2019 Financial Results

[Kwality]

This stuff is always done on the quiet. I have no doubt the perth stadium opened discussions with the AFL, but they never got past the coffee and a chat phase, because they were not able to commit to close to the money the MCC already had on the table

On the quiet, yes.

Big claim that a WA/SA offer was less than the MCC bid already on the table, remember the money is coming from the State Govt, they were there .... of course Vic had heaps to lose, Dan aced it.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

On the quiet, yes.

Big claim that a WA/SA offer was less than the MCC bid already on the table, remember the money is coming from the State Govt, they were there .... of course Vic had heaps to lose, Dan aced it.

I'm basing that on the $19m profit they get hosting at the G

Any state offer would need to exceed that, and honestly a state would be stupid to pay that much for a one off / cyclical event, when the NRL is much better value for money

 

[Kwality]

I'm basing that on the $19m profit they get hosting at the G

Any state offer would need to exceed that, and honestly a state would be stupid to pay that much for a one off / cyclical event, when the NRL is much better value for money

Better value for money, interesting concept given the ongoing commentary on F1.

For WA, it'd be about tourism.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Better value for money, interesting concept given the ongoing commentary on F1.

For WA, it'd be about tourism.

Vic uses the AFL event games to justify the cost of a 100000 seat stadium, and to assist in funding it

The whole sports tourism argument is one I struggle to accept (similar to you)

 

[jatz14]

I'm basing that on the $19m profit they get hosting at the G

Any state offer would need to exceed that, and honestly a state would be stupid to pay that much for a one off / cyclical event, when the NRL is much better value for money

Except they wouldn't need to offer 19. A GF at Optus would be very profitable in its own right. The state government would only need to cover the difference, which would be a whole lot less than 19 M.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Except they wouldn't need to offer 19. A GF at Optus would be very profitable in its own right. The state government would only need to cover the difference, which would be a whole lot less than 19 M.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

with 40% fewer tickets, 40% less potential revenue on pourage rights, no AFL members access (which probably means paying out them with some appeasement bribe)?

 

[Kwality]

with 40% fewer tickets, 40% less potential revenue on pourage rights, no AFL members access (which probably means paying out them with some appeasement bribe)?

WHY AFL members? If true how can the AFL continue this archaic relic of yesteryear in a national comp.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

WHY AFL members? If true how can the AFL continue this archaic relic of yesteryear in a national comp.

I hate afl memberships, but they have access to the G (and a lesser degree etihad) and get access rights to the finals

personally I want them gone because they keep premium memberships artificially low, but good luck getting the afl on board with that

 

[Ok Boomer]

I just don't get why the deal went to 2057. Who knows what the landscape will be like in 2027, let alone 30 years on top of that.

Waverley Park was built, opened and disused in a shorter space of time.

 

[jatz14]

with 40% fewer tickets, 40% less potential revenue on pourage rights, no AFL members access (which probably means paying out them with some appeasement bribe)?

Eagles pay a pretty steep price for use of the ground, and still make a decent to good profit, with a lot of tickets going for $55.

For a one off GF, corporates would pay through the nose. Ticket prices are higher, and the AFL wouldn't be paying the usage fees the Eagles do.

I would have thought profit would be in the $5 to $10m range comfortably.

That leaves $9 to $14m for the state to come up with, which sits comfortably in the range of what they would pay for NRL gf. And they would want the AFL gf a lot more.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Eagles pay a pretty steep price for use of the ground, and still make a decent to good profit, with a lot of tickets going for $55.

For a one off GF, corporates would pay through the nose. Ticket prices are higher, and the AFL wouldn't be paying the usage fees the Eagles do.

I would have thought profit would be in the $5 to $10m range comfortably.

That leaves $9 to $14m for the state to come up with, which sits comfortably in the range of what they would pay for NRL gf. And they would want the AFL gf a lot more.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

you think $14m isnt that much? for a one off event?

 

[The_Wookie]

I just don't get why the deal went to 2057. Who knows what the landscape will be like in 2027, let alone 30 years on top of that.

Waverley Park was built, opened and disused in a shorter space of time.

$300 million in funding - 250 million in much needed upgrade money for the AFL owned stadium, free use of the land next door to the stadium, and a host of funding for other AFL grounds and facilities will get you many things.

