Remove this Banner Ad

Stadium deal costs Saints $1.40 a fan

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

CHBench

CHBench

Norm Smith Medallist
Veteran St Kilda - Nathan Wright Player Sponsor 2014 St Kilda Saints - Tom Ledger Sponsor 2013 St Kilda Saints - Tom Ledger 2012 Player Sponsor St Kilda Saints - Nicholas Heyne 2011 Player Sponsor St Kilda Saints - Nicholas Heyne 2010 Player Sponsor
Jan 20, 2008
9,164
11,404
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
sixers
Etihad Stadium deal costs Saints $1.40 a fan

Mike Sheahan and Damian Barrett | May 07, 2009 12:00am

  • REVEALED: ST KILDA'S three home matches at Etihad Stadium this season will see it hit with a bill from the venue's operators for $125,626.
In the most glaring illustration yet that the stadium deals are financially disastrous to tenant clubs, the top of the ladder Saints will be slugged with the invoice, despite attracting 87,834 spectators to those games.
The club is effectively paying the Docklands stadium management about $1.40 for every patron who has attended their games.

The Round 1 match against Sydney attracted 32,442 fans, followed by 29,066 for West Coast in Round 3, and 26,326 for Fremantle in Round 4.

The Saints' bill for the Dockers game will be $73,105.
The shock revelations are in the first detailed analysis of match returns conducted by the AFL since Etihad Stadium operators removed deals that delivered fixed returns on matches.
Under the conditions that existed last year, St Kilda's first three games would have earned it $200,000.
The AFL has taken Docklands management to court over alleged contract breaches and is in an ugly standoff with the MCG Trust.
Docklands tenant the Western Bulldogs has fared better, but only just.

The Bulldogs earned $71,192 from their Round 3 match against Richmond, which attracted 46,261 spectators.

That equates to $1.53 a head from the average $20 generated at the gate by each patron.

Before the breakdown in relations between Etihad Stadium management and the AFL, the league paid about $700,000 a year to the stadium, half the fixed match returns.

The league withdrew the subsidy on the basis the money would stay with the stadium and not reach the clubs.

AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou revealed yesterday there was a $2.7 million gap in net stadium returns between Victorian and non-Victorian clubs.

"And the trend in the early part of the season is not looking flash at all," he said.

"They will be bleaker (than 2008 figures). What we do know is that without that guarantee (of fixed returns) there are clubs getting really disappointing returns at the moment."

Demetriou again attacked Etihad Stadium management.

"At the moment the only beneficiaries of how this stadium is going are the shareholders," he said. "The AFL has held its prices, but we are seeing nothing from the venues, in fact they are putting prices up.

"Food is up, car parking is up, and honestly, they need to take a good look at themselves on that front because everything else in this world is coming down at the moment due to the financial crisis."

Etihad Stadium management rejected Demetriou's claims, arguing food and beverage was comparable with other venues.

It also wanted it known the league had increased the price of a full AFL membership by $35 to $430.
Click to expand...
Greedy money grabbing whores. :thumbsdown:
Seriously. What kind of stadium deal is that?
Worse than the Bulldogs deal, Surely that would have to be the worst in the league. Eagles recieve $11 mil a year, and we end up having to PAY the stadium.

And this begs the question why are we playing almost exclusively at Jihad???
 
CHBench said:
Greedy money grabbing whores. :thumbsdown:
Seriously. What kind of stadium deal is that?
Worse than the Bulldogs deal, Surely that would have to be the worst in the league. Eagles recieve $11 mil a year, and we end up having to PAY the stadium.

And this begs the question why are we playing almost exclusively at Jihad???
Click to expand...

we should negotiate with the afl and start selling games more often:
SUGGESTIONS:
- aurora
- Bellerive
REASON: tassie may be looking for a new team to support when the current deal expires with the (money hungry) hawkers.
LEAVE it at 1 or 2 games a year we could in conjunction with other sides.

The only way this will be fixed is when the agreement expires after the afl owns the stadium innit?
 
This is Bull$h!t....we as members and supporters who pay yearly memberships and entry into the footy everyweek can't even support our team properly when this 'now g@y' stadium is ripping us off.
I call all saints supporters and members to really get out in force to our upcoming home games so we can show these stadium thieves we want our team to survive.If the AFL's not going to help then we can only show our support and back our team.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Not particularly up to speed with the stadium deal situations ...
Who is it that negotiated this deal? StKFC or the AFL on our behalf?
How can it be that we "owe" any stadium any money what-so-ever regardless of how many people turn up? Has "someone" guaranteed a certain value to the managers (doesn't the AFL own the stadium?) of the stadium?

