News New MCG deal (2019 onwards) - 'pies (& other MCG clubs) to receive more dollars

[barrackers]

As part of the VicGov, AFL and MCC agreement our MCG deal also improves. We get between $1.3 and $2 million extra per year!
[$2mil using Wilson's Richmond claim, $1.5mil using Wilson's $170k per game, $1.3mil using Wilson's total divided by 6 tenant clubs]

From Caroline Wilson, but the whole article is well worth the read
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/afl/in...al-for-the-next-40-years-20180413-p4z9jq.html

League CEO Gillon McLachlan, MCG bosses Steven Smith and Stuart Fox and Collingwood president Eddie McGuire began the conversation with the Premier who was then considering a $300 million AFL request for funding to rebuild the relatively shabby Etihad Stadium and its Docklands surroundings.

The elephant in the room was football’s historic home and its long-term future. The unspoken position of Melbourne Cricket Club chairman Smith and his new CEO Stuart Fox was that the government couldn’t possibly consider a massive funding package for the AFL-owned Etihad without involving the MCG in the deal.

McGuire, a close confidant of Andrews, had unwittingly or otherwise proved the stalking horse for the AFL, putting forward an unfeasible but headline-grabbing alternative for a third stadium. As a key MCG tenant he played an influential role in setting up the dialogue.

What followed was 12 months of negotiations between McLachlan, Fox and Andrews’ key negotiator Justin Hanney. While McLachlan could not proceed with redeveloping Etihad, moving the AFL’s headquarters and capitalising on his political love child, the AFL Women’s, he was unwilling initially to grant the MCG grand finals on a long-term basis.

But the MCG returned serve with an offer of about $8 million each year for its tenant clubs, roughly guaranteeing an extra $170,000 for each tenant club and every home. Having traded away a guaranteed preliminary final, the MCG bosses demanded long-term grand final security. McLachlan, knowing any alternative was unfeasible, agreed.

The MCG, demanding a commitment of a minimum 43 home-and-away games a season until 2057 and 10 of the best 12 fixtures each year, also promised to fund the redevelopment of its Southern Stand.

The only Victorian clubs overlooked in the complex multi-stadium deal were Essendon, whose government submission came in late, North Melbourne and Richmond. Hawthorn, which spent much of 2017 in an administrative black hole and is still finalising plans for its new Dingley home, did not apply.

The Andrews government decision proved bitter-sweet for Richmond. Although the new MCG deal is worth an extra $2 million annually to the Tigers...

http://www.mcc.org.au/whats-on/latest-news/2018/april/mcc-afl-agreement

Melbourne Cricket Club, the venue manager of the Melbourne Cricket Ground, is pleased to confirm a variation to the AFL’s user agreement at the MCG that will underpin the future of Australia’s most iconic stadium.
MCC president Steven Smith said the new agreement, which comes into effect from the start of the 2019 AFL season, would provide benefits to all parties, including MCG tenant clubs - namely Melbourne, Richmond, Collingwood, Hawthorn, Essendon and Carlton.

“Today’s agreement is good for the AFL, its clubs and the MCC,” Mr Smith said. “It heralds a new partnership with the AFL, and includes a significant amount of additional money that we have committed to distribute to the MCG tenant clubs.

“We want to see the Victorian clubs – particularly those based at the MCG – thrive and enjoy success. Their ongoing viability and success is good for the AFL, the MCG and the people of Victoria.

 

[76woodenspooners]

with the Premier who was then considering a $300 million AFL request for funding to rebuild the relatively shabby Etihad Stadium and its Docklands surroundings.

It’s not even 20 years old and it’s being described as “relatively shabby”. Relative to what, the Perth Stadium?

McGuire, a close confidant of Andrews, had unwittingly or otherwise proved the stalking horse for the AFL, putting forward an unfeasible but headline-grabbing alternative for a third stadium. As a key MCG tenant he played an influential role in setting up the dialogue.

I think Ed’s participation had more to do with the AFL’s purchase of Etihad than anything else.

LOL at use of the term “unwittingly” ... Ed would have known exactly what he was doing. What surprises me is that he put his name to something that was so “unfeasible”. But credit to him, it worked.

The only Victorian clubs overlooked in the complex multi-stadium deal were Essendon, whose government submission came in late, ...

