VFL/AFL Soap Opera!!

Remove this Banner Ad

James2

Senior List
Jun 6, 2000
209
1
Canberra (Essendon)
In an earlier thread, many members of this forum expressed their outrage at the AFL's actions in regard to Fitzroy. Others have also condemned the AFL/VFL's handling of issues pertinent to the future of the game.

Few would argue that the decision to go national secured the League's future and that of many Victorian clubs. However, having done some research, I've been able to piece together a litany of stuff-ups, that placed the future of the national competition in doubt.

Unfortunately, this rant does not include all the facts, only those I could garner ffrom 3 (spare) hours at the National Library.

SYDNEY

1) In 1980, John Hennessy delivered a confidential report to the VFL entitled "The Sydney Solution: VFL at the Crossroads." In it, he projects that a team in Sydney could expect to make a $750,000 surplus within three years. Allen Aylett, who had long harboured a desire to see the VFL become a national competition, used the report as the basis for the relocation of South Melbourne to Sydney.

2) The Swans were launched with the help of a $400,000 loan, negotiated by the VFL. Although attendances were better then expected, the Swans'financial performance was very poor. By the end of 1982, the club wrote to CIGS Nominees- the company that provided the credit, seeking a deferment of the loan. By May 1983, the Swans had accrued a debt of $1.5 million, forcing the VFL to take control of the club.

3)In 1984, things began to turn around. Financial problems eased and the club won 6 of its first 9 games. In round 10, 26,000 fans attended a a games against Carlton. However, by the end of the year, the club has slumped to 10th. A collection of Sydney identities began to pursue avenues to save the club. They were paticularly enticed by the concept of private ownership as existed in the USA. They began discussions with the VFL.

4) Geoffery Edelsten and Basil Sellers tenderd offers with the VFL. As Edelsten continued to up the ante in a bid to gain the franchise, Sellers pulled out, convinced that the club could not break even. In addition, the Age newspaper approached the VFL with some damning information regarding Edelsten's business dealings. Edelsten had been under investigation from the ATO, the Coporate Affairs Commission has wound up two of his companies and were prosecuting five of his ten companies for failure to lodge documents. It is difficult to fathom, why the VFL sold the Swans to a man whose management of his other businesses could be considered sloppy, at best. Nevertheless, the Swans were sold to Edelsten for $6.5 million in July 1985.

5) In May 1988, Powerplay (Edelsten's comany) and its subsidiaries (including the Swans) went into liquidation after Telecom cut the office's phones. The Sydney licence was sold back to the VFL for $10. A consortium of local businessman, including Mike Willessee, joins forces to buy the club.

6) In 1990, Swans players are forced to take 20% pay cuts. In 1993, the consortium goes into liquidation forcing the AFL, to once again, take control of the club. In 1994, the club reverted to its present structure.

Not suprisingly, the initial projections of $750,000 surpluses failed to materialise. The relocation of South Melbourne is just one of a litany of stuff-ups made by the VFL/AFL, because they were guided by ideology, rather then common sense. Allen Aylett later admitted, that the scheme was insufficiently funded from the start.

BRISBANE

1) In 1986 the VFL Commission, sough tenders for two new teams- one in WA and one in Qld. The VFL received two tenders for the Qld team. One from a joint consortium lead by Paul Cronin and the QAFL and another from QLD businessman John Brown. The VFL Commission were attracted to Brown's offer, however changed their mind after they were "lead" to the belief that the Cronin syndicate would provide the $4 million licence fee up front, enabling many struggling Victorian clubs to stay afloat.

2) Many members of the Cronin syndicate got cold feet, when it came time to provide the cash. Cronin was short of cash. Enter Christopher Skase. Skase payed the licence fee, with money borrowed from the ANZ Bank. Sakse set up Queensland Merchant Holdings Ltd to operate his first foray into Australian Rules. In a bizarre move, the cub set up at Carrara on the Gold Coast rather than in Brisbane.

3) When Skases's Quintex Empire collapsed in November 1989, the Bears went under with debts of $27 million. It was discovered at this time, that the money Skase borrowed to buy the Bears, was still owed (in full) to the ANZ Bank.

