Gold Coast and GWS has failed

[nobbyiscool]

Yes they can

You can only say that if you're assuming that the tv deal keeps increasing every 5 years. The extent of time to which the AFL continues to support GC rests almost entirely on that, cos they won't be supporting themselves for the next 10-15 years at least.

 

[Colonial]

You can only say that if you're assuming that the tv deal keeps increasing every 5 years. The extent of time to which the AFL continues to support GC rests almost entirely on that, cos they won't be supporting themselves for the next 10-15 years at least.

Both were set up and planned as a generational build.

They have the funding for it otherwise they wouldnt of planned it as such from the get go.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[nobbyiscool]

Both were set up and planned as a generational build.

They have the funding for it otherwise they wouldnt of planned it as such from the get go.

I doubt the AFL planned for GC to have made almost no inroads or on off the field in 8 years.

You might be right though given the AFL moves the goal posts regarding GC (and to a much lesser extent GWS) whenever it suits. But I have a hard time believing there's a bottomless pit of money for up to 50 years though to hope Gold Coast works. I also have a hard time believing that other clubs who give the AFL their mandate are going to allow the AFL to hand Gold Coast a blank cheque every year.

No other code has really had good success on the Gold Coast - the Titans are also a basketcase - so without massive gains in the next 5-10 years, surely the AFL and the other clubs come to realise that it's the graveyard that fans with good knowledge of other sports knew it was all along.

 

[Colonial]

I doubt the AFL planned for GC to have made almost no inroads or on off the field in 8 years.

You might be right though given the AFL moves the goal posts regarding GC (and to a much lesser extent GWS) whenever it suits. But I have a hard time believing there's a bottomless pit of money for up to 50 years though to hope Gold Coast works. I also have a hard time believing that other clubs who give the AFL their mandate are going to allow the AFL to hand Gold Coast a blank cheque every year.

No other code has really had good success on the Gold Coast - the Titans are also a basketcase - so without massive gains in the next 5-10 years, surely the AFL and the other clubs come to realise that it's the graveyard that fans with good knowledge of other sports knew it was all along.

They have made plenty of inroads off field.
Grassroots and infrastructure from what I've seen has grown massively like in Western Syeney.

The rest of your post appears to be a whinge. Move goal parts? Only in the negative when victorians start whinging and complaining about start up concessions.

As has been said 1000 times and maybe more this was always generational and the clubs all new this going in.

Some Victorian clubs are barely drawing more and havent won jack in over 100 years. Surely they are up for a boot as much as a new club in a new region that has been growing


Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[NoobPie]

You can only say that if you're assuming that the tv deal keeps increasing every 5 years. The extent of time to which the AFL continues to support GC rests almost entirely on that, cos they won't be supporting themselves for the next 10-15 years at least.

Well as an aside, the smart money, in my opinion, is the broadcast money will keep increasing.

-It has increased by between 50% and 150% every new rights period for the last few decades...as a rule, much of the commentary at this point in the cycle has pointed to reasons this current deal is the peak
-Digital is every bit as likely to well and truly overcome any possible losses to subscription and FTA. Apparently 10% of Australian males have the AFL telstra live subscription

In addition to this, the AFL will have pretty much paid off Marvel stadium by the start of the next deal.

But this is all moot. The overwhelming advantage the AFL has, and the primary reason it can guarantee support for the expansions for decades to come, is it has unrivalled control over its main costs (over and above the savings from the Marvel ownership)

-the EBA essentially locks the ALFPA into a revenue share model that means that stagnating revenue primarily means stagnating player payments.
-The AFL has applied a football department cap and not even given the clubs inflation when the games revenues have increased by 100s of millions. They have the power to even reduce that cap if necessary.

So the idea of the "bottomless pit of money" completely misunderstands the situation

I doubt the AFL planned for GC to have made almost no inroads or on off the field in 8 years.

You might be right though given the AFL moves the goal posts regarding GC (and to a much lesser extent GWS) whenever it suits. But I have a hard time believing there's a bottomless pit of money for up to 50 years though to hope Gold Coast works. I also have a hard time believing that other clubs who give the AFL their mandate are going to allow the AFL to hand Gold Coast a blank cheque every year.

I'm not sure where you have observed the AFL moving goal posts. I'm sure you could dig a quote up where someone's voiced a 5 or 10 year target. The bottom line though is the AFL has always spoken of this as an inter-generational investment.

The clubs (I'm pretty sure) unanimously voted in support of the expansion (though some may have had reservations). I have a hard time believing how anyone with a good knowledge of the AFL Commission's mandate could envision a situation where the AFL kill the suns off under pressure from the clubs.

