Carlton has a case

[Pessimistic]

I have a friend in the ACCC and he thinkd as ground operators, Carlton have a good case for control of any media signals out of optus oval (ironic name there) If they win the MCG (MCC) trust have also.

I don't know where that would leave geelong but the AFL could counter the MCG rights by playing all non carlton games at Colonial or Waverley

Waverley will remain untouched until all this is sorted out.

Ironically it could be John Elliot who helps to save Waverley

 

[Shinboners]

Carlton's case could lead the game into some interesting waters. The main power that the AFL has is their ability to program matches, so what would happen to Carlton if in 2001, the AFL decided to give Carlton the full set of interstate teams at Optus Oval? Throw in which ever Victorian teams happen to be at or near the bottom of the ladder in 2000 and you won't be getting any full houses at Princess Park.

The wider issue could spell the end of a few Melbourne clubs....namely North Melbourne, Western Bulldogs, St. Kilda, and possibly Melbourne and Richmond. It could also put Fremantle, Brisbane, and maybe Port Adelaide and Sydney under financial pressure. Much of the revenue football gets comes from television and the advertising dollars generated by TV.

If Carlton were to win their case and get their broadcast rights (internet or tv, both free to air or pay), then what is there to stop the West Coast, Adelaide, Collingwood, and Essendon from either gaining their own broadcast rights or at the very least, getting a higher percentage of the television revenues? Here is one scenario that could emerge.

The big 5 clubs (Carl, Coll, Ess, Adel, WC) cut a deal either individually or as a group with one or more of Channel 9, Foxtel, or an internet group. The matches become Pay-Per-View with the revenues shared between the clubs and the media operator. The AFL loses revenues, the end result being that a few Victorian clubs go to the wall or are forced into mergers. An elite 12 team competition emerges, but with that, the need for Optus Oval disappears. Carlton loses their home ground and is forced to the MCG or Colonial Stadium.

With less clubs, and thus less football, demand for the sport increases. The MCG clubs are fine, but Essendon suddenly finds that 55,000 seats at Colonial aren't enough. The prices go up. In Adelaide and Perth, they find that their stadiums aren't big enough either, so they put up their membership fees. Families suddenly cannot afford to go to the football, television and the internet become their source of the footy fix. What they see on the sceen is a game with an audience of suits.

 

[Arch]

a chilling vision of the future shinboner. i think the overriding theme here is that the fans are highly unlikely to be any better off after this whole episode, either financially or in terms of a better product.
I also think Elliot and the Carlton "social" club have hidden agandas with all this, and that they dont really have the good of the game at heart here.

------------------
BOMBERS REIGN SUPREME.

 

[nikkik]

When did Elliot ever tell the truth about anything.


BOMBERS 2000

 

[Pessimistic]

My point is that carlton have a LEGAL case in rights to some (not all) of the income from media usage.

My guess is that carlton like to flex their muscles and try to reinforce their position as much as possible. Ultimately there will be agreement. Costly and protracted legal work benefits no-one, especially Carlton.
The writ produced yesterday would have been comparatively cheap and reinforces their bargaining position.

John was on talking footy and said he thought that only Optus and MCG had not ceded all rights to AFL and Ch7. the other venues (subi, footy park, Gabba, SCG) had already and you can bet the AFL does that in any new venue (eg tassie, ACT)so the Super league scenario is not quite there.

Carlton have also seen Essendon and Hawthorn negotiate huge concessions from the AFL to move and probably want some of that too.

 

[Pessimistic]

Also I totally disagree with the AFL Using the draw to 'punish' errant clubs (even if it is carlton. For example the Carlton Collingwood Game at Optus. Parts of the ground are wooden and the passagways are inadequate. How do they know when the ground is full ? Have a look at the hillsboro and Bradford disasters and think again, Boys.

