Expansion Apple Isle Showdown: Tas Govt threatens to end Hawks, North deals if no plan for 19th side

Remove this Banner Ad

Rich01

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 5, 2004
8,566
7,878
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
Are they breaching the terms of their licence with 'poor attendances' and 'poor results'?

How would the AFL bring this about?
The AFL wouldn’t have to ‘bring anything about.’

If the club lost $4-5m in revenue through their tassie arrangement, they are suddenly in a financial hole. Poor performance could lead to a drop in already average attendances and membership, decreasing revenue even further.

I’m not sure the AFL is beholden to financially prop clubs up.
 

telsor

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2004
33,214
32,162
Here
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Habs
The AFL wouldn’t have to ‘bring anything about.’

If the club lost $4-5m in revenue through their tassie arrangement, they are suddenly in a financial hole. Poor performance could lead to a drop in already average attendances and membership, decreasing revenue even further.

I’m not sure the AFL is beholden to financially prop clubs up.
Dumping a club because you wont 'prop it up' (while propping other clubs up at the same time) and replacing it with a club that by it's own sales brochure would likely require significant propping up forever would lead to legal action.

The AFL would likely lose that BTW.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Rich01

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 5, 2004
8,566
7,878
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
Dumping a club because you wont 'prop it up' (while propping other clubs up at the same time) and replacing it with a club that by it's own sales brochure would likely require significant propping up forever would lead to legal action.

The AFL would likely lose that BTW.
I’m not saying that it’s ethical, but this is the AFL we are talking about.

The AFL would find a loophole if a club becomes insolvent. If that was what they wanted to do.
 

Roylion

Moderator
Oct 17, 2000
15,186
11,939
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Fitzroy Football Club
The AFL wouldn’t have to ‘bring anything about.’

If the club lost $4-5m in revenue through their tassie arrangement, they are suddenly in a financial hole. Poor performance could lead to a drop in already average attendances and membership, decreasing revenue even further.

I’m not sure the AFL is beholden to financially prop clubs up.
The AFL props up a number of clubs, many of whom have more debt than North. North will find more revenue if the Tasmanian arrangement is discontinued.
 

big_e

Premium Platinum
Apr 28, 2008
7,193
20,763
The Championship
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Wycombe Wanderers
I’m not saying that it’s ethical, but this is the AFL we are talking about.

The AFL would find a loophole if a club becomes insolvent. If that was what they wanted to do.
No AFL club is anywhere near insolvency. And the AFL pretty much bailed out Port when they were going downhill a decade or so ago.

The club nearest to it now is St Kilda, and even they are miles away from being in real trouble.
 

chiwigi

I’ll make tears from your Wines.
Apr 9, 2009
20,945
40,194
Port Adelaide Zone
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
No AFL club is anywhere near insolvency. And the AFL pretty much bailed out Port when they were going downhill a decade or so ago.

The club nearest to it now is St Kilda, and even they are miles away from being in real trouble.
Did they fu**!
Port fought tooth and nail to get out of the arrangement the SANFL and AFL put them in at West Lakes, literally hamstring them to ensure they wouldn’t be better than the Crows and to milk them for the SANFL.
They had to get to Adelaide Oval to do it and STILL the stadium deal isn’t as sweet as the Marvel one. Port and the Crows still pay for the SANFL to exist.

Port are a 50/60k membership club with 4ok home attendances against interstate clubs (not those double home team games the Vics get), something North will never be.

If North had been subject to similar arrangements they’d already be the GC Roos.

The constant attempts to deflect how sh*t you are onto other clubs is what is losing the Kangaroos sympathy and will eventually lose them the battle for survival.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The_Wookie

Queenslander
Jul 2, 2010
33,824
31,512
Scamander
AFL Club
Carlton
Did they fu**!
Port fought tooth and nail to get out of the arrangement the SANFL and AFL put them in at West Lakes, literally hamstring them to ensure they wouldn’t be better than the Crows and to milk them for the SANFL.
They had to get to Adelaide Oval to do it and STILL the stadium deal isn’t as sweet as the Marvel one. Port and the Crows still pay for the SANFL to exist.
by the time 2011 rolled around the league were already well on their way to forcing the Port license off the SANFL, and this included matches at Adelaide Oval without the redevelopment. Ports finances werent great for a variety of reasons, and the AFL loaned money to the SANFL to grant to Port Adelaide - money the SANFL paid off before any arrangement could be signed at Adelaide Oval that gave the AFL any leverage over them.

The fact that the SANFL were handed control of a stadium after that West lakes thing is a travesty.
 

Rich01

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 5, 2004
8,566
7,878
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
No AFL club is anywhere near insolvency. And the AFL pretty much bailed out Port when they were going downhill a decade or so ago.

The club nearest to it now is St Kilda, and even they are miles away from being in real trouble.
Where do north get the $5m annually from when Tas pull the pin after their current lucrative deal?
 

Rich01

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 5, 2004
8,566
7,878
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
Where did Richmond get the million bucks they lost after they stopped selling games to Cairns?
Significant increase in membership from 2014 onwards. And Jeep came on board as a major sponsor as the result of the membership increase and the team playing finals.

I’m not sure how this is relevant to North’s current predicament?
 

big_e

Premium Platinum
Apr 28, 2008
7,193
20,763
The Championship
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Wycombe Wanderers
Significant increase in membership from 2014 onwards. And Jeep came on board as a major sponsor as the result of the membership increase and the team playing finals.

I’m not sure how this is relevant to North’s current predicament?
Maybe we'll make more money from memberships from our Melbourne supporters? Or maybe we can get a new sponsor or two? Maybe better on field performance in a year or two might also help?

Like, it's not that hard to figure out where North can make some of that money.

In a broader sense, I think selling games and constantly being spoken of as a relocation candidate massively hurts our brand. It makes sponsors less likely to sponsor, and those that do spend less. Partly because you are physically getting in front of fewer people at Hobart than you are at Docklands, and partly because there's a vibe that they don't want to be associated with.

We're now debt-free, so the need for the money is reduced. If it ended tomorrow, it'd hurt a bit in year one, a bit less in year two, and so on. But there's also the "I won't buy a membership because they're a bit sh*t this year" element at play, so how much of the hurt would be Tassie related would be arguable.

Bottom line is that Tasmania don't want us to relocate, we don't want to relocate either, so assuming that we stay with the current or similar arrangement for a few years until the new Tassie side comes in would work well for all parties.
 

Verdun

Premium Gold
Oct 16, 2011
3,571
5,936
AFL Club
St Kilda
Maybe we'll make more money from memberships from our Melbourne supporters? Or maybe we can get a new sponsor or two? Maybe better on field performance in a year or two might also help?

Like, it's not that hard to figure out where North can make some of that money.

In a broader sense, I think selling games and constantly being spoken of as a relocation candidate massively hurts our brand. It makes sponsors less likely to sponsor, and those that do spend less. Partly because you are physically getting in front of fewer people at Hobart than you are at Docklands, and partly because there's a vibe that they don't want to be associated with.

We're now debt-free, so the need for the money is reduced. If it ended tomorrow, it'd hurt a bit in year one, a bit less in year two, and so on. But there's also the "I won't buy a membership because they're a bit sh*t this year" element at play, so how much of the hurt would be Tassie related would be arguable.

Bottom line is that Tasmania don't want us to relocate, we don't want to relocate either, so assuming that we stay with the current or similar arrangement for a few years until the new Tassie side comes in would work well for all parties.

Nope Tassie no longer needs to subsidise North - simple, should not continue.
 

Remove this Banner Ad