How the small Melbourne clubs saved footy

[Blackas87]

I think it should be a combination of club supporter base and on field success. I thought it was beyond stupid and incredibly irritating when a few years ago every second Friday night game was Carlton as Carlton were an awful team, and despite their supporter base they should have been no where near the prime time spots.

If the Bulldogs are playing well and are a very good team they should get some prime time spots, but not as many as lets say Hawthorn should get if Hawthorn was just as good on the field simply because Hawthorn has a lot more supporters.

Therefore the bulldogs should get financially compensated for not been given the same opportunities to build and sell their brand

 

[Cash is King]

The AFL is made up of lifters and leaners.
When the AFL constantly bails you out and keeps you afloat to stave off mergers then you cannot say that you played a part in maintaining the financial stability of the competition.
The TV rights boom just like the mining boom pre gfc is what played a part in having that buffer.
You can thank the big clubs for doing the heavy lifting and paying the equalisation taxes.
The Collingwoods and the Richmonds don’t get to avoid tax like the real world does.

 

[Blackas87]

you are trying to link that by North getting 10k supporters to games at Marvel, that is the reason the AFL were able to pay off the stadium. Effectively losing money and writing the stadium a cheque for each loss you made by playing at the ground

The fact is, those cheques were effectively signed by the AFL.

Therefore your point is void.

Sent from my SM-A505YN using Tapatalk

Incorrect, the stadium wasn’t paid off by the few 10k crowds at the stadium, clubs had get 25000 - 26000 supporters to break even every game.

even if they get 35000 to a game, the money of 25000 of those paying supporters goes to the stadium and not into the pockets of the club.

Even if they sold the joint out, money of 25000 supporters was going to the stadium and not the club.

therefore by playing at the stadium, those clubs weren’t making the money they should as it was going to the stadium.

 

[kranky al]

Yeah your last flag was one for you by Adam Simpson, Brady Rawlings and Daniel Pratt so you can thank us for that too.

You could become the eagles reserves team in the vfl

great idea

Feeder club

 

[kranky al]

Do the Eagles play home games at Docklands, I must have missed that.

No we played games at subi - the worst major oval in footy by a country mile

we sucked-it up and attended

 

[Boxhead007]

I find this amusing. If North didn’t play at Marvel where else were they going to play? Thanks for paying it off for the rest of us but it was more out of need then want. As for saving footy nah..

 

[BF Tiger]

what was yours like after 30 years of no relevance ?

In 2008, which was the only year in which North had a greater membership this century, it was pretty bad. But we did get 935,000 fans to see us that year, whereas North only got 680,000 through the gates. (including a final). But since then we’ve grown to have a membership base 2 1/2 times what North has. So we are the roadmap you minnows should be following. Quick, I better start a thread... how the big clubs provided funds and a roadmap and saved the small clubs.

 

[Blackas87]

I find this amusing. If North didn’t play at Marvel where else were they going to play? Thanks for paying it off for the rest of us but it was more out of need then want. As for saving footy nah..

Where did they play before the stadium was built? Did North ask for a stadium to get built and have their games moved there?

 

[W.C. Fry]

Meh. We play the Sunday afternoon timeslot more than most. Hosting more interstate sides than you do. Still pull a crowd. Poor excuse from poor clubs.

 

[sprockets]

No the TV rights and sponsorship money didn't pay it off.

When those riches hit they were, belatedly, used to COMPENSATE the Docklands tenants clubs for shouldering an unfair burden of paying for what would become a communal asset.

The reality is the AFL has only one asset that it could borrow against to save the league.

And that asset was disproportionately funded by one subset of clubs.

Wait, so you paid for the stadium from COMPENSATION money the bigger, non-tenant clubs gave you?

 

[Blackas87]

Wait, so you paid for the stadium from COMPENSATION money the bigger, non-tenant clubs gave you?

The big clubs gave them nothing, the league handed money in compensation for handing out prime time fixtures to bigger clubs.

 

[W.C. Fry]

Where did they play before the stadium was built? Did North ask for a stadium to get built and have their games moved there?

north has hosted games at -
Bellerive
SCG
Carrara
Manuka
Coburg Oval
Princess Park
MCG
Docklands
Arden St
Waverley

I think the easier question to answer would be where hasn't north hosted a game.

I think the only time the Eagles have actually played north at Docklands was when Drew Petrie played his first game...... for the eagles!

 

[Engimal v3]

Far too much sooking in this thread, and not nearly enough ring kissing. Tigers fans: pucker up!

I want you to repeat after me: "Thank you James Brayshaw for bailing out my club".

 

[Blackas87]

north has hosted games at -
Bellerive
SCG
Carrara
Manuka
Coburg Oval
Princess Park
MCG
Docklands
Arden St
Waverley

I think the easier question to answer would be where hasn't north hosted a game.

I think the only time the Eagles have actually played north at Docklands was when Drew Petrie played his first game...... for the eagles!

Majority of North’s home games were at the MCG during the 90’s, a few at princess park and a few in Sydney.

They didn’t ask for majority of their home games be moved to Docklands to fill the quota while Hawthorn moved into the MCG

 

[Blackas87]

Where did the AFL get the money? I'm sure it didn't come from NMelb's huge drawing power.

Most of it would of come from prime time games, which are handouts to certain clubs.

 

[sprockets]

Most of it would of come from prime time games, which are handouts to certain clubs.

Sorry deleted my post because it's not worth arguing about. Those "certain clubs" are the ones that bring in the big money, money that's used to help support the minnows. Without those "certain clubs" the AFL wouldn't be in any position to even rent the stadium let alone buy it.

