Richmond 2015 Draw - 7 FRIDAY NIGHT GAMES

[Ned_Flanders]

This may have been part of the reason, but the main reason is that the team with the lower amount of members/fans loses out on this type of arrangement. It only works out if the teams have about the same number of fans attending.

When you have a fewer amount of members against a bigger club, you are likely to get all the gate takings from a larger number of fans going to the away game. If you are sharing this revenue then you are essentially just handing money over to the bigger club.

Now we are substantially bigger than Carlton from a membership perspective, the deal no longer makes sense for them.

This is actually wrong.

the gate does not include membership numbers, only people who pay GA or buy a reserved seat from the ticketing agency.

As a big chunk of home team attendances is based upon using memberships, its the away team who bring in a big chunk of the gate.

As such, the smaller club actually benefits, as they get the benefit of the larger teams away attendance compared to theirs.

 

[Infamy]

This is actually wrong.

the gate does not include membership numbers, only people who pay GA or buy a reserved seat from the ticketing agency.

As a big chunk of home team attendances is based upon using memberships, its the away team who bring in a big chunk of the gate.

As such, the smaller club actually benefits, as they get the benefit of the larger teams away attendance compared to theirs.

That is what I am saying, the smaller club benefits from the bigger club paying to attend an away game
A bigger club is more likely to have more fans paying to attend an away game, therefore a smaller club sharing the gate is missing out

 

[Ned_Flanders]

That is what I am saying, the smaller club benefits from the bigger club paying to attend an away game
A bigger club is more likely to have more fans paying to attend an away game, therefore a smaller club sharing the gate is missing out

The big assumption you are making though is that both games are equal. Our opening game gets up to 20k more attending. Your assumption only works if the smaller team is always the home team for that game - they wont be

 

[Infamy]

The big assumption you are making though is that both games are equal. Our opening game gets up to 20k more attending. Your assumption only works if the smaller team is always the home team for that game - they wont be

This is true, but they rotate who gets the opening game as their home game each year
Over time the agreement is still worse off for the team with the smaller supporter/membership base

These gate sharing agreements are always ended by the team with the smaller supporter base. If it was good for them then they would keep going with it.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

This is true, but they rotate who gets the opening game as their home game each year
Over time the agreement is still worse off for the team with the smaller supporter/membership base

These gate sharing agreements are always ended by the team with the smaller supporter base. If it was good for them then they would keep going with it.

huh? Carlton ended ours, and they are not bigger than us. We only ended the one with the Pies because we desperately needed the cash that year (off memory there was no return game)

 

[Infamy]

huh? Carlton ended ours, and they are not bigger than us. We only ended the one with the Pies because we desperately needed the cash that year (off memory there was no return game)

Am I typing in a different language or something?
I said the team with the smaller supporter base is always the one who ends the relationship. Carlton is the smaller team, they have ended the agreement.
We were the smaller team when we ended it with Collingwood, we ended the relationship and as I said it wasn't just because we needed the cash, it is because it was a bad deal for us (ie losing $100-150k per year from it)

 

[tigs2010]

Infamy types English. Rfctiger reads it in Japanese.