2025 Attendances

[The_Wookie]

11.12.2024

Gather Round tickets snapped up in record time


The AFL is pleased to announce that more than 195,000 Gather Round…Festival of Footy tickets have sold… with five of the nine games sold out, 20,000 more than this time last year.

Member on sale on Tuesday saw a significant uplift in demand for tickets this year, selling more than 100,000 tickets in the first four hours, in comparison to the same amount in 24 hours last year.

This year there are an extra 47,000 tickets on offer for fans with the two Saturday matches being ticketed separately.

Tickets still remain for Collingwood vs Sydney Swans on Friday night, Carlton vs West Coast on Saturday afternoon, Melbourne vs Essendon on Saturday night and a very limited number of restricted view tickets and tickets for the Pepsi Collective for Port Adelaide vs Hawthorn on Sunday evening.

AFL CEO Andrew Dillon said it was clear Gather Round momentum was not slowly down.

“The demand for tickets this year was significantly higher than the first two Gather Rounds, with more than 195,000 tickets being purchased in the first two days,” said Mr Dillon.

“A ticket to the matches at the Barossa Park was always going to be one of the hottest tickets in town and the fans have certainly illustrated that by selling out both matches so quickly.”

South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas said: “Gather Round continues to exceed all expectations.

“We are honoured that so many footy fans from around the country are making the commitment to travel to our beautiful state to experience this event like no other.

“They’ll be truly welcome.

“If you haven’t got a ticket already – get in quick!”

Tickets for the remaining matches can be found here.

 

[DaTBird187]

So they're really giving this 6,000 per game season expansion benchmark a real shake.

 

[dave10]

So they're really giving this 6,000 per game season expansion benchmark a real shake.

Apart from the Swans, AFLW crowds have stagnated and probably declined the last 3 years.
I don’t know how the TV ratings are going but I sense interest levels are not at the same levels as 3/4 years ago and the crowds reflect this.
To me the standard is still not good enough to grab my interest.

 

[Bjo187]

Agree at this point I would prefer the likely $70 million loss from W this year to be halved, by splitting the comp into a division A and B. Then it funnels the minimal talent into 9 teams and cuts in half the amount of players they have to pay these big wages to. Have promotion and relegation, then over decades expand back out to all teams in the premier division. That was a massive error by the afl over expanding too early, it was obvious at the time but they still went with it.

The $30 million or so saved could go into improving W.A footy and paying for the game to be on tv and easily accessible in places like nz and India. I read an interesting article today how grassroots footy is going well in India (obviously it will never be more than a niche), but the participants there are annoyed they can't get access to games. I think paying to be on tv in these markets would be smart, not even necessarily you grow the game in India, but to help with increasing awareness in the local and growing Indian community in Australia.

India’s unexpected love affair with Aussie rules football - ABC Asia

Australian rules football is growing across Asia and the fastest growth has been India thanks to a former Aussie cricket captain.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Teen Wolf]

I don’t know how the TV ratings are going but I sense interest levels are not at the same levels as 3/4 years ago and the crowds reflect this.

4 years ago the average H&A attendance was 1,873. The following season it was 1,577.

The H&A average this year is about 2400 excluding Swans home games, and just over 2500 including them.

Ticket revenue has increased by more than 50% in the past couple of years too, and membership numbers are also up.

 

[Teen Wolf]

Agree at this point I would prefer the likely $70 million loss from W this year to be halved, by splitting the comp into a division A and B. Then it funnels the minimal talent into 9 teams and cuts in half the amount of players they have to pay these big wages to. Have promotion and relegation, then over decades expand back out to all teams in the premier division. That was a massive error by the afl over expanding too early, it was obvious at the time but they still went with it.

The $30 million or so saved could go into improving W.A footy and paying for the game to be on tv and easily accessible in places like nz and India. I read an interesting article today how grassroots footy is going well in India (obviously it will never be more than a niche), but the participants there are annoyed they can't get access to games. I think paying to be on tv in these markets would be smart, not even necessarily you grow the game in India, but to help with increasing awareness in the local and growing Indian community in Australia.

India’s unexpected love affair with Aussie rules football - ABC Asia

Australian rules football is growing across Asia and the fastest growth has been India thanks to a former Aussie cricket captain.

www.abc.net.au

The not-for-profit AFL made a $45m profit last year. They don't need to cut anything to spend more on grassroots etc.

Further, the total amount spent on AFLW player salaries this year is $41m. So any notion the AFL would lose $70m on the comp this year is as false and illogical as the idea they lost $50m on it last year.