 

[Kwality]

I hate afl memberships, but they have access to the G (and a lesser degree etihad) and get access rights to the finals

personally I want them gone because they keep premium memberships artificially low, but good luck getting the afl on board with that

Yep they dud the clubs competed against, mainly Melbourne based. Another example of the cosy MCC/AFL deal.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

The 20 year extension of the GF, so that Vic government spends some money on and around the Docklands stadium and sports facilities in Victoria was a BS decision for the national competition, but great for Victoria.

The AFL should have waited a few more years to pay $100m or less to buy Docklands as they could have got it for $30 on 31/12/25, so its purchase value was decreasing by $15-$20m per year.

But there was no guarantee that the Andrews government would get re-elected in November 2018, so the AFL screwed them for a commitment and had to jump and buy Docklands earlier than it should have.

The AFL copy so much from the NFL, but the NFL isn't dominated by one city/state. They have only partly copied what NFL do with stadiums and getting local and state governments to help pay for new stadiums and upgrades.

Paul Tagliabue was NFL Commissioner between 1989-2006 and in his 17 years he oversaw 17 stadiums either be built from scratch, or go through major redevelopments ie $300m+ USD (89-06$$$) type redevelopments. He was the mastermind who got city and/or state governments to contribute to new/upgraded stadiums for NFL teams. Its in big part why he gave the keynote speech when the AFL celebrated the 150th anniversary of the game at gala ceremony in 2008.

Tagliabue held the carrot out of bringing the Super Bowl to a city if the city and/or state governments helped the private owners build new stadiums for their city team. He set up an NFL fund to help contribute to new stadium costs.

The AFL has cut that carrot out in the Oz market by doing a 40 year deal then extended by 5 years to get out of the non Vic team being forced to play a home PF at the MCG, then the latest 20 year extension guaranteeing a GF at the MCG between 1992-2057.

If its good enough for the AFL to make commitments 40 years into the future, then it should insert a clause into its constitution and rules before the end of the year, and say post 2057, at least 5 of the next 10 GF's will be played outside Melbourne, at stadiums that have a minimum capacity of 75,000 for AFL playing field dimensions.

That should have been made for post 2037 GF's but the AFL in its haste to get more free $$$ sold its soul.

75,000 capacity is plenty and about right. You adjust the price of selling tickets between MCG and non MCG GF's and/or get $$$ out of state governments and sponsors to make up for 25,000 x $300-$350 = $7.5m - $8.75m lost by moving the GF.

You don't need to reward the 22,000 MCC members reserve membership to get access to a GF.

You don't need to reward most of the AFL members to get access to the 23,000 seat AFL members reserve.

The AFL sell 5,000 seats to the Medallion Club for the GF to make Docklands viable. In 2037 or 2057 that wont be the case so they don't need to have access to seats. The usual 15,000 or so normal AFL members don't need access, re price their memberships fees if need be. Sure the AFL need 2,000 to 3,000 seats for life members, staff and other entitlements but you can easily fit them into a 75,000 seat stadium.

Imagine what would happen around Oz if the the AFL said after 2037 we are going to take the AFL grand final a minimum of 5 out of every 10 years outside Melbourne to stadiums that have 75,000 capacity. The Tagliabue effect would come into play and stadiums would continually be upgraded to keep up and win GF hosting rights.

Sydney would have kept Stadium Australia as an potential oval configuration. Brisbane in its bid for the 2032 or 2036 Olympics would have factored in a main stadium of 75,000 that would be used to bid for the GF. Perth Stadium already is designed to expand to 70,000 so a 75,000 capacity wouldn't be that hard to do. Adelaide Oval being increased to 75,000 would be another story, and a generation on NIMBY types would have to die out before they moved to concrete up the oval and make it a 75,000 capacity around 2045-50 after realizing they are missing out.

Someone said there isn't the infrastructure to get 40,000 people to Perth.

Don't know why you would say that. 3 Oz Airlines put on 3 extra planes on the Perth route, making 3 extra flights a day to Perth - a 24 hour airport, with seating capacity of 200 per plane and do this for 6 days Sun-Fri, and you get 3x3x3x200x6 = 32,400 extra seats on a route that doesn't operate at 100% capacity anyway.

International Airlines that stop on the east coast before flying on to Perth would rapidly sell empty seats of people getting off on the east coast.