Stuffing with the draw would be the main dissapointment to footy fans and undermines our competition. If we take Dan24's argument and say the winner should be the tem on top after playing every other team twice then the last flag of any substance was in early eighties

I believe the draw should conform to a set formula and my 4 x 4 x 3 years system would provide this

 

[Shinboners]

Arch

Yeah, I did paint a bleak scenario. Your club is strong enough to survive, but does survival matter if you cannot go along with your mates to see a game? To me, the football isn't something that you simply watch on TV. It's walking to the ground, listening to the fans, screaming at the umpire, the high when you win a match against all odds, the lows of losing. After the '96 Grand Final, one of the best feelings I had was leaving the ground arm in arm with a Bloods fan....we were both so rapt just to have seen our teams in the Grand Final....you cannot experience that by sitting at home and watching it on TV. Grand Finals....they're almost a birth right to clubs like Essendon, Carlton, the West Coast....but to the likes of North Melbourne, St. Kilda, and the Doggies, it's an Everest that has to be climbed every year. As much as I laughed about Essendon in last year's preliminary final, as I was going through the city and saw the Dons fans walking around like zombies, I was also heartbroken for your fans...nothing can hurt as much as being so close and yet be so far. You cannot feel that in the comfort of a living room.

You see, I don't want to see my club die. I saw Fitzory and South Melbourne die. I saw Richmond, Footscray, and Hawthorn have near death experiences. Think of the Fitzroy fans who had been waiting since '44 and the Bloods since '33....imagine going every week with no hope of a premiership, but still going because you, well, it was in your blood. That's what the AFL doesn't understand. It's what Elliot doesn't understand. Football is something that goes beyond economics....it's something in our blood, it is a religion. Look at what News Corp did to rugby league....look at the clubs they destroyed....the histories of Manly, North Sydney, South Sydney, Western Suburbs....all destroyed because it didn't fit the economic demographics. Look at how chasing the dollar has destroyed the passion of English soccer. Get a video of Manchester United at Old Trafford in the 70s or 80s. Compare it to the video of the 90s. Watch the crowd, listen to the noise. In days gone past, Old Trafford was a couldron of passion.....now it's just like the theatre. It was so bad that Sir Alex Furguson had to say in the program notes tht he wanted more noise. Anfield, Highbury, Elland Road....they've all gone quiet now. The point is that as people like us get shipped out and replaced by the suits, a little bit of our clubs die. It might seem like a good idea now for each club to look after themselves, but what's the cost afterwards?

I have a healthy respect for everyone on this list....Dan24, Arch, Pessimistic, Sainter, LongJohn....you all love your clubs and you'll all defend them to the end....and all of us feel as if we're a part of our clubs. But what happens when you wake up one morning and decide that as much as you love your clubs, $50 is a bit pricey to see the game? I'm just shitscared that that is where we're heading.

 

[madswan]

Absolutely right shinboner,
My best mate's a bomber.....
His look of despair after the '96 prelim final was heartbreaking.
His look after last years prelim was soul destroying....(he still hasn't watched the GF)

Most of my mates AREN'T swans supporters, so they don't get to see their team play often.
But does this stop them going to the SCG to lap up the atmosphere and enjoy the footy??...NO!!
(And this is with most swans matches shown live against the gate in Sydney)
Our once a year migration to Melbourne is the focal point of the year.(perhaps twice a year if swans or bombers make GF)
Wake up to yourself Elliott and leave the game alone for the people that matter.
The people with passion...

