

The Suns were given the NT at their nadir and are a northern club. The Giants, certainly short of the introduction of a Canberra team, are a much better fit for the ACT and riverina. The number of non-white players is a distant consideration

If Canberra comes in as Team 20, you'd think they'd be a more natural fit for the Riverina.

If Queensland participation continues as it is, the Suns should be fine with just players from the Gold Coast and North Queensland, then shifting the NT to the Giants supplements their loss of the Riverina.

What I would suggest, and this is particularly enabled when Tasmania comes in, is that the Darwin and Canberra games should be "home games" of Victorian clubs.

Have the 5 smaller Melbourne clubs rotate through those places preferably and build it into the funding model. Or even have all the Victorian clubs playing home games in those places.

That would be my preference, too. Even if they end up having Gold Coast and GWS as away teams to keep the loyalty (and it's easier for travel). They're low-drawing teams in Melbourne so it seems a win-win.

Gold Coast and GWS need to be playing 11 home games in their home cities.

 

[GC2015]

If Canberra comes in as Team 20, you'd think they'd be a more natural fit for the Riverina.

If Queensland participation continues as it is, the Suns should be fine with just players from the Gold Coast and North Queensland, then shifting the NT to the Giants supplements their loss of the Riverina.

I agree that the Riverina zone would be a more natural fit for a potential Canberra-based AFL team and along with their own local academy in the ACT (that you would hope would take advantage of the AIS facilities) you'd think they would be able to produce enough talent to remain competitive in the current AFL draft model. Wagga Wagga to Canberra is less than a three hour drive so it would probably feel more like a local team for those in the Riverina. However, GWS without Canberra and the Riverina would really struggle in terms of draftable academy talent so you'd hope they would have made inroads in West Sydney before approving entry for a Canberra team. If the Giants were to be given unlimited access to the NT then I guess that might help but in the four years that the Suns have had Canberra, we've really only seen one potential top 10 pick in Joel Jeffrey come through so it might not be as lucrative as some think.

I think we're just now starting to see the the potential of the Gold Coast market after the AFL started putting forward an extra $400k a year back in 2018 to help the Suns properly resource its academy program. Walter, Read and Rogers are the first group of academy players to go through the full five-year program with the extra funding and now they all look like first round draftees. Last year also saw a further four Suns academy players named in the U15 & U16 AA teams so it looks like there is a really solid group of juniors coming through the Gold Coast over the next few years. North Queensland is a nice little top up for the Suns and I'm sure we'll see more talented players from Cairns making it and obviously Darwin has a long history of producing AFL players but Darwin is now NGA only for the Suns which means they can't match bids for players before pick 40. So it's really just the GC and North QLD for the Suns in terms of access to high end academy talent and you're looking at about 1 million people in terms of population (GC approx 700k North QLD approx 300k) which is significantly lower than the other three northern teams.

Ultimately I think you really need to be recruiting the majority of your high end talent from your own city in order for it to work at all levels. Brisbane and Sydney have done a good job of that recently and both have been highly competitive for the last five years so you really hope the Gold Coast and GWS can follow suit. The Suns are now showing signs of that being a reality but the Giants look a looooong way off from regularly producing first round talent that comes from West Sydney.

That would be my preference, too. Even if they end up having Gold Coast and GWS as away teams to keep the loyalty (and it's easier for travel). They're low-drawing teams in Melbourne so it seems a win-win.

Gold Coast and GWS need to be playing 11 home games in their home cities.

I suspect we'll see the Suns playing more games at Carrara once we start playing finals. At that point it will become more profitable to do so but right now we're often pulling crowds of around 12k at home and that's probably just breaking even in terms of revenue. I think the club knew we were in a rebuilding phase a few years ago when they signed the deal with the NT government and used the opportunity to make money / increase the club's footprint in a new market. We still don't have any clarification on future Suns games in the NT so that negotiation may still be playing out right now and I think a factor would be whether the club is about to launch into a finals window in which they want to play as many games on the Gold Coast as possible. It's a very interesting time to be involved with the Suns.

