Tasmania Congratulations on Tassie License. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5

[Chief]

---

GO TO PART 2 of this thread:

Tasmania - Tasmania Devils, welcome to the AFL. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5 (Part 2)

Continued from Part 1: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/congratulations-on-tassie-license-mens-team-to-enter-2028-womens-team-tba-other-details-tba-3-5.1226653/ Was going to draft up a Summary but this is pretty good...

www.bigfooty.com

---

 

[Walshawk]

I don't get the logic in having North coming down here to play 7 games and St Kilda maybe playing another 4. Between them, they'd be playing one team's worth of home games in Melbourne and one team's worth in Tas, so why don't they just merge and let Tassie have own team? They'd get bigger crowds in Melbourne for the same amount of games and Tassie would have a team they actually gave a sh*t about.

That is too hard for all involved. Until Saints and North are fixed, there will be no 19th team.
The AFL should pay those clubs the big buck to promote the game in NSW and QLD. North QLD (Cairns & Townsville combined 400k pop), Sunshine Coast (370k) NSW (Albury has a newly renovated 13k stadium), Woolongong (bigger than Geelong) and Newcastle (550k) need games. There are plenty of secondary markets available without Tassie.
The Tas govt should call the AFL’s bluff and say that they expect to have their own team soon, therefore there are. O funds available to subsidise Vic clubs. That is their only leverage.

 

[BringBackTorps]

1. WWOS. C. De Silva 15.10

Wilson said Pridham wants a Review on absolutely EVERYTHING- even the Commission itself, & R. Goyder's role! No one seriously believes the AFLC would have its powers removed, or severely curtailed. There is no threat to 18 teams- apart from their great success in growing AF in NSW, ACT, & Qld., the Rights' deal is based on 18 teams providing 9 games pw.
Pridham also said he wants the AFLPA reviewed- it won't be removed!

It is not news that, for several years, the AFL wanted HFC out of Tas., & for NMFC take an extra 4 games to Launceston.

Wilson actually said, re Pridham, "...although he did NOT say this, clearly [?] (There is no evidence any of the 18 Clubs' Presidents have opposed the continuing existence of the 18 clubs. Paraphrasing G. McLaclan in April, re covid "18 Clubs in, 18 clubs will survive". My words & emphases) 18 teams is something there is support [?] for a review of". No evidence provided by Wilson- poor journalism, just clickbait.

Ever since a broke NMFC rejected in 2007 a $100m offer from the AFL to relocate to the GC, Wilson was VERY critical of NMFC- & has constantly continued, to 2020, with her negative comments re NMFC's continuing existence in Melbourne etc.
NMFC adopted the brave policy to sell all its vile pokies,& is now in a strong financial position. It has an excellent $16M+ training facility/multicultural (especially African- Sudanese very good athletes!) community centre etc. at Arden St.

Also, Melb.'s outer nthn. suburbs are booming- experiencing (with the WS) the highest pop. growth in Aust. for the last 15 years (at least until covid).

E. Maguire (who was present at the AFL meeting, Wilson wasn't) responded directly to Wilson, when he said

"I don't think there's any attacks on the 18 Clubs. Everybody wants to get the 18 Clubs through".

In the accompanying WWOS video, Wilson said to Maguire (go to 1 minute 10 seconds - 1 min.19 secs)

"Pridham told the St Kilda Chairman he assured them he wasn't talking of getting rid of Clubs".

Eddie allays fears after bombshell review call

As Swans chairman's request causes paranoia

wwos.nine.com.au

2. Pridham has today issued a reply to Wilson's comments- but he made no mention of querying, or even challenging, 18 teams' existence in the AFL.
He appears to be implying he supports 18 teams- the AFLC's most momentous policy- when he said

"...the AFL & the Commission have done a great job for 27 years, so my views are not a reflection on them...".

Swans Chairman responds to Wilson's Footy Classified claims

Sydney chairman Andrew Pridham has responded to comments made by Caroline Wilson on Footy Classified overnight.

www.sen.com.au

3. https://twitter.com/TasAFLteam
Go to 23.9.
What is the significance of A. Pridham's twitter on here?





EDIT:

NMFC has submitted plans for a major new upgrade of its Arden St HQ- including major new community facilities (for an inner north area lacking many decent facilities, with many low-income residents now). It would become the best sports' facility in Australia.
Arden will have a new underground railway station- part of Melb.'s new underground line- currently being built.

The NMFC plans are part of the proposed $7b new suburb of Arden (replacing obsolete industrial & warehouse buildings etc.). The Arden mini-suburb will have many high rise residential & commercial buildings- to be occupied by c. 34k new residents & 15k new office etc. workers respectively.

