Tim Lane - Time for a Tasmanian Team

[Tas]

What rot. While Victorian clubs pay running costs for venues, they don't pay rent. The WA clubs pay $3m in rent every year for a 3rd rate venue. That's not a horrendous overhead?

Break-even mark for Victorian stadiums is around 30k, that would put the overhead for 11 games at about $5.5 million dollars. You want to add $2.5 million onto the bottom line of any of the smaller Victorian clubs and realise what that would do for their profitability?

This is really a hypothetical, because there's a zero chance of any Victorian club choosing to play at another Victorian venue, so it's never going to confront the AFL whether or not to approve it. But I would be surprised if a club made arrangements to play at another venue (assuming it met minimum requirements such as capacity, facilities and statutory requirements), the AFL would knock you back.

What the hell are you talking about, the AFL forced the clubs to abandon their suburban stadiums.

Unless you are going to pull a crowd of 70k+ then playing at the MCG is just a waste fo time, all you are doing is generating revenue for the MCC. TD you need to get close to 50k to make what you would squeezing 10k at a suburban stadium. The overheads on these stadiums charged by third party organisations are horrendous.

It is why Collo pulled off the cosmic joke of all time ditching OO and taking the blues to TD to play teams like Freo where they draw 16k to the game and they have nothing other than an expensive bill to show for it. 16k they would have made money at OO.

I think you're seriously underestimating how much it costs to build and maintain a sporting stadium. Not that you're the lone ranger there, Carlton made that mistake as well.

We don't need to build a new stadium, we have plenty of stadiums in Melbourne that are not utilised, the old Optus Oval is just one of them. OO failed because Carlton were morons and tried to rip off clubs to play there.

If the AFL is going to acquire OO from Carlton then it could be used as a low cost alternative for crowds they do not anticipate to go above 35k. As long as it is the AFL running the show and not Carlton, they couldn't run a chook raffle and not come out making a million dollar loss.

The problem isn't stadiums, it's lack of supporters. You've got the best stadiums in Australia to play out of, yet you're jealous of arrangements other clubs have to pay exorbidant rents for 3rd rate dungheaps? Imagine if you were paying $3m a year for the privilege of playing at Optus Oval? Then you'd have something to complain about.

I'm not jealous of anyone. They get a good deal on those stadiums because they can better utilise the capacity. More power to them. We just shouldn't be forced to play there where we are not given a good deal.

We should utilise other stadiums around Melbourne that are available and not being used for anything.

Do better out of Arden St.....jeez, it would cost $50 million just to bring Arden St up to AFL standard! You're saying you'd rather see your club spend $50 million and play out of a far inferior stadium to the one you've got now? Interest alone would be more than your current stadium costs, and that doesn't include running costs of the 'new' Arden st.

It was an example, it was more economic for the club to not play at the MCG or TD and choose to fly to Canberra and play in front of next to nobody there.

TD suits us for games against other Melbourne clubs, we would average 40k to those in Melbourne, outside of years we are playing poorly. But against interstate teams they are not profitable. It is not just us, most clubs here would struggle to make any money out of hosting any interstate club that didn't originate here (ie Swans and Lions).

2 Stadiums for 9 clubs is not sufficient. We need a third and we need to have more power in terms of who we wish to play where.

 

[Eagle87]

Break-even mark for Victorian stadiums is around 30k, that would put the overhead for 11 games at about $5.5 million dollars. You want to add $2.5 million onto the bottom line of any of the smaller Victorian clubs and realise what that would do for their profitability?



What the hell are you talking about, the AFL forced the clubs to abandon their suburban stadiums.

Unless you are going to pull a crowd of 70k+ then playing at the MCG is just a waste fo time, all you are doing is generating revenue for the MCC. TD you need to get close to 50k to make what you would squeezing 10k at a suburban stadium. The overheads on these stadiums charged by third party organisations are horrendous.

It is why Collo pulled off the cosmic joke of all time ditching OO and taking the blues to TD to play teams like Freo where they draw 16k to the game and they have nothing other than an expensive bill to show for it. 16k they would have made money at OO.



We don't need to build a new stadium, we have plenty of stadiums in Melbourne that are not utilised, the old Optus Oval is just one of them. OO failed because Carlton were morons and tried to rip off clubs to play there.

If the AFL is going to acquire OO from Carlton then it could be used as a low cost alternative for crowds they do not anticipate to go above 35k. As long as it is the AFL running the show and not Carlton, they couldn't run a chook raffle and not come out making a million dollar loss.



I'm not jealous of anyone. They get a good deal on those stadiums because they can better utilise the capacity. More power to them. We just shouldn't be forced to play there where we are not given a good deal.

We should utilise other stadiums around Melbourne that are available and not being used for anything.



It was an example, it was more economic for the club to not play at the MCG or TD and choose to fly to Canberra and play in front of next to nobody there.

