Moderator
#376
It seems likely.
-
The forum upgrade is complete. We will continue to polish it up a bit over the next week or three.
Post feedback, issues, errors and omissions here. Read the OP first, please.
-
Not Footy
3rd ODI: Aus v India // BBL: HEA v THU // BBL: SCO v HUR
NBA Week 14 - Spider Mitchell is back and Nick Collison jersey retired // NBL 18/19
NFC Champs: Rams@NO // AFC Champs: Pats@KC
EPL Matchday 22 // Champs Rd of 16 // Europa Rd of 32 // League Cup Semis // FA Cup Rd 4
2019 Formula 1 // How the hell did they survive that?
Wrestle Kingdom 13 - 14th Jan // Royal Rumble 2019 - 28th Jan // Royal Rumble Competition
Gold Coast and GWS has failed
- Thread starter BigVic
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2000
- Posts
- 26,805
- Likes
- 12,221
- Location
- South of the river
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Peel Thunder
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 26,522
- Likes
- 18,976
- Location
- Western Sydney
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Swans
To be fair, low attendances at NRL matches aren't limited to the Gold Coast (either the club or the area).
There have been 5 sub-10,000 attendances in Sydney this season for instance.
https://afltables.com/rl/crowds/2018.html#rbr
There have been 5 sub-10,000 attendances in Sydney this season for instance.
https://afltables.com/rl/crowds/2018.html#rbr
Gold Coast titans rl club
I can’t imagine the afl ever sacrificing all the benefits to cost control and strategic flexibility that comes with no private club ownership for the very limited and uncertain benefits of private ownership of an afl club
They might leverage it for Aflx (and I’m not a fan of that approach even) but they’ve clearly rejected the possibility of privately funded afl clubs otherwise would have surely taken that approach for the expansion if they were ever going to.
I can’t imagine the afl ever sacrificing all the benefits to cost control and strategic flexibility that comes with no private club ownership for the very limited and uncertain benefits of private ownership of an afl club
They might leverage it for Aflx (and I’m not a fan of that approach even) but they’ve clearly rejected the possibility of privately funded afl clubs otherwise would have surely taken that approach for the expansion if they were ever going to.
The AFL is only interested in control. Its become just another corporate entity. Profits are more & more channelled into corporate 'remuneration'. The game of A.R. has become incidental to the requirement of rising of AFL bonuses.
The clubs themselves are more franchises than ever before. The AFL control things more for their own benefit than for the benefit of the game.
Even the obvious reason for WA3. Its way big enough for 3 club but the AFL won't tolerate the WAFC having any more influence. Power & control is the mantra.
The clubs themselves are more franchises than ever before. The AFL control things more for their own benefit than for the benefit of the game.
Even the obvious reason for WA3. Its way big enough for 3 club but the AFL won't tolerate the WAFC having any more influence. Power & control is the mantra.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2018
- Posts
- 7,913
- Likes
- 5,970
- AFL Club
- GWS
My position was what I understood it to be not what I thought it should be. Private ownership doesn't preclude injecting funds but it does require faith in the ownership to give them control of the funds.
Certainly the Edelsten experiment was a disaster.
I do think the relationship between our board and the AFL is misunderstood though, but I'm not sure of other clubs.
Tony Shepherd has much more influence in NSW than the AFL. If you want evidence look to reports he was writing press releases for the NSW Minister for Sport about the Alliance Stadium rebuild. A proposal that was rejected rationally by Baird then adopted by a Government that could easily lose an election because of it, after he left. That was in his role on the board of the SCG trust but it shows his influence.
The notion he could be leaned on by Gillon doesn't make a lot of sense. Much more sensible is the notion the AFL would rely on him for influence in NSW.
Certainly the Edelsten experiment was a disaster.
I do think the relationship between our board and the AFL is misunderstood though, but I'm not sure of other clubs.
Tony Shepherd has much more influence in NSW than the AFL. If you want evidence look to reports he was writing press releases for the NSW Minister for Sport about the Alliance Stadium rebuild. A proposal that was rejected rationally by Baird then adopted by a Government that could easily lose an election because of it, after he left. That was in his role on the board of the SCG trust but it shows his influence.
The notion he could be leaned on by Gillon doesn't make a lot of sense. Much more sensible is the notion the AFL would rely on him for influence in NSW.
Thread starter
#385
Only 7,131 were at the Suns-Giants game today at Spotless Stadium
Do you blame them for not showing up? I couldn’t even be bothered watching most of it (bar 15 minutes in the 2nd) & I was at home with absolutely nothing else to do.
By having 9 games a week to sell to the broadcasters instead of 8, the AFL will be able to weather some pain on these sides for the long term pain. They don’t really lose money in that sense.
The question is whether they will continue to wear the pain if the next broadcasting deal doesn’t match or better this current deal. Which may well happen if the broadcasters start losing viewers to boring scoreless matches & one sided contests.
By having 9 games a week to sell to the broadcasters instead of 8, the AFL will be able to weather some pain on these sides for the long term pain. They don’t really lose money in that sense.
The question is whether they will continue to wear the pain if the next broadcasting deal doesn’t match or better this current deal. Which may well happen if the broadcasters start losing viewers to boring scoreless matches & one sided contests.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2013
- Posts
- 34,385
- Likes
- 60,429
- Location
- Destination Club
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Pfffft, as if!
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2013
- Posts
- 34,385
- Likes
- 60,429
- Location
- Destination Club
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Pfffft, as if!
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2013
- Posts
- 34,385
- Likes
- 60,429
- Location
- Destination Club
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Pfffft, as if!
It was a HOME game. That must be of concern. It just shows how much of the crowd comes with the opposition. GWS was always going to take time. So things like this are to be expected.
Its the GC I'd be concerned about. They've had a generation of footy. The support is going the way of all the other sports that have fallen over in that place.
If I was living in Sydney again I'd go & watch GWS. So much talent.
Its the GC I'd be concerned about. They've had a generation of footy. The support is going the way of all the other sports that have fallen over in that place.
If I was living in Sydney again I'd go & watch GWS. So much talent.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2013
- Posts
- 34,385
- Likes
- 60,429
- Location
- Destination Club
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Pfffft, as if!
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 26,522
- Likes
- 18,976
- Location
- Western Sydney
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Swans
As we seem to be throwing random crowd figures into the discussion now.......
I remember when North were trying their push into Sydney (what a success that was), I watched them play Port Adelaide at the SCG. It must have been around 2000.
The official crowd was 7,000 odd, and that was most definitely a stretch.
I remember when North were trying their push into Sydney (what a success that was), I watched them play Port Adelaide at the SCG. It must have been around 2000.
The official crowd was 7,000 odd, and that was most definitely a stretch.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2013
- Posts
- 34,385
- Likes
- 60,429
- Location
- Destination Club
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Pfffft, as if!
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2018
- Posts
- 7,913
- Likes
- 5,970
- AFL Club
- GWS