Essendon CEO should be sacked over that.

 

[jonbe54]

It's an tried and tested tactic '76 - push an agenda that the incumbents will resist to 'encourage' them to embrace the agenda that you want implemented.

 

[76woodenspooners]

It's an tried and tested tactic '76 - push an agenda that the incumbents will resist to 'encourage' them to embrace the agenda that you want implemented.

Absolutely, but that tactic only works if the stalking horse agenda is taken seriously, and in order for it to be taken seriously, it needs to be believable.

The old owners of Etihad must have either been really stupid, or they must have thought the Victorian Government (and by extension Victorian voters) were really stupid.

 

[jonbe54]

Yep '76 I can only say . . as I have said so often in the past.

Being rich doesn't imply intellect - it simply reflects a parsimonious nature - whether corporate or individual.

Anyone can spend less than they earn, and that is the ONLY basis for accumulating wealth.

The old Etihead owners obviously are not long on intellect lol.

 

[barrackers]

It’s not even 20 years old and it’s being described as “relatively shabby”. Relative to what, the Perth Stadium?

It was poorly designed to begin with being so isolated from it's surrounds and only having one connecting bridge to Southern Cross Station. The revamp looks to address these issues.

I think Ed’s participation had more to do with the AFL’s purchase of Etihad than anything else.

LOL at use of the term “unwittingly” ... Ed would have known exactly what he was doing. What surprises me is that he put his name to something that was so “unfeasible”. But credit to him, it worked.

McGuire would have had a bigger plan than just buying Etihad, which in itself doesn't deliver anything of real value to Collingwood. With more news coming out we've done very well out of this package even if other clubs are grabbing more dollars and headlines. Our rumoured pokies sale/exit also makes sense now.

Essendon CEO should be sacked over that.

Yep, a late submission is pretty amateur. Maybe they couldn't find the paperwork?

The old owners of Etihad must have either been really stupid, or they must have thought the Victorian Government (and by extension Victorian voters) were really stupid.

They didn't have much bargaining power with the AFL able to purchase the stadium for just 30 bucks in 2025 thanks to the original build contract. Ultimately selling now for $200mil was more profitable than owning the stadium for another 9 years. It's not like the ground was making huge money. For the AFL's part the purchase only makes sense with the now announced government funding.

http://www.afr.com/business/sport/h...l-into-a-financial-powerhouse-20180324-h0xx82

In note 26, under a heading "Acquisition of a subsidiary", the AFL - which started its 2018 season on the weekend - reveals its newly purchased Etihad Stadium managed to turn a $5 million operational profit in 2017 from $78.5 million of revenue.

 

[Quicky]

I think this is really fantastic for Collingwood. It will put us in a more secure financial position. It will help us exit pokies. And because Grand Finals are secured for the G' it'll give us a competitive edge for flags over many teams for the next 40 years.

Setting aside my Collingwood bias though i'm not sure that it is the best thing for our game. It seems unfair to pidgeon hole the Grand Final to one venue in Victoria when we are (supposedly) a national competion. I reckon there'll be a few interstate supporters and clubs quietly fuming at this, especially considering they all have worthy venues (if you accept smaller capacities).

But * it i'm Collingwood and this is good for us. Good onya Ed for getting us a piece of it!

 

[76woodenspooners]

It was poorly designed to begin with being so isolated from it's surrounds

What do you mean by “so isolated from it’s surrounds”?

It was isolated on day 1 when it was built, but today it would have to be the most integrated stadiums in the country today. These days the docklands precinct would be considered part of Melbourne’s CBD, so it’s a stadium in the CBD - an easy walk for many patrons. It’s next door to Melbourne’s regional train terminal. It’s got tram and suburban train services on the doorstep.

 

[Quicky]

What do you mean by “so isolated from it’s surrounds”?

It was isolated on day 1 when it was built, but today it would have to be the most integrated stadiums in the country today. These days the docklands precinct would be considered part of Melbourne’s CBD, so it’s a stadium in the CBD - an easy walk for many patrons. It’s next door to Melbourne’s regional train terminal. It’s got tram and suburban train services on the doorstep.

And regional. It's easier to get to than the G' if you're travelling in from Geelong for example or any other regional train that all arrive at Southern Cross. Or the western suburbs for that matter.

