? Should Tassie have 2 teams!!

[telsor]

tasmanias population is hardly "wide ranging". takes 2 hours to drive from one side to the other.

So, 2 hours drive to the game, 2 hours home after the game...yeah, that wouldn't make anyone less likely to go regularly and maybe do something wierd like continue supporting the team they now support, because they only watch them on TV anyway.

 

[telsor]

you do realise it has about 10x more afl support down there?? and its really not that large

And you do realise that the GC is GROWING (unlike Tas), and if you include the surrounding area (as you seem fine with for Tas), the population is significantly larger (indeed, you'd be including most of Brisbane for a shorter drive).

New fans to the game Vs getting existing fans to change clubs...Which do you think expands the market more?

 

[scott_the_man]

So, 2 hours drive to the game, 2 hours home after the game...yeah, that wouldn't make anyone less likely to go regularly and maybe do something wierd like continue supporting the team they now support, because they only watch them on TV anyway.

most people would only need to travel 10 minutes for the game. plus im sure plenty of people in the gold coast area would spend hours traveling aswell..

 

[scott_the_man]

And you do realise that the GC is GROWING (unlike Tas), and if you include the surrounding area (as you seem fine with for Tas), the population is significantly larger (indeed, you'd be including most of Brisbane for a shorter drive).

New fans to the game Vs getting existing fans to change clubs...Which do you think expands the market more?

honestly i think a tassie team would achieve better results than gws/gold coast

 

[telsor]

honestly i think a tassie team would achieve better results than gws/gold coast

Depends on the results you're after.

The AFL clearly went for converting people to the code...ie more/new fans, and was willing to make a long term investment to that end.

A Tas team would be more viable in the short term, but it'd be a zero sum affair. Any fans, TV audience, etc that went to a Tas team would be taken away from other teams, meaning the net effect from an AFL level would be minimal.

In 20 years, GWS/GC will have added a couple of hundred thousand supporters to the code. In 20 years a Tas team will probably add near enough to none.

 

[The_Reaper]

Depends on the results you're after.

The AFL clearly went for converting people to the code...ie more/new fans, and was willing to make a long term investment to that end.

A Tas team would be more viable in the short term, but it'd be a zero sum affair. Any fans, TV audience, etc that went to a Tas team would be taken away from other teams, meaning the net effect from an AFL level would be minimal.

In 20 years, GWS/GC will have added a couple of hundred thousand supporters to the code. In 20 years a Tas team will probably add near enough to none.

So a 3rd WA team should be ruled out?

 

[telsor]

So a 3rd WA team should be ruled out?

Not at all.

As I said earlier, I'm in favor of a Tas team (so long as people are realistic about it). Having people actually able to go to games is a good thing, and a 3rd WA team would help with that.

The question I was responding to was about which would have been a better result, Tas or GC/GWS, and I pointed out that it was a matter of perspective. Long term, for the league as a whole, GC/GWS is better than TAS/WA3, but that doesn't mean the latter isn't worthy.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

if they had their own club they'd be gettign more than that every week

Why would they?

Football is not a new market in Tasmania, and most Tassie people follow an AFL side, just as passionately as any Vic, Sandgroper or crow eater.

You'd effectively be hoping a Holden owner would trade in their much loved Commodore for a Daewoo.

 

[coniglio_number1]

Basically GC/GWS was the expansion that needed to happen, TAS/WA3 is the expansion people would like to happen.

Can't see the afl making much more money from wa with a third team. 99.9% of thepopulation follows afl and either supports wce/freo or another team and already spends money on merch/memberships.

From a non-romantic viewpoint the next real expansion should be FNQ and Newcastle.

 

[madmug]

Depends on the results you're after.

The AFL clearly went for converting people to the code...ie more/new fans, and was willing to make a long term investment to that end.

A Tas team would be more viable in the short term, but it'd be a zero sum affair. Any fans, TV audience, etc that went to a Tas team would be taken away from other teams, meaning the net effect from an AFL level would be minimal.