The problem I see with GWS is even when they were a top 4 team, regularly playing in prelims and even made a GF, they still averaged less than 15k to home games at the Sydney Showgrounds. I understand it takes time to build a fanbase but you'd like to think you would receive a decent boost of bandwagoners during that highly successful period but that didn't seem to be the case for the Giants. Having said that, I think the AFL are willing to give GWS at least another 10 years before they contemplate any kind of move so who knows what it looks like by the time the 2032 season rolls around.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

Whose choice is that the club or afl ?

The choice is the club’s. The club has a co-location model and is Canberra’s AFL team just as much as it’s Western Sydney’s AFL team. We have two home grounds - Giants Stadium in WS and Manuka in Canberra. I know that there are Giants members who don’t like it, but the club now has another long term 10 year contract till 2032 with our ACT Government (a 21 year commitment to Canberra) to annually play 3 AFL games (with an option of a 4th if available), 1 AFLW (and a second when the schedule expands) as well as a pre-season game.

 

[Walshawk]

Looking closely at the crowd at Homebush now (maybe 5k), there is very little orange in the crowd. If you pause the TV on any bay in you can make out that of around 50 people in each bay (of around 180) there is 1 - 5 in GWS gear and similar or slightly more in Dockers gear. Is this because a large portion would be Swans fans catching a game while the Swans are away? Or fans of other clubs?

 

[Prince Imperial]

Looking closely at the crowd at Homebush now (maybe 5k), there is very little orange in the crowd. I f you pause on any bay in 4K you can make out that of around 50 people in each bay (of around 180) there is 1 - 5 in GWS gear and similar or slightly more in Dockers gear. Is this because a large portion would be Swans fans catching a game while the Swans are away? Or fans of other clubs?

The attendance isn't too bad. Would be at least 7k is my guess. Looks more purple than orange on the outer side though I'm not watching in 4K. The atmosphere seems good.

 

[Canberra Pear]

I agree that the Riverina zone would be a more natural fit for a potential Canberra-based AFL team and along with their own local academy in the ACT (that you would hope would take advantage of the AIS facilities) you'd think they would be able to produce enough talent to remain competitive in the current AFL draft model. Wagga Wagga to Canberra is less than a three hour drive so it would probably feel more like a local team for those in the Riverina. However, GWS without Canberra and the Riverina would really struggle in terms of draftable academy talent so you'd hope they would have made inroads in West Sydney before approving entry for a Canberra team.

Agreed. Canberra is an obvious choice for Riverina players. It's also has a more country feel (like Geelong), so distance, as well as lifestyle, should be more enticing for Riverina players.

The difficulty for GWS is that the arbitrary NSW border is mostly all they share with the Riverina. For a lot of the region, Melbourne and Sydney are the same distance, and Melbourne's even closer for the more southern towns, so there's no hometown proximity reason to stay at the Giants. Of the current AFL talent that has gone through the GWS system, only a quarter of the players remain with the Giants.

On the plus side, the fact that only a quarter of that Southern NSW player pool remains, means that they only have to get their Western Sydney academy pumping out a quarter of the talent SNSW, to essentially be where they are now without the Riverina/ACT.

So it's really just the GC and North QLD for the Suns in terms of access to high end academy talent and you're looking at about 1 million people in terms of population (GC approx 700k North QLD approx 300k) which is significantly lower than the other three northern teams.

The population is smaller, but I would assume it's a stronger footy area (though happy to be proven wrong). I assume Gold Coast/Cairns has more footy players per capita than Brisbane and Sydney?

Out of curiosity, how far south from NQ does the Suns academy extend? The AFLW team plays in Mackay, I assume they're in the academy, too? And is the Northern Rivers area in NSW included?

 

[Prince Imperial]

Out of curiosity, how far south from NQ does the Suns academy extend? The AFLW team plays in Mackay, I assume they're in the academy, too? And is the Northern Rivers area in NSW included?

Most of the Northern Rivers and in Queensland as far south as the Capricornia region.

AFL - News, Fixtures, Scores & Results - AFL.com.au

Australian Football League. All the latest AFL news, video, results and information

www.afl.com.au

 

[Canberra Pear]

Most of the Northern Rivers and in Queensland as far south as the Capricornia region.

AFL - News, Fixtures, Scores & Results - AFL.com.au

Australian Football League. All the latest AFL news, video, results and information

www.afl.com.au

Cheers. A bit disjointed, but that still covers about ~1.8m people.