TD suits us for games against other Melbourne clubs, we would average 40k to those in Melbourne, outside of years we are playing poorly. But against interstate teams they are not profitable. It is not just us, most clubs here would struggle to make any money out of hosting any interstate club that didn't originate here (ie Swans and Lions).

2 Stadiums for 9 clubs is not sufficient. We need a third and we need to have more power in terms of who we wish to play where.

You are now just making stuff up!

Do you really believe that Victorian clubs are paying $2.5million more per annum for stadium usage than clubs such as West Coast and Freo?

You are struggling now.

FWIW, West Coast managed an average crowd in Melbourne last year of 33,460. This was dragged down by a paltry effort by the Hawks which drew only 21,000. We managed crowds of 39000, 40000, 31000 and 35000 in the other 4 games.

North averaged 31,453 at games in Melbourne. Thats right, North Melbourne averaged lower crowds in Melbourne than the West Coast Eagles did.

You are a rabble!

 

[RememberMe]

You are now just making stuff up!

Do you really believe that Victorian clubs are paying $2.5million more per annum for stadium usage than clubs such as West Coast and Freo?

You are struggling now.

FWIW, West Coast managed an average crowd in Melbourne last year of 33,460. This was dragged down by a paltry effort by the Hawks which drew only 21,000. We managed crowds of 39000, 40000, 31000 and 35000 in the other 4 games.

North averaged 31,453 at games in Melbourne. Thats right, North Melbourne averaged lower crowds in Melbourne than the West Coast Eagles did.

You are a rabble!

So are Carlton and Richmond.

 

[Hawkk]

1. They all ready sponsor AFL tasmania which is the governing body in Tasmania.

That in itself - as Kennett pointed out in the article, isn't enough to reach the 25,000,000 dollars required to be a bottom club. In 5 years time, that will be 30-35,000,000 dollars.

2. 3,000 members is not enough to pump 15 million into when the state has 500,000 people.

That's only from the Hawthorn support group - all up you'll probably find Tasmania has 6-8,000 club members.

BTW, that Hawthorn figure has tripled since they entered the Tasmanian market 5 years ago...

3. Tasmanian population has been growing now for a few years not by a huge amount but it's still growing and the economy has been doing well for last 5 years.

Tasmania has been growing slower relative to the rest of the country and the game of football as a whole - you've only got to look how much Fremantle's support has grown in the space of 3-4 years.

4. Unless they have done a study who knows how many members they will get, could be 45,000 and their is no problem or it could be 15,000 and they would be in trouble.

On average 1 in every 10-15 club supporters become members. Of course that figure fluctuates between the different teams - Collingwood and Essendon generally sign up 1 in 20 supporters while the Demons, Roos and Bulldogs generally sign up 1 in every 5-8 supporters.

The market for a Tasmanian side would not be 500,000 people - my guess is that at least half of the population don't take a passing interest in football or wouldn't change alligances if a Tasmanian or relocated side was to enter the market.

The market for a Tasmanian side is therefore at best 250,000 - which would give the state a support base of around about where the bottom end Victorian clubs currently sit. Therefore at best - as Kennett pointed out, a Tasmanian side would have a maximum membership base of between 15-25,000 members. Given membership is pushing up towards 40,000, that doesn't cut the sandwich...

5. If Geelong and Port Adelaide can sustain a side, Tasmania could.

SA's population and corporate pie is significantly greater then Tasmania - even if it is split in half. In addition to that, Port Adelaide is an established club that has been around for more then 100 years, it has therefore developed strong followings in places like NSW, NT, QLD etc. along the journey.

Geelong is an entirely different case. Whilst they are based in a regional capital that only accomadates for 200,000 people, due to geography and being a part of the VFL for 100+ years they have developed a strong following in Melbourne, its surrounding suburbs and different parts of Australia - QLD, WA etc. Like Richmond and the Hawks, Geelong has an estimated support base of 350-400,000 - significantly more then the greater population of Geelong. The GFC is soley Geelong in name only.

Even with that said, the GFC has been very fortunate to have a committed partner in Ford - who partically sponsor everything from the boot studder to the naming rights of the jumper. Without such a committed partner the GFC probably wouldn't be in the position it is today.

As stated in the article Tasmania does not have such a partner.

 

[Hawkk]

Edit

 

[RememberMe]

I am of the opinion that supporters (even members) of other clubs would be enticed to sign up for Tasmanian memberships, just for the opportunity to attend up to 11 AFL games a year.

 

[Ripper]

I am of the opinion that supporters (even members) of other clubs would be enticed to sign up for Tasmanian memberships, just for the opportunity to attend up to 11 AFL games a year.

Spot on. It is interesting to note that the majority of posts poo pooing the idea come from supporters of clubs with a vested interest.