In 20 years, GWS/GC will have added a couple of hundred thousand supporters to the code. In 20 years a Tas team will probably add near enough to none.

GWS is a real adventure into the great unknown. It is a real expansion for the game in an attempt to attract brand new supporters.

BUT the GC is really just attracting expat southerners who already have a team. They will buy memberships & maybe change allegiances over time. The same as Tassie would.

So Rather than calling the team the Brisbane Bears & watching it fail, instead the AFL called it the Gold Coast & funded it properly.

Wasnt that smart of them!!!!

 

[Seedsfan]

I like the idea when you look at the make up of the population it is split relatively even you would have about 250000 potential fans per club

 

[telsor]

GWS is a real adventure into the great unknown. It is a real expansion for the game in an attempt to attract brand new supporters.

BUT the GC is really just attracting expat southerners who already have a team. They will buy memberships & maybe change allegiances over time. The same as Tassie would.

So Rather than calling the team the Brisbane Bears & watching it fail, instead the AFL called it the Gold Coast & funded it properly.

Wasnt that smart of them!!!!

GC might have a base of expats/current support, but the goal was always to expand into the 'new'/'convert' market. There aren't enough expats up there to represent a viable level of support after all.

 

[telsor]

Basically GC/GWS was the expansion that needed to happen, TAS/WA3 is the expansion people would like to happen.

Can't see the afl making much more money from wa with a third team. 99.9% of thepopulation follows afl and either supports wce/freo or another team and already spends money on merch/memberships.

From a non-romantic viewpoint the next real expansion should be FNQ and Newcastle.

FNQ has the same problems as Tas, but without the benefits.

Putting a team in a region is problematic...where do you base it, how do you encourage people to travel to games and the issues of maintaining multiple AFL standard grounds if you want to play in multiple locations to try and draw on that geographically diverse support. In Tas they have the infrastructure and support base to cope with those problems. In FNQ, when you're struggling to encourage people who aren't firm in their support to games in the first place, adding extra problems could become overwhelming.

 

[madmug]

GC might have a base of expats/current support, but the goal was always to expand into the 'new'/'convert' market. There aren't enough expats up there to represent a viable level of support after all.

It would be interesting to get the stats on that. I believe the 'expat' population is quite large. It would also be interesting to see some figures on the people who were either originally Bears or Lions supporters who have been migrating to the Suns. I really dont believe they would have a lot of actual 'converts' or new non footy people that have started to follow football for the first time, via the Suns.
It would be interesting to find all this out, as compared to the GWS demographic.

 

[Papa G]

The argument about TV rights is interesting. Many argue that the TV rights rivers of gold are from having the Sydney market, but seriously, would TV execs look at these kind of figures ad say, lets give the AFL an extra $200 Million because we have 2 teams in Sydney??? Surely they'll cotton on soon that still nobody gives a * about the AFL in Sydney.

GWS enjoyed a historic win over Sydney Swans but only 63,000 people in Sydney watched it, just 1.3 per cent of the metropolitan area’s 4.6 million population.
The GWS-Swans game attracted 20,000 viewers on Fox Sports and another 43,000 on 7Mate.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/fa...g-the-favourites/story-fndv34of-1226857933645

 

[coniglio_number1]

The argument about TV rights is interesting. Many argue that the TV rights rivers of gold are from having the Sydney market, but seriously, would TV execs look at these kind of figures ad say, lets give the AFL an extra $200 Million because we have 2 teams in Sydney??? Surely they'll cotton on soon that still nobody gives a **** about the AFL in Sydney.

GWS enjoyed a historic win over Sydney Swans but only 63,000 people in Sydney watched it, just 1.3 per cent of the metropolitan area’s 4.6 million population.
The GWS-Swans game attracted 20,000 viewers on Fox Sports and another 43,000 on 7Mate.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/fa...g-the-favourites/story-fndv34of-1226857933645

You didn't really expect to convert millions of people to a new sport in less then 4 years?

 

[Papa G]

You didn't really expect to convert millions of people to a new sport in less then 4 years?