North's bold plan

North Melbourne will boast the biggest and best inner-city training complex in Melbourne under an ambitious plan submitted to the Victorian government.

www.nmfc.com.au

 

[fargothegreat]

The Tasmanian government needs to have the balls to say to the AFL: "There's money here for footy in Tassie, but only for a Tasmanian team. We're done propping up Victorian clubs".

If we end up with nothing, then so be it.

 

[justlookingaround]

Keep reading people say ‘AFL can’t afford a new team after covid’ - but isn’t it possible establishing a team in an established footy heartland would have a stimulus effect for the league?
If it was approved next year, it’d take another 3 years... get Chris Fagan there.

 

[fargothegreat]

Keep reading people say ‘AFL can’t afford a new team after covid’ - but isn’t it possible establishing a team in an established footy heartland would have a stimulus effect for the league?
If it was approved next year, it’d take another 3 years... get Chris Fagan there.

If the AFL can't afford a team in Tassie, then they can't afford one on the Gold Coast or to keep 10 in Victoria.

 

[Jazny]

The Tasmanian government needs to have the balls to say to the AFL: "There's money here for footy in Tassie, but only for a Tasmanian team. We're done propping up Victorian clubs".

If we end up with nothing, then so be it.

TBH I found the TSL more entertaining this year than the AFL.

 

[Engimal v3]

The Tasmanian government needs to have the balls to say to the AFL: "There's money here for footy in Tassie, but only for a Tasmanian team. We're done propping up Victorian clubs".

If we end up with nothing, then so be it.

Bluffing to the AFL and ending up with 0 games would be terrible PR for the state gov. I do agree somewhat though, you have to force the AFL's hand at some point.

 

[Kwality]

Bluffing to the AFL and ending up with 0 games would be terrible PR for the state gov. I do agree somewhat though, you have to force the AFL's hand at some point.

The AFL need the Tas sponsorship money.

 

[BobbyMorri]

There wasn't much outcry when we didn't let the AFL in this year. I am hoping that is the start of a tougher stance. That bringing in AFL games, for the sake of AFL games, is no longer the vote winner it once was.

obviously, the business/tourist groups will be pushing for games but it is the quality of games, rather than the quantity is important I feel. We get little to no tourist dollars for GWS or Freo. this should be viewed in the prism of business and solely that and the AFL can not be trusted to do right by us.

 

[fargothegreat]

The AFL need the Tas sponsorship money.

Yep and they wanna use it to keep struggling clubs afloat. They're pushing North to play more games and looking into getting the Saints down as well.

 

[Kwality]

Yep and they wanna use it to keep struggling clubs afloat. They're pushing North to play more games and looking into getting the Saints down as well.

Hopefully they dont think Tassie will pay more ..... they would

 

[Rob]

Keep reading people say ‘AFL can’t afford a new team after covid’ - but isn’t it possible establishing a team in an established footy heartland would have a stimulus effect for the league?
If it was approved next year, it’d take another 3 years... get Chris Fagan there.

What do you mean? It would only have a "stimulus effect" if the TV rights value increased by at least 6%. And I think that's unlikely with a Tassie team as they're all watching at the moment anyway so audiences won't actually increase.

 

[Tackle Bag]

The AFL need to grow some balls and make a call on 10 teams being too many in Melbourne.

If we’re going to subsidise some of the poorer clubs it may as well be one that brings a whole football loving state into the competition.

It’s a disgrace that Tassie hasn’t been let in already. There’s more to this game than $$$.

 

[Heardy_101]

It seems that, unless a 20th club enters alongside Tasmania, the only way the Apple Isle will get it's team is by either:

1. Vic Club relocation
2. 2 Vic Clubs merging
3. Vic Club merging with a failing Gold Coast

But no one at AFL house has the proverbial to make the call.

I've always been highly critical of North refusing to take the Cheque and bugger off to the Gold Coast. I'm of the view that had they relocated, we would have gotten a Tasmanian team alongside GWS in 2011/2012.

 

[justlookingaround]

The AFL need to grow some balls and make a call on 10 teams being too many in Melbourne.

If we’re going to subsidise some of the poorer clubs it may as well be one that brings a whole football loving state into the competition.

It’s a disgrace that Tassie hasn’t been let in already. There’s more to this game than $$$.

There’s more to this game than $$$, of course. But there’s also no game without $$$.

 

[justlookingaround]

What do you mean? It would only have a "stimulus effect" if the TV rights value increased by at least 6%. And I think that's unlikely with a Tassie team as they're all watching at the moment anyway so audiences won't actually increase.

A stimulus effect as in they start making money as soon as they start in the league as it’s in an established footy zone, but while not possessing the financial potential of a side in a large city like GWS.

I reckon the excitement in Tassie at the launch of a team would see inaugural membership numbers around 30k - possibly higher with foundation numbers - jumpers and other merch being sold etc.

