AFL Purchase Etihad Stadium

[Gasometer]

That ******* deal was disgusting.

 

[gokangas]

That ******* deal was disgusting.

Which is why we received substantial top up from AFL. I get so pissed off when outsiders say we only made a profit because of AFL top up. Meanwhile we paying off their lay by on Etihad.

 

[Firestarter]

Which is why we received substantial top up from AFL. I get so pissed off when outsiders say we only made a profit because of AFL top up. Meanwhile we paying off their lay by on Etihad.

And often had to sign a cheque because the attendance was low.

 

[berniemccarthy]

And often had to sign a cheque because the attendance was low.

Actually had to write a cheque when attendances were what can be considered reasonable. 22k you would think was a reasonable crowd especially against GWS et al. They get 8k and we pick up part of the tab !

 

[Firestarter]

Actually had to write a cheque when attendances were what can be considered reasonable. 22k you would think was a reasonable crowd especially against GWS et al. They get 8k and we pick up part of the tab !

Yeah fair enough. Low for the AFL's preferred standards I guess.

 

[Twinkletoes]

Actually had to write a cheque when attendances were what can be considered reasonable. 22k you would think was a reasonable crowd especially against GWS et al. They get 8k and we pick up part of the tab !

The fact that Melbourne Victory make plenty of money on Etihad games with 20,000+ says plenty. North/Aints/Dogs were getting royally screwed for years.

 

[Dirty_11]

True...wonder what the go is there with Pepsi Max cans under this new arrangements.

Keep away from Pepsi Max and Coke Zero for that matter. That stuff is poison. Better off copping the calories from a standard Pepsi if need be.

 

[Dirty_11]

Which is why we received substantial top up from AFL. I get so pissed off when outsiders say we only made a profit because of AFL top up. Meanwhile we paying off their lay by on Etihad.

People aren't interested in facts when taking pot shots at our club.

 

[shintemaster]

I posted something on the Football Industry Board thread on this however relevant to us too. I'm getting a tad frustrated that we still have been given no indication whatsoever of what changes if any are going to come about from this change in ownership. I hope NMFC and in particular all so-called tenant clubs are ready and primed for a massive PR campaign for when the AFL comes in and low balls us on their offer which will sound better than what we have but be sh*t in real terms. Questions that need answering:

- What happens to the *'s arrangement?
- Signage / Pourage rights
- Premium seating / memberships that compete with us. What happens with Medallion / Access One and their profits?
- Corporate box sales and profits?

Probably a whole bunch of other stuff as well that I've not thought of in a hurry. The break even on this stadium should be around the 15k mark IMHO. 25k should make you a tidy profit and clubs should be rolling in it when they get 45+ to games.

 

[Jay-Z]

I posted something on the Football Industry Board thread on this however relevant to us too. I'm getting a tad frustrated that we still have been given no indication whatsoever of what changes if any are going to come about from this change in ownership. I hope NMFC and in particular all so-called tenant clubs are ready and primed for a massive PR campaign for when the AFL comes in and low balls us on their offer which will sound better than what we have but be sh*t in real terms. Questions that need answering:

- What happens to the *'s arrangement?
- Signage / Pourage rights
- Premium seating / memberships that compete with us. What happens with Medallion / Access One and their profits?
- Corporate box sales and profits?

Probably a whole bunch of other stuff as well that I've not thought of in a hurry. The break even on this stadium should be around the 15k mark IMHO. 25k should make you a tidy profit and clubs should be rolling in it when they get 45+ to games.

Yeah I was really expecting to know a lot more about the effect for our club by now.

Keep away from Pepsi Max and Coke Zero for that matter. That stuff is poison. Better off copping the calories from a standard Pepsi if need be.

Wow. A bit off topic but I totally disagree with this. Sugar is the main cause of the obesity epidemic that has swept the world.

 

[Firestarter]

I've heard the aspartame in diet crap is more dangerous than sugar.

 

[Gasometer]

Yeah I was really expecting to know a lot more about the effect for our club by now.


Wow. A bit off topic but I totally disagree with this. Sugar is the main cause of the obesity epidemic that has swept the world.

Pepsi Max is better HELLSBELLS Hojuman

 

[Johnny99]

I think the biggest problem with the AFL today is even though all 18 clubs operate in the same marketplace, there are some clubs (including ours), that have a massive disadvantage to other clubs ie. Geelong, when it comes to home gate receipts.

Until this is resolved, all the AFL is doing is using a band aid to treat an amputation.

Lets look at Geelong, how much do they get playing a home game in Geelong, in front of 22,000 fans ? $750K

Compare that to North. What do we get playing a home game at Etihad in front of 22,000 fans. Do we breakeven ?

The only time we get anywhere near the money Geelong makes, is if we are travelling well and play a massive game against a top 4 Vic club (not very often).