Mate the Swans have been there for over 30 years.

 

[thegreig]

What is this WA3 thing people talk about

Where would it be based, where would it play and who would their supporters be?

I remember the Mayer of Joondalup pushing for a future team there back in 2009, there was also this article recently http://www.inmycommunity.com.au/new...on/Game-stirs-talk-of-third-AFL-side/7656851/

i don't know enough about the geography or population to have a proper opinion though

 

[thegreig]

The next phase of expansion will be in NZ, and it won't be for a decade or two at least. People are severely underestimating how much it costs to run an AFL club, and the variables which go along with it. The NRL has clubs in places like FNQ, Woolongong and Newcastle because they don't need the revenue required to operate which AFL clubs do.

why does a AFL club require so much more revenue? i would have thought NRL and AFL clubs operated in very similar ways

 

[Shoei]

I remember the Mayer of Joondalup pushing for a future team there back in 2009, there was also this article recently http://www.inmycommunity.com.au/new...on/Game-stirs-talk-of-third-AFL-side/7656851/

i don't know enough about the geography or population to have a proper opinion though

Joondalup is roughly 25-35 minutes from Subiaco Oval and the home of West Perth in the WAFL.

They would push to have West Perth as the 3rd AFL team in WA.

 

[walhawk]

A Tas team is good for footy.
Club based in Hobart.
Split games 50/50.
Bellrieve is being expanded to 20K for 2015. Plenty of room to expand Aurora if need be.
Will get 20K members in each city and be instantly self sufficient.

Just because WA could support another club does not make it a good idea.
I.e. Manchester could probably support another two Premier league clubs, but it is better to just have the two strong ones.

 

[Sniggles]

why does a AFL club require so much more revenue? i would have thought NRL and AFL clubs operated in very similar ways

I'm not sure what the structure is exactly but AFL clubs are their own entities while NRL clubs operate as part of a larger social club I believe. Someone else who knows more can explain it in more detail/tell me I'm wrong

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I'm not sure what the structure is exactly but AFL clubs are their own entities while NRL clubs operate as part of a larger social club I believe. Someone else who knows more can explain it in more detail/tell me I'm wrong

Exact opposite. They are separate legal entities, In the NRL some football clubs share common boards with the licensed club, some don't. AFL clubs report their gaming revenue as their revenue or their consolidated group's revenue. In NSW the licensed club's financial reports are separate and their turnover tends to be substantially more than the football club's turnover. Most licensed clubs pay a grant to the football club. It's why the NRL clubs look so small compared to the AFL clubs when looking at revenue.

When in December a Landor and Brand Finance study was released saying Penrith Panthers was the #1 sports brand in Oz - purely based on revenue and AFL clubs had 14 of the top 20 spots, I decided to look up Penrith Panthers financials. This was report in the standard press article but see the survey results at this marketing industry bible B&T
http://www.bandt.com.au/news/marketing/afl-brand-value-swamps-nrl-s

I have been to Panthers licensed club a couple of times when I lived in Sydney and knew it was huge - but when I looked up the financials, they owned 14 licensed venues, the licensed club owns the football club and their turnover in 2012 was $146mil.

I looked up Easts Leagues Club and it was separate to the Sydney City Roosters Football Club - they paid about $4mil grant to the football club in 2013.

 

[madmug]

why does a AFL club require so much more revenue? i would have thought NRL and AFL clubs operated in very similar ways

I'm not sure AFL clubs really need a lot more money. Perhaps a lot of clubs spend a lot to raise a lot. Also the AFL clubs footy department spending is like an arms race, with diminishing returns on higher investments. The AFL seem keen to limit footy dept spending. I think that would help the game no end. It would take a lot of financial pressure off many clubs & the AFL itself.
Hopefully the AFL may then be able to assist footy clubs further down the line. Regional, country & junior footy could always do with some help.

 

[Dont be a lemon]

why does a AFL club require so much more revenue? i would have thought NRL and AFL clubs operated in very similar ways

AFL salary cap is $9.6million. NRL salary cap is $5.5million.