why the name changes?

[Tas]

To Tasmania, doubtful!

Tasmania doesn't have the public support nor the corporate support to support a fully fledged AFL team.

I think they have public support. Tasmania has 487k people there, Geelong has 205k? They still get some support from Melbourne but they are not as small as people make them out to be.

Canberra has a population around 310k but it is not a football state/territory anymore and is sharing the region with Rugby league and union teams.

Corporate support wouldn't be massive as it is Melbourne but a lot of companies have vested interests in Tasmania and there would likely be access to a reasonable amount of corporate support given you are not sharing resources there with other sports.

Our members get treated like 3rd rate citizens, and hence don't go.

How do you get treated like 3rd rate citizens? With seating?

So Ian Dickers board had a master stroke, why not play these Dome disasters in a new market - turn what were financially disastrous games into profitable games?

It is the same reason we started playing games outside of Melbourne, for the exposure as much as the monetary incentive. We previously had and developed Friday Night footy which got us guaranteed games on TV. AFL was meant to schedule us for games against low drawing sides and we were meant to get more TV air time but the AFL forgot about that, schedules a lot of games against Melbourne based teams (even Collingwood) there and we played games there from time to time that had no tv coverage.

The change to Gold Coast opens up the possibility of night games so that really broadens the possibilities. Gold Coast has a slightly bigger population (482k) than Canberra and while it there is also a rugby presence there I think there is also a stronger AFL presence and a stronger economy than Canberra.

The more games we play at the Dome the smaller our membership has dropped 6,000 in the space of 5 years, in that time our Dome allocation has grown to the point where our Telstra Dome allocation was larger then our MCG allocation this season. I dare say that with a large increase in our MCG game allocation coming next season, our membership in Victoria will increase dramatically irrespective of the Tassie deal.

I don't mind going to the dome, i dont see why it is hated that much. MCG is easier to get to if you drive but overall I have no real preference between the two.

I think our financial result this is going to pretty harsh given the AFL has allowed Foxtel to broadcast 3 of our sunday homegames in Melbourne live against the gate, that always has a big impact on crowds and profits. Our average in Melbourne is down a bit, was 40k for Melbourne home games in 2005 and dropped to 28.5k in 2006. We had no live against the gate last year, we didn't suck last year either...

They looked seriously at Carrara, Canberra and even Darwin, but research suggested that the biggest Hawk stronghold outside Victoria was in Tasmania, in particular Launseston.

We are the fourth most supported club in WA but no Melbourne clubs were allowed to play home games in SA or WA so that wasn't an option for us.

The response we got down there was over whelming, especially in the earlier years, which in climax has resulted in us taking over York Park as a HOME GROUND – we now get the gate receipts, have sole access to the sponsors boards around the ground and now manage the members reserves and where they sit. This has never been done in Australian sport - a club having 2 home grounds in different states. We will even have Hawthorn people based full time in Tasmania!

The attraction to playing interstate is that interstate venues are very economical to play on, you really need a big crowd at TD or MCG to make any real money.

You probably make more at York with 15k than you do at the MCG with 40k.

The idea is to develop a very strong footing in 2 markets. Our primary market - in the Eastern suburbs of Melbourne, and our secondary market - Tasmania – which we all hope will give us a vibrant 8,000+ base. If we are going to reach our goal of a 40,000+ membership, this is the way we have to do it.

I understand the theory but I also think it can erode your supporter base here over a long period of time. Our membership base has doubled I think since we first started playing interstate but long-term I think it will be difficult to really push the support barrier unless you are ridiculously successful for a ridiculously long period of time.

Seeing less and less live games does errode the fanatasism of the supporter base. We have a ridiculously large number of supporters who do not re-sign from year to year, I think all clubs do but from the reaction from our club this trend has been growing larger and large. We just cycle through huge numbers who are fickle with the support. I think if that trend continues and deteriorates combined with growing support interstate it would put a lot of pressure on the clubs, especially when we eventually get to a point in time where the AFL can't or wont provide financial assistance.

