GWS is a great asset to the code and all fans.

[Giant Heart]

GWS are an enormous strategic asset to the AFL. Growing the game in NSW and Qld is the only way to grow the pie. The game is already at saturation level in Victoria, SA and WA. There is little room to grow in these states, if any at all. GWS represent more TV money, more eyeballs on the game and a guaranteed chance for the AFL to have a game in NSW every week of the season.

All these things will eventually result in more people watching the game, and therefore more people playing the game. The benefits of this will funnel back to the traditional football states eventually as the years and decades go by. I love the bold move by the AFL to place a team in Western Sydney as opposed to Hobart (which only has a population of 250,000). If you don't have a team in Western Sydney - which has a population of 2.7 million which is almost as many as Perth and Adelaide combined - then you're not fair dinkum about growing the game.

Some of the comments on BigFooty regarding GWS are simply ignorant and not respectful of the difficult nature the AFL has in growing the sport outside its heartland

Bravo! Spot on there, Dan! If only more than a handful of people could grasp the concept at play here...

 

[Drezdyn]

Because clubs should earn it, not be gifted it.

Is it any great surprise that many people dont like the idea of a club being given all the players and all the money and then performing really well, while other clubs who never get anything arent doing anywhere near as well?

Given all the players - Nope. Had to trade for them, and develop them. When we first got them as younglings everyone was quite happy to thrash the crap out of us. They also thought they'd be easy to poach. Our club had to work hard to keep them. Also players don't just magically become superstars. They have to be coached, trained and managed. For every player who has come good, there have been many others who have not made it - that's a risk we owned. Other clubs just pinch them when they come good - (except Miles at Richmond).

Given all the money - Well actually having the expansion sides got the better TV rights deal - which gets passed on to all the clubs. Having a team in the country's 3rd largest economy is certainly good business sense. Anyone who bypasses an opportunity like that should stick to running lemonade stands.

Other clubs who never get anything aren't doing anywhere near as well - Right?!. Last time I checked we haven't won anything yet (except the NEAFL premiership)

So say what you like. If believing that we didn't "earn" any prospective flags helps you acquire secondary gains and reduces your cognitive dissonance, then knock yourself out. We don't need you to validate whatever we might win.

 

[Drezdyn]

Whilst school visits and footy clinics are all good in promoting the code, what actual tangible benefits has GWS made to Western Sydney as a community as was your original contention?

Just one article from the Gentle Giants program. Feel free to research further.

http://www.gwsgiants.com.au/news/2016-07-14/our-gentle-giants

 

[sherb]

GWS are an enormous strategic asset to the AFL. Growing the game in NSW and Qld is the only way to grow the pie. The game is already at saturation level in Victoria, SA and WA. There is little room to grow in these states, if any at all. GWS represent more TV money, more eyeballs on the game and a guaranteed chance for the AFL to have a game in NSW every week of the season.

All these things will eventually result in more people watching the game, and therefore more people playing the game. The benefits of this will funnel back to the traditional football states eventually as the years and decades go by. I love the bold move by the AFL to place a team in Western Sydney as opposed to Hobart (which only has a population of 250,000). If you don't have a team in Western Sydney - which has a population of 2.7 million which is almost as many as Perth and Adelaide combined - then you're not fair dinkum about growing the game.

Some of the comments on BigFooty regarding GWS are simply ignorant and not respectful of the difficult nature the AFL has in growing the sport outside its heartland

The thing is they don't want to grow the game. They want it to be something which thrives in the heartland and in the heartland only.

The problem with this thinking is that they assume that the AFL will maintain its status in such circumstances.

Well, I've got news for them - if you stand still while other codes move forward, guess in which direction you travel?

Complacency can be a killer.

 

[Drezdyn]

This actually reads like an AFL HQ sock puppet.

No way a 22 year old nurse from Penrith joins less than a week ago and writes exactly the kind of boilerplate the AFL would have in their media strategy.

