20th AFL Team

[Canberra Pear]

How will you be the second most liveable city in the world? You're turning into another Melbourne or Sydney?
Cairns Darwin and lifestyle factors are where it's at.
Loving this debate btw

Second best by quality of life. Only Australian city in the top 10.

I normally can't convince people that Canberra is big enough for an AFL team. You're the first I've heard implying we're too big for an AFL team.

Cairns and Darwin will definitely attract a certain type, but Canberra is an amazing place to live.

We're relatively small, so we don't have the same issues as Melbourne or Sydney, but because of our capital status, we punch above our weight for food, culture, education etc. Best of both worlds.

Players can live in Braddon if they like the hipster vibe, or have a farm just outside, and either way only be 20 minutes from Manuka.

 

[Run n Spread]

Second best by quality of life. Only Australian city in the top 10.

I normally can't convince people that Canberra is big enough for an AFL team. You're the first I've heard implying we're too big for an AFL team.

Cairns and Darwin will definitely attract a certain type, but Canberra is an amazing place to live.

We're relatively small, so we don't have the same issues as Melbourne or Sydney, but because of our capital status, we punch above our weight for food, culture, education etc. Best of both worlds.

Players can live in Braddon if they like the hipster vibe, or have a farm just outside, and either way only be 20 minutes from Manuka.

I've lived in Canberra and it's fine. Great for a career. But a lifestyle in your 20s?? No

 

[Walshawk]

Just like plenty like playing in front of no one at gws and prefer anonymous lifestyles and a community so will plenty building north Australia. They will be pioneers. It's new original and needs to happen
What better opportunity for a young draftee.
Get grafted to a bottom club. Get monstered and defeated. Or play at a waste land?
Or go to the premiership club? Play 2 years without a game and be unceremoniously chucked on the dole queue without a game in the most expensive city in the world.
Or be paid a shit load to build a new life Nd community.
I know what I'd rather do. This needs to happen for the good of the sport and the country

You might attract fringe players but any decent player would rather be at a big Vic club. Premiership aside, do you think J Cameron prefers playing in front of 10k at Showgrounds or 35k @ Geelong/70k @ MCG? Players are always taking about playing in front of big crowds.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

And SA3 shouldn't even be in the viability conversation.

100% agree. I can see the merits of WA3 and even NT (provided the Commonwealth provides a lot of $$). But for a couple of people in this thread to insist SA3 is the superior team 20 candidate is just ridiculous. It’s between NT (possibly with game sharing with North Queensland), WA3 and Canberra for Team 20

 

[Canberra Pear]

I've lived in Canberra and it's fine. Great for a career. But a lifestyle in your 20s?? No

I moved in my 20s and loved it enough to settle here. The unis and grads skew Canberra younger.

Personally, couldn't have ever seen myself living in Darwin, but to each their own.

 

[big_e]

I've lived in Canberra and it's fine. Great for a career. But a lifestyle in your 20s?? No

And yet 20-something footballers fall over themselves to go to Geelong.

I lived in Canberra at 23-24 and didn't enjoy it (which was due to the work I was doing, not the city itself), I know others who moved there at the same time and have never left. Each to their own.

 

[Pivot Piece]

If you really want a Northern Australia team it actually makes more sense to base it in Cairns over Darwin imo. But I really think you are setting it up to fail if its “identity” is not tied to one city. Sharing home games with other cities is fine but Darwin and NQ really have nothing to do with each other so you aren’t going to create any loyalty with either community if it’s just branded as the Northern Crocs or whatever

 

[Perry Pie]

Because the AFL will be in a much better position to understand the Canberra/GWS contract expiring in 2031 to understand what the future of both GWS and a Canberra team will be, at roughly the time that the Tassie team enters.

This lines up with the TV deal in 2031. The nature of the AFL's revenue generation might change from 2032 onward, and we'll have a much better idea of the media landscape in 2032, in 2028, than in 2024 (now).

It also gives the AFL time to work through a relationship with the WAFC over the next three years for the possibility of a third Perth team, even if unlikely.

The type of people busy with working on expansion will be busy enough with Tassie. Until then, 2027/2028, any discussion is just hot air. Common sense dictates that any team 20 will be in 2032, at the earliest, both because of the Canberra/GWS contract as well as the media rights deal. Having four or five years of 17 teams and weird byes is not the end of the world. Fixturing is not going to be significantly worse, despite some grumbling, than this year, with opening rounds, some teams getting two byes before other teams have one, etc. 17 teams will not be worse than that.