If we are ever going to be able to go toe to toe with the Collingwood's and the SA and WA clubs, we have to do this. In a way it's a very small sacrifice for such a big reward, we get a large number of games at the MCG, we are still Hawthorn and we are still a Melbourne based club albeit with a Tassie connection, but most importantly we now have guaranteed financial future - for any Victorian club, that is golden.

We actually turned over more than Adelaide did last year, it is just that much cheaper to play football in SA and they have derived more income from membership than other less profitable forms means they were able to turn in healty profits and spend more on their footy.

I think you need a good stable membership base but we have increased our revenue stream some four fold over the last 10 years despite a relatively low membership base. The key is to grow your supporter base as that will directly relate to long-term growth. The problem is you have to live long enough to reap the seeds you sow.

I'm an ex pact Victorian, so the games don't matter to me, what does matter to me is our identity, our future and our ability to win premierships. This deal will help to keep the dream alive for a very long time, who knows what the future has install - we may win a premiership in the next 10 years, we may not, but the important thing – at least in my eyes, is that I will always have a Hawthorn support. Like it or lump it, the SA, WA and Collingwood clubs are the powerhouses of the league, I hope that this deal will at least bridge the gap.

If they are Hawthorn people, I welcome them with open arms into the family

I still think clubs will be very vulnerable, once you establish a symbiotic relationship you become dependant on the other partner and you can't detach yourself without it killing you in the process.

I think its great Hawks have found a good market in Tasmania, I just think in 20 years time you will be a Tasmanian side playing some games in Melbourne than vice versa. It is not a dig at the Hawks, I think the same of any club that spends that much time in one spot, especially if your interstate membership grows while your Melbourne based membership declines.

That will be the same fate for my club if we do not grow our membership base.

 

[NimChief]

What a coincidence!!!!

My VirginSensor went off when I read your post.

And if we didn't have internet down Frankston way, how the hell am I on here, you f**kwit.

Why don't you shrink your head and use it as a paperweight? It's not much use for writing intelligent posts with, that's for sure.

But seriously, I've come across decomposing dog carcases that are less offensive to the senses than you are.

Clearly, the full area of your ignorance is not yet mapped.

Try closing that mouth of yours before someone sticks an apple in it, piggy.

 

[Frankston Rover]

Why don't you shrink your head and use it as a paperweight? It's not much use for writing intelligent posts with, that's for sure.

Lucky we've got the internet down here otherwise I wouldn't get to read such quality posts.

But seriously, I've come across decomposing dog carcases that are less offensive to the senses than you are.

You may have Anti-Moron™ software but you obviously don't have spell check.

Clearly, the full area of your ignorance is not yet mapped.

Another sad attempt at humour. Maybe you should download Comeback2006 - it's a program designed to help sad sacks of sh*t like you.

Try closing that mouth of yours before someone sticks an apple in it, piggy.

I don't know about you but I keep my mouth shut when I type.

Another Norff fan with no clues.....

 

[Hawkk]

I think they have public support. Tasmania has 487k people there, Geelong has 205k? They still get some support from Melbourne but they are not as small as people make them out to be.

Canberra has a population around 310k but it is not a football state/territory anymore and is sharing the region with Rugby league and union teams.

I've done reports on this stuff. Tasmania's population is growing at a lower rate then the rest of the country - half the rate of Victoria. Unlike Canberra, Gold Coast etc. Tasmania's market is isolated due to its geographical location, the theory of 9 Melbourne based sides and 1 Geelong based side is wrong. There are 10 sides in Victoria that draw support from all over the state, on average 490,000 people support a side on a per capita basis. Hawthorn and St.Kilda for example draw much of their support from the outer Eastern suburbs of metropolitan Melbourne. Canberra is also a retreat/base to catch supporters in the Western NSW/Sydney region - with the AFL investing heavily into Blacktown, a team playing games in Canberra can be used as a strategic gateway to access the NSW market - why do you think the Roos played games there after the blotched NSW relocation?

Tasmania will dilute the TV ratings and thus the TV revenue.

Corporate support wouldn't be massive as it is Melbourne but a lot of companies have vested interests in Tasmania and there would likely be access to a reasonable amount of corporate support given you are not sharing resources there with other sports.

