Expansion Potential Expansion Markets

[DEVO]

I think the best strategy to introduce a team out of Canberra would be to play 8 games per year there and play the other 3 games 3 hours south at Lavington. This would move up the Barassi line even further and you would have significant support for this team in Southern NSW. An 8-3 split between Canberra and Lavington is the perfect model.

I was thinking one game at Albury and one game at Wagga Wagga. Although I'm not sure about the quality of facilities in either city. If the facilities and support are up to standard, perhaps alternate a second game between the two cities each year.

 

[Garlic muncher]

I think the best strategy to introduce a team out of Canberra would be to play 8 games per year there and play the other 3 games 3 hours south at Lavington. This would move up the Barassi line even further and you would have significant support for this team in Southern NSW. An 8-3 split between Canberra and Lavington is the perfect model.

I just cant see a new team for Canberra or Southern NSW, whilst the population is probably there, it is a spread over a fair distance and Albury is reasonably close to Melbourne and possibly further to Canberra, i seem to remember the half way point between Canberra and Melbourne is Holbrook when driving.

The Barassi line has not shifted really, perhaps the line is more blurred further North than in previous decades but is essentially the same as 100 years ago.

If GWS ever start looking self sufficient, MO is that the AFL would look to build a 3rd Sydney team, that is where the money, sponsorship, TV ratings and population is, eventually the Sydney market could have 4 teams, IMO it will have 3, sounds crazy , but it was Barassi who stated 4, we are half way there in 2016.

1982 Swans move to Sydney

2012 GWS joins AFL

2030 ???

 

[Gigantor]

18 teams sounds like plenty - it's hard to picture the comp being bigger.

 

[Garlic muncher]

18 teams sounds like plenty - it's hard to picture the comp being bigger.

That's true, 18 teams is plenty, in 20 years can we handle - say 20 ?, will we have the population, the depth of players and will the game be able to afford it ?.

My answer would be - who really knows.

 

[madmug]

So you think a Tas team would sell out those grounds, every week, rain hail or shine? Including low drawing games?

But you asked how much I 'recon' they make from the 15k crowd? Stuff all really. Let's be generous and say $300,000. ($20 per head, which is probably higher than the entire gate).

How much is made from Docklands? Well, the ground cost $460Million, and the AFL gets ownership from playing about 1000 games there, so the AFL makes $460,000 per game and the clubs make a minimum of $100,000.

So as a best case scenario (like the Tas game paying more than the entire gate is likely to be and not factoring in how much Docklands has appreciated in value, or that most games at docklands earn the club over the minimum), games there are still worth twice as much to the AFL 'industry' as a whole. The reality would be a significantly higher ratio.

WTF! now a supposed future asset values at Docklands is factored into the crowd figures. WALOS.

Asset doesnt necessarily equal future income
Indeed it might even cost the AFL in the long run.

 

[telsor]

WTF! now a supposed future asset values at Docklands is factored into the crowd figures. WALOS.

Asset doesnt necessarily equal future income
Indeed it might even cost the AFL in the long run.

No, but it factors into how much money is made from the game.

Tell me, how will it cost the AFL money?

Worst case, it's a billion dollar piece of real estate.

 

[telsor]

If GWS ever start looking self sufficient, MO is that the AFL would look to build a 3rd Sydney team, that is where the money, sponsorship, TV ratings and population is, eventually the Sydney market could have 4 teams, IMO it will have 3, sounds crazy , but it was Barassi who stated 4, we are half way there in 2016.

It is?

I suggest you check the TV ratings sometime.
Money/sponsorship flows from that (why pay a fortune to advertise when nobody is watching). Hell, they only get on FTA TV at all because the rest of the comp forced ch7 to do so.

Population only matters if/when they start to watch, and 34 years into this 'experiment' converting them is still moving at a glacial pace.

 

[telsor]

18 teams sounds like plenty - it's hard to picture the comp being bigger.

So when do we admit GWS is a failure and move the club/license to Tas or WA?

 

[The_Wookie]

If GWS ever start looking self sufficient, MO is that the AFL would look to build a 3rd Sydney team, that is where the money, sponsorship, TV ratings and population is, eventually the Sydney market could have 4 teams, IMO it will have 3, sounds crazy , but it was Barassi who stated 4, we are half way there in 2016.