 

[jonbe54]

What do you mean by “so isolated from it’s surrounds”?

It was isolated on day 1 when it was built, but today it would have to be the most integrated stadiums in the country today. These days the docklands precinct would be considered part of Melbourne’s CBD, so it’s a stadium in the CBD - an easy walk for many patrons. It’s next door to Melbourne’s regional train terminal. It’s got tram and suburban train services on the doorstep.

Sadly '76 its also got concrete foundations under the turf

 

[barrackers]

What do you mean by “so isolated from it’s surrounds”?

It was isolated on day 1 when it was built, but today it would have to be the most integrated stadiums in the country today. These days the docklands precinct would be considered part of Melbourne’s CBD, so it’s a stadium in the CBD - an easy walk for many patrons. It’s next door to Melbourne’s regional train terminal. It’s got tram and suburban train services on the doorstep.

It's isolated in terms of being closed and lacking integration. As you say it's part of the CBD, which is a point of difference to the parkland MCG yet it doesn't embrace that strength. There's only one walkway linking the ground to the Hoddle grid, which involves stairs or escalators and a significant bottle neck on game days. On the Docklands side again the stadium is raised, but worse the frontage isn't active with the private AFL house occupying prime position with a set of concrete stairs (running parallel to the street) either side leading up to the ground.

Decking over Wurundjeri Way and railyards while ideal isn't feasible, but another bridge will help activate the CBD side. The Docklands side is a cheaper and easier fix and from what I've read most of the redevelopment dollars and more from the AFL for a hotel/conference centre will be spent making better use of it's prime position.

 

[barrackers]

I think this is really fantastic for Collingwood. It will put us in a more secure financial position. It will help us exit pokies. And because Grand Finals are secured for the G' it'll give us a competitive edge for flags over many teams for the next 40 years.

Setting aside my Collingwood bias though i'm not sure that it is the best thing for our game. It seems unfair to pidgeon hole the Grand Final to one venue in Victoria when we are (supposedly) a national competion. I reckon there'll be a few interstate supporters and clubs quietly fuming at this, especially considering they all have worthy venues (if you accept smaller capacities).

But **** it i'm Collingwood and this is good for us. Good onya Ed for getting us a piece of it!

If SA and WA were serious about hosting the Grand Final they should have built their new stadiums with a capacity of at least 70k if not 80k.

 

[76woodenspooners]

If SA and WA were serious about hosting the Grand Final they should have built their new stadiums with a capacity of at least 70k if not 80k.

Hard to justify spending taxpayers dollars on it.

50,000 is the bar to get over for a World Cup hosting application, and that’s around the right size for Perth and Adelaide AFL teams for their H&A seasons. West Coast can justify the 60,000 Perth Stadium capacity and IIRC that stadium can be easily upgraded by another 10K if needed.

Consider Sydney has the second biggest stadium in the country in the most populous region in the country and ANZ cannot justify its size.

 

[Vicky Park]

Does anyone think the prospect of an entirely new stadium in the general area of the Holden Centre has legs? I scoffed when Eddie was talking it up a while ago. But I've since heard it might be a goer, although obviously not part of this new allocation of funds.

I'm thinking a dedicated 50k stadium for us to use for training and playing - AFL, VFL and AFLW - save for the big games. Given the expense involved, it couldn't realistically be exclusively ours, and we'd probably have to share with other clubs - Melbourne? Richmond?

If you look at Google Earth, the only available space is Gosch's Paddock, currently divided into a footy training oval, and the soccer training facility. Although it looks tight. Unlike Yarra Park around the MCG, which is heritage listed and therefore not available to be developed in this way, Gosch's Paddock is free of heritage constraints. Otherwise there is AAMI stadium and the tennis centre facilities which could be pulled down or relocated, but now I'm in Lala Land as these aren't going anywhere.

I'm certainly ready to have a lot of taxpayers money spent on us again.

 

[Matt_352]

I think this is really fantastic for Collingwood. It will put us in a more secure financial position. It will help us exit pokies. And because Grand Finals are secured for the G' it'll give us a competitive edge for flags over many teams for the next 40 years.

