Play Nice AFL Womens - General Discussion

[jatz14]

How does the AFLW actually make money? This is a genuine question, as far as I know entry to games is free and I can't see TV viewership being too high, although I'm not aware of exact figures.
I understand the importance of women's sport and I'm in no way trying to belittle the competition, I'm just curious how they justify tripling the salaries of these players in the next couple of years with no money being generated from the competition.
The AFL are already propping up quite a few AFL clubs, they've cut the soft-cap, and now with even more AFLW teams coming in on top of that and minimum salaries being tripled, all the while crowds in both the men's games and women's games seemingly falling away in the last couple of years... I'm wondering how sustainable it is in the long run. The women's game is decades away from even thinking about it being profitable, I'm not sure 60k per year adds up.

They say they want to be paid for 22 hours a week. Over a 16 round season (12+4 finals) plus let's say 6 weeks of preseason
22×22 = 484 hours
59013÷484 = $121.92p/h

Let's say a team doesn't even make finals so just 12 rounds plus 6 week preseason
18×22 = 396
59013÷396 = $149.02p/h

To me, thats crazy money. And that would just be the minimum salary!

The AFLW isnt a 'thing' that makes or loses money. Its a league put on by the AFL. The AFL makes or loses money, and it does so in the context of being a not for profit. Many things the AFL does, do not 'make' money. So, if the AFL overall remains solvent, and satisfies its stakeholders, it is entirely irrelevant what the financial status of the AFLW specifically is.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

The AFLW isnt a 'thing' that makes or loses money. Its a league put on by the AFL. The AFL makes or loses money, and it does so in the context of being a not for profit. Many things the AFL does, do not 'make' money. So, if the AFL overall remains solvent, and satisfies its stakeholders, it is entirely irrelevant what the financial status of the AFLW specifically is.

Is the mens league put on by the AFL irrelevant also?

 

[The_Wookie]

How does the AFLW actually make money? This is a genuine question, as far as I know entry to games is free and I can't see TV viewership being too high, although I'm not aware of exact figures.
I understand the importance of women's sport and I'm in no way trying to belittle the competition, I'm just curious how they justify tripling the salaries of these players in the next couple of years with no money being generated from the competition.
The AFL are already propping up quite a few AFL clubs, they've cut the soft-cap, and now with even more AFLW teams coming in on top of that and minimum salaries being tripled, all the while crowds in both the men's games and women's games seemingly falling away in the last couple of years... I'm wondering how sustainable it is in the long run. The women's game is decades away from even thinking about it being profitable, I'm not sure 60k per year adds up.

They say they want to be paid for 22 hours a week. Over a 16 round season (12+4 finals) plus let's say 6 weeks of preseason
22×22 = 484 hours
59013÷484 = $121.92p/h

Let's say a team doesn't even make finals so just 12 rounds plus 6 week preseason
18×22 = 396
59013÷396 = $149.02p/h

To me, thats crazy money. And that would just be the minimum salary!

Entry to games hasnt been free for 2 years.

 

[HugeJohnson]

Entry to games hasnt been free for 2 years.

Maybe it's just Adelaide games? Or just finals?

 

[cmndstab]

Maybe it's just Adelaide games? Or just finals?

No, the games have cost money to attend for two years. It was only the prelim finals this year that were made free (I'm honestly not sure why).

 

[cats_09]

No, the games have cost money to attend for two years. It was only the prelim finals this year that were made free (I'm honestly not sure why).

Was that a delayed/rescheduled match due to covid protocols?

 

[Dory_77]

Was that a delayed/rescheduled match due to covid protocols?

They were delayed but they've redone the fixture on the fly this year and as far as I know still had the $10 charge. Most ticket dealers are good with Covid refunds/reissued tickets so it was probably possible to have the prelims paid entry.

 

[faible]

Is the mens league put on by the AFL irrelevant also?

Well yes, in the context of jatz comment, so long as the AFL as a whole remains solvent then that's all that matters.

Also, FWIW the AFLW has brought in more sponsors and has demonstrably grown the grassroots participation.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Well yes, in the context of jatz comment, so long as the AFL as a whole remains solvent then that's all that matters.

Also, FWIW the AFLW has brought in more sponsors and has demonstrably grown the grassroots participation.

The AFL is a non entity without the mens league, it wouldn’t exist. It exists purely and simply because of the mens league, the mens league bring in all the income. It is hardly irrelevant.
I was not knocking the AFLW, I just found the comment strange to say the AFLW bringing in money is irrelevant. Clearly as it is in its infancy still it is being funded by the mens league, but it cannot stay like that forever. It is not irrelevant and it must in time be able to fund itself.

 

[faible]

The AFL is a non entity without the mens league, it wouldn’t exist. It exists purely and simply because of the mens league, the mens league bring in all the income. It is hardly irrelevant.
I was not knocking the AFLW, I just found the comment strange to say the AFLW bringing in money is irrelevant. Clearly as it is in its infancy still it is being funded by the mens league, but it cannot stay like that forever. It is not irrelevant and it must in time be able to fund itself.

