When the AFL bought the ground, they paid $200M, clearly they thought that was a fair/good price.
If they hadn't paid that, they would have got the ground anyway at the 'cost' of playing 8*45=340 games there.
Therefore, we can assume the AFL thought that the price per game was at least $200M/340=$588K each (more when you consider interest and that the ground was going to have to be significantly refurbished before then as per the contracted handover condition).
Forgive me if I've missed something, but disequal funding doesn't seem to match those sums, therefore the clubs are bearing higher costs than they're being compensated for in order for the AFL to acquire the ground.
Incredibly simplistic analysis. Ignores other events held at the stadium (which is a significant number) and assumes revenue streams are a cost to the club - Medallion club in particular. Per event each MC seat is probably worth $100 or so in revenue to the stadium, but it's hardly a cost to most AFL teams because they're seats that they wouldn't be selling anyway. Certainly not to the extent that the stadium is making money off them.
Never mind that there's no real reason why AFL clubs should be compensated for the cost of using a venue that the clubs themselves make money out of. Why shouldn't it cost them money? They're the bloody tenants!