How the small Melbourne clubs saved footy

[Blackas87]

Disagree all you like. It is fact. You don’t think neutrals would tune into watching Richmond v Collingwood on a Sunday arvo whilst cooking their roasts? Just their supporter base alone dwarfs any neutral viewers on a Friday night. Your trying to compare 2 of the smallest followings to 2 of the biggest if not the biggest.

Yeah Neutrals would, not nearly as many as Friday night though, people are usually out doing things on their weekends/Sunday arvos, they aren’t going to stop their life to watch 2 teams they don’t support.

 

[Blackas87]

You missed the bit where I said I read elsewhere that someone said they are. They even had comparisons so don’t shoot the messenger

No wasn’t shooting you, I’m not sure on their financial position in the 90’s, but currently they are in a huge hole, I just can’t imagine they are in a better financial position now, maybe they are I don’t know.

 

[Boxhead007]

Yeah Neutrals would, not nearly as many as Friday night though, people are usually out doing things on their weekends/Sunday arvos, they aren’t going to stop their life to watch 2 teams they don’t support.

At this point and time when they are the best 2 teams in comp there would be more interest then a Friday night between 2 lower sides. It’s fact I don’t care if you don’t agree with me but comparing the 2 games in the 2 time slots is so far from reality it’s not funny. But the joy of the society we live in we are all entitled to our own opinions

 

[sprockets]

How much money do they bring in? How much would Collingwood v Richmond bring in on a Friday night compared to North v St Kilda?

I dare say play Collingwood v Richmond on Sunday 1pm and North v St Kilda prime time Friday night they probably bring in similar ratings and money. Those clubs wouldn’t need extra AFL distribution money.

Yeah ok LOL.

 

[Blackas87]

At this point and time when they are the best 2 teams in comp there would be more interest then a Friday night between 2 lower sides. It’s fact I don’t care if you don’t agree with me but comparing the 2 games in the 2 time slots is so far from reality it’s not funny. But the joy of the society we live in we are all entitled to our own opinions

Yes at this point in time, agree Richmond and Collingwood would draw more neutrals as it’s a good game.

but since 2000, the time of Docklands stadium, Richmond Collingwood have had 17 night games, 13 of which have been Thursday/Friday night, and 12 day time fixtures, 5 which were a Sunday. Richmond and Collingwood, especially Richmond have had plenty of bottom of the ladder seasons during that period.

Ok that’s fine, Richmond and Collingwood can make money out of those prime time games, clubs that don’t get the same opportunity get compensated.

 

[Engimal v3]

A few of the "big" club supporters in this thread getting a bit hot under the collar it appears.

 

[Boxhead007]

Yes at this point in time, agree Richmond and Collingwood would draw more neutrals as it’s a good game.

but since 2000, the time of Docklands stadium, Richmond Collingwood have had 17 night games, 13 of which have been Thursday/Friday night, and 12 day time fixtures, 5 which were a Sunday. Richmond and Collingwood, especially Richmond have had plenty of bottom of the ladder seasons during that period.

Ok that’s fine, Richmond and Collingwood can make money out of those prime time games, clubs that don’t get the same opportunity get compensated.

I’m not debating that and I’m all for equality. The 18 clubs make the comp what it is. A 12 or 14 team comp doesn’t have the same appeal. If the attraction of the bigger clubs props up the smaller clubs with combined revenue then so be it. I was more debating your comparison. I could see where you were going with it, any almost any other 2 team combination you’d nearly be correct. But you picked the 2 biggest clubs () which happen to be the 2 best teams atm for your comparison.

 

[Blackas87]

I’m not debating that and I’m all for equality. The 18 clubs make the comp what it is. A 12 or 14 team comp doesn’t have the same appeal. If the attraction of the bigger clubs props up the smaller clubs with combined revenue then so be it. I was more debating your comparison. I could see where you were going with it, any almost any other 2 team combination you’d nearly be correct. But you picked the 2 biggest clubs () which happen to be the 2 best teams atm for your comparison.

I agree this season I’d be tuning into Richmond Collingwood over St Kilda North, but that’s got nothing to do with the size of the clubs though.

my debate is that any club that puts a good team on the park deserves the same opportunity to sell their brand and give exposure for their sponsors. Throughout recent history this is not the case and the clubs that don’t get exposure get compensated.

