TAS relocation rumours?

[Papa G]

The difference is the broadcasting rights are driven by Melbourne games, not SA games. Clubs here contribute significantly more than the pittance the AFL dishes out to them and the only reason we can spend ridiculous sums of money in NSW and QLD is because of the demand for the Victorian broadcasting rights.

I hear this from North supporters all the time, numbers on face value you are 1/10th of the pie, but in terms of real support and real numbers you are probably about 1/25th of the pie in Victoria. The TV rights will not implode if there is no North Melbourne. The won't if their is no Port either, but I have never heard a Port supporter use this arguement.

 

[Z_K]

Papa G, you old scallywag.

Still punching away at this matey? How's it all working out for you?

 

[Papa G]

Papa G, you old scallywag.

Still punching away at this matey? How's it all working out for you?

I think I have been fair and reasonable, not hysterical and playing the ball, not the man and staying on topic.

It's been a while, how's the whole Kevin07 thingy working out for you?

 

[A Living God]

What would 1/16th os the docklands be worth in 2025?

$ 2 - 3 million.

 

[Z_K]

I think I have been fair and reasonable, not hysterical and playing the ball, not the man and staying on topic.

I think this is your favourite topic in the world.

On topic for a brief moment, I will not be concerned with membership or attendance numbers until we're a good side. And we will be. If we still struggle to get a half decent crowd and 35k+ members at that point, this issue will be worthy of discussion.

It's been a while, how's the whole Kevin07 thingy working out for you?

He's a flog.

 

[AngelEyes]

Well the rumours suggest that in 2012 all special funding will cease. I'm not here to argue whether clubs like North get it because of bad stadium deals or because they can't make a profit. That is not my concern. However, it doesn't change the fact it has been suggested in the media and by high profile football figures that this will end in 2012.

If this happens a lot of clubs could be in trouble including the Kangaroos, Port Adelaide, the Western Bulldogs, Richmond, even Carlton etc. I think the troubling thing is that the AFL will force a club to the brink. A report came out last month suggesting the Bulldogs were as vital to the AFL as expansion in Western Sydney. To me this is a suggestion that the AFL won't kill the Dogs. You would think they will stick with two teams in SA and even the SANFL may step in if it means losing a license.

You could argue that teams such as Carlton and Richmond have the potential to improve their dollars due to strong supporter bases.

It seems as if someone will be left without a chair and I think they may wear blue and white.

 

[Z_K]

it doesn't change the fact it has been suggested in the media and by high profile football figures that this will end in 2012.

Nah, that's not true.

It was Caroline Wilson.

 

[Beckers]

I hear this from North supporters all the time, numbers on face value you are 1/10th of the pie, but in terms of real support and real numbers you are probably about 1/25th of the pie in Victoria. The TV rights will not implode if there is no North Melbourne. The won't if their is no Port either, but I have never heard a Port supporter use this arguement.

That is very good logic

 

[Rooiginal]

North will be forced to move to Tassy as Demetriou's final act of CEO.

He (and North) know full well they are not sustainable in Melbourne, and they will also be well aware that the next commission will not continue to prop up basket case clubs like North.
The Storm, Rebels, Victory and new Soccer team will already be bigger than North.

Demetriou will gift North Tasmania to ensure their long term survival.
I feel for the victims in all of this.... Tasmanians. Imagine having North forced on you.

North not moving to the Gold Coast has really had a major impact on your life.

Remember you promised us we would move, you said we would be on the Gold Coast by now??

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

It's been made very clear in the club's annual reports that these are not counted in our official gameday membership figures recognised by the AFL. The club has a great partnership with Vic Uni, involving sponsorship, sharing of sports training facilities and a $6m contribution by them to the Whitten Oval redevelopment for a sports science educational facility. Getting university students based in the West interested in our club is a very smart move. Your continual attacks on our club are an embarrasment and only highlight your insecurity.

I'm just saying its a bit rich for a Footscray supporter to be going on and on about a throwaway line from a North supporter on BigFooty about double scanning memberships when his own clubs literally gives away thousands of free tickets every week.