Or when we play games in Tassie. But even that is having a negative impact on our Melbourne supporter base.

So what does Geelong do with their $750K per home game profit ? They can invest in every part of their club....Football Dept, non-football revenue, additional admin staff, improvements, etc.

They can go to any bank and get a loan to invest in an opportunity that will future proof the club's future, and the bank will handover the money because the financials say they make $8.0M a year just in home game profit.

NMFC dont have this opportunity. We are expected to compete against Geelong, play by the same rules on the field, in the draft and trading. But if we go to the bank and ask for a loan to invest in the club's future, the bank will review our financials and tell us to pi55 off!

Yes we get money from the equalisation fund. But what is that ? A grant ? Is that a guaranteed income source or something that gets reviewed every year. If if that is the case, which bank is going to loan a us $5M, when we are dependant on AFL handouts, that could potentially get switched off any time ?

The club should be able to make home game returns similar to Geelong, WCE, Freo, etc. Maybe not exactly the same, but comparable. Its only fair we have the same opportunity to secure our club's future like they do. Unless this is the intention of the AFL, then buying the stadium is a waste of time.

 

[Firestarter]

I think the biggest problem with the AFL today is even though all 18 clubs operate in the same marketplace, there are some clubs (including ours), that have a massive disadvantage to other clubs ie. Geelong, when it comes to home gate receipts.

Until this is resolved, all the AFL is doing is using a band aid to treat an amputation.

Lets look at Geelong, how much do they get playing a home game in Geelong, in front of 22,000 fans ? $750K

Compare that to North. What do we get playing a home game at Etihad in front of 22,000 fans. Do we breakeven ?

The only time we get anywhere near the money Geelong makes, is if we are travelling well and play a massive game against a top 4 Vic club (not very often).

Or when we play games in Tassie. But even that is having a negative impact on our Melbourne supporter base.

So what does Geelong do with their $750K per home game profit ? They can invest in every part of their club....Football Dept, non-football revenue, additional admin staff, improvements, etc.

They can go to any bank and get a loan to invest in an opportunity that will future proof the club's future, and the bank will handover the money because the financials say they make $8.0M a year just in home game profit.

NMFC dont have this opportunity. We are expected to compete against Geelong, play by the same rules on the field, in the draft and trading. But if we go to the bank and ask for a loan to invest in the club's future, the bank will review our financials and tell us to pi55 off!

Yes we get money from the equalisation fund. But what is that ? A grant ? Is that a guaranteed income source or something that gets reviewed every year. If if that is the case, which bank is going to loan a us $5M, when we are dependant on AFL handouts, that could potentially get switched off any time ?

The club should be able to make home game returns similar to Geelong, WCE, Freo, etc. Maybe not exactly the same, but comparable. Its only fair we have the same opportunity to secure our club's future like they do. Unless this is the intention of the AFL, then buying the stadium is a waste of time.

For what it's worth 22k is still a loss.

 

[Jay-Z]

I think the biggest problem with the AFL today is even though all 18 clubs operate in the same marketplace, there are some clubs (including ours), that have a massive disadvantage to other clubs ie. Geelong, when it comes to home gate receipts.

Until this is resolved, all the AFL is doing is using a band aid to treat an amputation.

Lets look at Geelong, how much do they get playing a home game in Geelong, in front of 22,000 fans ? $750K

Compare that to North. What do we get playing a home game at Etihad in front of 22,000 fans. Do we breakeven ?

The only time we get anywhere near the money Geelong makes, is if we are travelling well and play a massive game against a top 4 Vic club (not very often).

Or when we play games in Tassie. But even that is having a negative impact on our Melbourne supporter base.

So what does Geelong do with their $750K per home game profit ? They can invest in every part of their club....Football Dept, non-football revenue, additional admin staff, improvements, etc.

They can go to any bank and get a loan to invest in an opportunity that will future proof the club's future, and the bank will handover the money because the financials say they make $8.0M a year just in home game profit.

NMFC dont have this opportunity. We are expected to compete against Geelong, play by the same rules on the field, in the draft and trading. But if we go to the bank and ask for a loan to invest in the club's future, the bank will review our financials and tell us to pi55 off!

Yes we get money from the equalisation fund. But what is that ? A grant ? Is that a guaranteed income source or something that gets reviewed every year. If if that is the case, which bank is going to loan a us $5M, when we are dependant on AFL handouts, that could potentially get switched off any time ?

The club should be able to make home game returns similar to Geelong, WCE, Freo, etc. Maybe not exactly the same, but comparable. Its only fair we have the same opportunity to secure our club's future like they do. Unless this is the intention of the AFL, then buying the stadium is a waste of time.

Sadly I don't think much will change in this regard so long as Fat Ed is driving the "don't take money off the rich clubs" bus

 

[HELLSBELLS]

Pepsi Max is better HELLSBELLS Hojuman

Oath ! Drink of champions.

