Analysis Stadium deals - what, how, when - why we need a new one and the SA footy paradigm shift happening

[Pt Augusta Power]

Is it worrying that Gill is probably at one with the Sanfl pissants? He would have been cut from the same cloth.

Also gill would be comfortable that he can offset the crows shitty deal by giving them 22 home games. Gill has been in charge of giving Adelaide one of the easiest draws for the past 4 seasons.

 

[Kwality]

Is it worrying that Gill is probably at one with the Sanfl pissants? He would have been cut from the same cloth.

Also gill would be comfortable that he can offset the crows shitty deal by giving them 22 home games. Gill has been in charge of giving Adelaide one of the easiest draws for the past 4 seasons.

The original architect of putting footy with cricket at Adelaide Oval was Ian McLachlan.
... Ian became director of Cricket Australia. He also served as President of the South Australian Cricket Association (SACA). While in this role, he entered into discussions with the AFL over football’s return to the Adelaide Oval. Though he stood down from the presidency in June 2013, he continued on as chair of the Adelaide Oval Stadium Management Authority, handing over to the former South Australian premier, John Olsen, a few days ago.
McLachlan and his nephew were behind the negotiations to bring footy back to Adelaide Oval. It was a fraught but partly family affair. In 2008 Gillon was appointed the AFL’s chief operating officer. His brief was overseeing the League’s new stadium deals. McLachlan raised the Adelaide Oval issue with the then South Australian Liberal leader, Martin Hamilton-Smith, who took it up with uncle Ian at the SACA.
http://thenewdaily.com.au/sport/2014/05/01/networker-gillon-mclachlan-landed-footys-top-job/

 

[Doctor Feel]

I told people to be careful what you wish for when cheering that Andy D was leaving.

 

[TheFVK]

I told people to be careful what you wish for when cheering that Andy D was leaving.

Noone on this board was cheering.

 

[Doctor Feel]

Noone on this board was cheering.

I assure you there were some. Couldn't name them though.

 

[tribey]

I assure you there were some. Couldn't name them though.

Probably the same ones who still think the Victorian man is keeping us down.

 

[I Dont Care]

Probably the same ones who still think the Victorian man is keeping us down.

Trigg for CEO

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Looks like Port will definitely have to do the heavy lifting on the stadium deal review. Can't help but laugh at Rucci's article on 9th July - but lets hope KT takes over the review of the SMA deal with the AFL's backing.

mmmh is that why the AFL is backing Trigg to Carlton?? get him out of being in charge of the leading the 2 AFL clubs' side of the review and hand it over to KT??

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...983418221?nk=d43d3942d0363e6a3d8eb2f8c19fca7d

....
Chapman declared it was not difficult to see that Trigg “is on the back nine, not the front nine” of his journey with Adelaide.

His legacy, Chapman added, is to be the review of the Adelaide Oval finances that begins under the stewardship of new AFL chief Gillon McLachlan next week.

The conclusion is Trigg will be gone — perhaps to Brisbane or even Gold Coast — by season’s end.

Nigel Smart or former Port Adelaide chief executive Mark Haysman are seen as the immediate successor.

So should Trigg feel flattered that his star has risen from the ashes to be seen as candidate for major AFL-driven projects either at AFL House or in Queensland?

Or should be feel threatened by critics and analysts imagining he is on the 18th hole looking to make his last putt with the Oval stadium review?

Asked on Wednesday, Trigg simply replied his focus was firmly on the needs of the Adelaide Football Club — on and off the field.

He also was far too busy reviewing Oval figures and documents to entertain the debate on his future in Adelaide.

Trigg also has a firm desire to complete his mission to deliver senior coach Brenton Sanderson - who is on contract for the next two seasons — a football department and program that makes the Crows a solid top-four contender.

So, to use Chapman’s image from the golf course, Trigg is on the 15th fairway rather than the 18th green........

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...983418221?nk=d43d3942d0363e6a3d8eb2f8c19fca7d

 

[Kwality]

Hard to deny many AFL & club appointments appear to favour the insiders.

Be at airport to see Trigg leaves town #7?

 

[scotty13]

Is it true the SACA was billed $6500 for a 2hr training session under lights?

If true the SMA have massive problems!

 

[*PAF]

Any news?
How is the review going?

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

No idea PAF but we were all spewing at how slow it was to get beers yesterday. Definately less beer pourers (we are at the bar eastern , southern scoreboard). Mate had to wait the entire break which is shitloads longer than usual. I'd expect the campaigners to pass on these savings.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Any news?
How is the review going?

Your about 3 months premature.

 

[*PAF]

Your about 3 months premature.

I'm confused. Didn't It start a couple of weeks back?

EDIT: I know it is expected to go for a while but if things aren't working out as planned something usually leaks out.

No news good news or hasn't it started yet?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I'm confused. Didn't It start a couple of weeks back?