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

North will be forced to move to Tassy as Demetriou's final act of CEO.

He (and North) know full well they are not sustainable in Melbourne, and they will also be well aware that the next commission will not continue to prop up basket case clubs like North.
The Storm, Rebels, Victory and new Soccer team will already be bigger than North.

Demetriou will gift North Tasmania to ensure their long term survival.
I feel for the victims in all of this.... Tasmanians. Imagine having North forced on you.

YES!

I was happy with a personal email from Eugene Arocca telling me we aren't interested in Tassie but now Doctor_Jolly has spoken saying we certainly will go, we have our final guarantee of safety.

Really though dude, give it up, you've been wrong on this stuff for getting close to three years (that I remember).

Every time. Every step of the way. Every development. You have got it wrong.

I know you are such an embrassment to other Sydney posters that they tried to ban you from their own board but really, maybe just take the hint and find something else to do.

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

Talk about all other clubs you like ..but the fact of tha matter is that North are the most vulnerable club in Melbourne ..and have been for a number of years ...logic dictates that they would be the obvious team to relocate to Hobart if the AFL are serious about sending a team there, it's not rocket science.

The mods should heed your advice regarding trolling ..as you are quite a good one and so you should know all about it .

Vulnerable?

Actually mate, there's been a number of clubs far closer to bankruptcy/insolvency/complete meltdown than us recently.

Don't mistake us having a quisling board that wanted to sell the club from under the members feet to the AFL/Gold Coast for true financial vulnerability.

The Bulldogs, the Dees and Carlton have all been far, far (in some cases literally within days) of going Lehman Brothers insolvent than we have.

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

Well the rumours suggest that in 2012 all special funding will cease. I'm not here to argue whether clubs like North get it because of bad stadium deals or because they can't make a profit. That is not my concern. However, it doesn't change the fact it has been suggested in the media and by high profile football figures that this will end in 2012.

If this happens a lot of clubs could be in trouble including the Kangaroos, Port Adelaide, the Western Bulldogs, Richmond, even Carlton etc. I think the troubling thing is that the AFL will force a club to the brink. A report came out last month suggesting the Bulldogs were as vital to the AFL as expansion in Western Sydney. To me this is a suggestion that the AFL won't kill the Dogs. You would think they will stick with two teams in SA and even the SANFL may step in if it means losing a license.

You could argue that teams such as Carlton and Richmond have the potential to improve their dollars due to strong supporter bases.

It seems as if someone will be left without a chair and I think they may wear blue and white.

Making something up on the Internet to support a barrow you've been pushing (unsuccessfully) for a few years doesn't count as a 'rumour' nor does it count as evidence.

Tell me this.

Just think it through. Nice and slow.

Why at a time when the AFL is pouring money into what it knows will be hugely risky and time and resource consuming activity in expansion clubs would it actively divert that effort into removing an estalished revenue source?

Why?

 

[chesson]

SLF has owned every poster responded to in this thread.

Tassie Tiger's for me.

 

[Brad Roo]

Well the rumours suggest that in 2012 all special funding will cease.

Sweet.

That means in 2012 we will get a decent draw and much better scheduling.

Fine by me.

 

[JiggaDog]

I honestly feel sorry for North supporters having to trott out the same lines pretty much every week when one of these threads is started. I also admire their persistance and belief in their club.

Who knows whether the Tassie team will be a relocated one or a new franchise .... but, if it is to be a relocated one, then who is the most likely candidate?

There is a pretty general consensus amongst supporters of all teams but North that they would be the prime candidate. Obviously they disagree.

So the question to North supporters out there:

If the Tassie team was definitely going to be a relocated team, who do you think would be the prime candidate and why?

My breakdown of candidates is as follows:

North - Have already shown they will be very difficult to relocate anywhere. However AFL could contrive a situation where given their lack of support and funds they are left with little option.