The men's comp has been around for 150 odd years, how much of that was fully professional?

Maybe give it more than 6 years before declaring the Women's game has to stand on its own two feet.

Also, as I mentioned, the AFLW has demonstrably grown grassroots participation and brought in it's own sponsors, plus funding from State and Commonwealth levels for facility and ground upgrades that the men's clubs alone weren't able to secure.

The AFL already props up AFL clubs with funding distributions, because they know as part of the larger picture it's important to do so.

Not everything is about a short-term ROI.

 

[Bostonian]

AFLW will be like the WNBA.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

The men's comp has been around for 150 odd years, how much of that was fully professional?

Maybe give it more than 6 years before declaring the Women's game has to stand on its own two feet.

Also, as I mentioned, the AFLW has demonstrably grown grassroots participation and brought in it's own sponsors, plus funding from State and Commonwealth levels for facility and ground upgrades that the men's clubs alone weren't able to secure.

The AFL already props up AFL clubs with funding distributions, because they know as part of the larger picture it's important to do so.

Not everything is about a short-term ROI.

I am not giving it any timeframe, FFS why is everyone so sensitive about the AFLW?
I am just saying it’s not irrelevant.

 

[cmndstab]

The point is that all that matters is that the AFL makes money, not that each component of it makes money at all times.

AFLW as a standalone entity might be a money-loser. But it existing is a massive driver of girls playing footy. Increased engagement with playing the sport is likely to translate to increased engagement with watching it as well. More memberships, more attendance, more merchandise, etc. It also means those girls are more likely to encourage their children to get into the sport as well.

Meanwhile, supporting the women's game is likely to open up additional sponsorship opportunities, perhaps some opportunites to get grants, etc. And, in the long run, the league will hopefully go professional, and may become a money earner in it's own right.

It's too simplistic to ask whether AFLW generates a profit by itself right now, six seasons in.

 

[faible]

I am not giving it any timeframe, FFS why is everyone so sensitive about the AFLW?
I am just saying it’s not irrelevant.

Which part isn't irrelevant?

That the AFL puts money in to things they either expect a short-term loss from but that will be a long-term ROI (examples in expansion clubs and AFLW) or they put money in to things that don't have a financial ROI but are important for the growth and ongoing existence of the game (sport below the top level).

The AFLW has already brought in additional, new sponsors, has grown the grassroots participation in the game, and has seen improvements in facilities at community level due to additional access to State and Federal grants.

Long-term it'll almost certainly be a net positive addition to the sport financially too.

It's not about being sensitive, it's about people making uninformed commentary.

 

[Profop]

Rather prop up the AFLW than Gold Coast, GWS and the Saints

 

[Bostonian]

The point is that all that matters is that the AFL makes money, not that each component of it makes money at all times.

AFLW as a standalone entity might be a money-loser. But it existing is a massive driver of girls playing footy. Increased engagement with playing the sport is likely to translate to increased engagement with watching it as well. More memberships, more attendance, more merchandise, etc. It also means those girls are more likely to encourage their children to get into the sport as well.

Meanwhile, supporting the women's game is likely to open up additional sponsorship opportunities, perhaps some opportunites to get grants, etc. And, in the long run, the league will hopefully go professional, and may become a money earner in it's own right.

It's too simplistic to ask whether AFLW generates a profit by itself right now, six seasons in.

Playing a sport doesn't equate to watching it.

Netball and Basketball prime examples.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

Playing a sport doesn't equate to watching it.

Netball and Basketball prime examples.

Not sure about Netball but people are watching Basketball it’s just the highest tier league is overseas.

 

[cmndstab]

Playing a sport doesn't equate to watching it.

Netball and Basketball prime examples.

It definitely correlates with it.

 

[jatz14]

Is the mens league put on by the AFL irrelevant also?

Its the overall financial status of the AFL that is relevant, not any specific individual component. This is true regardless of what component you are talking about. Many specific parts of the AFL are loss making, and have been for a long time. Why is it only the AFLW that causes concern?

Investment in 'grass roots' is loss making. The elite pathway is 'loss making'.

But these make other returns for football people cry.

The AFLW is loss making. Yes, but it produces other returns for the AFL, thats why they fund it.

NOOOO, it must pay its own way, is the forlorn whale, it will be the roooon of us all.

okey dokey then.

 

[jatz14]

Is the mens league put on by the AFL irrelevant also?

To answer more specifically requires a hypothetical.

Imagine if the AFL got a pot of money from somewhere not tied directly to the AFL mens league (government policy, a thank you from betting agencies, whatever) social inclusion, and this money let the AFL operate where the money the mens comp was pulling in wasn't covering costs, but the AFL overall was in the black.

ie, the mens comp was losing money, but the AFL was in the black. Is this a problem? Would people be saying that the mens comp needed to pay its way and break even?