The TV Ratings arent quite there (after 35 years the Swans arent getting more than about 75k on tv on average) but the rest is, as shown by the Swans sponsorship portfolio, and even the Giants.

 

[Garlic muncher]

It is?

I suggest you check the TV ratings sometime.
Money/sponsorship flows from that (why pay a fortune to advertise when nobody is watching). Hell, they only get on FTA TV at all because the rest of the comp forced ch7 to do so.

Population only matters if/when they start to watch, and 34 years into this 'experiment' converting them is still moving at a glacial pace.

That is true, FTA ratings are not great most of the time, albeit on a secondary channel, but still the Swans do OK, in fact i could be wrong but i think they have the biggest sponsorship in Australian sport.

Getting families and kids to take an interest in footy in Sydney has always been 2 steps forward and 1 step back and sometimes the opposite, however the private schools comp in Sydney and overall interest in the Eastern and Northern suburbs is pretty good, it moves at a glacial pace in the Western and Southern suburbs for many reasons, 100 years of inbred hostility from the Sydney media and other sports does not help, that is not going to change, so therefore i doubt whether there will be some miraculous tipping point where we declare footy a winner in Sydney, it is a long slow multigenerational effort.

The AFL will keep plugging away in Sydney, there is actually no real alternative.

 

[Garlic muncher]

The TV Ratings arent quite there (after 35 years the Swans arent getting more than about 75k on tv on average) but the rest is, as shown by the Swans sponsorship portfolio, and even the Giants.

I agree, I sort of meant the potential is in Sydney, the potential in Southern NSW and Canberra is not to the same degree IMO.

 

[madmug]

So when do we admit GWS is a failure and move the club/license to Tas or WA?

That wont happen. The AFL are never wrong, no matter what it costs.

Also the AFL totally control GWS. They like that. The AFL are micromanagers. They may be bad at it, but thats what they do.

Power & control first, their image close behind. The game itself a long way behind in their considerations, .

 

[telsor]

I agree, I sort of meant the potential is in Sydney, the potential in Southern NSW and Canberra is not to the same degree IMO.

Oh, I agree, heaps of potential, but after 35 years, Sydney still needs help (let alone GWS).

At that pace, a 3rd team is a LONG way away.

 

[telsor]

That wont happen. The AFL are never wrong, no matter what it costs.

Also the AFL totally control GWS. They like that. The AFL are micromanagers. They may be bad at it, but thats what they do.

Power & control first, their image close behind. The game itself a long way behind in their considerations, .

I agree, but don't kid yourself, the AFL would totally control a Tas team too.

As you've said yourself, nobody else down there could.

 

[telsor]

That's true, 18 teams is plenty, in 20 years can we handle - say 20 ?, will we have the population, the depth of players and will the game be able to afford it ?.

My answer would be - who really knows.

18 is a crappy number though...Just look at the fixture.

We either need to move towards having enough that we 'just' play each other once a year or reduce back to 12 and play twice.

I think expansion (to 22-24, I think 23 would work best) should be the goal, with that number to be reached in ~30 years. (which, given the rate of expansion over the past 30 should mean the average talent level and support still improves overall).

Vic 10
WA 4
SA 3
NSW 2
QLD 2
TAS 1
1 more to be worked out in ~20 years time. (currently, I'd say WA5, but who knows what could change in that time).

After that, they can look at 'moving' clubs/licences if those clubs are deemed failures and/or other places considered more worthy.

 

[Garlic muncher]

Oh, I agree, heaps of potential, but after 35 years, Sydney still needs help (let alone GWS).

At that pace, a 3rd team is a LONG way away.

Snow ball rolling down hill !

 

[madmug]

I agree, but don't kid yourself, the AFL would totally control a Tas team too.

As you've said yourself, nobody else down there could.

Thats clear. Any new teams would be built under the auspices of the Melbourne bosses.. So the Ability to run the club would also be down to the AFL. To say nobody here couldnt run a club is not necessarily true. We have a range of professional administrators who could run a small business. Because thats all it is. A small business with about 100 employees. Sure its a high profile organisation. But thats all. It doesnt take some magical touch only available in Victoria.
The ones who ran AFLTas proved pretty poor at doing the job. They were backed bythe AFL for far too long, And many down here said so. However, I myself know people who would do a good job of it if they were given the brief. The interference from the AFL would be a complication. But thats all.