2030 or 2031 for team 20. Canberra makes sense, a single full time team.
IF we go further it would be WA3 & SA3 or QLD3. (expect conference type fixtures if we go over 20 teams).

 

[Coolangatta]

2030 or 2031 for team 20. Canberra makes sense, a single full time team.
IF we go further it would be WA3 & SA3 or QLD3. (expect conference type fixtures if we go over 20 teams).

Yes, I have no doubt they’ll introduce conference fixtures if we go beyond 20. I think the AFL will go with NSW3 and QLD3 for their next round of expansion, though.

Half the Oz population has more to offer the growth of the game. I really don’t think the AFL gives a shit if WA is starved of live footy or not.

 

[Purple Suit]

I got my figures from the ABS from the 2021 census.

Median wage, not average.

Median income is much more important than average income. Average is inflated by the high end, but a higher median income means a higher percentage of our overall population can afford to participate.

The personal median weekly income for Greater Perth is $859. The median weekly income in the ACT is $1,203.

Line up everybody in Perth by income, then everybody in Canberra by income. The person in the very middle of the Canberra line will earn 40% more than the person in the middle of the Perth line.



If Manuka gets upgraded for cricket, which is looking more and more likely, that advantage evaporates.

WA3 will get two sell outs, but what will the average crowd outside of that be? The crowds will look empty in the 60k stadium against the Suns and Giants.



As just pointed out, Canberrans have significantly more cash flow, so this is at least an even point between the two bids.

Just earlier I mentioned how many more foundation jumpers we bought (more per capita than WA), which shows both an appetite for AFL, and how much disposable income we have.

The acceptable price point for Canberra, the only AFL team in the wealthiest town, will be just as high, if not more, than the third Perth team desperately trying to fill a stadium too big for them.



Fair, it would mean one less travel game per team. But overall, it would mean a further 17 long-haul trips a season. Which is more costly than a trip to Canberra.

Is it? WA's wage structure is different to that of Canberra but I doubt there is any difference in available money (WA has a higher average wage). Most of the big earners aren't going to have their partner on a full time wage, especially if FIFO is involved as they need to be a solo parent for half the time so working becomes impossible. It therefore distorts the median income by pushing lower paid workers up the tree. If paying to go to footy was an issue in WA, how come WC & Freo are basically printing money?

How big are the upgrades going to be on Manuka? I thinks it's currently at 13K?

Freo averaged 25K in their first season 30 years ago at a 40,000 seat stadium. I recon a new WA3 team would be 30K right off the bat without even trying. Especially if they get fixtured a stand alone weekend for the first few years with Freo & WC playing at home for the other one. Those numbers would be stuff of dreams for any other expansion team.

The last point about cost of flights is crazy, if it was an issue the AFL wouldn't have done gather round.

 

[Walshawk]

Is it? WA's wage structure is different to that of Canberra but I doubt there is any difference in available money (WA has a higher average wage). Most of the big earners aren't going to have their partner on a full time wage, especially if FIFO is involved as they need to be a solo parent for half the time so working becomes impossible. It therefore distorts the median income by pushing lower paid workers up the tree. If paying to go to footy was an issue in WA, how come WC & Freo are basically printing money?

How big are the upgrades going to be on Manuka? I thinks it's currently at 13K?

Freo averaged 25K in their first season 30 years ago at a 40,000 seat stadium. I recon a new WA3 team would be 30K right off the bat without even trying. Especially if they get fixtured a stand alone weekend for the first few years with Freo & WC playing at home for the other one. Those numbers would be stuff of dreams for any other expansion team.

The last point about cost of flights is crazy, if it was an issue the AFL wouldn't have done gather round.

AFL TV ratings in Perth are level with Adelaide despite a population more than 50% higher, which suggests that there might not be many latent AFL fans sitting at home waiting for a new team.

Right now you can easily get tickets for every WC and Freo game. Why would 30k people change teams?

 

[Bjo187]

Is it? WA's wage structure is different to that of Canberra but I doubt there is any difference in available money (WA has a higher average wage). Most of the big earners aren't going to have their partner on a full time wage, especially if FIFO is involved as they need to be a solo parent for half the time so working becomes impossible. It therefore distorts the median income by pushing lower paid workers up the tree. If paying to go to footy was an issue in WA, how come WC & Freo are basically printing money?