Yes I watched Saints and North round 1, it was possibly the worst game I’ve seen seen since Saints and North Good Friday a few years ago. They don’t deserve the prime time spots at the moment

 

[Dazb86]

Not only did the Dogs pay off the stadium which is now being used for a lot of clubs survival loans, we are not even using the AFL's money to stay afloat during this year.

We are truly the Mother Teresa club of the AFL.

 

[Farang83150]

Yeah your last flag was one for you by Adam Simpson, Brady Rawlings and Daniel Pratt so you can thank us for that too.

Any of your flags with WA's in the team were won by WA for you, Ah..Nth, never stop taking handouts..

 

[Farang83150]

This is as bad as the stuff you used to troll under your previous name. And that's saying something.

Nailed it.

 

[Rich01]

Unfortunately all the OP highlighted is the terrible deal they signed to play games at this stadium in the first place.

They have been horribly managed.

 

[Kwality]

Yep. I mean it is pretty rare for a Friday night game to be between two non-Victorian teams, while a Friday night game between two Victorian teams is very common.

Too subtle ?
The claims here seem focussed on the 'poor' time slots, BUT so liitle substantion from the OP.

Even here not in support of the proposition:

North... 149 home games at Docklands, 4.31 million through the gate.

Richmond... 45 home games at Docklands, 1.45 million through the gate.

Collingwood... 52 home games at Docklands, 1.99 million through the gate.

Combined Tigers and Pies at Docklands... 97 home games for 3.44 million fans through the gates. Playing our home games against minnow sides and interstate clubs... but we’ve done nothing to pay for the stadium.

 

[Kwality]

you paid it off with the AFLs money

fact

Sent from my SM-A505YN using Tapatalk

Even thats not got an iota of fact attached ...

 

[Kwality]

Therefore the bulldogs should get financially compensated for not been given the same opportunities to build and sell their brand

Next thing the handout mentality will go to the smaller teams in every city.

We are ignoring the AFL going forward is cash strapped, cant see the Bank covenant including ' cash splashes'. We know clubs will be paying interest on loans for the first time.

Any rejigged FIXture will need the TV company approval imho.

 

[Bulldog1954]

Unfortunately all the OP highlighted is the terrible deal they signed to play games at this stadium in the first place.

They have been horribly managed.

The clubs didn’t negotiate the deals, the AFL did and the clubs were forced to accept. The AFL needed 46 games a year at the ground.

 

[RUNVS]

A few of the "big" club supporters in this thread getting a bit hot under the collar it appears.

Only because they let their 6 year old come to work and now the 6 year old has convinced himself that he is the reason why mummy earns most of her money.

 

[Engimal v3]

Only because they let their 6 year old come to work and now the 6 year old has convinced himself that he is the reason why mummy earns most of her money.

Whatever troubles your family is going through is a bit off topic for this thread tbh mate. Just state your gratitude for North, St Kilda and the Western Bulldogs and pop out, I reckon.

 

[Scotland]

Meh. We play the Sunday afternoon timeslot more than most. Hosting more interstate sides than you do. Still pull a crowd. Poor excuse from poor clubs.

Yeah but we have a better stadium deal. Didn't you know that?

We get to keep a higher percentage of the much higher revenue we generate, therefore that's unfair - even though if we got similarly small crowds of low paying spectators we would also get a much lower percentage of revenue return...

 

[RUNVS]

Yeah but we have a better stadium deal. Didn't you know that?

We get to keep a higher percentage of the much higher revenue we generate, therefore that's unfair - even though if we got similarly small crowds of low paying spectators we would also get a much lower percentage of revenue return...

I believe in socialism, I really do. I think socialised democracies are great for countries and people, where the poorest of the poor are still able to eat and have a roof over their heads due to a strong social safety net.

I do not really believe in corporate socialism though, where governments prop up companies that do not really provide a direct benefit to society.

