Unequal stadium deals and the impact of massive spending increases by the Rich Clubs

[Periphery]

I heard today Dunstall said that GC have a stadium attendance break even number of 7000.
Does anyone know what our break even attendance number is and I would be really interested to see
the figures from other clubs, anyone know where i can find this info?

This article isn't exactly what you are looking for but: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...games-in-geelong/story-e6frf9jf-1226600992429

In 2011, North Melbourne made just $97,540 from 11 home-games at Docklands before guaranteed top-ups of $100,000 per game, with seven losses on games with crowds of less than 28,000.

As Cooksen said, I think the breakeven is about 30k. Compare this to Geelong who make $750k from crowds of 22k...

 

[Ice-Wolf]

This article isn't exactly what you are looking for but: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...games-in-geelong/story-e6frf9jf-1226600992429



As Cooksen said, I think the breakeven is about 30k. Compare this to Geelong who make $750k from crowds of 22k...

Imagine what we could do with even a 22k stadium in Frankston or surrounds.

 

[Defacto]

7k break even, *en hell. how do we get on that gravy train

 

[Periphery]

7k break even, ****en hell. how do we get on that gravy train

Have someone pay the $150m to get the stadium built. While I think we could go a cheaper option I just don't see us getting anything with Etihad the way it is. At the moment we are stuck at Etihad and I think we will still be stuck there when the AFL takes over. Hopefully the deal we get from the AFL is significantly better than our current one. I'm not convinced it will be as amazing as we hope it will be, but hope is pretty much all we have. The AFL owes us (and the other tenants) and we just have to hope they repay us, preferably with interest.

One thing I would love to ask Summers is what the clubs position on a boutique stadium is. Have they ever commissioned a study into whether it would be commercially viable in Frankston/Moorabbin and what were the results? As unlikely as I think it is to happen, I think it is worthwhile investigating it just so the club knows what their options are if the opportunity ever arises.

Of course this all costs money to do with very little expectation of a return so we probably have more pressing things to spend the cash on.

 

[Sunshine Saint]

People today were discussing the later starts on Sundays and how less people will go.
Ie they have sacrificed Stadium attendance for TV audience.

So increasing media revenue to the AFL ( effectively over a term ) and decreasing revenue to the clubs.

And what clubs do they sacrifice attendance for TV ratings? Collingwood, Hawthorn, or the drug cheats? Not a chance the larger clubs will be financially disadvantaged like this. For TV and its scheduling it does make sense to have a variety of times for games, but those teams MUST be financially compensated for playing outside what is the optimum time for them and their supporters.

You can't ask teams to play in difficult time slots and then ignore the fact that these times draw low attendance numbers, for all sorts of practical reasons and are financially disadvantaged because of it.

 

[Baldur]

I heard today Dunstall said that GC have a stadium attendance break even number of 7000.
Does anyone know what our break even attendance number is and I would be really interested to see
the figures from other clubs, anyone know where i can find this info?

I heard that as well and was going to ask the same question.

I do not expect the AFL to help us out either. They prefer for clubs like ours to be poor. It makes us beholden to them. We must tug the forelock and vote how they wish. Eddie being able and willing to question what they do pisses them off.

Simple way to understand the world. Those who seek power, want power.

 

[Persevering Saint]

I think there's a chance that the admin are hoping for a kind of mini boutique thingy going on with Moorabbin.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think we're ever going to play AFL there again. But I do think we are in a unique situation from a VFL position. I suspect the nostalgic power of Moorabbin for many fans could see us get some really nice crowds down there, especially compared to wider VFL affiliates.

That's precisely why they're planning such a massive improving of the ground. This from one of the posters on SS:

Was running around Linton St oval, and had a chat with the curator, nice bloke. Asked him if we are coming back to play St.Kilda VFL games in 2016.
Replied this is the case, with a brand new complex built on centre wing south of, close to main stand.
Double story, 4 changing rooms with coaches boxes on top. Funded by Kingston City council, apparently back in the good books with them due to marginal seat and election next year. 1M and AFL 1M plus.

Club wanted to start stand alone team from 2014 but AFL came out to inspect facilities, shook their heads, said no way. The G.G.Huggins stand will get a complete refurb inside and out, with the AFL to cover costs of that and a brand new roof, apparently which is a nightmare also covered by AFL.