But I’m also talking out my ass because I’m not a financial minded person at all.

 

[Rob]

A stimulus effect as in they start making money as soon as they start in the league as it’s in an established footy zone, but while not possessing the financial potential of a side in a large city like GWS.

I reckon the excitement in Tassie at the launch of a team would see inaugural membership numbers around 30k - possibly higher with foundation numbers - jumpers and other merch being sold etc.

I don't disagree, but that's almost all going to the team itself, and the AFL now needs to split it's distributions 19 ways instead of 18. Unless it can increase its income then all existing clubs will get less. And less distributions from the AFL on top of servicing covid debt and serious questions about match day income in the short term will not make those 18 clubs happy.

 

[Tackle Bag]

There’s more to this game than $$$, of course. But there’s also no game without $$$.

Yes there is.
The game would be just as popular if there was not a dollar of TV money coming in.

Prior to Covid the AFL was flush with cash and spending it in all sorts of wasteful ways while saying it couldn’t afford a team in Tasmania. It simply is not true.

They chose potential growth and the hope of more cash in the long term ahead of supporting a state that has given plenty to the game.

 

[Kwality]

The AFL need to grow some balls and make a call on 10 teams being too many in Melbourne.

If we’re going to subsidise some of the poorer clubs it may as well be one that brings a whole football loving state into the competition.

It’s a disgrace that Tassie hasn’t been let in already. There’s more to this game than $$$.

The $$s are under more pressure than ever, thats why Tas money is at the centre of this discussion again, courtesy of Mr Pridham.

 

[fargothegreat]

The $$s are under more pressure than ever, thats why Tas money is at the centre of this discussion again, courtesy of Mr Pridham.

The reality is that North Melbourne would be making a loss almost every year if it wasn't for the $4 million they get from Tasmania each season.

I say we cut that funding off and see how long it takes for these weaker clubs to start scrambling for someone to merge with.

If the AFL can't afford us, then they can't afford them.

 

[The_Wookie]

The AFL need the Tas sponsorship money.

The AFL doesnt any Tas sponsorship money. Hawthorn and North do. The hawks would be fine with a lesser sponsorship, And North arent getting anywhere near Hawthorns money,

The reality is that North Melbourne would be making a loss almost every year if it wasn't for the $4 million they get from Tasmania each season.

The realiity is North arent getting 4 million a year from Tasmania each season. Hawthorn are. North is getting less than half that.

 

[Kwality]

The AFL doesnt any Tas sponsorship money. Hawthorn and North do. The hawks would be fine with a lesser sponsorship, And North arent getting anywhere near Hawthorns money,



The realiity is North arent getting 4 million a year from Tasmania each season. Hawthorn are. North is getting less than half that.

Sorry that I was not more specific about the AFL & the competition more generally. It is the competition in its totality I was referring to.

I look forward to you opening the 2020 Financials thread when appropriate.

 

[BringBackTorps]

Watching Footy Classified tonight both Caro and Ed spoke of the AFL Commission/Presidents meeting today and the opportunity for North to play between seven and 11 games in Tassie. Also said Saints are looking to play there again.
Assume the AFL will push hard for Hawthorn to exit, which explains why Kennett want to stay on as President to fight this. Does not sound promising[Incorrect] for Tassie getting their own team.

The AFL probably wants NMFC to play c. 7 games in Tas. until c. 2024 (assuming HFC departs).
This has no relevance for a Tas. 19th team being established some time after 2025.

Swans want less teams and are leading the charge [No]

Pridham/ Swans have not said 18 teams are in question- & rebutted the suggestion. It was a C. Wilson beatup/clickbait comment.

See my post of what Pridham actually said (which was corroborated by E. Maguire, who was actually at the Presidents' meeting) in post #2677 above.

There seems to be a bit of a push now for less teams, so expansion is definitely off the table.[No]

Ditto, above to Walshawk.

The Tas govt should call the AFL’s bluff and say that they expect to have their own team soon, therefore there are. O funds available to subsidise Vic clubs. That is their only leverage.

Interesting strategy- would it help with the Bid?

Could the Tas. govt. declare the HFC & NMFC deals void now, due to Force Majeure?
(ie no HFC or NMFC Tas. games in 2021, assuming borders are open with Vic.)

Keep reading people [?] say ‘AFL can’t afford a new team after covid

AFAIK, no AFL HQ Officials have said (after 2015) specifically that the AFL cannot afford to fund a Tas. 19th team (ie in addition to the usual Vic. Club distributions from the AFL).
AFAIK, only 1 Club Official: J. Kennett has said (but not after 2018) that Tasmania may not have the funds, from within, to afford its own 19th team.

R. Oakley said in 2019 that the AFL had sufficient funds to support a Tas. 19th team; & he wants Tas. to become the 19th team.