How big are the upgrades going to be on Manuka? I thinks it's currently at 13K?

Freo averaged 25K in their first season 30 years ago at a 40,000 seat stadium. I recon a new WA3 team would be 30K right off the bat without even trying. Especially if they get fixtured a stand alone weekend for the first few years with Freo & WC playing at home for the other one. Those numbers would be stuff of dreams for any other expansion team.

The last point about cost of flights is crazy, if it was an issue the AFL wouldn't have done gather round.

It's good to see some w.a folk want w.a 3, I can't believe their amatuer commission don't want it.

What would you call the team? Where would they be based out of? Would they play all games at Optus? And what colours would you like them to have?

 

[Bjo187]

AFL TV ratings in Perth are level with Adelaide despite a population more than 50% higher, which suggests that there might not be many latent AFL fans sitting at home waiting for a new team.

Right now you can easily get tickets for every WC and Freo game. Why would 30k people change teams?

One thing with that is though, most eagles and Dockers games are not on the main channel in Perth due to it clashing with the news. This traditionally gives at least a 25 to 50 percent drop off in viewers across all teams.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Is it? WA's wage structure is different to that of Canberra but I doubt there is any difference in available money (WA has a higher average wage).

The numbers I've just shown you show that there is more available money for Canberrans.

And average wage means little compared to median wage. Rich miners aren't going to buy 10 memberships each.

Most of the big earners aren't going to have their partner on a full time wage, especially if FIFO is involved as they need to be a solo parent for half the time so working becomes impossible. It therefore distorts the median income by pushing lower paid workers up the tree.

That's not how median works. There's no distorting. It's the person in the middle regardless of higher or lower earners.

Very rough maths, but let's say the top 50% of earners in Perth can afford memberships. That means at the same price point, roughly the top 70% of earners in Canberra can afford memberships.

I'm not saying Perth doesn't have money. It's very well off compared to the rest of Australia. But Canberra is another level without mining skewing numbers.

It just means that for its size, the market of Canberra is disproportionate to its population.

If paying to go to footy was an issue in WA, how come WC & Freo are basically printing money?

Perth has a shit tonne of money. But with the lower median income, and West Coast and Freo sucking up the majority of money, WA3 has no more money than Canberra.

How big are the upgrades going to be on Manuka? I thinks it's currently at 13K?

Freo averaged 25K in their first season 30 years ago at a 40,000 seat stadium. I recon a new WA3 team would be 30K right off the bat without even trying. Especially if they get fixtured a stand alone weekend for the first few years with Freo & WC playing at home for the other one. Those numbers would be stuff of dreams for any other expansion team.

Manuka will be upgraded to 20k for the cricket. A bit on the low side, but good for starters.

I honestly think you're dreaming if you think you'll average 30k straight away. Especially in the second season once the excitement wears off. You'll get 15k against the Suns and Giants, which will be huge losses in a 60k stadium.

A sold out Manuka will net us similar to 30k at Optus.

I think a third Perth team will be fine. And I've got no qualms with WA3 in the long-term. But I can't stand it when people assume it's the safe financial option without even looking at the numbers.

 

[Coolangatta]

AFL TV ratings in Perth are level with Adelaide despite a population more than 50% higher, which suggests that there might not be many latent AFL fans sitting at home waiting for a new team.

Right now you can easily get tickets for every WC and Freo game. Why would 30k people change teams?

Because West Coast hates Fremantle as much as Hawthorn hates Essendon. Eagles supporters will have no reason to hate WA3.

That said, I still prefer Canberra in the short term. Once Fremantle are selling out Optus, they could perhaps look at a 3rd Perth side. But I don’t think the AFL would ever consider expanding beyond 20 teams just for another Perth side. It wouldn’t interest them much.

 

[Walshawk]

Because West Coast hates Fremantle as much as Hawthorn hates Essendon. Eagles supporters will have no reason to hate WA3.

That said, I still prefer Canberra in the short term. Once Fremantle are selling out Optus, they could perhaps look at a 3rd Perth side. But I don’t think the AFL would ever consider expanding beyond 20 teams just for another Perth side. It wouldn’t interest them much.