Now, the AFL and the Club aren't going to build that kind of seating for nobody to sit there. They'll be expecting to get a fair few to come. At the Port vs Saints practice game at Alberton, apparently some 7,000 fans attended. So, imagine if we get, say 5000-6000 at Moorabbin for every VFL home game? And if we get an AFL praccie game there before the Season (much like Port did), I reckon you'd get near 10,000.

While quite a few will be members, and so their attendance will be probably be free, there COULD be quite a few coming and paying. And, obviously, the price of tickets won't be the same as for an AFL game - but the cost of the venue will also be remarkably cheaper as well.

If the Suns break even at 7,000 for an AFL game, then we will probably actually make some cash out of a VFL attendance of 5000+ at an upgraded Moorabbin.

It's not exactly the Cattery's sweet deal. But every bit helps.

 

[blktreacle]

it could even be the start if something a lot bigger in the (probably many) years to come. if I were an adjacent resident. I wouldn't be surprised if I got a knock on the door from the club at sone stage down the track.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

I think there's a chance that the admin are hoping for a kind of mini boutique thingy going on with Moorabbin.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think we're ever going to play AFL there again. But I do think we are in a unique situation from a VFL position. I suspect the nostalgic power of Moorabbin for many fans could see us get some really nice crowds down there, especially compared to wider VFL affiliates.

That's precisely why they're planning such a massive improving of the ground. This from one of the posters on SS:



Now, the AFL and the Club aren't going to build that kind of seating for nobody to sit there. They'll be expecting to get a fair few to come. At the Port vs Saints practice game at Alberton, apparently some 7,000 fans attended. So, imagine if we get, say 5000-6000 at Moorabbin for every VFL home game? And if we get an AFL praccie game there before the Season (much like Port did), I reckon you'd get near 10,000.

While quite a few will be members, and so their attendance will be probably be free, there COULD be quite a few coming and paying. And, obviously, the price of tickets won't be the same as for an AFL game - but the cost of the venue will also be remarkably cheaper as well.

If the Suns break even at 7,000 for an AFL game, then we will probably actually make some cash out of a VFL attendance of 5000+ at an upgraded Moorabbin.

It's not exactly the Cattery's sweet deal. But every bit helps.

I don't think that Moorabbin is a great location for a Stadium any more, not the greatest road access, where as a Frankston or Mornington Peninsula Stadium could be situated right alongside rail lines and freeways.

I think Baxter might be an ideal locations, another option would be between Tyabb & Hastings.

Baxter right across from the current station with new off / on ramps from Peninsula link directly into the car park.

Between Tyabb and Hastings at the end of the Western Port Highway with a new Station added to the Stony Point Line for the Stadium. Lot of rail and road upgrades are going to take place there for the Port anyway.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I don't think that Moorabbin is a great location for a Stadium any more, not the greatest road access, where as a Frankston or Mornington Peninsula Stadium could be situated right alongside rail lines and freeways.

I think Baxter might be an ideal locations, another option would be between Tyabb & Hastings.

Baxter right across from the current station with new off / on ramps from Peninsula link directly into the car park.

Between Tyabb and Hastings at the end of the Western Port Highway with a new Station added to the Stony Point Line for the Stadium. Lot of rail and road upgrades are going to take place there for the Port anyway.

Trains in the Burbs don't work.
For example someone coming from Cranbourne ( relatively close ) needs to catch a train to Caulfield and back out.
Add to that our rail system is designed to have a station at every corner, so the journey would probably take 2 hours.

The rail is only suitable to people travelling from selected suburbs to the city.
State of the art 19th century. ( ie its slightly better than riding a horse ).
( And they still build the newer stations next to main roads so they get to keep the &*^$ boom gates down while the train stops ).

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Trains in the Burbs don't work.
For example someone coming from Cranbourne ( relatively close ) needs to catch a train to Caulfield and back out.
Add to that our rail system is designed to have a station at every corner, so the journey would probably take 2 hours.

The rail is only suitable to people travelling from selected suburbs to the city.
State of the art 19th century. ( ie its slightly better than riding a horse ).
( And they still build the newer stations next to main roads so they get to keep the &*^$ boom gates down while the train stops ).

Someone travelling from Cranbourne would probably just drive or catch the bus.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Someone travelling from Cranbourne would probably just drive or catch the bus.

