Lol... sorry to offend you.vomit
non football market
way more expensive to go see them play
something st kilda already tried
I'm not offended but lets replace Tassie with Auckland is about as dumb as it gets.Lol... sorry to offend you.
For 3 games a year to expose 4 AFL brands to a place that is closer to the eastern states than West coast travel & in return advertise NZ tourism & products; there is a very large market that the AFL, NZ & state governments should be interested in for a 3 year deal.
If at the end of the 3 years there wasn’t 10,000 people regularly attending, based on a Aurora stadium attendance, & there wasn’t any real interest in NZ membership for Hawthorn, Brisbane, Gold Coast or the Giants then you could easily pull out.
What is the difference to a GC start up club trying to get members in a non afl state?
What is the average attendance to a Nsw or Qld team that is not Sydney Swans?
I think that the cost to explore the market seriously is far less of a risk with AFL & NZ money than the money generated from a successful venture.
Hawthorn can cash in on this & play more games at the MCG as an advantage in the process for premierships.
How is that not a win win situation on a 3 year projection while chasing more premierships in our future window that has been estimated for the last 2-3 years to start 2019-20 & beyond?View attachment 644551View attachment 644552View attachment 644553View attachment 644554
Pretty irrelevant for the main stakeholders, being the players, coaches and admin staff. None of them are going to be catching buses or trains to work.One thing Waverley and Dingley have in common is that neither are served well by public transport.
Ok Gralin....I'm not offended but lets replace Tassie with Auckland is about as dumb as it gets.
I know what the flights are like I was in Auckland last month and I'm going to be in Wellington next month.
Don't forget to international check in lead times, going through customs at both ends and the fact that Auckland is comparable to Sydney for costs, go look up hotel prices.
You're talking about making 3 home games less accessible to actual fans and members, not more. You're talking about increasing travel times for the players, making the disruption worse and doing to for access to a market that doesn't care about footy.
I was more referring to the fact that someone else in the thread was suggesting building a boutique stadium at DingleyPretty irrelevant for the main stakeholders, being the players, coaches and admin staff. None of them are going to be catching buses or trains to work.
It may be an infrequent issue for the odd supporter who wants to attend training. Once Dingley is built, i'm sure the bus network will expand.
Why do you keep talking about the benefit for four clubs and the AFL?Ok Gralin....
So 9 games over 3 seasons in Auckland isn’t worth it to crack an international market for 4 clubs & expand football in the northern states with regular appearances & Hawthorn assistance to also increase a membership base for Hawthorn & the other AFL clubs.
Your view seems very Melbourne “bubble” supporter driven & rather selfish to be honest.
Plenty of teams have outside of Melbourne games as a part of their fixture & in a somewhat saturated market in the “people who care” areas why flog a dead horse or stuff that pig that’s already full.
I go to games in Sydney all the time to watch the Hawks, Swans & Giants even when Hawthorn aren’t playing; as well as traveling to Qld quite a lot to visit family where we also go to the footy if given the chance.
I was going to games in Tassie when Fitzroy were regulars at North Hobart oval & have seen plenty of Tasmanian growth & the stories behind the Hawks in Tasmania relationship.
If it’s time to go then why not pioneer again?
You say people care... in tassie nobody gave a stuff about the Devils in the VFL & I can just about guarantee an afl club in Tasmania full time will be a white elephant & be a similar failure as GC as a full time club propped up under the AFL wing.
And you actually referenced the Saints... I thought you more one eyed than that but I fear that that eye is fixed firmly on yourself seeing another 3 games rather than the thousands that don’t get to see enough of their teams around the country as is is.
No.There's an interesting theory that less is more
If you knew that there was only one Collingwood v Carlton match every year then does it get a bigger crowd, more corporate sales and high ratings than either of the two Collingwood v Carlton matches that often happen (repeat for Hawks v Cats / showdown etc and every rivalry out there)
So if you have 190 rather than 198 games (not much difference) but less of the rivalry matches does that make them bigger?
A stadium at Dingley is nothing more than a pipedream for wishful supporters in any case. We invested a lot of time to investigate the training facilities of successful, large clubs overseas and are now attempting a similar facility for our club. Personally, I didn't think we'd do anything as grandiose as the European soccer clubs but I was more than surprised to find we were seriously attempting a similar setup. Dream big. Make the dream happen. That's what we do.I was more referring to the fact that someone else in the thread was suggesting building a boutique stadium at Dingley
Nailed it. From a business perspective Tasmania protected us from a poor deal at Etihad. Certainly we have done well from it and I expect we will be compensated for being forced out of an arrangement where we have sewn seeds in membership. Naturally we will loose members to an indigenous Tasmanian team and as long as that is accounted for financially then we are well poised to secure our future in Melbourne.For some time now the economics show our net sponsorship income, improved stadium rights (AFL owning Marvel) and increased membership revenue (in particular Vic based members) the club would be better off financially to play all our games in Melbourne. Whenever the Tassie deal is up for negotiation the figures are crunched - play in Tassie vs return to Melbourne, the math says play in Melbourne.
However, Kennett in particular has romanced the Tassie relationship like no other, having a state as your major sponsor is unique in our game. He preaches regularly about the Hawks not standing still, we make things happen, we do things differently. Tassie offers all of these pillars like few other sponsorship relations can.
No way will the Hawks simply roll over and have the AFL tickle our tummy with niceties around what a good job we’ve done delivering AFL to the Tassie footy community for 20 years. Kennett will want a nice big juicy exit fee cheque from the AFL by way of compensation.
Who knows, that may be partially an amount to get the Kennedy Centre over the line .
Kennett, love him or hate him he is a master negotiator and will deliver.
On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
Tassie will get their own teamI'm expecting a very low crowd game for the game against Fremantle,if Tasmania doesn't get its own team in the future and we stay with Hawks and north in Tasmania, it's going to look pretty bad for tasmania when the crowds continue to decline.
How can you be certain Tasmania will get a team,I think if we don't get a team,it's no use keeping Hawks and North here with the crowds continuing to decline,how will look when we are getting lots of crowds under 10000 in the future.they'll put a 3rd team in perth/adelaide or Queensland.
Yeah that does sound like AFL logic. Instead of taking a team from a market where no sporting team has ever flourished and put it into a captive market that would embrace it 100% - persist with the struggling franchise that is a money succubus and then put a team in Cairns as well.they'll put a 3rd team in perth/adelaide or Queensland.