No other code has really had good success on the Gold Coast - the Titans are also a basketcase - so without massive gains in the next 5-10 years, surely the AFL and the other clubs come to realise that it's the graveyard that fans with good knowledge of other sports knew it was all along.

You're not seriously comparing pissant soccer and basketball private franchises to an AFL club?

It is really simple. The Suns will survive because their existence is ensured by the AFL. At 8 years old they are already older than the life of every other pro sporting team bar the titans and what ended up being called the chargers (4 names in 11 years).

In a decade, they'll be approaching their 20th birthday. In 2 decades their 30th.

 

[Rabman]

Could only imagine if this type of forum was around throughout the 80's and 90's and the countless articles there would have been on the swans.

 

[NoobPie]

Could only imagine if this type of forum was around throughout the 80's and 90's and the countless articles there would have been on the swans.

Exactly. The Swans averaged under 10K to their games between 92 and 94 and won just 8 games.

At the end of '92, the AFL "board of directors" voted to keep the Swans and Bears going for 3 more years with 4 clubs abstaining!

Now people think a far far wealthier league with a far more "civilised" and professionalised club environment are going to neck one of these expansion clubs?

Also, in 122 years the VFL/AFL has one club drop back to the amateurs after 7 seasons and one club (sort of) merged with another.

 

[Aucklander]

I think it's pretty obvious even from here, that 3 of the teams are on track and 1 still has loads to do on the field to gain some respect.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Well as an aside, the smart money, in my opinion, is the broadcast money will keep increasing.

-It has increased by between 50% and 150% every new rights period for the last few decades...as a rule, much of the commentary at this point in the cycle has pointed to reasons this current deal is the peak
-Digital is every bit as likely to well and truly overcome any possible losses to subscription and FTA. Apparently 10% of Australian males have the AFL telstra live subscription

In addition to this, the AFL will have pretty much paid off Marvel stadium by the start of the next deal.

But this is all moot. The overwhelming advantage the AFL has, and the primary reason it can guarantee support for the expansions for decades to come, is it has unrivalled control over its main costs (over and above the savings from the Marvel ownership)

-the EBA essentially locks the ALFPA into a revenue share model that means that stagnating revenue primarily means stagnating player payments.
-The AFL has applied a football department cap and not even given the clubs inflation when the games revenues have increased by 100s of millions. They have the power to even reduce that cap if necessary.

So the idea of the "bottomless pit of money" completely misunderstands the situation



I'm not sure where you have observed the AFL moving goal posts. I'm sure you could dig a quote up where someone's voiced a 5 or 10 year target. The bottom line though is the AFL has always spoken of this as an inter-generational investment.

The clubs (I'm pretty sure) unanimously voted in support of the expansion (though some may have had reservations). I have a hard time believing how anyone with a good knowledge of the AFL Commission's mandate could envision a situation where the AFL kill the suns off under pressure from the clubs.



You're not seriously comparing pissant soccer and basketball private franchises to an AFL club?

It is really simple. The Suns will survive because their existence is ensured by the AFL. At 8 years old they are already older than the life of every other pro sporting team bar the titans and what ended up being called the chargers (4 names in 11 years).

In a decade, they'll be approaching their 20th birthday. In 2 decades their 30th.

Nail on head.

Also I don't understand why anyone cares about the money going to these clubs.
It's not like it would be allocated to grassroots. It would just inflate player, Coaches and other involved employees pay.

 

[Roylion]

Also, in 122 years the VFL/AFL has one club drop back to the amateurs after 7 seasons

Two clubs.
- University Blacks in onfield recess 1915-1919. VAFA - 1920 to the present.
- Fitzroy - in onfield recess 1997-2008. VAFA - 2009 to the present.

 

[NoobPie]

Two clubs.
- University Blacks in onfield recess 1915-1919. VAFA - 1920 to the present.
- Fitzroy - in onfield recess 1997-2008. VAFA - 2009 to the present.

Sure, I did use "sort of" when mentioning Fitzroy's merger with Brisbane. I understand it wasn't really a merger

 

[BIRDBRAIN]

I think in years down the track one of the two new teams will indeed fail and the AFL will call time on them and start from scratch with a new club in Hobart, playing say 8 games in Hobart and 3 in Launceston. Lock it in.

 

[The_Wookie]

I think it's pretty obvious even from here, that 3 of the teams are on track and 1 still has loads to do on the field to gain some respect.

some problems can only be solved by winning.

 

[The_Wookie]

I think in years down the track one of the two new teams will indeed fail and the AFL will call time on them and start from scratch with a new club in Hobart, playing say 8 games in Hobart and 3 in Launceston. Lock it in.