 

[Bernie]

The issue here is the unlinking of membership - a core revenue stream - with seats at the ground. If , for your membership, you got access to your club's game LIVE plus access to downloadable catalogue of other games i.e. Football-on-demand , would you part with the money ? Clubs such as Collingwood and those who play interstate regularly, see this as a way of expanding membership - delivering a quality service - unrestrained by the confines of the ground. Also, the more access to members' details, the more enhanced revenue opportunities ( the whole fly-buys thing ) become available.
So, if the AFL negotiated a deal to provide pay-to-view for all the clubs, AND then allowed each club to market this offering over the Internet ( for a fee ), would that work ? There are examples of this worldwide.
English soccer , with smaller all-seat grounds ( they can sell these out BEFORE the season starts ) and SKY pay TV, seems the model here. Remember Murdoch tried to buy Manchester U ? I wonder why. Viewers of ESPN can set the European Club championships - terrific standard but not TOTALLY packed stands .. and ALL the players are earning a fortune !
I'm sure Carlton are positioning for some of this .. and all the large clubs, esp. those interstate must be considering this. Fans are basically customers - look at what the banks have done. They get you to do the work - ATM access - and charge a fee. The upside is that it's ON DEMAND - cash at midnight.
The impact of all this 'blue sky' speculation is the loss of the live spontaneous experience, so maybe that's where the VFL comes in!

 

[Pessimistic]

Don't feel sorry for the Essendon Fans - Look at the comments in this forum so far this year - They are just cruising for a fall. Their own worst enemies.

Yes there's some good players but aren't they also the most injury prone in the league also ?

 

[Arch]

shinboner,
cool post-
Living in Perth as a bombers fan is pretty tough. I was so heart broken in 96- mostly because we had been beaten by the Lions by 1 pt also, just two weeks earlier. But we werent really expected to get that far anyway- all our players were injured after that game too. So it wasnt too bad.
But last year, I had a fear b4 that prelim, that we might f*ck it up. We had just played so well for so long it had to end. Its just hard to take when we had so many chances to win that game, but wasted 'em. Plus i think evryone missed what wouldve been one the best GF's in recent memory if that clash earlier in the year was any indication. It would have been better than 89.. I just sat there with "we're the team that never lets u down" going thru my head over and over. But its always been that way- I remember watching us play Fitzroy in an elimantion final when I was about 8 (ie in the mid 80's), where we kicked 5 consecutive points, only to have them kick the last goal and win it by a point. that sucked too. thats what makes you tough as a fan- copping the low points.
One of my very best mates is a total die hard north fan. I watched as he decorated the place with blue and white balloons, got all excited and then almost ended up in tears in that GF agst the crows. once again- thats what toughs you up as a fan.
Its what some eagles fans in perth esp have to learn. You cant just expect success on success on success, and then start bleating when it doesnt come.
the point about footy being "corporatised" is dead right. Subiaco is a perfect example (as Im sure Ive posted about many times) of a stadium for suits, premium ticket holders, polite clapping yuppies and people who try to shoosh you for yelling too loud (geez), thats what sucks about it nowadays. What happened to us standing room yobs who enjoyed having a shout at the game ????
anyway- I'll enjoy my crabby reserved seating on Sunday nite, next to all the quiet yuppies staring at me when i scream "LLLLLOOYYYDDDIIIIIEEEEEEE", should be a laff.
sorry for prattling on BTW.

PS- Pes- Im not getting too cocky just yet, and neither is any Bombers fan here with half a brain- just ask Dutchy. We know anything can happen in the AFL. We are just damn hopeful they can do it for us.

------------------
BOMBERS REIGN SUPREME.

 

[Dave]

So what do Carlton do in 6 years time when the league starts scheduling their games at venues where they (the AFL) control all the TV and Internet brodcast rights? Because mark my words if Carlton win this is what will happen. They may end up slightly better off in the short term, but long term they'll have earned the emnity of the competition as a whole and I'd say they may well rue the day....

 

[Roylion]

Elliot has two valid points in this whole issue.
1) There should be no live telecast of any match against the gate in the city where it is played unless it is a sell-out. This goes for free-to air TV or Pay-TV. It's costing clubs memberships and attendances and thus revenue. If games that were not sold out were NOT to be televised, I doubt if it would have much of an effect on the amount of the annual dividend paid out to the clubs from the AFL and Channel 7.

