Should AFL players take a pay cut to support the development of AFLW?

[Angak]

Listening to Caroline Wilson on 3AW this afternoon and the topic of the men's competition subsidising the women's competition came up. Caro mentioned that the AFL's plan all along was to ask the men's players to take a paycut to support the women's competition.

I am assuming this will be a hot topic as part of the next CBA which comes to an end this year.

Should the men's competition take a pay cut to support the development of the women's competition?

 

[00Stinger]

Should you take a pay cut to allow your employers to pay employees of a new start up business?

Remembering if this new business is a success you won't get any financial reward


Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk

 

[bzparkes]

No.

The onus is on the AFL to continue to improve the quality of the competition and bring in more sponsors.

Not seeing how asking the men to take a pay cut would benefit the AFLW.

 

[deanc]

Listening to Caroline Wilson on 3AW this afternoon and the topic of the men's competition subsidising the women's competition came up. Caro mentioned that the AFL's plan all along was to ask the men's players to take a paycut to support the women's competition.

I am assuming this will be a hot topic as part of the next CBA which comes to an end this year.

Should the men's competition take a pay cut to support the development of the women's competition?

I've heard Ms. Wilson is sadly showing early signs of dementia, didn't realize a symptom of this included making false claims/telling porky pies.
Thoughts and prayers for Caro...

 

[aussierulesrules]

No.

Men built this competition by playing for peanuts for decades, while working day jobs, to the point where it’s now making enough money to pay them what they get paid, so why shouldn’t the ladies do the same, and put in the hard yards to build their competition to the point where it’s likewise making enough money for them to also be able to be full time and make significant money?

 

[RAPPA]

How about Caroline Wilson invests some of her savings in growing AFLW? The hypocrisy of calling for people to forgo part of their future earnings when this peanut probably doesn’t even rock up to AFLW games. The average AFL carver length of sweet FA so the men may as well earn as much as they can before most of them have to enter the real world with a 9-5 gig.

 

[Kappa]

AFL players are already underpaid, dumb dumb suggestion.

 

[Freomaniac]

Listening to Caroline Wilson on 3AW this afternoon and the topic of the men's competition subsidising the women's competition came up. Caro mentioned that the AFL's plan all along was to ask the men's players to take a paycut to support the women's competition.

I am assuming this will be a hot topic as part of the next CBA which comes to an end this year.

Should the men's competition take a pay cut to support the development of the women's competition?

Well the WNBA loses 10 million a year.

Yet the NBA has to put in cash to keep it running

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

No.

If men take a pay cut, does that mean the money would be used to pay the women more so they don't have to work anymore and can therefore train full time?

Most of the women have poor skills, it's too late for them, enabling them to train fulltime will get them fitter and improve their skills marginally.

What they need is young girls and their likeminded mates spending hours on the weekend or after school at the local oval playing kick to kick, taking hangers on each other, having shoots on goal and running around balking each other for fun.

As a kid growing up, that's what every kid that I ever knew who played u/19s and above did.

They need time more than they need money.

 

[Munga]

Pffft, the AFL have plenty of cash.

Maybe if they stop p*ssing money away on the Suns, Giants, and Ben King

34

Ben King

Age

23

Ht

202cm

Wt

98kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

7.2

2star

K

5.0

2star

HB

2.2

2star

M

3.5

4star

T

0.5

3star

G

1.3

5star

D

7.5

2star

K

5.6

2star

HB

1.9

1star

M

3.6

4star

T

0.3

1star

G

1.5

5star

D

6.8

2star

K

4.4

2star

HB

2.4

3star

M

3.2

4star

T

0.2

3star

G

1.0

4star

then they might feel more generous to the women.

I'm all for ideas, but this is just silly from Caro. The AFLW won't be operating at profit for a long time which is fine, but it's not up to the male players to take a cut, come on!

How hard is it for the AFL to support the women? Instead of trying to create two new small markets interstate, actually help 50% of the population!

 

[eastfreo75]

Well the WNBA loses 10 million a year.

Yet the NBA has to put in cash to keep it running

The WNBA players still complain about their wages.

 

[cmndstab]

The women's competition is already subsidised by the enormous influx of women starting to play/getting interested in Aussie Rules footy. Over time that will pay off the costs of AFLW many times over. Short term "pain" (and not even much of that) for massive long term gain.