If Tassie got their own team (not a S/H relocated Vic one) , most Taswegians would rally to support it IMHO.

 

[Eagle87]

Spot on. It is interesting to note that the majority of posts poo pooing the idea come from supporters of clubs with a vested interest.

If Tassie got their own team (not a S/H relocated Vic one) , most Taswegians would rally to support it IMHO.

Ripp in about 10 threads on this topic, I have raised clear reasons why their is zero business case for a Tassie team. I have no vested interest. No-one at any stage has managed to come up with anything that is remotely suggestive of a sustainable side (from a financial viewpoint).

Apart from your additional warm fuzzy feelings, are you able to add anything to this debate?

 

[The Majestic]

Queensland-Northern Territory gave us quite a touch-up. I think that's the only AFL recognised game to have been at bellerive. All other Origin games, Fitzroy games, pre-season and practice matches were at North Hobart; with some practice matches at York Park (this is prior to Hawthorn choosing Launceston as their base) and West Park, maybe Devonport Oval.

I think you are right, I didn't remember the scores or anything I have a bit of footage of the game on an AFL dvd which was "Miracle Marks" with Lynch taking a big mark.

I remember back in 1999 North Hobart hosted North Melbourne playing an Anzett Cup game there against I think maybe Essendon(?) I remember the Fitzroy games, I went to see Fitzroy/Essendon one year, and I believe there was Fitzroy/West Coast once as well, which I think there was a promotional thing for the game that was hosted by the North Hobart Football Club.

KGV hosted an AFL game once as well, it was a practice game, from memory, I am not sure the year, or really recall the teams (might have been St. Kilda/Footscray) I heard the story from my dad who said Glenorchy and another side split the gate for the game.

 

[drusswaylander]

Spot on. It is interesting to note that the majority of posts poo pooing the idea come from supporters of clubs with a vested interest.

If Tassie got their own team (not a S/H relocated Vic one) , most Taswegians would rally to support it IMHO.

Unlikely mate. It is not just North versus South in Tassie you have to throw in the NorthWest as well. These regions despise eachother. That is part of the reason the statewide football competition went under.

The state would not support a relocated club and starting from scratch isn't viable. People will not give up their current AFL clubs and buy two memberships. The people of Tassie are passionate about their current clubs as the Hawks found out when they played Carlton.

As has been mentioned Tassie is already a captive audience and the AFL are looking to expand their market in non core States thus the Gold Coast option.

 

[Ripper]

Ripp in about 10 threads on this topic, I have raised clear reasons why their is zero business case for a Tassie team. I have no vested interest. No-one at any stage has managed to come up with anything that is remotely suggestive of a sustainable side (from a financial viewpoint).

Apart from your additional warm fuzzy feelings, are you able to add anything to this debate?

I noticed that you were the odd one out. But quite often you are.

Instead of talking total populations, it would be better to talk in "footy mad" populations.

Not to mention the Ex-pat "footy mad" Taswegians that abound.

Tassie have proven that they can get 15-17K to a game where the majority have no "ownership".

Give them the "ownership" and that figure would most likely double.

They could not be less viable than a poor Melbourne team, and again We get back to that old chestnut.

 

[drusswaylander]

I noticed that you were the odd one out. But quite often you are.

Instead of talking total populations, it would be better to talk in "footy mad" populations.

Not to mention the Ex-pat "footy mad" Taswegians that abound.

Tassie have proven that they can get 15-17K to a game where the majority have no "ownership".

Give them the "ownership" and that figure would most likely double.

They could not be less viable than a poor Melbourne team, and again We get back to that old chestnut.

Once the novelty wore off people wouldn't travel anymore. Then you would be relying on one area to provide the patrons. Tassie people are fanatical about their football true, but about their club. The carlton's, Richmonds, Essendons, Collingwoods etc these are the games you would get sustained crowds to over time.
The home team would be booed at home

Just like the Tassie Devils basketball team did well first up in Tassie. It failed partly because the stronger basketball culture in the North wouldn't travel South to watch them play.

 

[Blues_Man]

There is a lot of people who follow AFL teams because there was not a tasmanian team to go for but would go for Tasmanian side.
Still some issues to resolve mainly around AFL Tasmania and the public with transparency of AFL Tasmania.

Please provide proof of this claim

 

[Hawkk]

Spot on. It is interesting to note that the majority of posts poo pooing the idea come from supporters of clubs with a vested interest.

If Tassie got their own team (not a S/H relocated Vic one) , most Taswegians would rally to support it IMHO.

Personally I'm opposed to the move - from an economic background, because like other satellite regions - ie Canberra and Darwin, I can't see economically how these regions can support clubs in Australia's premier sporting competition.

On the flip side, I guess a Tasmanian side would ultimately result in another poorer side that doesn't have the sufficient infastructure required to reach the top of the mountain entering the competition = a greater chance of the remaining sides winning a premiership.