2) In the future (5..10 years down the track) clubs are going to want to sell memberships where as part of their membership, supporters can watch the pre-paid game live on the Internet. As a Victorian Brisbane Lions member, the amount of matches the Lions play in Melbourne is likely to decrease, as Victorian clubs shift home games to the Gabba, or if teams merge/relocate. If I could be assured of watching Lions games at home on the Net as part of my membership fee, then naturally I am more likely to buy a membership. It has the potential to be a huge moneyspinner for clubs and certainly clubs have the opportunity to pick many more untapped supporters who aren't currently members from regional Australia and who don't join because the distances they have to travel to see a match (and therefore use their membership) are prohibitive. There are large numbers of supporters at the moment untapped in places such as Bendigo (where Carlton has many supporters), Ballarat (Richmond), Warnambool (geelong) Rockhampton (Brisbane), Newcastle (Swans), etc. etc. The question is where does this revenue go to...the clubs or the AFL?

Something along the lines such as what Bernie suggested where the AFL negotiated a deal to provide pay-to-view for all the clubs, AND then allowed each club to market this offering over the Internet for a set fee seems to be a reasonably sensible compromise.

 

[Dan26]

Look, I think all this might be an over-reaction. I think we are all thinking of the What-if's rather than the reality.

The AFL is probably not becoming as corporatised as what many of us believe. There are few venues in the country (aside from Subi and Football Park, which are all-member stadiums anyway, for Eagles and Crows games.....fair enough too, with their massive followings), that don't allow walk-up $14.00 entry.

I've noticed the admission prices for AFL games for the last 10 years. They have NOT increased at all. Only inflation has pushed them up, and this doesn't count.

However, despite the cheap cost of going to the footy (compared to other sports), the AFL has made the mistake of not listening to their fans. Most successful businesses, survey their market, and see what their consumers want. They then adjust their product accordingly. The AFL, primarily with their scheduling of games, have gone against what the public demands, and I don't know why.

But, I think the AFL has realised their mistake, and no doubt we will go back to more Saturday afternon football next year anyway. As Wayne Jackson has promised. They are afraid of the supporter backlash, so it WILL happen.

Why schedule games for Saturday nights ? It can't be for TV. We all know, that Saturday night is NOT a big TV night. Ratings are down because people are out, socialising. It's a Saturday night for crying out loud. It would be more beneficial for players, fans, TV, and the AFL to re-schedule the rest of this years Colonial Stadium Saturday night matches to Saturday afternoon.

Do you know why there are so many Colonial Stadium Saturday night matches this year ? Because the AFL doesn't want Colonial Stadium going head to head against the MCG on a Saturday afternoon. WHY NOT ????

The crowds won't be any different. How many people are going to go to a Saturday afternoon game at the MCG, then say :"Oh Gee, I think I might go to Colonial now"

NO ONE goes to two matches on the same day. If Colonial Stadium matches for the rest of the year were held on Saturday afternoons, it would be better for everyone.

Look at English Soccer. It is a huge money driven TV sport. But, despite this, nearly all if the 10, or 12 games each week are played on Saturday afternoons. There is usually one match on a Sunday, and possibly one more on a Monday night. This suits families in terms of attending the games, the only problem is they can't afford it !

The AFL would be beter served with Carlton at the MCG, and Optus Oval no longer being used. If Carlton for just a moment, made a decision based on what is good for the game, rather than what is good just for them, we would have a fantastic competition.

Imagine 10 Melbourne Clubs, shared around 3 venues (MCG, Colonial, and Waverley) With Geelong playing 7 home games a year at Shell Stadium.

Essendon, Collingwood, Carlton and Richmond, playing 7 home games at the MCG, and 4 home games at Colonial.

The Kangaroos, and the Bulldogs, playing 9 home games each at Colonial, and two each at the MCG (their two biggest drawing games)

Melbourne Football Club playing all their 11 home games at the MCG. the MCC, comprise half their supporter base, and supply half their crowds. If only they contributed financially.

