Opinion Commentary & Media IV

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
the big lebowski said:
The freo chairman said that they will announce a $1 mill plus loss for the year. And that was a good result. And they got to play some home games.
Click to expand...

That's nothing to them in the big scheme of things mate.

the big lebowski said:
There will be losses closer to 10 mill for the year I think. And it’s worrying some of those big clubs.
Click to expand...

If the football departments are all under the same caps, then that's fiscal mismanagement. Cut some of the little piggies off the teat.

I'm reading lot's of "allusion", but nothing in the way of hard data or politics that adds up to me.
 
the big lebowski said:
I think it’s solely about money. The big clubs have already stated they will demand the AFL pay 100% of the salary cap, which to this point the AFL haven’t agreed to.

These same clubs will announce massive losses for 2020, and are probably fearful of more big losses in the next couple of years. They haven’t needed to run a tight ship to this point.

They see the $12 mill plus the extra in disequal funding north get and say, we could just get rid of north and get an extra $1 mill a year.
Click to expand...
Based on a very quick search and so not completely up to date ...

We got $5M more than Collingwood in 2018 under the "Enhanced Club Funding Model", and only about $2.5M more than the median clubs. The real money pits are GC, GWS, and Brisbane (the Bears' situation might have improved since as they've headed up the ladder).

That $5M is about 12% of our total revenue, and would be <5% of revenue of a big club. $2.5M, which you could happily argue is the real amount of "suckling on the teat" we do, is down to about 6% of our total revenue. Every time someone accuses us of being a drain on the league, remember they're quibbling about 2-3 million bucks in a multi-billion dollar league.

My guess is a few clubs are looking uneasily at the bath they're going to take on lost pokie revenue this year. * 'em.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

RobZombie said:
Based on a very quick search and so not completely up to date ...

We got $5M more than Collingwood in 2018 under the "Enhanced Club Funding Model", and only about $2.5M more than the median clubs. The real money pits are GC, GWS, and Brisbane (the Bears' situation might have improved since as they've headed up the ladder).

That $5M is about 12% of our total revenue, and would be <5% of revenue of a big club. $2.5M, which you could happily argue is the real amount of "suckling on the teat" we do, is down to about 6% of our total revenue. Every time someone accuses us of being a drain on the league, remember they're quibbling about 2-3 million bucks in a multi-billion dollar league.

My guess is a few clubs are looking uneasily at the bath they're going to take on lost pokie revenue this year. fu** 'em.
Click to expand...

Finally, some data. Thanks Rob.

Okay, so for that $2-3 mill p.a., we supply 1/9th of the television rights revenue, correct? This is a nothing argument.

I don't believe this is what the gripe is about, and I still associate Koch's "land grab" quip with academies and player access, which mean more to the big clubs than a pissy $2-3 mill a year..
 
Snake_Baker said:
How?

By driving up the inflation of the sport?

If that's the case, then it ultimately goes back to them being put over a barrel by players.
Click to expand...

Mate, you are thinking as if any rule change would be brought in across the board.

This sounds very much like a few clubs pushing for a set of their own rules to take the strain off the AFL.
 
RobZombie said:
My guess is a few clubs are looking uneasily at the bath they're going to take on lost pokie revenue this year. fu** 'em.
Click to expand...

Agree.

DunderHead said:
Less clubs in the Vic landscape equals more pie for those who remain. If we die or relocate it’s in every other Vic clubs interest. With exception of maybe the next smallest club who will start getting talked about in the same terms we do. However, I doubt any of those clubs would be thinking about this. They’d be too busy trying to make a grab for our supporter base.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it does increase the pie for those who remain. If say 2 clubs in Melbourne went away (hypothetically us and St Kilda) how do Collingwood make more money out of football? They now have to play extra games against even smaller interstate clubs and they have to play more games against remaining smaller Melbourne clubs (plus more travel). How does this help them significantly? I think there is an argument that it might help the medium sized Vic clubs though and the interstate clubs. It's not like they're going to get more prime time exposure - they already get well and beyond the normal share. Arguably their strength is diluted as the small Melbourne teams go - they need to compete against West Coast off field but each game is now more likely to be a smaller affair and more likely to be interstate.
 
Last edited:
Pykie said:
Mate, you are thinking as if any rule change would be brought in across the board.

This sounds very much like a few clubs pushing for a set of their own rules to take the strain off the AFL.
Click to expand...


I get that, but the way it's presented, it's also a very naked act of whining about entitlement, that would destabilize the entire competition.

Example: Does Andrew Pridham seriously want to rejig the power structure of the AFL and then think it's going to benefit his club? They would be plucking feathers out of the most entitled club in the comp straight away! :D He's inviting vampires in his front door.

What do this lot have in mind? Ditch 4-6 clubs and divide up the country between themselves? They would start turning on each other immediately.
 
RobZombie said:
Based on a very quick search and so not completely up to date ...

We got $5M more than Collingwood in 2018 under the "Enhanced Club Funding Model", and only about $2.5M more than the median clubs. The real money pits are GC, GWS, and Brisbane (the Bears' situation might have improved since as they've headed up the ladder).