Setting aside my Collingwood bias though i'm not sure that it is the best thing for our game. It seems unfair to pidgeon hole the Grand Final to one venue in Victoria when we are (supposedly) a national competion. I reckon there'll be a few interstate supporters and clubs quietly fuming at this, especially considering they all have worthy venues (if you accept smaller capacities).

But **** it i'm Collingwood and this is good for us. Good onya Ed for getting us a piece of it!

Understand that its a national comp but the gf belongs at the G. End of.

 

[whiskeytown]

Does anyone think the prospect of an entirely new stadium in the general area of the Holden Centre has legs? I scoffed when Eddie was talking it up a while ago. But I've since heard it might be a goer, although obviously not part of this new allocation of funds.

I'm thinking a dedicated 50k stadium for us to use for training and playing - AFL, VFL and AFLW - save for the big games. Given the expense involved, it couldn't realistically be exclusively ours, and we'd probably have to share with other clubs - Melbourne? Richmond?

If you look at Google Earth, the only available space is Gosch's Paddock, currently divided into a footy training oval, and the soccer training facility. Although it looks tight. Unlike Yarra Park around the MCG, which is heritage listed and therefore not available to be developed in this way, Gosch's Paddock is free of heritage constraints. Otherwise there is AAMI stadium and the tennis centre facilities which could be pulled down or relocated, but now I'm in Lala Land as these aren't going anywhere.

I'm certainly ready to have a lot of taxpayers money spent on us again.

I think we already have our 3rd stadium - Princes Park. Upgrade that to fit 30-35k and it's the perfect boutique ground for low drawing games against GC, Freo, etc.

People say no parking but the train and tram lines service it quite well. But building a multi story carpark at the zoo would probably help.

 

[jonbe54]

I think we already have our 3rd stadium - Princes Park. Upgrade that to fit 30-35k and it's the perfect boutique ground for low drawing games against GC, Freo, etc.

People say no parking but the train and tram lines service it quite well. But building a multi story carpark at the zoo would probably help.

You do realize that that is the SCUM POND!!!!?? - The lowest ebb of organic existence in this or any other continuum!!??

I feel violated even having read that

Now I need to scrub myself with an antiseptic . . EEEEEWWWWW!!!!

 

[Black_White]

You do realize that that is the SCUM POND!!!!?? - The lowest ebb of organic existence in this or any other continuum!!??

I feel violated even having read that

Now I need to scrub myself with an antiseptic . . EEEEEWWWWW!!!!

Very true.
But the AFL and the Government have made it clear that it has a place going forward in our competition.
Not so much for AFL games, though we do play games in regional centres now so they could argue that scum games vs GC or Brisbane could be played at the pond.
It has now been officially backed as the home of AFLW. By the AFL and the Government.
As for the MCG being safe as the GF venue for 40 more years, don’t worry about how upset the interstate clubs are, rejoice in the fact that Geelong, who have been agitating for finals/GF’s to be played at pussy village, are now denied GF’s for four decades.

 

[Vicky Park]

I think we already have our 3rd stadium - Princes Park. Upgrade that to fit 30-35k and it's the perfect boutique ground for low drawing games against GC, Freo, etc.

People say no parking but the train and tram lines service it quite well. But building a multi story carpark at the zoo would probably help.

Yeah, but that will mainly be the focus of the AFLW.

My objective would be to have us play no games - none, zero, zilch - at Olympic Park. It just doesnt work.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

The idea of another stadium in a prime capable location would surely have to hold 60 k people capacity or at worst 50k.
If at Goschs paddock or say the Showgrounds it could work very well.
Ideal for us.
Share the smaller games of Melbourne and Richmond.

 

[jonbe54]

Very true.
But the AFL and the Government have made it clear that it has a place going forward in our competition.
Not so much for AFL games, though we do play games in regional centres now so they could argue that scum games vs GC or Brisbane could be played at the pond.
It has now been officially backed as the home of AFLW. By the AFL and the Government.
As for the MCG being safe as the GF venue for 40 more years, don’t worry about how upset the interstate clubs are, rejoice in the fact that Geelong, who have been agitating for finals/GF’s to be played at pussy village, are now denied GF’s for four decades.

I lived in sleepy hollow for nearly 3 years - and it took 5 years for my IQ to recover to normal levels