It also means you wouldn't even save $30m by not paying half the competition.

 

[Bjo187]

The not-for-profit AFL made a $45m profit last year. They don't need to cut anything to spend more on grassroots etc.

Further, the total amount spent on AFLW player salaries this year is $41m. So any notion the AFL would lose $70m on the comp this year is as false and illogical as the idea they lost $50m on it last year.

It also means you wouldn't even save $30m by not paying half the competition.

So approx $20 mill on player salaries plus you'd get savings elsewhere from running a lower level league. Less money to staff, officials, umpires, coaches, plus the standard wouldn't be as crap, so people might actually start watching again. The last point seems to have been lost in this whole venture.

 

[Teen Wolf]

So approx $20 mill on player salaries plus you'd get savings elsewhere from running a lower level league. Less money to staff, officials, umpires, coaches, plus the standard wouldn't be as crap, so people might actually start watching again. The last point seems to have been lost in this whole venture.

Yes the last point is lost in a sea of facts, like the ones I posted above, which affirm attendance is growing.

 

[The_Wookie]

Agree at this point I would prefer the likely $70 million loss from W this year to be halved

What 70m loss. Dillon says 50m a year. And the Age says it costs 100m, returning 50m in revenue. This figure appears to have been reached once.



Effectively AFLW funding accounts for 8% of AFL Revenue – thats competition expenses and club distributions included – in any of the last three years. The Average AFL club will have recieved about 1.9m for AFLW from the league in 2024. Stay with me here, because I dont think we’ve reached a crisis point.



AFLW is designed with the future and development in mind, a top down approach to the game that will hopefully reap dividends. In the same vein the AFL has spent nearly as much on the Suns, Giants and Lions in the same period.

Finally, its notable that the league believes that AFLW combines with the AFL to enable it to reach its targets in membership and attendance.

 

[Teen Wolf]

What Andrew Dillon actually said: "That [$50m loss] is not a line that's ever been run by the League."

Caro talked to one club CEO who was either ineptly or deliberately providing her with false information. Hence the AFL gave the same presentation to the media a week later to clear the record.

The AFL spent $34.1m on AFLW player salaries for the year ending 31 October 2024. If they spent $63.7m on additional costs to run a 14-week AFLW season (last 5 weeks of 2023 season, first 9 weeks of 2024 season), you'd have to wonder how they ran up such a hefty bill... gold-plated private jets? hiring out massive stadiums? paying for competent umpires?

 

[Bjo187]

What 70m loss. Dillon says 50m a year. And the Age says it costs 100m, returning 50m in revenue. This figure appears to have been reached once.

View attachment 2462945

Effectively AFLW funding accounts for 8% of AFL Revenue – thats competition expenses and club distributions included – in any of the last three years. The Average AFL club will have recieved about 1.9m for AFLW from the league in 2024. Stay with me here, because I dont think we’ve reached a crisis point.

View attachment 2462947

AFLW is designed with the future and development in mind, a top down approach to the game that will hopefully reap dividends. In the same vein the AFL has spent nearly as much on the Suns, Giants and Lions in the same period.

Finally, its notable that the league believes that AFLW combines with the AFL to enable it to reach its targets in membership and attendance.

Well If you read what I said, I said this year. I knew it was $50 mill last year and was aware they were getting a large pay rise due to the new tv rights deal this year. So i was just throwing around rough estimates, as there would be over 500 players getting a significant bump in salary and i doubt there's been any significant increase in income from other avenues to cover the extra costs.

 

[The Educator]

What Andrew Dillon actually said: "That [$50m loss] is not a line that's ever been run by the League."

Caro talked to one club CEO who was either ineptly or deliberately providing her with false information. Hence the AFL gave the same presentation to the media a week later to clear the record.

The AFL spent $34.1m on AFLW player salaries for the year ending 31 October 2024. If they spent $63.7m on additional costs to run a 14-week AFLW season (last 5 weeks of 2023 season, first 9 weeks of 2024 season), you'd have to wonder how they ran up such a hefty bill... gold-plated private jets? hiring out massive stadiums? paying for competent umpires?

The only way you might get there is if you included W pathway programs and other non AFLW season expenditure. Just as likely is that $63.7M is inclusive of player salaries / club distributions.

 

[TimZoo]

2500 at the north-hawks game for what should be a Friday night blockbuster is pretty disappointing,Mind-boggling venue choice aside,80k + for the t20,60k for oasis

 

[Cmarsh]

2500 at the north-hawks game for what should be a Friday night blockbuster is pretty disappointing,Mind-boggling venue choice aside,80k + for the t20,60k for oasis

Never heard an AFLW match described as a blockbuster though in fairness.