Plenty of talent to work with if the current participation trends continue.

 

[GC2015]

The population is smaller, but I would assume it's a stronger footy area (though happy to be proven wrong). I assume Gold Coast/Cairns has more footy players per capita than Brisbane and Sydney?

That's a fair assumption. The estimations are that both Gold Coast and Cairns have a 60/40 split in terms of the interest levels between rugby league and Aussie rules, with rugby league being the dominant code. Townsville is very much a rugby league town though and so is the Northern Rivers region of NSW. So in terms of the population that is reasonably interested in Aussie rules, we're looking maybe 500k people at most. With that said, if you were to look at people that are reasonably interested in Aussie rules in both Brisbane and Sydney then I think it's potentially an even lower number.

It's a question of quality vs quantity - would you rather have zone access to a small town with a higher concentration of AFL quality talent or a larger population that's mostly not interested in Aussie rules? This an extreme example but I reckon most people would take academy access to Geelong (200k) over the whole of Queensland (5.3m). The GC will probably never be on the footy factory level of a city like Geelong but the population is growing quickly and many of them come from the southern states who have an existing interest in Aussie rules and that obviously helps. So if we can flip the sporting interest level from 40/60 to 60/40 in our advantage and we have access to 60% of the best young athletes from the Gold Coast then we're going to see something really special take place on the Gold Coast in the lead up to the 2032 Olympic Games when the GC is predicted to hit a population of 1 million.

Cheers. A bit disjointed, but that still covers about ~1.8m people.

Plenty of talent to work with if the current participation trends continue.

Somewhere in that vicinity but the distances between are vast which makes it difficult. Far easier for a junior from the Sunny Coast to travel an hour down the road each week to participate in Brisbane's academy program then it is for a Cairns junior to drive 20 hours to the Gold Coast. Cairns juniors essentially have to move at the age of 15-16 to have any chance of making it whereas a Sunshine Coast junior can stay in their hometown all the way up until the draft night.

Population of the GC is approx 730k, another 300k in the Northern Rivers, North QLD approx 400k at most, maybe 250k at most in Central QLD. NGA in Darwin limits it to 10% of the 150k population so at best with people of international backgrounds included in Darwin you're looking at another 20k. So at absolute most we're looking at approx 1.7-8m in the Gold Coast academy zone.

By comparison, Brisbane's current population is 2.5m and Sydney's population is split between the Swans' 2.5m to the east and and the Giants' to 2.6m the west. All three significantly higher than the Gold Coast's total and that's not including other big cities including in their zones like 470k in the ACT (Giants), 450k in Newcastle (Swans) and 370k in the Sunshine Coast (Brisbane). As I already mentioned, the distances between are far more manageable as well.

 

[kalex6251]

its interesting how the age covers the storm .... does the SMH pay the same attention to either the swans or giants?

appreciate nine news has an investment in rugby league but the imbalance in coverage should concern the AFL (also raises questions about how much control/influence sydney HQ exerts over editorial decisions exercised by the age)

 

[Bjo187]

its interesting how the age covers the storm .... does the SMH pay the same attention to either the swans or giants?

appreciate nine news has an investment in rugby league but the imbalance in coverage should concern the AFL (also raises questions about how much control/influence sydney HQ exerts over editorial decisions exercised by the age)

I agree this is a big issue in the northern markets. The AFL CEO should be on the phone to the media outlets with an investment in the game continually demanding better coverage through their various media platforms.

So that includes in Sydney for example 7 Sydney, the daily telegraph, news.com.au, sen 1170 etc.

The coverage is terrible and has a big impact on the sport not becoming 'every day mainstream' and 'culturally relevant' in this part of the world.

It's the job of the AFL ceo and chairman to continually monitor this and lean on their so called 'partners' to ensure as much exposure as possible.

I know Vlandy's has been doing it successfully in the other direction to effectively smother AFL content in NSW and QLD, so I'd hope (although highly doubt despite how obvious it is) that the AFL are doing the same.

The other thing is AFL fans are passive in this area. Rugby league fans continually whinge via text, email etc if they aren't getting enough exposure on tv, radio, in the papers etc. It's a case of the squeekiest wheel gets the most oil.