It would only have a "stimulus effect" if the TV rights value increased by at least 6% [There would be much more Rights'$]. And I think that's unlikely with a Tassie team as they're all watching at the moment anyway so audiences won't actually increase. [Games in Tas. would also get mainland viewers- sometimes very large viewer nos.].

The Tas. Bid documents (whose financial claims & predictions were verified by independent experts) said the extra Rights' $ would be worth $19m pa for the AFL. Admittedly, the new Rights' deal from 11.6.20 has reduced the Total Rights by 12-13%, according to the AFL's report to Club Presidents around 11.6.

A 19 th team delivers 11 extra H & A games pa -more content.

From September 2019 (for the first time), there were several MSM articles (including from award winning journalist & author C. Le Grand, & AFR journalist P. Durkin), & several AFL Officials (including, by implication, R. Goyder), that said that the 9th game pw (by adding GCFC & GWS to the comp.) was worth an extra $50m - $60m pa.
IMO, this $50-60m pa is not just extra & direct Rights$ for the 9th game, but also include indirect benefits for the AFL, GCFC, & GWS eg

. major govt. stadia upgrades x2
. private sponsorships for GCFC & GWS
.major increase in GR AF club & school comp. player nos., & GR ovals, in NSW, ACT, & Qld.,
. more MSM AFL coverage in NSW, ACT, & Qld. etc.

See my posts #726,875,938,1251,1352,1373,2354 in the link below for full details & links.

Tasmania - Congratulations on Tassie License. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5

GO TO PART 2 of this thread: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/congratulations-on-tassie-license-mens-team-to-enter-2028-womens-team-tba-other-details-tba-3-5-part-2.1357724/

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Walshawk]

The AFL probably wants NMFC to play c. 7 games in Tas. until c. 2024 (assuming HFC departs).
This has no relevance for a Tas. 19th team being established some time after 2025.



Pridham/ Swans have not said 18 teams are in question- & rebutted the suggestion. It was a C. Wilson beatup/clickbait comment.

See my post of what Pridham actually said (which was corroborated by E. Maguire, who was actually at the Presidents' meeting) in post #2677 above.



Ditto, above to Walshawk.


Interesting strategy- would it help with the Bid?

Could the Tas. govt. declare the HFC & NMFC deals void now, due to Force Majeure?
(ie no HFC or NMFC Tas. games in 2021, assuming borders are open with Vic.)



AFAIK, no AFL HQ Officials have said (after 2015) specifically that the AFL cannot afford to fund a Tas. 19th team (ie in addition to the usual Vic. Club distributions from the AFL).
AFAIK, only 1 Club Official: J. Kennett has said (but not after 2018) that Tasmania may not have the funds, from within, to afford its own 19th team.

R. Oakley said in 2019 that the AFL had sufficient funds to support a Tas. 19th team; & he wants Tas. to become the 19th team.



The Tas. Bid documents (independently verified by experts) said the extra Rights' $ would be worth $19m pa for the AFL. Admittedly, the new Rights' deal from 11.6.20 has reduced the Total Rights by 12-13%, according to the AFL's report to Club Presidents around 11.6.

A 19 th team delivers 11 extra H & A games pa -more content.

From September 2019 (for the first time), there were several MSM articles (including from award winning journalist & author C. Le Grand, & AFR journalist P. Durkin), & several AFL Officials (including, by implication, R. Goyder), that said that the 9th game pw (by adding GCFC & GWS to the comp.) was worth an extra $50m - $60m pa.
IMO, these nos. also include indirect benefits for the AFL, GCFC, & GWS eg ma govt. stadia upgrades x2, private sponsorships for GCFC & GWS, major increase in GR AF club & school comp. player n, & GR ovals, in NSW, ACT, & Qld., more MSM AFL coverage in NSW, ACT, & Qld. etc.

See my posts #726,874,932,1250,1351,1372,3312 in the link below for full details & links.

Tasmania - Congratulations on Tassie License. Mens team to enter 2028. Womens team TBA. Other details TBA 3/5

GO TO PART 2 of this thread: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/congratulations-on-tassie-license-mens-team-to-enter-2028-womens-team-tba-other-details-tba-3-5-part-2.1357724/

www.bigfooty.com

Disagree. If a Tassie team was imminent, the AFL would be less likely to go through all the angst to try to persuade the Hawks to leave (Kennett has pre-emptied that a fight is coming), and another team to take up Launceston games, for just three years (2022 - 24).

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Disagree. If a Tassie team was imminent, the AFL would be less likely to go through all the angst to try to persuade the Hawks to leave (Kennett has pre-emptied that a fight is coming), and another team to take up Launceston games, for just three years (2022 - 24).

It’s pretty obvious there going try and push north down here over the next 5-10 years