 

[sverik25]

2500 at the north-hawks game for what should be a Friday night blockbuster is pretty disappointing,Mind-boggling venue choice aside,80k + for the t20,60k for oasis

Agree it was a poor crowd, but Hawthorn play home games at Frankston. Where else should they have played it?

 

[dave10]

2500 at the north-hawks game for what should be a Friday night blockbuster is pretty disappointing,Mind-boggling venue choice aside,80k + for the t20,60k for oasis

I agree. 1st Vs 2nd. To me it shows how much more work is going to be required to generate interest in this comp. A ‘blockbuster’ in the top Aussie Rules women’s comp in the country should be aspiring for at least 10-15K. If you went back 10 years to those earlier years when crowds were seemingly going in larger numbers to games between Dogs / Demons and those early Imon Park games you’d be disappointed and concerned to see that crowds have I think regressed.

Swans aside, few clubs are winning in drawing crowds. The Bombers were one club I think doing a decent job at getting crowds, drawing ~3K to home fixtures in recent years but due to form it’s crowds have tanked too.

That leaves not much good news with crowds after what I think has been a ‘ho hum’ and disappointing season for the competition overall.

 

[Hawkk]

I agree. 1st Vs 2nd. To me it shows how much more work is going to be required to generate interest in this comp. A ‘blockbuster’ in the top Aussie Rules women’s comp in the country should be aspiring for at least 10-15K. If you went back 10 years to those earlier years when crowds were seemingly going in larger numbers to games between Dogs / Demons and those early Imon Park games you’d be disappointed and concerned to see that crowds have I think regressed.

Swans aside, few clubs are winning in drawing crowds. The Bombers were one club I think doing a decent job at getting crowds, drawing ~3K to home fixtures in recent years but due to form it’s crowds have tanked too.

That leaves not much good news with crowds after what I think has been a ‘ho hum’ and disappointing season for the competition overall.

To be fair, it’s much easier to draw thousands to a novelty when the tickets are free. The AFL and its partners have a major decision to make. Will the AFLW make money for the clubs or is it a financial drain?

Remember, the player salaries are expecting to grow exponentially over the next two years too…

AFL strikes $2.2 billion pay deal with players in historic joint collective bargaining agreement

The five-year collective bargaining agreement covering male and female players features significant wage rises and a longer AFLW season.

www.abc.net.au

 

[dave10]

To be fair, it’s much easier to draw thousands to a novelty when the tickets are free. The AFL and its partners have a major decision to make. Will the AFLW make money for the clubs or is it a financial drain?

Remember, the player salaries are expecting to grow exponentially over the next two years too…

AFL strikes $2.2 billion pay deal with players in historic joint collective bargaining agreement

The five-year collective bargaining agreement covering male and female players features significant wage rises and a longer AFLW season.

www.abc.net.au

I agree. They’re approaching key decisions around direction. I can’t see at this stage they would do anything but continue to try and invest in the comp. They have to in the current climate of growth in women’s sport.

All the big leagues in other sports are investing behind their women’s elite competitions. If the AFL at this stage take their foot off the pedal they risk being left behind its competitors in a segment that’s potentially going to grow enormously. Women’s participation and attendance at the men’s comp requires the league continue to go full steam ahead.

The conundrum as you say is how does the league support strongly growing salaries and a desire to go more professional in an environment where there’s been a stagnation in crowds and I think public interest (Tv??)? The revenues in the game are not supporting this investment.

How do you grow public interest and attendances? I’d have thought this is in large part the competitions standard and quality… How do you improve the standard of players aren’t totally professional and committed as full time athletes? It’s difficult!

 

[Cmarsh]

I agree. They’re approaching key decisions around direction. I can’t see at this stage they would do anything but continue to try and invest in the comp. They have to in the current climate of growth in women’s sport.

All the big leagues in other sports are investing behind their women’s elite competitions. If the AFL at this stage take their foot off the pedal they risk being left behind its competitors in a segment that’s potentially going to grow enormously. Women’s participation and attendance at the men’s comp requires the league continue to go full steam ahead.

The conundrum as you say is how does the league support strongly growing salaries and a desire to go more professional in an environment where there’s been a stagnation in crowds and I think public interest (Tv??)? The revenues in the game are not supporting this investment.

How do you grow public interest and attendances? I’d have thought this is in large part the competitions standard and quality… How do you improve the standard of players aren’t totally professional and committed as full time athletes? It’s difficult!