Guess what?? All those planes redirected to Melbourne for the GF, now get redirected to Perth or Sydney or Brisbane or Adelaide for the GF. The capacity is there. And Melbourne based fans might have to do what Perth fans have to do for the GF, and rather than fly direct, they have to fly via Sydney or Auckland or Brisbane or Singapore. Then there would be private planes and private charters, just like you get for the Super Bowl.

And if it all gets a bit complicated, rather than have a week off before week 1 of the finals, then have a week off between PF's and GF and it means people have more time to get their s**t together and get flights, drive, train etc.

It's not that hard.

But you would need a lead time say if 2037 was the last year of guaranteed MCG GF, you have a bidding system after 2032 season and in 2033 announce that say, 2038 Sydney (old Stadium Australia stadium) host the GF, 2039 Perth host it, 2040 the new Brisbane Olympic Stadium gets it and in 2041 its back at the MCG.

There is plenty of lead time for AFL and fans to get their s**t together.

Same thing could happen in 2052/53 for post 2057 but I wont give a s**t by then. I will be dead or if alive, highly unlikely to be able to travel to a GF unless its in my hometown.

 

[NoobPie]

The 20 year extension of the GF, so that Vic government spends some money on and around the Docklands stadium and sports facilities in Victoria was a BS decision for the national competition, but great for Victoria.

The AFL should have waited a few more years to pay $100m or less to buy Docklands as they could have got it for $30 on 31/12/25, so its purchase value was decreasing by $15-$20m per year.

But there was no guarantee that the Andrews government would get re-elected in November 2018, so the AFL screwed them for a commitment and had to jump and buy Docklands earlier than it should have.

The AFL copy so much from the NFL, but the NFL isn't dominated by one city/state. They have only partly copied what NFL do with stadiums and getting local and state governments to help pay for new stadiums and upgrades.

Paul Tagliabue was NFL Commissioner between 1989-2006 and in his 17 years he oversaw 17 stadiums either be built from scratch, or go through major redevelopments ie $300m+ USD (89-06$$$) type redevelopments. He was the mastermind who got city and/or state governments to contribute to new/upgraded stadiums for NFL teams. Its in big part why he gave the keynote speech when the AFL celebrated the 150th anniversary of the game at gala ceremony in 2008.

Tagliabue held the carrot out of bringing the Super Bowl to a city if the city and/or state governments helped the private owners build new stadiums for their city team. He set up an NFL fund to help contribute to new stadium costs.

The AFL has cut that carrot out in the Oz market by doing a 40 year deal then extended by 5 years to get out of the non Vic team being forced to play a home PF at the MCG, then the latest 20 year extension guaranteeing a GF at the MCG between 1992-2057.

If its good enough for the AFL to make commitments 40 years into the future, then it should insert a clause into its constitution and rules before the end of the year, and say post 2057, at least 5 of the next 10 GF's will be played outside Melbourne, at stadiums that have a minimum capacity of 75,000 for AFL playing field dimensions.

That should have been made for post 2037 GF's but the AFL in its haste to get more free $$$ sold its soul.

75,000 capacity is plenty and about right. You adjust the price of selling tickets between MCG and non MCG GF's and/or get $$$ out of state governments and sponsors to make up for 25,000 x $300-$350 = $7.5m - $8.75m lost by moving the GF.

You don't need to reward the 22,000 MCC members reserve membership to get access to a GF.

You don't need to reward most of the AFL members to get access to the 23,000 seat AFL members reserve.

The AFL sell 5,000 seats to the Medallion Club for the GF to make Docklands viable. In 2037 or 2057 that wont be the case so they don't need to have access to seats. The usual 15,000 or so normal AFL members don't need access, re price their memberships fees if need be. Sure the AFL need 2,000 to 3,000 seats for life members, staff and other entitlements but you can easily fit them into a 75,000 seat stadium.

Imagine what would happen around Oz if the the AFL said after 2037 we are going to take the AFL grand final a minimum of 5 out of every 10 years outside Melbourne to stadiums that have 75,000 capacity. The Tagliabue effect would come into play and stadiums would continually be upgraded to keep up and win GF hosting rights.

Sydney would have kept Stadium Australia as an potential oval configuration. Brisbane in its bid for the 2032 or 2036 Olympics would have factored in a main stadium of 75,000 that would be used to bid for the GF. Perth Stadium already is designed to expand to 70,000 so a 75,000 capacity wouldn't be that hard to do. Adelaide Oval being increased to 75,000 would be another story, and a generation on NIMBY types would have to die out before they moved to concrete up the oval and make it a 75,000 capacity around 2045-50 after realizing they are missing out.