The only thing that needs subsidising at this point is the salaries of the few hundred women playing AFLW, and frankly, it would be a drop in the bucket for the AFL to pay each of them $100k a year. It would cost, what, around $30M than they're currently spending? Their TV deal alone is worth literally a hundred times that much.

 

[footyfan1978]

No.

Men built this competition by playing for peanuts for decades, while working day jobs, to the point where it’s now making enough money to pay them what they get paid, so why shouldn’t the ladies do the same, and put in the hard yards to build their competition to the point where it’s likewise making enough money for them to also be able to be full time and make significant money?

Well said.

 

[Bostonian]

I think they need to be working harder to get more women and girls to actually watch the game at the ground. Women often say they want something but then the support for such things from other women despite being over half the population is generally poor.

Get those huge numbers of women to come watch and your gate receipts improve, your merchandise revenue improves, your ticket sales improve and then your ability to ask for more for your product improves.

They are building it, but they aren't coming.

 

[Bostonian]

The women's competition is already subsidised by the enormous influx of women starting to play/getting interested in Aussie Rules footy. Over time that will pay off the costs of AFLW many times over. Short term "pain" (and not even much of that) for massive long term gain.

The only thing that needs subsidising at this point is the salaries of the few hundred women playing AFLW, and frankly, it would be a drop in the bucket for the AFL to pay each of them $100k a year. It would cost, what, around $30M than they're currently spending? Their TV deal alone is worth literally a hundred times that much.

Women might play sports in large numbers, not much evidence to show they'll go and watch anything in large numbers though.

 

[Great8]

The men are already subsidising the AFLW, why should they give up any more money.
Time the AFLW stood on its own two feet

 

[Teen Wolf]

I think they need to be working harder to get more women and girls to actually watch the game at the ground. Women often say they want something but then the support for such things from other women despite being over half the population is generally poor.

Get those huge numbers of women to come watch and your gate receipts improve, your merchandise revenue improves, your ticket sales improve and then your ability to ask for more for your product improves.

They are building it, but they aren't coming.

What you think "women often say" is irrelevant. The reality is slightly more men watch AFLW than women do, and neither demographic is going to significantly grow without the other growing at a similar rate.

As for more people watching at the ground, it would be nice, but it's clearly very silly to judge crowd numbers atm anyway. Besides, when attendances were higher 5 years ago, the complaint was "yeah but free entry". Now there are around 40,000 paying members at an average of $75, and those numbers are going to keep increasing... a far more significant piece of the puzzle that you're apparently unaware of.

Time the AFLW stood on its own two feet

Clearly you don't get it. Australian football is all one body. The 18 men's AFL teams are one foot. The 18 women's AFL teams are the other foot. Now that the AFL Corporation and its 18 clubs have come up with the idea of exploiting one for the benefit of the other--and, notably, vice versa--it will always be this way.

 

[Bostonian]

What you think "women often say" is irrelevant. The reality is slightly more men watch AFLW than women do, and neither demographic is going to significantly grow without the other growing at a similar rate.

As for more people watching at the ground, it would be nice, but it's clearly very silly to judge crowd numbers atm anyway. Besides, when attendances were higher 5 years ago, the complaint was "yeah but free entry". Now there are around 40,000 paying members at an average of $75, and those numbers are going to keep increasing... a far more significant piece of the puzzle that you're apparently unaware of.


Clearly you don't get it. Australian football is all one body. The 18 men's AFL teams are one foot. The 18 women's AFL teams are the other foot. Now that the AFL Corporation and its 18 clubs have come up with the idea of exploiting one for the benefit of the other--and, notably, vice versa--it will always be this way.

And the reality is I think the AFLW is at a level where that's almost as many men as you're going to get watching it already. There might be a small increase over time but if the sport moves to winter then that's it for trying to bring in more male viewers.

No I get it. There's a flag ship comp and then there's all the other lesser smaller leagues that feed off it.

Outside of the flagship league the other leagues only really attract die-hard fans of those competitions or teams.

If you think the demographics of people watching it can only grow if they both grow at a similar rate then that doesn't bode well for growing the bums on seat component of the league.

 

[Teen Wolf]

And the reality is I think the AFLW is at a level where that's almost as many men as you're going to get watching it already.

You think that, but it has nothing to do with reality.

if the sport moves to winter then that's it for trying to bring in more male viewers.

It would also be bad for increasing female viewers. Hence a move to a full winter season isn't going to happen (though that's just one of several reasons).

If you think the demographics of people watching it can only grow if they both grow at a similar rate then that doesn't bode well for growing the bums on seat component of the league.