 

[Aussie in exile]

Agreed, but that contract won’t expire. Hopefully they won’t continue playing there after 2032.

The boat might have sailed by then

 

[Aussie in exile]

If Canberra comes in as Team 20, you'd think they'd be a more natural fit for the Riverina.

If Queensland participation continues as it is, the Suns should be fine with just players from the Gold Coast and North Queensland, then shifting the NT to the Giants supplements their loss of the Riverina.



That would be my preference, too. Even if they end up having Gold Coast and GWS as away teams to keep the loyalty (and it's easier for travel). They're low-drawing teams in Melbourne so it seems a win-win.

Gold Coast and GWS need to be playing 11 home games in their home cities.

We are at least 10 years away from Canberra having their own team if ever sadly

 

[robbieando]

I agree this is a big issue in the northern markets. The AFL CEO should be on the phone to the media outlets with an investment in the game continually demanding better coverage through their various media platforms.

Its hard for the AFL to demand better coverage in NSW for example when AFL's own media department doesn't have a single journalist employed to cover the NSW clubs.

 

[The Educator]

The Eels form is down from previous years which will be having a sizeable impact.

Round 1 versus the Storm coming off a GF appearance....



Announced crowd of 17,300 but there is no way there is half that using #Giantscrowdanalysis

The Storm's move to a new stadium in virtually the same spot has assisted its sustained increase in attendance.

You couldn't have a better example of how minimal a new stadium affects crowds.

Olympic park was archaic, with a running track around it. And yet the Storm's average in 2008 was pretty much the same as the average in 2012 (3rd year at MRS)

I doubt the Perth's stadium location is any better than Subiaco but even taking into account its bigger capacity, the vastly improved facilities would have helped increase Freo's attendances.

It has enabled growth in a way that Subiaco couldn't. Ultimately, Freo were averaging mid 30s in a 40K stadium

Regardless of the size of attendances, clubs generally significantly benefit from improved financial returns from better corporate facilities, premium seating, bar/restaurant sales etc. Its happened all round the world such as Yankee Stadium. The NRL clubs finances are likely to be considerably strengthened from the 3 new stadia and that's a key reason why I made reference to them.

This is true

It's 13 seasons into their existence and the Giants have already enjoyed a sustained period of on field success with 7 finals victories to their name.

No reasonable person would deny that as a fledging club in a new market they were massively impacted by Covid. Particularly given their onfield decline occurred during covid

2019 was their 8th season and they undeniably pulled a substantial number of people down for the GF (perhaps a decent chunk from canberra and riverina included TBF)

Tomorrow's attendance will be a further indicator of the success of the project and their future prospects.

It certainly wasn't in a downward sense (i.e. if they drew a poor crowd against Freo in mid-June when they were sitting 14th)

No one can accurately predict what their on field results will be over the medium to long term but this is a bloody tough league with 17 (and probably soon 18) fierce competitors. The long periods of success of Hawthorn, Sydney and Geelong are the exceptions rather than the rule.

Of course. There are no guarantees of onfield success but it is to an extent more than likely over the longer cycle

Their previous period of success was greatly assisted by generous start up concessions, the benefit of which is reducing. Whilst they have a fertile academy zone in the Riverina, Canberra and Broken Hill there is no stay at home factor and they have lost quite a few of their products (Hopper, Steele, Williams, Finlayson, Kennedy) to other clubs. Cameron and Taranto are starring elsewhere. Their small crowds are no doubt a significant factor in players wanting to leave. Apart from the on field impact, this must be demoralising to their fans. Still, they have a competitive list and other clubs aren't going to keep quiet if more concessions are demanded.

They have kept a significant cohort who will be one-club players or otherwise have played most their careers out at the Giants (i.e Toby Greene, Kelly, Coniglio, Whitfield, Haynes, Davis, Ward). I'd suggest the death riding would be more demoralising for their supporters.

On field success is by far the most critical factor for the growth of any club and I reckon its more likely than they not they won't get the magnitude of success to substantially grow the club off field. Anyway, time will tell as they say.

Simple time is the other factor that I think you are missing. In a brutally competitive, yet heavily equalised, league, just showing up (including to schools, academy programs etc etc) coupled with inevitable periods of on-field contending will ensure it at least passes the smaller Melbourne clubs eventually