 

[Blackas87]

Sorry deleted my post because it's not worth arguing about. Those "certain clubs" are the ones that bring in the big money, money that's used to help support the minnows. Without those "certain clubs" the AFL wouldn't be in any position to even rent the stadium let alone buy it.

How much money do they bring in? How much would Collingwood v Richmond bring in on a Friday night compared to North v St Kilda?

I dare say play Collingwood v Richmond on Sunday 1pm and North v St Kilda prime time Friday night they probably bring in similar ratings and money. Those clubs wouldn’t need extra AFL distribution money.

 

[BF Tiger]

The big clubs gave them nothing, the league handed money in compensation for handing out prime time fixtures to bigger clubs.

The league didn't hand out prime time fixtures between bigger clubs for no reason. The television rights demanded it, and the league agreed so they could get paid billions, some of which went to keeping clubs like NMFC, MFC and StKFC alive. If the league demanded NMFC v MFC (and the like) on Friday nights then the networks would have said we'll be giving you less money... and then NMFC die.

 

[Boxhead007]

How much money do they bring in? How much would Collingwood v Richmond bring in on a Friday night compared to North v St Kilda?

I dare say play Collingwood v Richmond on Sunday 1pm and North v St Kilda prime time Friday night they probably bring in similar ratings and money. Those clubs wouldn’t need extra AFL distribution money.

Hahaha not even close. I’m all for saints and north playing Friday night. Even all for Richmond playing Collingwood Sunday arvo. But to say they would have the same ratings and money is incorrect. You can play Richmond v Collingwood at 3am in the morning and they will draw a massive crowd and eye balls to the screen. Nothing against those other clubs. fact of the matter is Pies and Richmond get Massive interest from 2 huge supporter bases

 

[Blackas87]

The league didn't hand out prime time fixtures between bigger clubs for no reason. The television rights demanded it, and the league agreed so they could get paid billions, some of which went to keeping clubs like NMFC, MFC and StKFC alive. If the league demanded NMFC v MFC (and the like) on Friday nights then the networks would have said we'll be giving you less money... and then NMFC die.

The tv rights might demand it as it drags in bigger ratings. But having prime time games allows clubs to sell it to their sponsors, they make money out of their sponsors.

Eddie McGuire said playing away on Queens birthday every year was a selling point to their sponsors. A guaranteed prime time fixture every year among others.

simply by more people choosing to support a club means tv stations want them on prime time spots, that allows that club to make more out of sponsors, the club didn’t really do anything other then more people chose to follow them.

if the Saints were given prime time slots they’d also be able to more money out of sponsors. The arent given those prime time spots, so they are handed cash as compensation.

some get handed prime time fixtures, some get handed cash.

 

[Boxhead007]

The tv rights might demand it as it drags in bigger ratings. But having prime time allows clubs to sell it to their sponsors, they make money out of their sponsors.

Eddie McGuire said playing away on Queens birthday every year was a selling point to their sponsors. A guaranteed prime time fixture every year among others.

simply by more people choosing to support a club means tv stations want them on prime time spots, that allows that club to make more out of sponsors.

if the Saints were given prime time slots they’d also be able to more out of sponsors. The arent given those prime time spots, so they are handed cash a compensation.

some get handed prime time fixtures, some get handed cash.

Iirc saints and bulldogs were getting s**t loads of Friday nights during the late 00s when they were up and about. They didn’t cash in then. Why? I read elsewhere that stkilda are in a better financial position now to back then. Why? Is there more money via distribution? If so why is that?

 

[Blackas87]

Hahaha not even close. I’m all for saints and north playing Friday night. Even all for Richmond playing Collingwood Sunday arvo. But to say they would have the same ratings and money is incorrect. You can play Richmond v Collingwood at 3am in the morning and they will draw a massive crowd and eye balls to the screen. Nothing against those other clubs. fact of the matter is Pies and Richmond get Massive interest from 3 huge supporter bases

Disagree, majority of people that watch Friday night footy don’t support the clubs that are playing.

Sure play Collingwood and Richmond 3 in the morning, and Collingwood and Richmond supporters would wake up for it, I won’t but I would of Saints v North Friday night.

 

[Boxhead007]

Disagree, majority of people that watch Friday night footy don’t support the clubs that are playing.

Sure play Collingwood and Richmond 3 in the morning, and Collingwood and Richmond supporters would wake up for it, I won’t but I would of Saints v North Friday night.

Disagree all you like. It is fact. You don’t think neutrals would tune into watching Richmond v Collingwood on a Sunday arvo whilst cooking their roasts? Just their supporter base alone dwarfs any neutral viewers on a Friday night. Your trying to compare 2 of the smallest followings to 2 of the biggest if not the biggest.

 

[Blackas87]

Iirc saints and bulldogs were getting s**t loads of Friday nights during the late 00s when they were up and about. They didn’t cash in then. Why? I read elsewhere that stkilda are in a better financial position now to back then. Why? Is there more money via distribution? If so why is that?

Well the tv stations weren’t paying big money back then, there is so much more money within the AFL these days compared to back then, Collingwood were in financial trouble in the late 90’s, no one was making money back then.

St Kilda in a better financial position now? They’re in what $12 million debt at the moment?

 

[Boxhead007]

Well the tv stations weren’t paying big money back then, there is so much more money within the AFL these days compared to back then, Collingwood were in financial trouble in the late 90’s, no one was making money back then.

St Kilda in a better financial position now? They’re in what $12 million debt at the moment?

You missed the bit where I said I read elsewhere that someone said they are. They even had comparisons so don’t shoot the messenger