Dogs - I have posted my reasons why this is unlikely already. Suffice to say we represent one of the biggest growth corridors in Australia and the AFL is finally realising how important a healthy and successful Bulldogs is to the competition.

Saints - Going through a good period of success and their support is currently up, however the increase can be largely attributed to bandwagoners and giddy teenage girls. Long term feasibility still questionable.

Hawks - Given the already strong association with Tassie this could be a possibility. Members have in the past proved to be fickle and strongly considered merging. Very strong membership numbers may save them but they are a chance.

Dees - As with Hawks members can be fickle and also considered merging. Don't have the strong membership of the Hawks to back them up and sometimes you've got to wonder whether their supporters actually care. If not for the Melbourne name they may have been shafted already.

The way I see it, the main contenders would be 1st place North, 2nd place Hawks, 3rd place Saints.

 

[Brad Roo]

If the Tassie team was definitely going to be a relocated team, who do you think would be the prime candidate and why?

Whichever club CHOOSES to go.

People need to get rid of the ridiculous mindset that the AFL can force clubs to relocate.

 

[chesson]

North supporters I also admire their persistance and belief in their club.

Who knows whether the Tassie team will be a relocated one or a new franchise .... but, if it is to be a relocated one, then who is the most likely candidate?

The AFL's incompetence has put a stop to a long overdue start up Tasmanian team.

Richmond i prefer to Hawthorn. Many of us in Tassie will be happy to have the hawks pull up stops.

North Melbourne's new dig's are for the long term. Gold Coast relocation speculation previously would not have been North Melbourne. No matter what the Blight's/McCartney's/Barassi's etc say. Get over it people.

 

[JiggaDog]

Whichever club CHOOSES to go.

People need to get rid of the ridiculous mindset that the AFL can force clubs to relocate.

I also think your view is just as shortsighted. Did Sth Melb and Fitzroy choose to go? (Not that I remember but I may be incorrect).

Also, the AFL wields enough power to make circumstances difficult for almost any club it chooses, and whilst I don't know the full history I believe this is part of what happenned with Fitzroy. Its been doing this in some capacity to North for a bit too - draw, stadium deals, FTA TV, etc.

If the AFL decides that 18 teams is the max they want in the comp AND they want a new Tassie team, it would be naive to think they will not try everything in their powers to make a relocation happen - willing participants or not.

 

[stickman11]

The AFL's incompetence has put a stop to a long overdue start up Tasmanian team.

Richmond i prefer to Hawthorn. Many of us in Tassie will be happy to have the hawks pull up stops.

North Melbourne's new dig's are for the long term. Gold Coast relocation speculation previously would not have been North Melbourne. No matter what the Blight's/McCartney's/Barassi's etc say. Get over it people.

Moving to Tasmania would kill off any club.

Hopeless at running any sporting organisation. Would fall over in five years.

 

[chesson]

Moving to Tasmania would kill off any club.

Hopeless at running any sporting organisation. Would fall over in five years.

Tell me when The AFL started up the Tasmanian team to which you refer?
Did it cost the same as GC or WS? How many years did it survive?

 

[Brad Roo]

I also think your view is just as shortsighted. Did Sth Melb and Fitzroy choose to go? (Not that I remember but I may be incorrect).

What serious comparisons can be made between those clubs and any existing club?

Also, the AFL wields enough power to make circumstances difficult for almost any club it chooses,

Actually, it doesn't. No club would ever again sit silent and let the AFL do a South or Fitzroy on them. If they do then they deserve everything they get.

North definitely won't, I know that much. We are constantly pitching guaranteed revenue raising ideas that are constantly being knocked back. This places the AFL in a compromising position should it choose to undergo some Machiavellian reconstruction of the Victorian clubs that was detrimental to North.

and whilst I don't know the full history I believe this is part of what happenned with Fitzroy. Its been doing this in some capacity to North for a bit too - draw, stadium deals, FTA TV, etc.

Please detail these points?

The latest report I saw on our board was that Norths overall debt is $3.5 Mill which has an annual interest debt of $167,000.