So, are you saying WC and Freo supporters will change teams or buy two memberships?

 

[Walshawk]

One thing with that is though, most eagles and Dockers games are not on the main channel in Perth due to it clashing with the news. This traditionally gives at least a 25 to 50 percent drop off in viewers across all teams.

So, if WA3 is not going to bring extra eyeballs to the game, and the club profits stay in WA, what is in it for the AFL and the existing clubs?

 

[Coolangatta]

So, are you saying WC and Freo supporters will change teams or buy two memberships?

You are already familiar with the argument, I'm sure, that the Eagles have a big waiting list of people that can't get a seat to games. It is from this pool that WA3 would, hypothetically, gain new seats and memberships. You're saying if that was the case, Freo's ticket sales and memberships would have surged, but a near 30 year rivalry has been embedded between these two clubs that perhaps you're underestimating.

WA3 is a clean slate that these Eagles members would not have the same level of animosity towards, hence it could work. That said, I think WA3 would not be an overnight success. It'd probably take 10-15 years to build up future support. Canberra does seem to me like the better bet for early success and one that actually grows the game.

 

[Bjo187]

So, if WA3 is not going to bring extra eyeballs to the game, and the club profits stay in WA, what is in it for the AFL and the existing clubs?

Who said it won't bring extra eyeballs though? If it's based in Joondalup you might get some poms that never followed the game begin to be fans. Plus cheaper prices and seat availability means more people can go to games than currently, a lot are priced out, they could get hooked and become rusted on afl fans from finally being able to attend a game.

Plus in a population that's booming, those new people to the state might become fans, plus people that are expats from s.a, Vic etc will be more comfortable in supporting a new team than the eagles or dockers. There are heaps of expats living there.

Plus you won't wanna hand a slice of the w.a pie to the nrl being only a 2 team town, you'd wanna dominate them out of the market, like the nrl tried to do by introducing their new Brisbane team.

Also the additional money comes from the additional tv money being 11 home games, that comes regardless of where it is located, in fact, it will increase viewers in Perth because you'll have 4 more derbies in the state.

 

[Coolangatta]

Who said it won't bring extra eyeballs though? If it's based in Joondalup you might get some poms that never followed the game begin to be fans. Plus cheaper prices and seat availability means more people can go to games than currently, a lot are priced out, they could get hooked and become rusted on afl fans from finally being able to attend a game.

Plus in a population that's booming, those new people to the state might become fans, plus people that are expats from s.a, Vic etc will be more comfortable in supporting a new team than the eagles or dockers. There are heaps of expats living there.

Plus you won't wanna hand a slice of the w.a pie to the nrl being only a 2 team town, you'd wanna dominate them out of the market, like the nrl tried to do by introducing their new Brisbane team.

Also the additional money comes from the additional tv money being 11 home games, that comes regardless of where it is located, in fact, it will increase viewers in Perth because you'll have 4 more derbies in the state.

If Canberra was already in the league I’d be hands down in favour of WA3 as team 20.

Since I can’t see a Vic club ever relocating to Canberra, I honestly wouldn’t be against expanding to 22 teams by 2050. Canberra, Perth 3 and it’s hard to say who else but I’m sure at least one more viable option would pop up in 20-25 years time.

Although, it depends heavily on growing the talent pool in the northern states. I believe we do have enough to support 18 clubs unlike some but adding four more clubs within the next 25 years would stretch the pool too far you’d think. At its current participation levels I mean.

Edit: And while I understand less is more, we don't want to undersell any markets either. WA and ACT are underutilised IMO.

I'd much prefer ACT and WA3 in a 20 team comp, and that's the real problem with 10 teams in Vic. It has nothing to do with whether they can support that many teams or not, they arguably can, it's about whether it's to the detriment of other markets not getting enough footy and I say it is.

 

[Bjo187]

If Canberra was already in the league I’d be hands down in favour of WA3 as team 20.

Since I can’t see a Vic club ever relocating to Canberra, I honestly wouldn’t be against expanding to 22 teams by 2050. Canberra, Perth 3 and it’s hard to say who else but I’m sure at least one more viable option would pop up in 20-25 years time.

Although, it depends heavily on growing the talent pool in the northern states. I believe we do have enough to support 18 clubs unlike some but adding four more clubs within the next 25 years would stretch the pool too far you’d think. At its current participation levels I mean.