That is what the AFL is, the AFL is the government and the clubs are corporations. Now the AFL may want to prop up Gold Coast as they are like the only airline in an entire city, and that city needs the airline. However, I would not be a fan of the AFL propping up an airline that is failing in a city where there are already 8 other airlines, 5 of which are really successful. What benefit does the city of Melbourne have in propping up a clearly unprofitable airline that should it not exist would not hurt the people of Melbourne in any way.

 

[Blackas87]

Next thing the handout mentality will go to the smaller teams in every city.

We are ignoring the AFL going forward is cash strapped, cant see the Bank covenant including ' cash splashes'. We know clubs will be paying interest on loans for the first time.

Any rejigged FIXture will need the TV company approval imho.

The AFL isn’t really cash strapped, it generates one of the largest revenues of sporting leagues in the world, and it will continue to generate a ton of revenue in future years to come.

 

[O_Grinners17]

Week after week St Kilda, the Dogs and North have occupied the crappy slots in the fixture.

4.40PM Sunday at Docklands. 1.10PM Sunday at Docklands. Usually against an interstate team. The graveyard slot.

For many years we even paid for the privilege, such was the shocking nature of the stadium deals we got.

But every game we played there chipped away at the future where the AFL would own the stadium.

Finally the AFL was in a position to buy the stadium early.

And now COVID-19 has thrown the competition off track, the AFL has been forced to seek a line of credit of hundreds of millions.

Using the stadium as security, the loan was secured. And yes, a few clubs are individually wealthy enough to have seen out the shutdown, but they would have no league to play in. Collingwood and Richmond and Hawthorn and West Coast isn't a league.

So, remember what saved footy - the poor little Melbourne clubs paying off Docklands Stadium provided the league with the security it needed to get through this.

ANZAC Day "blockbusters" didn't save footy, North v Freo at 4.40PM on a Sunday did.

Richmond's endless MCG primetime runs didn't save footy, St Kilda vs Port at 1.10PM on a Sunday did.

No Showdown or Derby or Q Clash or Battle of the Bridge put a single cent toward saving footy, but the Dogs playing Gold Coast on a shitful Sunday arvo did.

AFL agrees to purchase Etihad Stadium

The AFL has agreed to purchase Etihad Stadium in a deal reported to be worth about $200 million.

www.theage.com.au

quarantine be hitting this guy hard

 

[Scotland]

The AFL isn’t really cash strapped, it generates one of the largest revenues of sporting leagues in the world, and it will continue to generate a ton of revenue in future years to come.

Borderline top 20.

Which is a lot of money, but it's not the NFL.

 

[Blackas87]

Borderline top 20.

Which is a lot of money, but it's not the NFL.

Yeah ranked 21st. The top 20 leagues all come from countries with a population double the size of Australia except for the la liga which is in Spain has a population 47 million just under double Australia’s 25 million.

considering AFL is only popular in half the country, it does extremely well at producing revenue.

TV viewers in the 5 major cities last year show where majority of the TV revenue comes from

Melbourne 20.08 million
Perth 8.4 million
Adelaide 8.28 million
Sydney 2.8 million
Brisbane 2.59 million

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

No, that’s not at all what I’m suggesting. But the largest portion of the money made comes from big clubs. You said that may just be due to getting a good draw etc. but the recent example of my club I.e. always had a lot of support, but nearly died in the expansion era due to mismanagement, suggests its more than that. A good draw doesn’t take you from rattling tins to 100k members. Only difference between Richmond and Collingwood/West Coast is the latter pair have been doing it for longer.

In short - all clubs contribute to why the league will survive this year. Highlighting a subset seems silly.

May be??!

No, that’s not at all what I’m suggesting. But the largest portion of the money made comes from big clubs. You said that may just be due to getting a good draw etc. but the recent example of my club I.e. always had a lot of support, but nearly died in the expansion era due to mismanagement, suggests its more than that. A good draw doesn’t take you from rattling tins to 100k members. Only difference between Richmond and Collingwood/West Coast is the latter pair have been doing it for longer.

In short - all clubs contribute to why the league will survive this year. Highlighting a subset seems silly.

The eagles get all these crappy timeslots and still get 50+k

its almost like theres..... too many clubs....in one city

I don't think even Richmond or Collingwood pull crowds on Sunday arvos.