Hawthorn and St,Klda, play 11 home games at Waverley.

Geelong with 7 home games in Geelong, and two each at Colonial and the MCG.

This would leave the MCG with 45 matches, Colonial with 36, Waverley with 22, and Shell Stadium with 7. A perfect fit. PERFECT.

No stupid contracts, just the most appropriate games, and the most appropriate clubs at the most appropriate venues. No more MCG finals contract. There will be 4-5-6 finals at the MCG each year anyway. There doesn't need to be a contract. Play finals where they DESERVE to be played.

The AFL doesn't need an agreement to play 41 games att he MCG. There will be at least that many there each year anyway. The AFL have gotten them involved in some silly contracts, which have tied their hands. This contract to play at Optus Oval is ridiculous.

Optus should have gone, not Waverley.

John Elliott, seems to ave missed the point. Carlton is not suited to Optus. If he had the needs of the game at heart, the Carlton Football Club would be palying 7 home games at the MCG, and 4 home games at Colonial.

Money has led to some irrational decisions to be made. We all have to remember that Australian Football, has always been a sport first and a business second. The business wouldn't exist without the sport. The integrity of the competition is paramount.

If the most appopriate clubs were playing at the most appropriate venues, no doubt, everyone would be financially better off. With everyone working together, rather than for their own personal, and selfish interests, everyone will be better off

 

[Dave]

One problem that doesn't seem to have been addressed here, or anywhere else for that matter, is that currently Internet broadcasts of matches aren't all that feasible. The current speed at which images are downloaded at is abysmal and I doubt whether it'll be any better if there are say 50,000+ people all attempting to access it at the same time. Maybe the technology in the future will be better but as it currently stands unless you've got an ISDN or better link you'll be watching some pretty crappy images.

 

[Pessimistic]

Assuming the net gets faster, then you would need to put your membership number into your PC to get access. But how can they prevent fans in the same town watching it 'against the gate' The internet knows no geographical limits.

 

[Shinboners]

Dave

I agree with you. Right now, the images that we'd get on the internet would be crap. But with the way technology is moving and the mechanations between media and telecommunications companies, who's to say that there won't be TV quality broadcasts via the internet in just two or three years?

As much as Jack Elliot comes across as a one-eyed buffoon, the guy does have some vision and he seems to be the only one aware of internet media rights. Someone else posted elsewhere about how these internet broadcasts could give country people better access to matches. But if country people can access games via the net, then why not city people? Again, as someone else posted, the internet knows no boundaries.

This is why David Smorgon was getting so upset last night, and why it upsets me. If clubs were able to cut their own media deals, the following clubs would flourish....West Coast, Adelaide, Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Port Adelaide, and possibly Richmond (that is, if they ever get a half decent team together). Sydney, Fremantle, and Brisbane would be propped up by the AFL. St. Kilda and Hawthorn would probably survive....North Melbourne, Footscray, Melbourne, and Geelong would probably finish.

Okay, a 12 team competition. Hooray everyone screams. You will have a 22 game home and away. Every Victorian side would have 6 interstate trips a year...so, that's 6 weekends of sitting in front of the TV. You'd also have 6 games in Victoria hosting interstate sides. Too the Essendon fans, does Essendon vs Fremantle cause the same excitement as say, Essendon vs North Melbourne? That's 12 games vs interstate sides leaving just 10 matches against Victorian teams where you might get the *buzz*. Maybe I'm reading all this wrong. With the national competition, playing the interstate sides has never held the same excitement and passion as playing the Victorian sides....you guys could feel differently. We all know about the West Coast vs Essendon rivalry....but, *sigh*, maybe I just have too many fond memories of the old VFL.

Crapped on for too long.
Thanks for reading
Cheers
Shinboner

 

[staggy]

I just wanted to go over a few of the facts of the john elliott…..sorry the carlton case against the afl.