I think we can take this statement as code that Giant Heart has out-smarted and out-argued him. If you can't beat them, just shoot the messenger.

 

[gavaniacono]

The adults have entered the room.
The children are sleeping dreaming dreams in their soliptic universe.

 

[coerced]

Given all the money - Well actually having the expansion sides got the better TV rights deal

Did it?

Did the size of the deal increase at a greater rate than the previous two rights deals?

No two sums of money have been the same between TV rights deals.

If TV rights in NSW are so important, why does every single game that features a NSW team get shunted to 7Mate, instead of the prime time channel of 7 itself?

 

[Colonial]

Did it?

Did the size of the deal increase at a greater rate than the previous two rights deals?

No two sums of money have been the same between TV rights deals.

If TV rights in NSW are so important, why does every single game that features a NSW team get shunted to 7Mate, instead of the prime time channel of 7 itself?

Are clubs getting less money now than before we entered?
No.
So its not costing your club a cent.

 

[Drezdyn]

Did it?

Yes

Did the size of the deal increase at a greater rate than the previous two rights deals?
No two sums of money have been the same between TV rights deals.

Irrelevant. Needed to expand into new markets for continued sustained growth

If TV rights in NSW are so important, why does every single game that features a NSW team get shunted to 7Mate, instead of the prime time channel of 7 itself?

It doesn't need to be prime time. NSW is a big market in terms of population and potential growth.

 

[coerced]

Yes

It didn't. The increase in TV rights deal from that signed in 2007 to that signed in 2012 was 61% per year (references: http://www.news.com.au/finance/afl-announces-1bn-tv-rights-deal/story-e6frfm1i-1226046325694 and http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/seven-ten-win-afl-rights/2006/01/05/1136387555565.html)

The increase from the 2012-2016 to 2017-2022 is 67% per year. There are no rivers of gold coming in for the AFL well over and above the increases already produced by previous inflation in TV rights deals. That's without considering the expected costs in the new ventures that negate the extra money coming in.

Money is coming in for sport, because as the president of ESPN noted, there is nothing else for TV networks to invest in.

 

[Drezdyn]

It didn't. The increase in TV rights deal from that signed in 2007 to that signed in 2012 was 61% per year (references: http://www.news.com.au/finance/afl-announces-1bn-tv-rights-deal/story-e6frfm1i-1226046325694 and http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/seven-ten-win-afl-rights/2006/01/05/1136387555565.html)

The increase from the 2012-2016 to 2017-2022 is 67% per year. There are no rivers of gold coming in for the AFL well over and above the increases already produced by previous inflation in TV rights deals.

Note bolded words. It did increase. Increases are not a given. Needs to demonstrate sustainable projected growth and access to new markets, otherwise it tapers off.

 

[coerced]

Note bolded words. It did increase. Increases are not a given. Needs to demonstrate sustainable projected growth and access to new markets, otherwise it tapers off.

The CEO of ESPN disagrees

THR: Where's the ceiling on sports rights?

Skipper: Ultimately it's a free market, and sports rights end up being sold and valued for what they're worth. They're worth one dollar more than what somebody else will pay for them. Things that are unique and rare will cost a lot of money. Houses in East Hampton and Malibu will cost a lot of money because there just aren't that many of them. The value of sports has appreciated because it's the only thing that people have to watch live.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/espn-john-skipper-keith-olbermann-574231

 

[sherb]

It's fantastic to see the AFL expand into Western Sydney.

Great for all genuine lovers of the game.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

We do have a crack at GWS for the amount of AFL-love they've been given thus far, but do we really want another Gold Coast/Brisbane Bears style utensil-up? That to my mind - a hugely uncompetitive team that burns everything it touches - is far worse.

They're both extreme situations though. There is a middle ground. It's not like we have to ensure instant success otherwise they'll end up like the '89-'91 Bears

 

[Drezdyn]

The CEO of ESPN disagrees


http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/espn-john-skipper-keith-olbermann-574231

Not seeing the disagreement. American sports market is a vastly different landscape. Compare apples to apples please.

