- Joined
- Oct 20, 2000
- Posts
- 6,149
- Reaction score
- 80
- Location
- Belgrave
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Richmond
It was recently announced that a News Limited led consortium comprising Channel 9, Channel 10, Foxtel and Telstra had been awarded the rights to broadcast AFL football for 5 years commencing in 2002.
This consortium will be paying somewhere in the order of $500 million dollars for this privilege - more than double what Channel 7 are paying under the current agreement.
It has been reported - although not substantiated - that as part of the Collective Agreement between the AFL and the AFL Players Association that 85% of the revenue increases must go to the players in the form of increased payments.
Regardless of whether this is correct or not, what is clear is that there is this ready acceptance of the line continually being pushed by the player managers that the players deserve more money, that in fact they are poorly paid for what they do, yada yada yada...
This all appears well and rosy in this post TV Rights euphoria, with all the powers that be patting themselves on the back for doing such a great service!
I am not quite so convinced! I have two issues with this situation that acts as a wet blanket on my enthusiasm!
This inflation is unsustainable
The first issue I have with the TV Rights revenue and the player's stranglehold over it is that this level of inflation is clearly unsustainable. As the AFL were able to secure a bid worth $500 million over the 5 years this huge windfall will be used to fuel inflation with the salary cap expanding to accommodate this.
The AFL is prepared to withstand a $15 million deficit through the 2001 season in order to assist the clubs to meet the escalating wages bill that has inflated dramatically - and unsustainably - just in ancticpation of these funds.
What happens in 5 years time when we are up for renewing the TV Rights? What if, in 5 years Channel 7 are very comfortable and profitable making Blue Heelers spin off's and have no interest in bidding for the AFL football rights.
What if there is no competition to the Channel 9 consortium?
You can then bet that they won't be paying top dollar for the privilege of broadcasting the AFL - just enough to keep say Channel 10 or Foxtel from taking outright ownership. What if the next bout of TV Rights only yields say $250 million for the next 5 years?
All of a sudden you have clubs with massive wages bills and without the revenue streams with which to support it. This could well drive clubs to the wall. Any Club. My Club! I don't want that!
Players or Club?
As much as I cheer on our current crop of players with all the passion and enthusiasm that befits a Tiger, I know that in 15 years time it is unlikely that any of them will still be playing. There will no longer be Richo, Knighter or Cambo. No, in their place will be a whole new crop of stars, hopefuls and ordinary players. And good luck to them all as well.
Understand this. It is not the players I really care about. They are transient. They come. They go. Some stay on with the club and ultimately become regarded as champions. Some leave to find there fortunes elsewhere. At any rate, they all are only temporary.
What I really do care about is the clubs! In particular, the Richmond Football Club. Established in 1885. Winner of 10 premierships. 5 Brownlow Medal winners. I loved them before Richo was even born!
I want my club to survive! I want all clubs to survive! I don't want this greedy grab by the players to be threatening our existence - which is exactly what it is doing!
This has got to stop!
What I would much rather see is only conservative increases in the salary cap and with a more substantial portion of it being paid to the clubs in the form of a capital grant - in much the same manner as the 'Last Rights' payment was - so that clubs can do something like build a new gym or a swimming pool or an indoor training facility.
This way, both the current and future players receive benefit of this windfall, and the clubs develop the financial strength that enables them to prosper into the future.
That way, everybody wins!
------------------
TigerFury.net - Independant Richmond Tigers website
This consortium will be paying somewhere in the order of $500 million dollars for this privilege - more than double what Channel 7 are paying under the current agreement.
It has been reported - although not substantiated - that as part of the Collective Agreement between the AFL and the AFL Players Association that 85% of the revenue increases must go to the players in the form of increased payments.
Regardless of whether this is correct or not, what is clear is that there is this ready acceptance of the line continually being pushed by the player managers that the players deserve more money, that in fact they are poorly paid for what they do, yada yada yada...
This all appears well and rosy in this post TV Rights euphoria, with all the powers that be patting themselves on the back for doing such a great service!
I am not quite so convinced! I have two issues with this situation that acts as a wet blanket on my enthusiasm!
This inflation is unsustainable
The first issue I have with the TV Rights revenue and the player's stranglehold over it is that this level of inflation is clearly unsustainable. As the AFL were able to secure a bid worth $500 million over the 5 years this huge windfall will be used to fuel inflation with the salary cap expanding to accommodate this.
The AFL is prepared to withstand a $15 million deficit through the 2001 season in order to assist the clubs to meet the escalating wages bill that has inflated dramatically - and unsustainably - just in ancticpation of these funds.
What happens in 5 years time when we are up for renewing the TV Rights? What if, in 5 years Channel 7 are very comfortable and profitable making Blue Heelers spin off's and have no interest in bidding for the AFL football rights.
What if there is no competition to the Channel 9 consortium?
You can then bet that they won't be paying top dollar for the privilege of broadcasting the AFL - just enough to keep say Channel 10 or Foxtel from taking outright ownership. What if the next bout of TV Rights only yields say $250 million for the next 5 years?
All of a sudden you have clubs with massive wages bills and without the revenue streams with which to support it. This could well drive clubs to the wall. Any Club. My Club! I don't want that!
Players or Club?
As much as I cheer on our current crop of players with all the passion and enthusiasm that befits a Tiger, I know that in 15 years time it is unlikely that any of them will still be playing. There will no longer be Richo, Knighter or Cambo. No, in their place will be a whole new crop of stars, hopefuls and ordinary players. And good luck to them all as well.
Understand this. It is not the players I really care about. They are transient. They come. They go. Some stay on with the club and ultimately become regarded as champions. Some leave to find there fortunes elsewhere. At any rate, they all are only temporary.
What I really do care about is the clubs! In particular, the Richmond Football Club. Established in 1885. Winner of 10 premierships. 5 Brownlow Medal winners. I loved them before Richo was even born!
I want my club to survive! I want all clubs to survive! I don't want this greedy grab by the players to be threatening our existence - which is exactly what it is doing!
This has got to stop!
What I would much rather see is only conservative increases in the salary cap and with a more substantial portion of it being paid to the clubs in the form of a capital grant - in much the same manner as the 'Last Rights' payment was - so that clubs can do something like build a new gym or a swimming pool or an indoor training facility.
This way, both the current and future players receive benefit of this windfall, and the clubs develop the financial strength that enables them to prosper into the future.
That way, everybody wins!
------------------
TigerFury.net - Independant Richmond Tigers website