If the AFL didnt give up on the Lions and Swans when it barely had the money to keep them going, its not going to happen now.

 

[Aucklander]

some problems can only be solved by winning.

Absolutely. I think they pretty much stuffed it up, but plenty of time to get things right and winning will help that a lot.

 

[Gigantor]

The Suns only need to keep up with the titans to be considered a success (they saw off GCU a long time ago), and the giants only need to keep up with the Wanderers and NRL clubs like parra, Penrith and Wests to be considered a success.

I would have thought they're all doing that right now.

 

[BigVic]

Not a good future for both expansion teams. GWS made the 2019 GF only to get flogged now they're going nowhere and the Suns are 0-2 to start season 2023.

 

[kickazz]

Not a good future for both expansion teams. GWS made the 2019 GF only go get flogged now they're going nowhere and the Suns are 0-2 to start season 2023.

Not a good start.

My mind always goes back to Sydney in the nineties though. They were in real trouble.

The AFL persisted with them and now the swans are very strong.

So it will take time. The difference now I think is the ease with which players can change clubs. GWS got all those picks, the AFL expected them to trade for more established players.


It's a long season and they still have time to make something of it.

 

[Power Raid]

Not a good future for both expansion teams. GWS made the 2019 GF only go get flogged now they're going nowhere and the Suns are 0-2 to start season 2023.

Agree

The AFL need to introduce a high COLA and get behind the respective businesses

Or accept failure and loss of markets

 

[kickazz]

What impact do timeslots have as well?

Sydney's brand got built in the 80s partly on the back of being the only game on Sunday on TV every second week. Maybe it was mainly Victorians watching but everyone knew the Sydney players, etc.

GWS and Gold Coast don't get much exposure in good time slots. I know it's all different now with pay tv and games spread over the weekend, but I do wonder what it would be like if these sides had a few Friday night games (home or away) in the mix.

 

[glengowan]

Instead of starting up these two teams, they should’ve gone with the Hawthorn in Launceston model and play 4 home games.

Each Melbourne based club make a 2nd home outside of Victoria and grow the game.

Brisbane can play 4 home games on the Gold Coast, so still 8 games played on the Gold Coast.

Collingwood - Gold Coast
Brisbane - Gold Coast
North Melbourne - North QLD (Cairns & Townsville)
Richmond - Hobart
Hawthorn - Launceston
Western Bulldogs - Western Sydney
St Kilda - Western Sydney
Carlton - Central Coast NSW
Melbourne - Canberra
Essendon - Darwin
Geelong - Regional Victoria

 

[BigVic]

Instead of starting up these two teams, they should’ve gone with the Hawthorn in Launceston model and play 4 home games.

Each Melbourne based club make a 2nd home outside of Victoria and grow the game.

Brisbane can play 4 home games on the Gold Coast, so still 8 games played on the Gold Coast.

Collingwood - Gold Coast
Brisbane - Gold Coast
North Melbourne - North QLD (Cairns & Townsville)
Richmond - Hobart
Hawthorn - Launceston
Western Bulldogs - Western Sydney
St Kilda - Western Sydney
Carlton - Central Coast NSW
Melbourne - Canberra
Essendon - Darwin
Geelong - Regional Victoria

Would've been a good option. I remember North played in Canberra 21 years ago as simply the "Kangaroos"

 

[kranger]

Whilst over $130m a year continues to be directed into Victorian AFL teams which contains a quarter of Australia’s population, then I am ok with $85m a year being spent on NSW and QLD AFL teams which contains half of Australia’s population in attempts of growing the game.

Revealed: Where your club sits on AFL’s $276m ladder... and who’s getting the most help

Where your club sits on AFL’s $276m ladder as league’s wealth divide explained

www.foxsports.com.au

Even if only $23m a year is directed into WA AFL teams and $28m a year goes into SA AFL teams which have a sixth of Australia’s population.

States and territories of Australia - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[jb40]

Whilst over $130m a year continues to be directed into Victorian AFL teams which contains a quarter of Australia’s population, then I am ok with $85m a year being spent on NSW and QLD AFL teams which contains half of Australia’s population in attempts of growing the game.

Revealed: Where your club sits on AFL’s $276m ladder... and who’s getting the most help

Where your club sits on AFL’s $276m ladder as league’s wealth divide explained

www.foxsports.com.au

Even if only $23m a year is directed into WA AFL teams and $28m a year goes into SA AFL teams which have a sixth of Australia’s population.

States and territories of Australia - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

the WA clubs licenses are owned by the WA football commission, so a lot of the money generated by the WCE and Freo gets fed down to the local WAFL and other grass roots levels.

 

[Colonial]

Lol ffs