Someone said there isn't the infrastructure to get 40,000 people to Perth.

Don't know why you would say that. 3 Oz Airlines put on 3 extra planes on the Perth route, making 3 extra flights a day to Perth - a 24 hour airport, with seating capacity of 200 per plane and do this for 6 days Sun-Fri, and you get 3x3x3x200x6 = 32,400 extra seats on a route that doesn't operate at 100% capacity anyway.

International Airlines that stop on the east coast before flying on to Perth would rapidly sell empty seats of people getting off on the east coast.

Guess what?? All those planes redirected to Melbourne for the GF, now get redirected to Perth or Sydney or Brisbane or Adelaide for the GF. The capacity is there. And Melbourne based fans might have to do what Perth fans have to do for the GF, and rather than fly direct, they have to fly via Sydney or Auckland or Brisbane or Singapore. Then there would be private planes and private charters, just like you get for the Super Bowl.

And if it all gets a bit complicated, rather than have a week off before week 1 of the finals, then have a week off between PF's and GF and it means people have more time to get their s**t together and get flights, drive, train etc.

It's not that hard.

But you would need a lead time say if 2037 was the last year of guaranteed MCG GF, you have a bidding system after 2032 season and in 2033 announce that say, 2038 Sydney (old Stadium Australia stadium) host the GF, 2039 Perth host it, 2040 the new Brisbane Olympic Stadium gets it and in 2041 its back at the MCG.

There is plenty of lead time for AFL and fans to get their s**t together.

Same thing could happen in 2052/53 for post 2057 but I wont give a s**t by then. I will be dead or if alive, highly unlikely to be able to travel to a GF unless its in my hometown.

I think your plan is highly likely to be viable by 2057 with transport technology etc

In terms of the infrastructure to shift 40k to Perth (that was me) I spoke to eagles fans before the 2018 gf who said they'd paid $3k for tickets. This seemed standard and there were reports of people going via Singapore whole others came back from Europe for it and paid half the amount of people flying across the nullubor.

Most superbowl cities would probably have several airports within 100 miles.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I think your plan is highly likely to be viable by 2057 with transport technology etc

In terms of the infrastructure to shift 40k to Perth (that was me) I spoke to eagles fans before the 2018 gf who said they'd paid $3k for tickets. This seemed standard and there were reports of people going via Singapore whole others came back from Europe for it and paid half the amount of people flying across the nullubor.

Most superbowl cities would probably have several airports within 100 miles.

Getting an extra 40k over normal current throughput (there is always unutilized capacity in any week of flights into Perth) to Perth between a Sunday and Friday isn't a issue today, or even if you have a week off between PF and GF.

It's getting them all out of town on Sunday and Monday after the GF that is the issue. People would have to accept they might have to spend a week in Perth. That's the carrot for state governments to back a bid.

 

[Tiger Soze]

It’s an interesting debate, do interstate teams think they have the rough end of the current system? Victorians (who make up over 60% of club memberships) would think interstate clubs get it pretty good I would think. The only team in Vic that gets a real home ground advantage is Geelong when they play at KP. The thought of taking away the biggest 1 day sporting event from the sporting capital of Australia is an intriguing one. 38 years to contemplate that and perhaps the landscape will have changed somewhat by then.

 

[Tiger Soze]

Getting an extra 40k over normal current throughput (there is always unutilized capacity in any week of flights into Perth) to Perth between a Sunday and Friday isn't a issue today, or even if you have a week off between PF and GF.

It's getting them all out of town on Sunday and Monday after the GF that is the issue. People would have to accept they might have to spend a week in Perth. That's the carrot for state governments to back a bid.

And where would they stay even if you could get them there, Perth and surrounding areas has 13k rooms accommodation for tourism. So if there was a 40% vacancy for that weekend for football fans that’s approximately 5k rooms available. Doesn’t come close.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

And where would they stay even if you could get them there, Perth and surrounding areas has 13k rooms accommodation for tourism. So if there was a 40% vacancy for that weekend for football fans that’s approximately 5k rooms available. Doesn’t come close.

Where did you get that figure from?

 

[Tiger Soze]

Where did you get that figure from?