EDIT: I know it is expected to go for a while but if things aren't working out as planned something usually leaks out.

The parties have been told/asked not to leak because its going to take time and to keep the negotiations on good faith.

 

[raptalia]

For years the SANFL was telling us to get more people to our games and the AFL was telling us the same thing. This year Port have had over 43,000 to our home games on average and still cannot make enough from the stadium deal. Something stinks about this deal and it is time for the AFL to show that it has the interests of all AFL clubs at heart and start insisting on a better cut.

South Australia's AFL fans have been magnificent in their response to the new stadium and it is time for the AFL to reward some of that faith and get a lot tougher with the SMA. If that means going to the State and Federal Governments, who have invested millions of tax payer dollars in this deal, so be it.

We will not know what is being said because of the 'confidentiality' agreements but it is to be hoped that the AFL is playing a leading role in this. You really have to worry about organisations who want to hide things from the public. We, the fans are the people who make this stadium viable yet we are never allowed to know where our money goes.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Depends what we negotiated for the deal.

If we negotiated we wont have to write a cheque if we get less than 20,000 then I can understand why we get bugger all if we get over 33,000.

I would like this to be publicly clarified but the club might not want it to be revealed. Remember when we were negotiating we were struggling to draw 20,000 and writing the SANFL cheques for most games. The club could have negotiated a best deal for when the shinyy new toy loses its appeal. I dont think anyone expected AO to be as successful as it has been. So we may have negotiated to stop the bleeding in the worst case scenario but the pay off is that we dont get any real upside when we get more than the budgeted 33,000 average.

 

[Jim Dixon]

It should be noted at this stage that the AFL has no interest in Port or the Crows making enough revenue from the stadium to be financially independent; Gillon would prefer both AFL clubs to be on financial struggle street- so they need to be obedient to him and rely on tv money to balance the books. The AFL find Collingwood and Eddie to be quite a pain in the neck and have no interest in other AFL clubs becoming rich and possibly as intractable.

So KT will not be getting much if any help from AFL HQ in his battle with the SMA, as it's not in the AFL's financial interest to do so.

 

[The_Wookie]

It should be noted at this stage that the AFL has no interest in Port or the Crows making enough revenue from the stadium to be financially independent; Gillon would prefer both AFL clubs to be on financial struggle street- so they need to be obedient to him and rely on tv money to balance the books. The AFL find Collingwood and Eddie to be quite a pain in the neck and have no interest in other AFL clubs becoming rich and possibly as intractable.

So KT will not be getting much if any help from AFL HQ in his battle with the SMA, as it's not in the AFL's financial interest to do so.

Im sorry, but this is one of the silliest things ive read in some time.

 

[Jim Dixon]

Im sorry, but this is one of the silliest things ive read in some time.

Why so?

I'm watching what's going on with AFL clubs in Melbourne getting the shaft with the ticketing arrangements and timeslots- the AFL clearly is interested in maximising tv viewership, and seem quite happy to schedule games in such a way as to reduce attendences. And the 'category' A, B, C etc- seems all designed to discourage the fans from attending.

I bet that the CEO's contracts have clauses that offer bonuses if certain incentives are met- notably, tv contracts are of a certain size. When you give people incentives to do something, they do it.

 

[The_Wookie]

Why so?

I'm watching what's going on with AFL clubs in Melbourne getting the shaft with the ticketing arrangements and timeslots- the AFL clearly is interested in maximising tv viewership, and seem quite happy to schedule games in such a way as to reduce attendences. And the 'category' A, B, C etc- seems all designed to discourage the fans from attending.

I bet that the CEO's contracts have clauses that offer bonuses if certain incentives are met- notably, tv contracts are of a certain size. When you give people incentives to do something, they do it.

Yes and its a one year thing that isnt going to happen again next year. The AFL experiments all the time, some things work and some things dont. It doesnt mean the league wants the clubs financially reliant on them.

 

[Jim Dixon]

Yes and its a one year thing that isnt going to happen again next year. The AFL experiments all the time, some things work and some things dont. It doesnt mean the league wants the clubs financially reliant on them.

Hmm. Maybe I'm just too cynical!

 

[bringbackbucky]

No idea PAF but we were all spewing at how slow it was to get beers yesterday. Definately less beer pourers (we are at the bar eastern , southern scoreboard). Mate had to wait the entire break which is shitloads longer than usual. I'd expect the campaigners to pass on these savings.

I got evicted and fined $560 for letting one f-bomb slip in my dealings with a security guard in a 'no-standing' area. Someone is making money...

 

[Andre]

I got evicted and fined $560 for letting one f-bomb slip in my dealings with a security guard in a 'no-standing' area. Someone is making money...

Stick to calling everyone campaigners.

 

[bringbackbucky]

Stick to calling everyone campaigners.

Lol I did actually think that as I sat in the lock up at Adelaide Oval for the entire last quarter...