Driving would be easier anyway. Bus Lol.
Like I said, too many stations too close together, a train takes forever.

 

[sverik25]

I don't think that Moorabbin is a great location for a Stadium any more, not the greatest road access, where as a Frankston or Mornington Peninsula Stadium could be situated right alongside rail lines and freeways.

I think Baxter might be an ideal locations, another option would be between Tyabb & Hastings.

Baxter right across from the current station with new off / on ramps from Peninsula link directly into the car park.

Between Tyabb and Hastings at the end of the Western Port Highway with a new Station added to the Stony Point Line for the Stadium. Lot of rail and road upgrades are going to take place there for the Port anyway.

I think the Mornington Peninsula would piss off a lot of Saints fans who live closer to the city. Don't get me wrong, for me it would be great and I think the club needs to capitalise on the region, but it is a bit too far out of the way for many. Maybe Frankston at a push.

 

[Kildonan]

Geelong accuses AFL of caving in to Magpie-led campaign on equalisation
June 17, 2014
[URL='http://www.theage.com.au/afl/by/Caroline-Wilson']Caroline Wilson
[/URL]
Geelong president Colin Carter has accused the AFL of caving in to a Collingwood-led campaign in its failure to adequately address the growing divide between the rich and poor clubs.

The former AFL commissioner said the competition's equalisation policy had been wrongly sold and designed and that the poorer clubs such as St Kilda and the Western Bulldogs should have been compensated through an equation based upon the inequalities of the fixture and widely varying stadium agreements.

"I had great support for the AFL carting some clubs off to the US in an an attempt to demonstrate their point but the mistake they made is they allowed the conversation to be hijacked by taxation. They could have achieved a better outcome and everything they intended to achieve by compensation.

"Instead Eddie (McGuire) and Andrew (Newbold, the Hawthorn president) started screaming about the game taking away their hard-earned and they succeeded in getting a deal which weakens the position of the middle clubs against the wealthy.

"The compensation should have been linked to the fixture which is significantly unequal when you consider a game like Anzac Day is worth $1 million to those clubs. And it should have been linked to the various stadium agreements. The small clubs are being forced to play at Etihad Stadium which is too large generally for their attendances and it continues to hurt their economies."

"The taxation has been hopelessly compromised because Eddie refused to pay it," Carter said. "I don't mind the tax on footy departments but this notion of a cap of half-a-million dollars on the rich clubs is a joke.

"The philosophy is wrong. What we are doing is just screwing the middle class while the rich are able to get their affairs in order which is what happens in real life.

"To take $300,000 from us and $500,000 from Collingwood actually weakens our position against Collingwood. And for the AFL to come out at the end and say they won't be taking money for equalisation from club revenues ... what an admission of defeat.

"Our club supported the genuine attempt to bridge the growing divide between the clubs but now it seems that the ones that shouted the loudest have been rewarded."

Intense lobbying from the wealthy clubs led by the Magpies and including West Coast (with a 2013 profit of $4.1 million) and Hawthorn ($3.1 million) saw the AFL back down from its original revenue tax equation. Now the 2015 equalisation pool will include club contributions of no more than $4 million and as low as $3 million although the AFL will top up that amount with money from its club future fund.

The key recipients of the equalisation pool in 2015 will be Brisbane, St Kilda and the Western Bulldogs along with Melbourne, Port Adelaide and North Melbourne.

The clubs will also be taxed for exceeding a soft cap on football department spending which is expected to cost the Magpies a further $1 million.

 

[Periphery]

"The compensation should have been linked to the fixture which is significantly unequal when you consider a game like Anzac Day is worth $1 million to those clubs. And it should have been linked to the various stadium agreements."

This is clearly what the AFL should have done. It is so obvious it hurts.

The fixture and uneven stadium deals are the first things the AFL should have looked at addressing, but instead we get some BS spending cap/tax and they completely ignore and take no responsibility for helping to create the issue in the first place. Instead of addressing the causes the AFL decided to show how much it really cares about equalisation and give us some weak bandaide solution. The AFL are gutless fools.

If we don't get an AMAZING deal from the AFL when they take over Etihad I propose we burn AFL HQ to the ground.

/rant

 

[sverik25]

Collingwood and Eddie are once again the villains. My hate for that club is unbelievable.