 

[ArjenTheGreat]

Keep away from Pepsi Max and Coke Zero for that matter. That stuff is poison. Better off copping the calories from a standard Pepsi if need be.

Diet Coke OK?

If not I'm ****ed.

 

[kangaspurs]

Diet Coke OK?

If not I'm stuffed.

Haha me too.

I'm guessing they're talking about aspartame being the poison part, but there are many conflicting reports on how bad it is for humans and in what volume. Most governmental food regulatory agencies say that in the current volumes in which it is being consumed it's, well not safe, but not overly detrimental to your health.

 

[ArjenTheGreat]

Haha me too.

I'm guessing they're talking about aspartame being the poison part, but there are many conflicting reports on how bad it is for humans and in what volume. Most governmental food regulatory agencies say that in the current volumes in which it is being consumed it's, well not safe, but not overly detrimental to your health.

I laugh at those reports or recommendations.

Diet Coke needs to take a number and get in line if it wants do any harm to me.

 

[Saintly35]

Or when we play games in Tassie. But even that is having a negative impact on our Melbourne supporter base.

Where is the evidence of this though? (other than the discontent around replacement games etc)

Our membership numbers in recent years are high compared to prior years, even without taking the Tassie member figure into account.

 

[shintemaster]

Where is the evidence of this though? (other than the discontent around replacement games etc)

Our membership numbers in recent years are high compared to prior years, even without taking the Tassie member figure into account.

How do you prove a negative?

I don't think it's an unreasonable position to say that playing games in Tasmania affects our Melbourne membership. I'd be comfortable assuming that is the case - it is a logically obvious point IMHO. The real questions - as always with NMFC - are around:

- How much of an effect?
- Is this long term damage that could not be reversed in the event of a change of focus?
- What are the financial offsets in the short and long term?

I struggle to think of any justification someone could have that would imply we would have less or the same number of Melbourne supporters with more games in Victoria. We would definitely have more, the question is how many more. 10, 100, 1000, 10,000?

 

[Saintly35]

How do you prove a negative?

I don't think it's an unreasonable position to say that playing games in Tasmania affects our Melbourne membership. I'd be comfortable assuming that is the case - it is a logically obvious point IMHO. The real questions - as always with NMFC - are around:

- How much of an effect?
- Is this long term damage that could not be reversed in the event of a change of focus?
- What are the financial offsets in the short and long term?

I struggle to think of any justification someone could have that would imply we would have less or the same number of Melbourne supporters with more games in Victoria. We would definitely have more, the question is how many more. 10, 100, 1000, 10,000?

I'm not so sure about that. A financially struggling Melb only club compared to a performing club that misses 3 Melb games a year may well end up with less members due to a range of factors. All things being equal on and off field I agree then yes we would have more Melb members, but I don't think the partnership has (so far at least) had a material effect on Vic member numbers which is how I interpreted the initial comment.

Members get upset about a range of topics, from prices to seating, to performance and staffing, to where money is spent, with playing in Tas being just one of them. I don't think it's as high on the list in terms of turning people away as some on here like to suggest, and the numbers support that.

 

[Johnny99]

Where is the evidence of this though? (other than the discontent around replacement games etc)

Our membership numbers in recent years are high compared to prior years, even without taking the Tassie member figure into account.

Its a negative because Melbourne fans only get 8 home games instead of 11.

Yes we get replacement games. But the club has to pay the home team for allowing NMFC members to attend their home game.

So it does cost the club money playing in Tassie.

Also, when you are at a replacement game, you don't get a reserved seat. You have to sit in the GA area. (which can be a real pain in the a55 if your replacement game is against Essendon or Pies)....

 

[Saintly35]

Its a negative because Melbourne fans only get 8 home games instead of 11.

Yes we get replacement games. But the club has to pay the home team for allowing NMFC members to attend their home game.

So it does cost the club money playing in Tassie.

Also, when you are at a replacement game, you don't get a reserved seat. You have to sit in the GA area. (which can be a real pain in the a55 if your replacement game is against Essendon or Pies)....

I realise all that.

But the numbers both in membership and revenue don't support that it is a financial negative nor having that effect, but rather a grievance that Melb members (understandably) would rather not put up with, among others of being a member.

 

[Johnny99]

It is a financial negative because if we get $700K for playing a game in Tassie. That is not profit. You need to adjust it for the cost the club incurs buying a replacement game in Melbourne, to keep Melbourne members content.

This is an additional cost NMFC incurs, that teams like Geelong dont.

ie Revenue earnt for playing a game in Tassie might be $700K

But adjusted for the cost of buying a replacement game (I have no idea, lets say, $150K), the Profit playing that game comes down to $700K-$150K = $550K.