4) The ANZ Bank and Cronin approached Gold Coast businessman Reuben Pellerman with an offer to buy the club. As evidence of the farce that was to become the Brisbane Bears, Cronin and the Bank, harrased Pellerman for days, including one discussion, just hours after major surgery"! Pellermen eventually "relented" and agreed to purchase the Bears. Cronin ignored the offer made by Andrew Ireland and Andrew Piper on behalf of another syndicate. Andrew Ireland was to become the Bears CEO and Piper, their Chairman.

5)When Pellerman took over the club, he found that everything (membership, signage etc) had been sold off. As he had no revenue, Pellerman had to meet the opeating costs with his own money. He sunk $3.3 million in 1990. At the end of 1991, the club reverted to a members based structure. In 1993, they finally relocated to Brisbane.

The mishandling of the expansion of the league, poses an interesting question:

1) If the AFL had based their decisions on common sense rather then ideology, would Fitzroy be the only Victorian club that no longer exists?

The VFL/AFL insists that their decisions were the only ones open. It is difficult to accept this arguement, when the process was riddled with poor planning, a lack of discussion and no studies into the varisty of the projetions they received.

If the AFL/VFL had no been so rushed, the fiascos in Brisbane and Sydney, which nearly floored any oppurtunity of an AFL club establishing itself in an important market, could have been avoided.

------------------
"Be not afraid of greatness."
Shakespeare, Twelfth Night.
 
Well Done James!

I have some intial comments to make.

  1. I would sincerely hope that when the time comes - as I believe it surely will - for another Melbourne based team to relocate, that the AFL and the management of Team X look at and learn from the mistakes of the past.
  2. It is my perception that the management of clubs today in general have a lot more business savvy than those of 10 - 20 years ago. I believe that most clubs back then were still run as football clubs rather than as a business. I would certainly hope that anyone who moves does so with the guaranteed support of the AFL - and therefore by extension the other 15 clubs - and after completing an exhaustive planning process.
  3. Sadly, I think that the team that moves next will do it as an option of last resort. This will probably lead to it being done in haste and with many of the same errors repeated. Let's hope not.
    [/list=a]

    ------------------
    This is a hallucination and these faces are in a dream. A computer generated environment; a fantasy island you can do anything and not have to face the consequences.
 
Even the so called 'harsh' environment in melbourne is more attracive than any of the alternatives.

Given the need for long term support and the deep-seated mistrust of the AFL _ Can;t see a club doing it voluntarily.

Expect to see melbourne clubs play more and more games in strange places to try to develop markets. But if past experience is anything to go by, gdon't expect it tobe done with much strategy
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Of course with the benefit of hindsight we can now say the AFL did make some mistakes. In my opinion in many cases there were considered reasons for doing so.

SYDNEY
1) In 1980, John Hennessy delivered a confidential report to the VFL entitled "The Sydney Solution: VFL at the Crossroads." In it, he projects that a team in Sydney could expect to make a $750,000 surplus within three years. Allen Aylett, who had long harboured a desire to see the VFL become a national competition, used the report as the basis for the relocation of South Melbourne to Sydney.

I could also add here that with the increasing professionalism of the AFL and the spiraling costs, many of the clubs were broke. It is now well known that the VFL/AFL had real fears that the Victorian market was saturated in terms of sponsorship and corporate dollars. Unless the VFL moved into the Sydney market, the TV rights would be unlikely to increase in value sending many Victorian clubs to the wall. The League had toyed with the idea of having a team in Sydney for a few years before 1981 and had scheduled matches for premiership points to test the market.

2) By May 1983, the Swans had accrued a debt of $1.5 million, forcing the VFL to take control of the club. It was at this point that the 'South Melbourne FC Ltd'. became the 'Sydney Swans Ltd'.

3) They were particularly enticed by the concept of private ownership as existed in the USA, where in fact it had worked very successfully making large profits for the owners.

4) "It is difficult to fathom, why the VFL sold the Swans to a man whose management of his other businesses could be considered sloppy, at best."