Seriously confused about the whole matter and why exactly the AFL seem to be fighting with ES and the MCG
 
js13nat_talstra_wideweb__470x468,2.jpg
 
IllBeTheJudge said:
Not particularly up to speed with the stadium deal situations ...
Who is it that negotiated this deal? StKFC or the AFL on our behalf?
How can it be that we "owe" any stadium any money what-so-ever regardless of how many people turn up? Has "someone" guaranteed a certain value to the managers (doesn't the AFL own the stadium?) of the stadium?

Seriously confused about the whole matter and why exactly the AFL seem to be fighting with ES and the MCG
Click to expand...

the two points I think i can answer:
- The afl doesn't own the stadium. they will in 2025. the game guarantee ( of x games a year) finishes in 2014?
- The guaranteed value is the same reason PAFC is in debt i believe, the money that we pay revolves around "expected" crowd numbers and the fact that a game against failmantle disn't pull the huge amount of spectators the geelong game may do.

please correct me if I am wrong.
 
I didn't realise the deal at the Dome was quite that bad. I know that clubs needed to get above a certain threshold crowd figure before they started making money, but for them to actually be paying to play games there is ridiculous. You can understand why clubs which play home games at the Dome are looking to play elsewhere, especially when they play interstate clubs.

It's not as if St Kilda get terrible crowds anyway, like North or the Bulldogs do, yet we still end up in debt. Even a big drawing club like Carlton are playing Freo at the Gold Coast this weekend, which tells you how difficult it must be to make money playing at the Dome.
 
Plugger35 said:
I didn't realise the deal at the Dome was quite that bad. I know that clubs needed to get above a certain threshold crowd figure before they started making money, but for them to actually be paying to play games there is ridiculous. You can understand why clubs which play home games at the Dome are looking to play elsewhere, especially when they play interstate clubs.

It's not as if St Kilda get terrible crowds anyway, like North or the Bulldogs do, yet they still end up in debt. Even a big drawing club like Carlton are playing Freo at the Gold Coast this weekend, which tells you how difficult it must be to make money playing at the Dome.
Click to expand...

:thumbsu: - and carlton at least will be most likely paid a couple of hundred K for playing in front of two men and a dog! no wonder we sell games to the GC etc.
 
krusden said:
:thumbsu: - and carlton at least will be most likely paid a couple of hundred K for playing in front of two men and a dog! no wonder we sell games to the GC etc.
Click to expand...

That situation still isn't ideal though. Even though it may be more profitable for the Dome clubs to play home games elsewhere, like the Gold Coast, it still puts them at a big disadvantage playing on neutral territory.

None of the interstate teams have to move home games away from their home stadiums to make money, as they all have much better stadium deals. Hopefully the AFL can sort out a better deal at the Dome but it sounds like they are at the mercy of the Stadium management.
 
Plugger35 said:
That situation still isn't ideal though. Even though it may be more profitable for the Dome clubs to play home games elsewhere, like the Gold Coast, it still puts them at a big disadvantage playing on neutral territory.

None of the interstate teams have to move home games away from their home stadiums to make money, as they all have much better stadium deals. Hopefully the AFL can sort out a better deal at the Dome but it sounds like they are at the mercy of the Stadium management.
Click to expand...

the only similar deal is the one port have with aami stadium and the sanfl. their problem is similar to ours regarding butt-hole stadium management, "minimum" crowds and monetary loss.
we won't end up in as bad a situation as them i shouldn't think (their probs are myriad) but I can empathise with their frustrations regarding the stadium
 
IllBeTheJudge said:
Not particularly up to speed with the stadium deal situations ...
Who is it that negotiated this deal? StKFC or the AFL on our behalf?
How can it be that we "owe" any stadium any money what-so-ever regardless of how many people turn up? Has "someone" guaranteed a certain value to the managers (doesn't the AFL own the stadium?) of the stadium?

Seriously confused about the whole matter and why exactly the AFL seem to be fighting with ES and the MCG
Click to expand...

For the most part it was the AFL negotiating, clubs gave proposals to them and they then negotiated on behalf on each club for an individual deal.

There is no way in hell though that any club should be paying the Stadium for people showing up to games, I think it was Arocca who said something along the lines of he'd rather North player to an empty house than a 20k house simply because he then wouldn't have to hand over a payment to Jihadist management. So if no crowd draws about a better outcome than a 20k crowd there is something really really broken with the deals.

On the doggies, didn't they also do a deal with the NT for a game or two in Darwin a year or so ago? Which would make pretty much every tenant of Etihadocklandome bar (Essendon I think) buggering off and playing interstate at any opportunity they get.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

This is a really distressing situation, not just for us Saints fans, but fans of every Docklands tenant it would appear.