In that aspect, I'm not completely opposed to a Tasmanian side entering the competition due to vested interests.

 

[Blues_Man]

Spot on. It is interesting to note that the majority of posts poo pooing the idea come from supporters of clubs with a vested interest.

If Tassie got their own team (not a S/H relocated Vic one) , most Taswegians would rally to support it IMHO.

keep dreaming sunshine

 

[Ripper]

Please provide proof of this claim

http://footygoss.com/modules.php?op...article&sid=32203&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

 

[RememberMe]

If those marketing an AFL team in Tasmania painted it as another case of Us against them and brought Boony, Hudson and Foster on board, a majority of Tasmanians would get behind a Tasmanian AFL team. Only proviso would be that it'd have to be a new franchise, not a relocated rabble.

 

[Blues_Man]

I noticed that you were the odd one out. But quite often you are.

Instead of talking total populations, it would be better to talk in "footy mad" populations.

Not to mention the Ex-pat "footy mad" Taswegians that abound.

Tassie have proven that they can get 15-17K to a game where the majority have no "ownership".

Give them the "ownership" and that figure would most likely double.

They could not be less viable than a poor Melbourne team, and again We get back to that old chestnut.

Pure specualtion on your part ...and the funny thing is you know nothing about Tassie and their football allegiences

 

[Ripper]

If those marketing an AFL team in Tasmania painted it as another case of Us against them and brought Boony, Hudson and Foster on board, a majority of Tasmanians would get behind a Tasmanian AFL team. Only proviso would be that it'd have to be a new franchise, not a relocated rabble.

Exactly , nothing would unite the north and south more than that.

Hell, I even don't hate Sowf Fremantle anymore.

 

[Blues_Man]

http://footygoss.com/modules.php?op...article&sid=32203&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

A WA football forum does not equate to proof of your wild assertions ...try again

 

[drusswaylander]

keep dreaming sunshine

Agreed You not only have the North, South, NorthWest divide, but people are passionate about their current clubs.
The population has a large proportion of retirees with the main young population growth coming from the housing estates who don't have a lot of disposable income.

There are unfortunately so many reasons why it wouldn't work.

 

[Blues_Man]

I think you are right, I didn't remember the scores or anything I have a bit of footage of the game on an AFL dvd which was "Miracle Marks" with Lynch taking a big mark.

I remember back in 1999 North Hobart hosted North Melbourne playing an Anzett Cup game there against I think maybe Essendon(?) I remember the Fitzroy games, I went to see Fitzroy/Essendon one year, and I believe there was Fitzroy/West Coast once as well, which I think there was a promotional thing for the game that was hosted by the North Hobart Football Club.

KGV hosted an AFL game once as well, it was a practice game, from memory, I am not sure the year, or really recall the teams (might have been St. Kilda/Footscray) I heard the story from my dad who said Glenorchy and another side split the gate for the game.

Essendon verses Carlton at North Hobart oval ..i was there .
St Kilda V Carlton at Burnie as well ..i was there.
don't bother going to the other games because my side isn't playing ..i'm pretty typical of your average Tassie footy supporter .

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

There is a lot of people who follow AFL teams because there was not a tasmanian team to go for but would go for Tasmanian side.

Still some issues to resolve mainly around AFL Tasmania and the public with transparency of AFL Tasmania.

http://footygoss.com/modules.php?op...article&sid=32203&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

Freo is a very different market to Tassie.
You have to remember that until very recently the WAFL was #1 footy in WA, with the VFL followed from a distance. In Tassie the VFL (the VFL which is now AFL, not the VFL that was VFA) has been king for decades.
Perth is also 1.5m people within 30km or so of Freo, and one of the wealthiest cities on the planet with big corporates available. As opposed to under 0.5m spread out across the state and the poorest state in the nation with the least growth prospects and no corporates. Not just no headquarters, but very few decision makers for sales people to bribe with corporate suites either; as most major company state offices are run out of Melbourne as a Vic/Tas state.

People in Tas follow their club with the same passion as Victorians do. Their club. They won't change that. Some would get a membership as a second team, others because its the only top standard footy in town, but very, very few would actually be supporting the Tas team ahead of their original one.

 

[Ripper]

Pure specualtion on your part ...and the funny thing is you know nothing about Tassie and their football allegiences

It is speculation, but every one of the 41K Freo Membership followed some VFL team (and some still do).

A lot still have/had their VFL team as their primary allegance while the Kiddies follow Freo.

I've met every breed of VFL supporter (with Freo memberships) at the footy.

 

[Blues_Man]

People in Tas follow their club with the same passion as Victorians do. Their club. They won't change that. Some would get a membership as a second team, others because its the only top standard footy in town, but very, very few would actually be supporting the Tas team ahead of their original one.

Bingo !