The problem is the approach the AFL took by fast tracking all 18 clubs diluted the talent pool so much it just never allowed the quality to be showcased properly.

The only way to fix it now is that you completely transform it by dissolving the current comp with AFL club allignment and instead introduce a new 8-10 team competition that includes only the premium players with new team identities. Player and game quality would then improve to a point it would attract more casuals to the games and ratings would increase.

 

[Hawkk]

The problem is the approach the AFL took by fast tracking all 18 clubs diluted the talent pool so much it just never allowed the quality to be showcased properly.

The only way to fix it now is that you completely transform it by dissolving the current comp with AFL club allignment and instead introduce a new 8-10 team competition that includes only the premium players with new team identities. Player and game quality would then improve to a point it would attract more casuals to the games and ratings would increase.

This is actually the direction that English Football want to push too — and it would absolutely be the right thing to do.



Women’s sport can only survive if it doesn’t inherit the baggage of men’s sport .

 

[Teen Wolf]

Growth in player salaries are slowing over the next two years. Crowds have increased for the 4th straight season.

 

[Bjo187]

The problem is the approach the AFL took by fast tracking all 18 clubs diluted the talent pool so much it just never allowed the quality to be showcased properly.

The only way to fix it now is that you completely transform it by dissolving the current comp with AFL club allignment and instead introduce a new 8-10 team competition that includes only the premium players with new team identities. Player and game quality would then improve to a point it would attract more casuals to the games and ratings would increase.

You don’t even need to reinvent the wheel, just split the competition into two divisions with promotion and relegation. That model keeps all the existing infrastructure in place while concentrating the top-tier talent into eight to ten quality teams.

It would also rein in the unsustainable salary inflation by effectively halving the number of players earning top-tier contracts, from around 600 to 300, saving tens of millions in losses for the game per year.

The rapid expansion to 18 teams, combined with excessive pay rises, was yet another example of the AFL chasing the appearance of social progressiveness at the expense of sound business judgment. I don't think one person genuinely would have thought expanding this fast when the competition was already poor quality was a good idea. The leadership of the game has been poor for years, and with another bland corporate in Drummond joining Dillon at the top, it’s hard to see things improving any time soon.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

The problem is the approach the AFL took by fast tracking all 18 clubs diluted the talent pool so much it just never allowed the quality to be showcased properly.

The only way to fix it now is that you completely transform it by dissolving the current comp with AFL club allignment and instead introduce a new 8-10 team competition that includes only the premium players with new team identities. Player and game quality would then improve to a point it would attract more casuals to the games and ratings would increase.

At which facilities do you propose that these teams train at?

 

[Rob]

The problem is the approach the AFL took by fast tracking all 18 clubs diluted the talent pool so much it just never allowed the quality to be showcased properly.

The only way to fix it now is that you completely transform it by dissolving the current comp with AFL club allignment and instead introduce a new 8-10 team competition that includes only the premium players with new team identities. Player and game quality would then improve to a point it would attract more casuals to the games and ratings would increase.

First paragraph is spot on, but its too late to unscramble the egg now. The AFL have to live with it. Promotion and relegation is probably the only answer but that won't happen.

New teams with new identities would be a disaster.

 

[The_Wookie]

To be fair, it’s much easier to draw thousands to a novelty when the tickets are free. The AFL and its partners have a major decision to make. Will the AFLW make money for the clubs or is it a financial drain?

Its not - and never has been - about profit. Ticket prices were only introduced because the women felt that having it be free was demeaning.

The formative years - which we are still in - have been as much about womens game development as it has been about the league. While the league is often incorrect, its ability to lay out longer term views and goals is second to none.

The AFL could at the same time make a decision about supporting loss making clubs like North, the Bullodgs, Lions, Suns, Giants and Saints. AFLW expenditure is roughly the same as the league spends on the Suns/Giants/Lions annually.

The problem is the approach the AFL took by fast tracking all 18 clubs diluted the talent pool so much it just never allowed the quality to be showcased properly.

The problem is people are impatient and the AFl cant fixture the women properly - and they for some reason took away their successful Origin match. Also the women slightly too idealistic in their demand to not be curtainraisers, not have free entry and other things which would stimulate interest in the womens game.

The only way to fix it now is that you completely transform it by dissolving the current comp with AFL club allignment and instead introduce a new 8-10 team competition that includes only the premium players with new team identities. Player and game quality would then improve to a point it would attract more casuals to the games and ratings would increase.

Would never happen. That would also require the league to set up completely new infrastructure and staff per club, something currently shared by AFL clubs.

 

[Teen Wolf]

I'm detecting a trend here...