Or would people take the view that as long as the AFL was 'in the long run' balancing its books, then that was sufficient.

This doesn't mean that income and expenses of each part of the AFL doesn't matter, and isn't carefully considered and watched. In the above scenario, the AFL might be concerned that this pot of money doesnt hang around long term, so running the mens league at a loss could lead to problems.

But the AFL is a not for profit. It isnt looking at EBITDA for each division to justify investment in it. If it can achieve its various goals, and do so in a manner that guarantees the long term future of the league, the profit/loss of each individual component isn't really here or there.

I mean, if you gave the AFL the opportunity for the AFLW to return 25% on investment, I am sure they would jump at it. But I am also sure they have factored in to their long term plans the financial reality of sinking money into the AFLW that they aren't getting back. They will be prepared to lose money on the AFLW, in the interest of pursuing other goals. They wouldn't be prepared to lose so much money it undermines the financial security of the league, or compels it to cut to much in other areas the AFL is invested in.

Balancing those interests is the job of the board and management and requires info us pundits do not have.

None of this is remotely captured by simplistic statements of, 'its got to pay its own way'.

 

[Bostonian]

It definitely correlates with it.

It doesn't though.

AFL already has a large female following so AFLW isn't bringing many more female fans to AFL.

Conversely that large group of females who watch AFL aren't going along to watch AFLW in any great numbers.

 

[Bostonian]

Not sure about Netball but people are watching Basketball it’s just the highest tier league is overseas.

Women don't watch basketball in any great numbers compared to how many actually play it.

I've been around basketball scenes a long time and I've come across a lot of females who play but don't watch the NBA.

Men on the other hand seem to love watching it. Maybe it's because men have sport as a big part of their socialising groups where as women tend to play it then separate it more from their social lives.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

To answer more specifically requires a hypothetical.

Imagine if the AFL got a pot of money from somewhere not tied directly to the AFL mens league (government policy, a thank you from betting agencies, whatever) social inclusion, and this money let the AFL operate where the money the mens comp was pulling in wasn't covering costs, but the AFL overall was in the black.

ie, the mens comp was losing money, but the AFL was in the black. Is this a problem? Would people be saying that the mens comp needed to pay its way and break even?

Or would people take the view that as long as the AFL was 'in the long run' balancing its books, then that was sufficient.

This doesn't mean that income and expenses of each part of the AFL doesn't matter, and isn't carefully considered and watched. In the above scenario, the AFL might be concerned that this pot of money doesnt hang around long term, so running the mens league at a loss could lead to problems.

But the AFL is a not for profit. It isnt looking at EBITDA for each division to justify investment in it. If it can achieve its various goals, and do so in a manner that guarantees the long term future of the league, the profit/loss of each individual component isn't really here or there.

I mean, if you gave the AFL the opportunity for the AFLW to return 25% on investment, I am sure they would jump at it. But I am also sure they have factored in to their long term plans the financial reality of sinking money into the AFLW that they aren't getting back. They will be prepared to lose money on the AFLW, in the interest of pursuing other goals. They wouldn't be prepared to lose so much money it undermines the financial security of the league, or compels it to cut to much in other areas the AFL is invested in.

Balancing those interests is the job of the board and management and requires info us pundits do not have.

None of this is remotely captured by simplistic statements of, 'its got to pay its own way'.

you said it is irrelevant whether the women bring anything to the table, never at any point did I say they need to fund themselves right now.
I responded to your quote which basically said women never have to do anything.
I actually said they were in their infancy and hopefully In time will continue to raise what they bring to the table.
As I said to Owen you are all to bloody sensitive, it was your quote not mine.
I think the women are relevant, you think they are not.

 

[allswell]

It doesn't though.

AFL already has a large female following so AFLW isn't bringing many more female fans to AFL.

Conversely that large group of females who watch AFL aren't going along to watch AFLW in any great numbers.

Surely your not saying they only proof is if more females actually go to an afl game? Thats not what this is about. It’s about the huge increase of females now playing (kids and adults). Most junior clubs now have stand alone girls teams which didn’t exist even 5 years ago. This grows the brand of AFL which, although isn’t a direct money making part of AFLW, it is a direct concequense of females having a pathway.

 

[Bostonian]

Surely your not saying they only proof is if more females actually go to an afl game? Thats not what this is about. It’s about the huge increase of females now playing (kids and adults). Most junior clubs now have stand alone girls teams which didn’t exist even 5 years ago. This grows the brand of AFL which, although isn’t a direct money making part of AFLW, it is a direct concequense of females having a pathway.

So they play and that's it.

Like most other sports once the game is over they just go off and do other non-sporting things.

Would have to see the figures of girls not playing any sport that have taken up AFL as to how much of a real impact it's having.

If all they are doing is jumping from one sport to another it's not that big of a deal.

The brand of AFL is well known already, the AFLW isn't raising it any more than it is now.