Jack Hamilton in charge of the VFL opposed the sale of the Swans to Edelsten, little of the evidence against Edelsten could be substantiated in court. As well as that a big fee from Edelsten would mean more money for Victorian clubs, many of whom were close to going to the wall. There's no doubt now that the money from the Swans and Bears licence fees, saved Collingwood, Fitzroy, Footscray, Richmond, St Kilda, Hawthorn, Melbourne and North Melbourne from possible extinction. The VFL was also advised from a leading financial and mangement consultant that Edelsten could pay the money. Again with the benefit of hindsight, we know that was in fact incorrect.

With the benefit of hindsight, one would agree that perhaps the relocation of South Melbourne is one of a litany of stuff-ups made by the VFL/AFL. I would disagree that it was solely because they were guided by ideology. There were financial concerns as well and the AFL/VFL recognised this, acted upon it and now have a presence in what will be in about twenty-five years the two largest markets in Australia. By 2025 it is estimated, by the Bureau of Statistics, that half the population of Australia will reside in NSW and Queensland and that Brisbane will overtake Melbourne as Australia's second biggest city.

BRISBANE

1) The VFL Commission were attracted to Brown's offer, however changed their mind after they were "led" to the belief that the Cronin syndicate would provide the $4 million licence fee up front, enabling many struggling Victorian clubs to stay afloat.

Exactly. That was the driving force behind the admission of clubs. Remember it is the clubs who still make the final decisions about the make-up of the competition, and the AFL commission only make recommendations in this area. Cronin and co. tried first to lure Fitzroy up there and very nearly succeeded. It was the AFL clubs who wanted Cronin becuase of the upfront licence fee and the AFL commission was forced to agree, against it's better judgement. Again with hindsight, it's easy to condemn now.

2) In a bizarre move, the club set up at Carrara on the Gold Coast rather than in Brisbane. Why was it such a bizarre move? Again with the benefit of hindsight, we see that now, and I agree that the Brisbane Lions are much better at the Gabba than Carrara. However the Bears had no home several weeks before the start of the 87 season and Carrara seemed to be the best of a bad lot of grounds. Having put $12 million into the club already Skase and Cronin did not want to shift lock stock and barrel back to Brisbane because of the huge cost. The AFL/VFL in fact was reluctant to have the club move there in the first place and agreed on the basis that it would only be for one year. They were most unhappy with the situation for several years and in fact had no legal course of action to send them to Brisbane. As well as that the Queensland government supported Skase staying on the Gold Coast.

The mishandling of the expansion of the league, poses an interesting question:

1) If the AFL had based their decisions on common sense rather then ideology, would Fitzroy be the only Victorian club that no longer exists?

The AFL/VFL commission did use commonsense on many occasions when deciding on the circumstances of entry of clubs. In some cases they were overuled or opposed by the clubs who make the final decisions. I would argue that in fact it is the individual clubs, not the AFL commission who often lack a long-term vision and in many cases a common-sense approach to the competition as a whole. The establishment of the Brisbane Bears is a classic example. Long term the AFL's ideology was sound. Expansion needed to be made into the two markets that will eventually become the biggest in Australia. If the move had not been made when it was, then the opportunity may have been lost.

The VFL/AFL insists that their decisions were the only ones open. It is difficult to accept this arguement, when the process was riddled with poor planning, a lack of discussion and no studies into the variety of the projections they received.

I agree with you that the VFL/AFL could have made different decisions. However as I have said before hindsight is a wonderful thing. There's no doubt in my mind that Fitzroy should have moved to Brisbane as a relocated club in 1986. Leon Wiegard again with the benefit of hindsight still regrets not going and he singlehandedly opposed the Fitzroy Board's decision to go!!

"If the AFL/VFL had not been so rushed, the fiascos in Brisbane and Sydney, which nearly floored any oppurtunity of an AFL club establishing itself in an important market, could have been avoided."

I'm not sure what could have been done differently or better. Private ownership seemed like the way to go, because of the relative success in the USA. It was thought, based on overseas experience, that it would provide a cash injection for the VFL. An entry needed to be made into the Sydney and Brisbane markets, as quickly as possible to get as much money as possible for the struggling clubs in Victoria. The AFL/VFL made mistakes, sure.....but in my opinion they were driven by other external (and sometimes internal) forces other than ideology.