Not sure what you're basing that on. The AFL's growth over the last 30 years has largely been based on appealing to families, and it's worked pretty well.

 

[Bostonian]

You think that, but it has nothing to do with reality.

Has plenty to do with reality.

The growth of male viewers isn't going to ever explode or even get to large numbers ever.

It would also be bad for increasing female viewers. Hence a move to a full winter season isn't going to happen (though that's just one of several reasons).

They key to growing large numbers of crowds is to get in new fans that aren't already watching live football weekly. That group will be far bigger for women than men.

Not sure what you're basing that on. The AFL's growth over the last 30 years has largely been based on appealing to families, and it's worked pretty well.

It's worked because it's the elite comp and it has less competition from other sports or other Aussie Rules competitions as competition.

 

[DragoDelph]

I thought the whole thing was, in the next CBA, the men take (for example, random numbers) a 2% raise, instead of a 10% , with the remaining 8% going to AFLW to try and bridge the gap and build parity (not equal pay) to enable the women to become professional.

I don’t see the issue with this. As if it works, the next CBA afterwards would, in theory, be more significant due to the increase in viewership, which the men will benefit from.

Remember here, I don’t think anyone is asking for equal pay. Comparable and enough so they don’t need to work a second job, sure. (Although I expect the more senior players would anyway).

 

[Teen Wolf]

Has plenty to do with reality.

The growth of male viewers isn't going to ever explode or even get to large numbers ever.




They key to growing large numbers of crowds is to get in new fans that aren't already watching live football weekly. That group will be far bigger for women than men.




It's worked because it's the elite comp and it has less competition from other sports or other Aussie Rules competitions as competition.

Delusional. The family focus is what has helped crush the competition from other sports. And it will be the basis for longterm steady growth of AFLW as well (there is no reasonable expectation for viewership to "explode", nor does there need to be).

 

[lusheslewis]

The women's competition is already subsidised by the enormous influx of women starting to play/getting interested in Aussie Rules footy. Over time that will pay off the costs of AFLW many times over. Short term "pain" (and not even much of that) for massive long term gain.

The only thing that needs subsidising at this point is the salaries of the few hundred women playing AFLW, and frankly, it would be a drop in the bucket for the AFL to pay each of them $100k a year. It would cost, what, around $30M than they're currently spending? Their TV deal alone is worth literally a hundred times that much.

The TV deal is a bit under $500 million per year.

I thought the whole thing was, in the next CBA, the men take (for example, random numbers) a 2% raise, instead of a 10% , with the remaining 8% going to AFLW to try and bridge the gap and build parity (not equal pay) to enable the women to become professional.

I don’t see the issue with this. As if it works, the next CBA afterwards would, in theory, be more significant due to the increase in viewership, which the men will benefit from.

Remember here, I don’t think anyone is asking for equal pay. Comparable and enough so they don’t need to work a second job, sure. (Although I expect the more senior players would anyway).

I feel like this is wishful thinking or you are making this up. It will be very difficult to convince the male players that simply paying the AFLW players more will somehow result in more AFL viewers and more pay for them.

They may concede a bit because they want to be seen to be doing the right thing. The AFL will do everything it can to avoid a public, drawn out negotiation like the last Cricket Australia/player dispute.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

What you think "women often say" is irrelevant. The reality is slightly more men watch AFLW than women do, and neither demographic is going to significantly grow without the other growing at a similar rate.

As for more people watching at the ground, it would be nice, but it's clearly very silly to judge crowd numbers atm anyway. Besides, when attendances were higher 5 years ago, the complaint was "yeah but free entry". Now there are around 40,000 paying members at an average of $75, and those numbers are going to keep increasing... a far more significant piece of the puzzle that you're apparently unaware of.


Clearly you don't get it. Australian football is all one body. The 18 men's AFL teams are one foot. The 18 women's AFL teams are the other foot. Now that the AFL Corporation and its 18 clubs have come up with the idea of exploiting one for the benefit of the other--and, notably, vice versa--it will always be this way.

If this is the case then why do clubs have womens memberships? Why not jus one membership that covers the club be it male or female? Why is there a need for a female membership if they play for the same club?

 

[Teen Wolf]

If this is the case then why do clubs have womens memberships? Why not jus one membership that covers the club be it male or female? Why is there a need for a female membership if they play for the same club?

Because clubs have men's and women's teams. Members have the option to financially support either or both, despite the meme about AFLW being "shoved down our throats".