I am not aware of the full ins and outs of the current agreements. What I have noticed is that when we have previously played WCE and Freo at the Docklands, not all food and bar outlets have been open, obviously used as a cut costing measure, however this year I have noticed all outlets are open. I wonder if this is part of the deal.

Something which is a little off track, but still relevant. Do you recall in 2004 and 2005 when we played games against the Dogs at the MCG, despite both our sides being co-tenants at the then Telstra Dome? I can't help but wonder if this was a gentleman's like agreement between the two clubs to play at the MCG where it was more financially viable. I realise I may be clutching at straws at here, but I just thought it was interesting point to consider.

The Bulldogs figures are skewed with that Easter Monday crowd figure against the Tigers. They are in the same boat as us, perhaps worse. They would have surely expected a crowd greater than 36k on Sunday. I'm sure once the figures are done and dusted we'll even it out. I'd expect us to get 40k minimum for our next home game against Essendon.

I understand it's financially viable to look at other options, but it makes it difficult when we have been so successful at the Docklands. I remember Grant Thomas wanting us to abort the Tasmania project because of our poor form there. I wonder if this was another issue that was part of his demise.

Ok. I'll end my random thoughts here.
 
Compare this to Geelong. The cats make $650,000 profit for every crowd of 23,000 at Skilled.

It's the AFL's fault, they have tried to force clubs to relocate by shutting the suburban grounds and canning Waverley.
Etihad withdrew their games guarantee that was to last until 2014 at the beginning of the season as the clubs were arking up that they weren't making enough coin. Under last years arrangement we would have been 200K ahead.
 
Something must be done. The AFL should immediately boycott the Docklands and play the remaining games at Visy Park. Surely that would avoid having to pay money to play? They would soon wakeup and decide that they aren't making money when there aren't any games at all.
 
Between Visy and the MCG if the boycott were to happen so that 2 venues were still used, could still then have 1 a week at Docklands with those who make the most money out of the smaller crowd just to show management that the clubs are serious about the situation and by sending in the highest earner you are in fact pinch hitting in a sense.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Do you think that all of Australia will donate to the Saints about 100 mill like the bushfire appeal so we can build our own stadium and make the same money as they do!?
How is it that interstate teams have grounds that are older and would need greater upkeep than the newer Dome, you need to second mortgage your home for a pie, you are better off with a parking fine than paying to get in and we are drawing good crowds but owe them money. Stuff me!! Even if we get a capacity crowd we make stuff all. I know we should go and support the Saints but, when you read these facts you just don't want to give these maggots more money.
:cool:
 
Armitage2Riewoldt said:
Sign up guys. At least you know the club will get 100% of the money. Instead of 10% of your ticket.
Click to expand...

What a bullshit situation

Agree, at least being a member means the club gets the $$.

Not sure what else we can do as members/supporters?

Do Ethiad airways realise what Docklands management is doing to their brand in Melbourne?
 
BrianSpeaking said:
Compare this to Geelong. The cats make $650,000 profit for every crowd of 23,000 at Skilled.

It's the AFL's fault, they have tried to force clubs to relocate by shutting the suburban grounds and canning Waverley.
Etihad withdrew their games guarantee that was to last until 2014 at the beginning of the season as the clubs were arking up that they weren't making enough coin. Under last years arrangement we would have been 200K ahead.
Click to expand...

Suddenly Butterss' suggestion a few years ago that we rebuild Moorabbin doesn't sound so stupid. If they could have done a 25,000 seat refurb without bankrupting the club (big if), in the long term we would have been very, very well off compared to most other Melb teams.
 
It's no longer economic unless you have multiple tenants. You couldn't do another Skilled - most of it was built a long time ago but still does the job, and Linton St needed a complete re-build. The Kingston council wasn't quite as supportive as the council down Kardinia Park way would be.

I'm not sure how hard the AFL has tried to help clubs negotiate deals, and am quite surprised the returns to different clubs are wildly different (but understand that there will always be some differences due to average attendances). Also odd that the Saints could've made money under last year's deal but lose money this year.
 
It's pretty shocking but we play really well at Etihad, so I woudn't consider selling more games or moving grounds. Hopefully the Saints, AFL and the ****ers can work something out.
 
sainter_girl said:
Do Ethiad airways realise what Docklands management is doing to their brand in Melbourne?
Click to expand...

That's a good point - Telstra never really had anything to lose, but Etihad is trying to build a business in the Australasia - Europe route...

airbus_390350a.jpg
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Stadium deal costs Saints $1.40 a fan

Similar threads

Saintos The ITK
Training Saints preseason 2026
128 129 130 131 132
Replies
3K
Views
214K
MordySaint
MordySaint

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top