Edit: And while I understand less is more, we don't want to undersell any markets either. WA and ACT are underutilised IMO.

I'd much prefer ACT and WA3 in a 20 team comp, and that's the real problem with 10 teams in Vic. It has nothing to do with whether they can support that many teams or not, they arguably can, it's about whether it's to the detriment of other markets not getting enough footy and I say it is.

The talent pool argument we hear is rubbish in my opinion. The last 3 years I've been following underage footy a lot. The amount of talented kids that don't get drafted or even get close to being drafted is amazing. You really notice this once you start watching all the underage competitions. Often guys that are more talented don't get picked up coz they're already very good and developed, instead the recruiters pick up some skinny athlete coz of their high potential upside, it's weird. But you could fill another 4 teams tomorrow no problems.

 

[Walshawk]

You are already familiar with the argument, I'm sure, that the Eagles have a big waiting list of people that can't get a seat to games. It is from this pool that WA3 would, hypothetically, gain new seats and memberships. You're saying if that was the case, Freo's ticket sales and memberships would have surged, but a near 30 year rivalry has been embedded between these two clubs that perhaps you're underestimating.

WA3 is a clean slate that these Eagles members would not have the same level of animosity towards, hence it could work. That said, I think WA3 would not be an overnight success. It'd probably take 10-15 years to build up future support. Canberra does seem to me like the better bet for early success and one that actually grows the game.

The wait list is for a reserved seat. About 15k I think. But you can still book a ticket for almost any WC game easily. Why are those people not attending now? And even if half of those WC members on the waitlist changed clubs, that is not much of a start. And why would WC or Freo support the idea of another club that is going to cannibalise their support? And why would the other club votes in another long road trip each season? Don’t see how actually WA3 helps anybody.

Canberra is the go.

 

[brutus76]

WA3 before anyone else

Perth Panthers

 

[Coolangatta]

The wait list is for a reserved seat. About 15k I think. But you can still book a ticket for almost any WC game easily. Why are those people not attending now? And even if half of those WC members on the waitlist changed clubs, that is not much of a start. And why would WC or Freo support the idea of another club that is going to cannibalise their support? And why would the other club votes in another long road trip each season? Don’t see how actually WA3 helps anybody.

Canberra is the go.

Thought it was 50k but 15k changes everything. Otherwise my answer would be because West Coast are shit and sell out on the regular when not.

Anyway I’m all in on Canberra. WAFC don’t want WA3 and I don’t think I it’s worth the drama for the AFL to pursue it.

Maybe one day if the WAFC changes their tune but that seems decades off.

 

[Purple Suit]

The numbers I've just shown you show that there is more available money for Canberrans.

And average wage means little compared to median wage. Rich miners aren't going to buy 10 memberships each.



That's not how median works. There's no distorting. It's the person in the middle regardless of higher or lower earners.

Very rough maths, but let's say the top 50% of earners in Perth can afford memberships. That means at the same price point, roughly the top 70% of earners in Canberra can afford memberships.

I'm not saying Perth doesn't have money. It's very well off compared to the rest of Australia. But Canberra is another level without mining skewing numbers.

It just means that for its size, the market of Canberra is disproportionate to its population.



Perth has a shit tonne of money. But with the lower median income, and West Coast and Freo sucking up the majority of money, WA3 has no more money than Canberra.



Manuka will be upgraded to 20k for the cricket. A bit on the low side, but good for starters.

I honestly think you're dreaming if you think you'll average 30k straight away. Especially in the second season once the excitement wears off. You'll get 15k against the Suns and Giants, which will be huge losses in a 60k stadium.

A sold out Manuka will net us similar to 30k at Optus.

I think a third Perth team will be fine. And I've got no qualms with WA3 in the long-term. But I can't stand it when people assume it's the safe financial option without even looking at the numbers.

I’m not dreaming of 30k, considering 2 games will be 60k sell outs with 55k rocking up.

The population is basically doubled from 1995 when Freo started, easily enough to support a 3rd team. If you line all the people up above the medium wage of Canberra, WA will simply have significantly more people on more money so your who has more cash available point isn’t true.

30k average is a lot more money than a 20k stadium can generate, espically with our prices. Hell, if they set the price point at Melbourne footy prices they would get 50k a game as we pay extortionate prices over here in comparison.