Search results for query: *

It gets a fair bit from sponsorships, with the most obvious being the Tasmanian deals for Hawthorn and North.

I am thinking something in the order of at least 15% and that should be the sort of trade-off to remain tax exempt.

Interesting proposition but I think it would be more appropriate to require them to contribute a certain percentage to grass root sport across the nation. The AFL and NRL are generating the surplus because of the support across the country and the overall health and welfare of the nation would...

What we are talking about is a more equitable distribution of timeslots. There is no conflict in my points of the AFL arranging the fixture and new timeslots suiting the TV networks. You insinuated that Western Bulldogs were fixtured at the unfriendly crowd slots because the TV networks wanted...

I am under the impression that the fixturing is arranged by the AFL not the TV stations. We do not expect opposition fans to make our games moneyspinners, but we would like a fair crack at decent time slots to enable us to grow our brand. Instead we are shuffled to non productive time slots...

What I want is equal opportunity, that is not hamstrung by the ingrained financial disadvantages of being forced to play games at a loss. When the AFL takes ownership of the Docklands stadium, the West Aust teams will have their share of that, but it is sides like St Kilda, North Melbourne and...

A true commitment to equality would eliminate most of the second rate games. Fox show EVERY game. They would prefer an even competition.

Collingwood gets better exposure which transfers to greater sponsorship/membership/crowds. It is a self fulfilling position, that simply maintains the staus quo and the long game without equalisation measures would see a situation where only a very few teams could compete and the competition...

While the fixturing remains an exercise in revenue gathering and the respective clubs are left with separate stadium expenses, there can be no real equalisation. If we really want an equal playing field it actually requires equivalent exposure and a system of total revenue sharing as the NFL...

I'm sure he can be both.

That is just garbage. The so called smaller clubs already have to work harder because they have receive less favourable fixturing yet pay more for the privilege of running onto the ground. Meanwhile the so called larger clubs are able to attract better sponsorship etc. because of the improved...

We could also just pool all the gate takings and share amongst the 18 clubs, so that the sides paying off Etihad for the AFL and not so badly treated. Then the fixturing to maximise revenue would benfit everyone.