 

[sherb]

Not seeing the disagreement. American sports market is a vastly different landscape. Compare apples to apples please.

Apparently ESPN is now the guru when it comes to the AFL.

 

[sherb]

They're both extreme situations though. There is a middle ground. It's not like we have to ensure instant success otherwise they'll end up like the '89-'91 Bears

It could be argued that the AFL has gone too far the other way.

However, GWS hasn't matched the achievements of the West Coast Eagles, who made a Grand Final in their 5th year.

It's not an exact science.

 

[coerced]

Not seeing the disagreement. American sports market is a vastly different landscape. Compare apples to apples please.

How is it vastly different? They have three-four different sports all competing for the same TV dollar.

NRL has seen the same rate of rights increases between each deal as the AFL. They don't even have national exposure like the AFL do. You look up any TV rights deal for a broadcasted sport in Australia for the past 20 years, and you see the words 'record deal' for that sport (eg ARU, FFA, etc).

You look at international coverage of TV rights deals, and they speak of a 'bubble'.

So tell me again how, in this worldwide environment where media conglomerates will pay big money for any sport worth broadcasting, the AFL's expansion project is a necessary driver for those increases in TV rights deals.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Im all for everyone having academies in their own region.

Get all your fans and members to email bomb the AFL.

We don't want academies, we want an uncompromised draft and pure salary cap.

 

[Drezdyn]

The CEO of ESPN disagrees


http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/espn-john-skipper-keith-olbermann-574231

Free market yes. That means sporting rights can go down. And they do have a ceiling - What people will pay for them. So if the game is not getting new supporters either via population growth or popularity of the sport then it's not going to grow. It would be fair to say that popularity has reached saturation point in the traditional AFL states, so they only get growth from population increases. Western Sydney has extremely high population growth and it has the greatest growth potential in terms of popularity (i.e from next to nothing)

 

[Demonic Ascent]

It could be argued that the AFL has gone too far the other way.

However, GWS hasn't matched the achievements of the West Coast Eagles, who made a Grand Final in their 5th year.

It's not an exact science.

The Eagles were a completely different situation, their situation is incomparable to the Giants.

 

[sherb]

The Eagles were a completely different situation, their situation is incomparable to the Giants.

Only because it doesn't suit your argument.

 

[coerced]

Free market yes. That means sporting rights can go down. And they do have a ceiling - What people will pay for them. So if the game is not getting new supporters either via population growth or popularity of the sport then it's not going to grow. It would be fair to say that popularity has reached saturation point in the traditional AFL states, so they only get growth from population increases. Western Sydney has extremely high population growth and it has the greatest growth potential in terms of popularity (i.e from next to nothing)

Did you miss the last sentence?

The value of sports has appreciated because it's the only thing that people have to watch live.​

In a world where people download TV shows and movies, how do advertisers guarantee they can reach the masses? Sport.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Only because it doesn't suit your argument.

Not at all, because the situations were completely different. Did the VFL set up the Eagles to ensure they had immediate success? Did they get priority access to players through the draft? Was the draft anywhere near the science it is now?

The early Eagles teams were made up of ex-WAFL players or WA rejects from Vic clubs. There wasn't much difference between the Eagles and Bears in terms of initial list composition except the Eagles could draw on local talent to fill their list (like the Crows did in 91) whereas the Bears could not.

 

[Drezdyn]

Did you miss the last sentence?

The value of sports has appreciated because it's the only thing that people have to watch live.​

In a world where people download TV shows and movies, how do advertisers guarantee they can reach the masses? Sport.

No I did not miss the last sentence. All that means is that there is still a market for a broadcast deal if it has to be watched live. Otherwise it would lose out to non-broadcast forms. However the point still remains - if the number of people watching does not increase, the TV rights deal will not either.