- make absolutely no mistake about this. The specific issue that Elliott is taking the afl to court about is the issue of who owns the rights to the television signals which come from the grounds – whether it is the afl who owns them, or the grounds who own them. Elliot is obviously arguing that the grounds should own them
- the issue of internet, pay tv rights and the live against the gate fiasco are all important issues, but they have little or nothing to do with this case. Elliott is puling the wool over the public’s eyes by suggesting that he is trying to protect the Victorian clubs re these issues. Make no mistake, HE IS NOT.
- The only reason Elliott is taking the afl to court over this issue is that he wants carlton to own the rights to the tv signal from optus….because he is concerned that the afl may not schedule any games at optus in a few years and then carlton would not be able to pay off the legends stand – leaving them in a huge financial hole. He is not trying to protect the other clubs, he is trying to protect Carlton and carlton ONLY.
- If carlton win this case…then the mcc trust will be able to sue under the legal precent created. So what we will have is the tv rights being owned by grounds, not the afl.
- If this situation arose, the mcc trust and cartlon would be unlikely to give any of the monies produced from tv rights to the clubs….leaving the clubs with a huge financial hole millions and millions of dollars deep.
- CLUBS WILL GO UNDER. North, Footscay, Richmond, St.Kilda and Hawthorn will not be able to survive without the money raised from tv rights – which is of course is what Elliott has wanted for years….an elite competition led by carlton.

So while some might say that they don’t want their game corporatised and on tv too much…at least your teams will still exist if the afl wins.

come on the afl….
staggy

 

[staggy]

I just wanted to go over a few of the facts of the john elliott…..sorry the carlton case against the afl.

- make absolutely no mistake about this. The specific issue that Elliott is taking the afl to court about is the issue of who owns the rights to the television signals which come from the grounds – whether it is the afl who owns them, or the grounds who own them. Elliot is obviously arguing that the grounds should own them
- the issue of internet, pay tv rights and the live against the gate fiasco are all important issues, but they have little or nothing to do with this case. Elliott is puling the wool over the public’s eyes by suggesting that he is trying to protect the Victorian clubs re these issues. Make no mistake, HE IS NOT.
- The only reason Elliott is taking the afl to court over this issue is that he wants carlton to own the rights to the tv signal from optus….because he is concerned that the afl may not schedule any games at optus in a few years and then carlton would not be able to pay off the legends stand – leaving them in a huge financial hole. He is not trying to protect the other clubs, he is trying to protect Carlton and carlton ONLY.
- If carlton win this case…then the mcc trust will be able to sue under the legal precent created. So what we will have is the tv rights being owned by grounds, not the afl.
- If this situation arose, the mcc trust and cartlon would be unlikely to give any of the monies produced from tv rights to the clubs….leaving the clubs with a huge financial hole millions and millions of dollars deep.
- CLUBS WILL GO UNDER. North, Footscay, Richmond, St.Kilda and Hawthorn will not be able to survive without the money raised from tv rights – which is of course is what Elliott has wanted for years….an elite competition led by carlton.

So while some might say that they don’t want their game corporatised and on tv too much…at least your teams will still exist if the afl wins.

come on the afl….
staggy

 

[Dave]

Pess, SB,
agree with what you say, but by the time internet technology is good enough to do what they are talking about we'll probably all be able to watch the games live on pay tv for a reasonably comparable price anyway. I know if it comes to a choice of watching a game on my 15" monitor or the telli which one I'll choose!

 

[Shinboners]

Staggy

Agree with everything you say. The only thing I'll split hairs with you about is that whoever owns the rights to the TV signals that go from the ground will logically also own the signals that end up on the internet and pay TV.

Dave

Yeah, in my froth and fury, I forgot that I'd much rather be watching a game on TV than on my monitor ;-) Right now though, I'm thinking of the Dutchman salivating in London at the prospect of watching his beloved Bombers over the internet in a couple of years (assuming, of course, he doesn't came back in the meantime).