I am not an AFL apologist, but I do understand in many cases the motivating forces behind decisions that were taken rightly or wrongly. For example I think the closing of Waverley was/is wrong, but I understand why it was done.
 
Football - Inc is a very good reference on these and similar matters. I was hoping the author would publish a sequel documenting the '90s shenanegins.

But were the Hawks in financial trouble in the eighties ? I think not, so the Sydney move didn't really benefit them that much.

The early nineties, secret payments (we did them too)salary cap, loss of zones, loss of access to Interstate players and the draft were designed to 'limit' hawthorn and certainly worked.
 
plus if we accept thay these moves were neccesary in the Eighties, why are they persisting with them 15 years later. If the steps taken were so good how come the league is still in trouble.
 
Cheers Dutchy!!!

Football Ltd by Gary Linnell was a very good source of information, as was Allen Aylett's autobiography My Game. Aylett speaks frankly on many issues- most unusual for a VFL/AFL administrator
wink.gif
VFL annual reports are also a good source of information, especially the detail they stuff into the fine print and express in a manner Sir Humphrey would be proud of
biggrin.gif
Many newspaper and journal articles on this subject, too.

Roy,

I'm not questioning the wisdom of national expansion. I think it was a good idea. I think it could have been handled better and that many of the mistakes that occurred, could have been avoided.

SYDNEY

I am perplexed as to why the VFL's original Sydney proposal, contained no contingency, in case of problems. The VFL were convinced that the projections in the Hennessy report would come to fruition. What proof did the VFL have, to suggest that this would occur? None. How could they? No one could make such a claim with any assurity. Why then, did they fund the venture on the basis of the Hennessy Report? Aylett's admission that the relocation was insufficiently funded from the start, suggests that getting the approriate funding was not a problem, they (the VFL) didn't think it was an issue. There can be no considered reason for making such an error.

Private ownership had been a success in the USA; it had also failed. One of the reason the NBA introduced a salary cap, was because there were franchising losing money. In addition, the administration of sporting competitions in the USA, is different to the AFL. This made the comparison with USA examples, very tenuous indeed. An essential difference, is that American teams can charge their own prices for tickets- this is one of the ways they cover their costs. Although AFL clubs have autonomy over the price of membership, they can not control the cost of admission for general members of the public. This is set by the AFL. In general, it is very difficult for a privately owned club, to remain profitable, whilst still appealling to a mass market.

I agree that the Swans and Bears licence fees gave money to struggling clubs, whether it saved them from extinction is a moot point. The $263,000 they received from the Edelsten sale and approx $400,000 they received from the West Coast/Brisbane sales, would have dissappeared within a year or so. This does not justify the VFL's decision to sell licences to dubious consortia.

------------------
"Be not afraid of greatness."
Shakespeare, Twelfth Night.
 
The League had toyed with the idea of having a team in Sydney for a few years before 1981 and had scheduled matches for premiership points to test the market.
One wonders why they did not test more markets than just Sydney or Brisbane if the VFL really wanted to expand internationally. It is true that historically the area from Nowra to Bundaberg has been very much the centre of Australia’s population, but Aussie Rules has - almost certainly owing to the less unlimited supply of land - never been the major winter game in this area as it has in the limitless land supply of the southern and western states.

In the 1952 National Day Round, the VFL had scheduled a match for premiership points in Tasmania. Why when it was considering expansion for the first time did it not try playing matches in Tassie, WA or SA - perhaps even in Canberra?

There's no doubt now that the money from the Swans’ and Bears’ licence fees, saved Footscray, Richmond, St. Kilda, Melbourne and North Melbourne from possible extinction.
I read some time ago that St. Kilda were going to be bought by a major Perth businessman (I forget his name) at a time when they were in dire straits on the field. Given his location, I can imagine St. Kilda might have been relocated to Perth very soon afterwards had their members allowed the privatisation to go through? That would have been a far more certain move to deal with a saturated Melbourne market than what happened with South or Fitzroy. I am also confident that St. Kilda’s club culture would have been much more accepting of the principle of sacrificing on-field success to reduce debts (profit-maximisation as opposed to the win-maximisation of traditional VFL clubs) than those two clubs built historically around defunct, unionised working classes.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

VFL/AFL Soap Opera!!

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top