WA government paper provided by the Australian Hotels Association in response to the WA parliament inquiry into short stay accommodation January 2019

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

WA government paper provided by the Australian Hotels Association in response to the WA parliament inquiry into short stay accommodation January 2019

I'm sure I read 24,000 earlier this year when Kwality talked about 15,000 people travelling to Perth for state of Origin, but that might have been all of WA.

And how many rooms of these 13,000, hold 2 people? how many 3? how many 4-8? how many 10 or more??

Why do you assume with a 4 or 5 year lead time only 40% would be available for footy fans? People plan in advance.

How many people would with a 4 or 5 year lead time say, we can make money out of this and we are going to set up our home to rent out for the GF?? Ever heard of people doing that in Sydney for the Olympics? People in Gold Coast for the Comm Games? People in Adelaide and Melbourne for the Grand Prix? Then there are caravan park type accommodation, serviced apartments etc.

Ever heard of Airbnb"

Do people from Melbourne or the rest of Oz not have family and/or mates to stay with in Perth?

Do you reckon people who would be going to Perth/WA for a week wouldn't be prepared to stay an hour, or two, or three drive from the ground, wouldn't be prepared to stay that far out of town and drive to the game?

To assume all 40,000 people flying/driving/training in would need to stay in the centre of Perth and in 4 or 5 star hotel accomodation is nonsense. A city of over 2 million and with a solid tourism regions within 3 hours drive south, north and east of Perth, would have no problems accommodating 40,000 visitors for a day to a week.

This isn't a pick the GF venue the week before the finals start, or after the PF's are played type exercise.

 

[Tiger Soze]

I'm sure I read 24,000 earlier this year when Kwality talked about 15,000 people travelling to Perth for state of Origin, but that might have been all of WA.

And how many rooms of these 13,000, hold 2 people? how many 3? how many 4-8? how many 10 or more??

Why do you assume with a 4 or 5 year lead time only 40% would be available for footy fans? People plan in advance.

How many people would with a 4 or 5 year lead time say, we can make money out of this and we are going to set up our home to rent out for the GF?? Ever heard of people doing that in Sydney for the Olympics? People in Gold Coast for the Comm Games? People in Adelaide and Melbourne for the Grand Prix? Then there are caravan park type accommodation, serviced apartments etc.

Ever heard of Airbnb"

Do people from Melbourne or the rest of Oz not have family and/or mates to stay with in Perth?

Do you reckon people who would be going to Perth/WA for a week wouldn't be prepared to stay an hour, or two, or three drive from the ground, wouldn't be prepared to stay that far out of town and drive to the game?

To assume all 40,000 people flying/driving/training in would need to stay in the centre of Perth and in 4 or 5 star hotel accomodation is nonsense. A city of over 2 million and with a solid tourism regions within 3 hours drive south, north and east of Perth, would have no problems accommodating 40,000 visitors for a day to a week.

This isn't a pick the GF venue the week before the finals start, or after the PF's are played type exercise.

lol relax mate, it ain’t happening anyway.
And if you think the 140k WA club members have any pull you are dreaming. It will never happen.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

lol relax mate, it ain’t happening anyway.
And if you think the 140k WA club members have any pull you are dreaming. It will never happen.

140k WA members is irrelevant.

It's if the AFL Commission want to be seen to be a true national comp and no just a heavily biased Victorian one.

Never is a long time.

 

[Kwality]

WA government paper provided by the Australian Hotels Association in response to the WA parliament inquiry into short stay accommodation January 2019

Again no link, no cred.

I think your plan is highly likely to be viable by 2057 with transport technology etc

In terms of the infrastructure to shift 40k to Perth (that was me) I spoke to eagles fans before the 2018 gf who said they'd paid $3k for tickets. This seemed standard and there were reports of people going via Singapore whole others came back from Europe for it and paid half the amount of people flying across the nullubor.

Most superbowl cities would probably have several airports within 100 miles.

I flew Perth Sydney on an international flight in the 90s, its done.

Non Vic fans have as little as 7 days notice of wanting a flight, of course they get gouged - academic for some, not all.

 

[Tiger Soze]

Again no link, no cred.




I flew Perth Sydney on an international flight in the 90s, its done.

Non Vic fans have as little as 7 days notice of wanting a flight, of course they get gouged - academic for some, not all.

Now that’s a poor reflection on yourself as you must be a liar. I have no need to BS, what’s the point, if you ever would like a link then ask politely and I may provide it. Otherwise find it yourself, it’s not that hard.