Do you honestly believe that $167,000 p.a. is going to bring down the NMFC?

We are light years away from being insolvent. There is simply NO comparison to South or Fitzroy.

If the AFL decides that 18 teams is the max they want in the comp AND they want a new Tassie team, it would be naive to think they will not try everything in their powers to make a relocation happen - willing participants or not.

I'm aware that they will attempt to be very persuasive but $100 million didn't move North and I didn't see any other clubs put their hands up either.

What will be the sweetener next time? $200,000,000?

Tell me, seeing as the North CEO has dismissed talk of a Hobart relocation, which are the three clubs that you believe are interested?

 

[Tas]

1) Can you provide evidence to showing that North Melbourne contributes $8m a year to dockland stadium?
2) Any money you are paying is not for an asset owned equally; you are paying to use the stadium. The right to acquire the Dockland Stadium for $1 in 2025 has already been paid for and is completely separate

I performed some calculations a while ago based on the figured provided in an article last year I believe which estimated the average attendee at TD generates between $33 to $35 and the average stadium return was 75% of the gate and what the break even mark is at TD. It is a ballpark figure.

My figures, which i scribbled on the back of a used napkin, are probably far more reliable than ex-CEO Whacko Jacko, who conned people into believing the stadium would attract 150 events outside football and they would subsidise the cost of playing football there. Other than football the stadium generates two bits and every event totally ****s the surface and god knows how much it costs to repair that damage.

Don't be an idiot. We don't own the stadium, it is a 25 year lease with no reserve, it was built by an investment company and the users of the stadium are the ones who are paying it off.

You don't need 30k people to break even on a stadium, you would have to be an utter moron to believe that shit. Most of the profit margin from the stadium is being absorbed the stadium owners.

We are paying it off and it is an asset that will be owned by the AFL, thus equally owned by each license holder, which is 1/16th. It shouldn't be, it should be an asset of the clubs that have paid it off, which doesn't include your free loading clubs.

 

[tonk]

Whichever club CHOOSES to go.

People need to get rid of the ridiculous mindset that the AFL can force clubs to relocate.

Yep, the days of forcing clubs to relocate are a relic of the dark past. The AFL couldn't induce North to move north, why would they choose to move anywhere?

 

[JiggaDog]

What serious comparisons can be made between those clubs and any existing club?

History has a tendency to repeat itself, so looking to the past can be relevant.

Please detail these points?

I would say your point is above is one of those, wouldn't you? As for the others you and other North supporters have covered those I brought up in much details on this and other previous threads on this topic. Are you now denying the AFL has given North a bad schedule, shitty stadium deals (better since this year), low FTA coverage, etc????

The latest report I saw on our board was that Norths overall debt is $3.5 Mill which has an annual interest debt of $167,000.

Do you honestly believe that $167,000 p.a. is going to bring down the NMFC?

We are light years away from being insolvent. There is simply NO comparison to South or Fitzroy.

By removing the CBF the AFL could quickly accelerate spiralling debt. I'm sure the sneaky pricks have other tactics they could use to create problems should they wish to.

I'm aware that they will attempt to be very persuasive but $100 million didn't move North and I didn't see any other clubs put their hands up either.

What will be the sweetener next time? $200,000,000?

If I remember correctly you and other North supporters have said in other threads (maybe this one also) that the deal for relocation to the GC was NOT good for North due to the conditions hiding behind the $100 million carrot. The money was not the issue. You haven't changed tune here also have you?

Tell me, seeing as the North CEO has dismissed talk of a Hobart relocation, which are the three clubs that you believe are interested?

Is that in the same way that your president said you would play all home games in Melbourne and you are now looking at playing games in Ballarat? Yes that's a stretch as Ballarat really isn't that far away, but the point is what is said at one point in time is not necessarily valid in 2/5/10 years.

As for the three interested clubs, I can only think of two that may voice an interest at the present time being Hawks and Tigers, although I dunno why the Tigers would do it - they have plenty of support in Melbourne and a new 5 year plan (Gotta love their 5 year plans).