That $5M is about 12% of our total revenue, and would be <5% of revenue of a big club. $2.5M, which you could happily argue is the real amount of "suckling on the teat" we do, is down to about 6% of our total revenue. Every time someone accuses us of being a drain on the league, remember they're quibbling about 2-3 million bucks in a multi-billion dollar league.

My guess is a few clubs are looking uneasily at the bath they're going to take on lost pokie revenue this year. fu** 'em.
Click to expand...

How much of that $2.5 million could be offset if we had equal access to the highest revenue slots in the fixture? The big clubs get the closest to revenue optimisation fixtures from the AFL which flows through to ratings, membership, gate receipts, and sponsorship. I would venture there is at least another million in that effect.
 
7577969923 said:
How much of that $2.5 million could be offset if we had equal access to the highest revenue slots in the fixture? The big clubs get the closest to revenue optimisation fixtures from the AFL which flows through to ratings, membership, gate receipts, and sponsorship. I would venture there is at least another million in that effect.
Click to expand...

Yep. It's an illogical argument.
 
As long as channel 7 , Foxtel, Telstra and the radio stations continue to pay for the rights, they will not be wanting a drop in games.
Based on the new climate we will all be living in the monies will be less but so will the clubs costs.
I actually hate these s**t crap rumours, as we are a sound financial club at the moment.
We have a fantastic opportunity when the Arden st precinct is developed
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Snake_Baker said:
I get that, but the way it's presented, it's also a very naked act of whining about entitlement, that would destabilize the entire competition.

Example: Does Andrew Pridham seriously want to rejig the power structure of the AFL and then think it's going to benefit his club? They would be plucking feathers out of the most entitled club in the comp straight away! :D He's inviting vampires in his front door.

What do this lot have in mind? Ditch 4-6 clubs and divide up the country between themselves? They would start turning on each other immediately.
Click to expand...
Pridham is pissed off the AFL spends millions in western Sydney to "grow the game", much of which just goes to GWS.
 
big_e said:
Pridham is pissed off the AFL spends millions in western Sydney to "grow the game", much of which just goes to GWS.
Click to expand...

The financial aspect that some seem to think this is about (not me), is what has kept his club alive for 30 years, that's why this angle makes no sense to me from any "power grab" perpsective.
 
shintemaster said:
Agree.



I don't know if it does increase the pie for those who remain. If say 2 clubs in Melbourne went away (hypothetically us and St Kilda) how do Collingwood make more money out of football? They now have to play extra games against even smaller interstate clubs and they have to play more games against remaining smaller Melbourne clubs (plus more travel). How does this help them significantly? I think there is an argument that it might help the medium sized Vic clubs though and the interstate clubs. It's not like they're going to get more prime time exposure - they already get well and beyond the normal share. Arguably their strength is diluted as the small Melbourne teams go - they need to compete against West Coast off field but each game is now more likely to be a smaller affair and more likely to be interstate.
Click to expand...

There’s still six million people in Victoria who will follow a Victorian team. You’re competing against one less in terms of grabbing those supporters, and also for the advertising dollars available in the Vic market.
 
DunderHead said:
There’s still six million people in Victoria who will follow a Victorian team. You’re competing against one less in terms of grabbing those supporters, and also for the advertising dollars available in the Vic market.
Click to expand...

Long term maybe - Collingwood (example only) won't get more supporters tomorrow though and they'd be hard pressed to get more benefits from the league than they do today. I think personally that the biggest Melbourne clubs have the most to gain from the current setup and the least to gain from reducing Victorian clubs. If the AFL actually fixtured fairly that might not be the case, but they don't.
 
Snake_Baker said:
Cameron's walk out has primed me for some Wilson & Robinson "basketcase" comments tonight.

.........or are GWS a protected species?
Click to expand...

3 players have opted out of GWS and 2 of those that they were desperate to keep and confident that they would do so.

2 of * big-name players want out at any cost with rumours there are more that aren't happy.

Let's have another crack at North for doing what we all thought they needed to do for the past few years.
 
7577969923 said:
3 players have opted out of GWS and 2 of those that they were desperate to keep and confident that they would do so.

2 of * big-name players want out at any cost with rumours there are more that aren't happy.

Let's have another crack at North for doing what we all thought they needed to do for the past few years.
Click to expand...

5 GWS players that they want to keep are leaving - Cameron, Corr, Caldwell, Hately, Williams.

It is an exodus, worse then * IMO
 
shintemaster said:
Long term maybe - Collingwood (example only) won't get more supporters tomorrow though and they'd be hard pressed to get more benefits from the league than they do today. I think personally that the biggest Melbourne clubs have the most to gain from the current setup and the least to gain from reducing Victorian clubs. If the AFL actually fixtured fairly that might not be the case, but they don't.
Click to expand...

Yeah fixturing might be a valid point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Yianni
Roast The state of modern football media...
Replies
5
Views
742
ferball
ferball

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top