Reports are circulating this morning about two key Tasmanian tourism chiefs wanting as many as 4 home games a year in Hobart. This would deny mainland North members more Melbourne home games, where the vast majority of it's membership resides.
They also want to attach conditions that GWS and Gold Coast not play as part of those 4 games. Obviously they are not good enough for Tasmania.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/143282/default.aspx
What's your problem with this?
The folks in Hobart are using the Hawthorn / Launceston model that has proven to be a successful and profitable partnership. Why wouldn't Hobart / North Melbourne use that model?
They have even identified a weakness in the model, namely the AFL rarely sending Victorian based teams to Launceston. No doubt the majority of folks in Tassie would support a Victorian based team already, born from the days of the VFL, yet they get shafted with a stream of non-Vic clubs playing Hawthorn down there.
As for home-games, the club could insist on a replacement game system like Hawthorn. While that has been a contentious issue for some Hawk supporters, the sponsorship dollars ensure financial stability, an opportunity that North Melbourne can not afford to ignore.
Tassie govt pays (and reaps tourism dollars), North gets financial stability in the short term (and can change the conditions or pull out in the long term), and Tassie fans get better quality games.
What's your problem with this?