And good on Geelong for speaking out against the AFL's proposal and Collingwood.

 

[BrianSpeaking]

Luckily in the pay tv age it really won't effect us at all, the AFL and partners need 9 games per week, so they will prop any teams up for the foreseeable future, regardless of how bad a clubs business model may be, ala Brisbane and GWS.

 

[Sunshine Saint]

Luckily in the pay tv age it really won't effect us at all, the AFL and partners need 9 games per week, so they will prop any teams up for the foreseeable future, regardless of how bad a clubs business model may be, ala Brisbane and GWS.

Thats true Brian, but unfortunately there is a huge difference between surviving and thriving and being successful. Financial strength gives a definite advantage in recruiting, facilities, rehab, staffing, assistants and coaching all which flows to an advantage on the ground. Many including Geelong saw the equalisation as a means of giving all teams a more equal opportunity to compete. Unfortunately this is not to be.

 

[Kildonan]

One of the questions in the AFL survey was to ask if you believed your club will still exist in 20 years.

Would the AFL be asking that question if the opposite was a fait accompli? I don't think so.

Sure - they are assessing consumer confidence, but the very real risk remains that if any club is to fail and is culled from the competition it will be a Victorian club and the financially stricken clubs will be at the top of the list.

Collingwood and Hawthorn (and to a lesser extent WCE and Adelaide) have ensured that we are not safe.

St Kilda, Western Bulldogs and North Melbourne all remain at significant risk. These clubs are not adequately compensated for the inequity of the draw nor the stadium deals and so they remain the most likely clubs to fail financially. This is when the financially struck club will be forced to choose between ceasing to exist or relocating to places like Tasmania, Darwin and New Zealand.

 

[sverik25]

One of the questions in the AFL survey was to ask if you believed your club will still exist in 20 years.

Would the AFL be asking that question if the opposite was a fait accompli? I don't think so.

Sure - they are assessing consumer confidence, but the very real risk remains that if any club is to fail and is culled from the competition it will be a Victorian club and the financially stricken clubs will be at the top of the list.

Collingwood and Hawthorn (and to a lesser extent WCE and Adelaide) have ensured that we are not safe.

St Kilda, Western Bulldogs and North Melbourne all remain at significant risk. These clubs are not adequately compensated for the inequity of the draw nor the stadium deals and so they remain the most likely clubs to fail financially. This is when the financially struck club will be forced to choose between ceasing to exist or relocating to places like Tasmania, Darwin and New Zealand.

Yeah, I agree, but I would like to think that St Kilda has a greater chance of being financially viable in the long term than the Bulldogs, North or even Melbourne. There is a lot of latent support for St Kilda out there, people who are currently disillusioned with the club, or aren't happy with our on field performances and have attitudes like "I'll buy a memberhsip when we're good again" and so on. I don't think any of the Bulldogs, North or Melbourne can really claim that they have as much support as St Kilda does. If as a club we survive until the AFL buys Etihad Stadium, then I think we should be fine, so long as on field success doesn't elude us for too long.

 

[Nutsngum]

Yeah, the secondary support for the Saints in the south east is rather big. Had we capitalized on this (and had Hawthorns ******* zoning on the peninsula like we should have) in the 70's and 80's we would be contending as one of the big 4 right now with 60 thousands members easily.

 

[Nutsngum]

So we lose money on most of our home games due to us paying off Etihad for the AFL (along with the doggies and Norf) and Eddie has the gall to bitch about 40odd thousand at the MCG on a shitty cold night on the sunday, demanding compensation.

Get stuffed Eddie.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

So we lose money on most of our home games due to us paying off Etihad for the AFL (along with the doggies and Norf) and Eddie has the gall to bitch about 40odd thousand at the MCG on a shitty cold night on the sunday, demanding compensation.

Get stuffed Eddie.

Agree, at least $100 million each in compensation to Footscray, St Kilda and North Melbourne for years of being ****ed over, and 50c to Collingwood for 1 shitty fixture on a cold & rainy winters night so Eddie can call someone who cares.

 

[Plugger35]

Eddie McHypocrite up to his usual tricks.

Welcome to our world Eddie.

 

[Baldur]

Eddie McChins fanbois cannot see it. To them 4.40 is nothing to see here but 7.10 is an outrage. The ladies doth protest too much.