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

Cull a few Victorian clubs &/or ship em' elsewhere before expanding to a ridiculous number.. 10 clubs in Victoria is still the biggest joke in the comp.

 

[telsor]

Snow ball rolling down hill !

Try that sometime...it doesn't work like on the cartoons.

 

[telsor]

Thats clear. Any new teams would be built under the auspices of the Melbourne bosses.. So the Ability to run the club would also be down to the AFL. To say nobody here couldnt run a club is not necessarily true. We have a range of professional administrators who could run a small business. Because thats all it is. A small business with about 100 employees. Sure its a high profile organisation. But thats all. It doesnt take some magical touch only available in Victoria.
The ones who ran AFLTas proved pretty poor at doing the job. They were backed bythe AFL for far too long, And many down here said so. However, I myself know people who would do a good job of it if they were given the brief. The interference from the AFL would be a complication. But thats all.

But remember that AFLTas came in to fix up the mess resulting from Tas trying to run it football across the whole state themselves.

I'm sure Tasmanian's have the administrative capacity to run a club, as you say, it's not rocket surgery, but How well do you think they would balance the needs of the different parts of the state (and perhaps more importantly, be seen to do so)?

In many ways, the politics of football in Tasmania is like the politics of football in the rest of the country. One BIG market (~50% of the total), but if you are perceived to favor them at all (rightly or wrongly), the rest scream about how the administration is supposed to be for the whole state/country and not just Hobart/Vic. The politics of it all would be far tougher than the administration.

 

[telsor]

Cull a few Victorian clubs &/or ship em' elsewhere before expanding to a ridiculous number.. 10 clubs in Victoria is still the biggest joke in the comp.

So apart from satisfying your dislike for Victoria, what do you think the results of that would be?

 

[JimmyBeerCans]

So apart from satisfying your dislike for Victoria, what do you think the results of that would be?

I love Victoria beautiful state that aside why dilute the talent pool any further with upwards of 20 clubs? there are guys running around now that would struggle at ammo's level in the days of yore.

 

[Gigantor]

So when do we admit GWS is a failure and move the club/license to Tas or WA?

At current growth trends, I can't foresee that happening any time soon, and let's be honest, while the Tassie Govt continues handing over millions to two AFL clubs, they aren't going to get a team.

Can't speak for the Suns, but the amount of footy development around west sydney and Southern NSW as a direct result of the giants entering the comp is massive - absolutely no way known the AFL is going to let that slip now - that's worth at least $10 mill per annum to the AFL for the remainder of the century - and the AFL will pay it, don't you worry about that.

 

[Established1870]

Cull a few Victorian clubs &/or ship em' elsewhere before expanding to a ridiculous number.. 10 clubs in Victoria is still the biggest joke in the comp.

The only one really worth culling is North (relocate them somewhere). Footscray is going to get a fair population boom soon so they might be able to draw on more supporters. Saints are the only club left south of Melbourne if I recall correctly. As for Melbourne, they're our oldest club. We should protect history IMO.

 

[telsor]

I love Victoria beautiful state that aside why dilute the talent pool any further with upwards of 20 clubs? there are guys running around now that would struggle at ammo's level in the days of yore.

So how many hundreds of thousands Vic supporters do you want to lose from the game?

When Fitzroy was *cough* merged, it's estimated that about a 3rd of their fans were lost to the game. Given that even the smallest Vic clubs would have well over a quarter of a million fans, you're looking at about 100K gone per club.

and of course if you get rid of even 1 Vic club, it'd have significant impact across the country.

1 club gone means no more games in Tas/Cairns/NT (assuming the AFL wants to keep their contracts with MCG/Docklands).

2 means at least one of those contracts are gone, and given that the MCG isn't nearly as expendable, that means bye bye to the AFL owning a billion dollar stadium at Docklands.

There is also the not insignificant detail about how Vic football is the one paying for NSW & QLD, so if you're making cuts there, you have to cut back on supporting those clubs and/or development in those states.


But yeah, get rid of the clubs that are the ones keeping the league financially strong...I'm sure next time Port falls on it's arse and needs a handout, somebody will turn up...surely...