Corporately, Tasmania couldn't be supported in a 20 team Victorian market. Once 2-4 teams leave the Victorian market, there will be more bang for our buck in the Victorian market anyway

How do you get treated like 3rd rate citizens? With seating?

We don't even have access to member’s wing tickets.

It is the same reason we started playing games outside of Melbourne, for the exposure as much as the monetary incentive.

You can't even compare your reasonings to ours. Ours were purely to do with our MCG-Telstra Dome allocation, yours were to do with being cash strapped. The year we moved 2 games to Tasmania, was the year we posted a 1.5 million dollar profit and had the 5th largest membership in the league.

We previously had and developed Friday Night footy which got us guaranteed games on TV. AFL was meant to schedule us for games against low drawing sides and we were meant to get more TV air time but the AFL forgot about that, schedules a lot of games against Melbourne based teams (even Collingwood) there and we played games there from time to time that had no tv coverage.

But as usual your administration crumbled, you can't blame us for poor administration.

The change to Gold Coast opens up the possibility of night games so that really broadens the possibilities. Gold Coast has a slightly bigger population (482k) than Canberra and while it there is also a rugby presence there I think there is also a stronger AFL presence and a stronger economy than Canberra.

So it's only a coincidence that part of the AFL's expansion plans are to have a side based in SEQ by 2015. I live in SEQ, we will support another team up here - I'll even purchase a membership, if you embrace us and look to increase your commitment once the 5 year contract is up.

I don't mind going to the dome, i dont see why it is hated that much. MCG is easier to get to if you drive but overall I have no real preference between the two.

Since when was this about you, I was talking about Hawthorn supporters and their preference.

I think our financial result this is going to pretty harsh given the AFL has allowed Foxtel to broadcast 3 of our sunday homegames in Melbourne live against the gate, that always has a big impact on crowds and profits.

Your only getting 9.6 million dollars from the AFL, it shouldn't be that hard. We also get poor schedules, in fact this year we probably had a worse fixture then you from the TV ratings viewpoint - we played 14 games on FF.

Our average in Melbourne is down a bit, was 40k for Melbourne home games in 2005 and dropped to 28.5k in 2006. We had no live against the gate last year, we didn't suck last year either...

We've been having those seasons for the last 10 years, but we still averaged 37,000 for our home games in Melbourne. Crowds don't matter, membership does.

You probably make more at York with 15k than you do at the MCG with 40k.

Under the old agreement, we needed a 45,000 crowd to make the same profit at the MCG as we would in Tasmania. If we started winning games, we would have ran the risk of the games becoming non profitable - ala St.Kilda, but with this new agreement it equates to a crowd around 80,000 in Melbourne - we get 600,000 + gate receipts per match we play.

I understand the theory but I also think it can erode your supporter base here over a long period of time. Our membership base has doubled I think since we first started playing interstate but long-term I think it will be difficult to really push the support barrier unless you are ridiculously successful for a ridiculously long period of time.

Not really, ironically we are investing alot of this excess revenue into marketing the club in Victoria - around where we now call home. The aim is to play half of our games at the MCG - with membership rights, and build on the surrounding areas much in the same way the Dogs are doing in the Western suburbs of Melbourne. Whether it works or not, it will be interesting..but we will be cashed up and if we want to take the games back we will be in a financial position to do it.

Seeing less and less live games does errode the fanatasism of the supporter base. We have a ridiculously large number of supporters who do not re-sign from year to year, I think all clubs do but from the reaction from our club this trend has been growing larger and large. We just cycle through huge numbers who are fickle with the support. I think if that trend continues and deteriorates combined with growing support interstate it would put a lot of pressure on the clubs, especially when we eventually get to a point in time where the AFL can't or wont provide financial assistance.

Didn't you have 6,000 non resignables? We had 10,000!

We actually turned over more than Adelaide did last year, it is just that much cheaper to play football in SA and they have derived more income from membership than other less profitable forms means they were able to turn in healty profits and spend more on their footy.

No you didn't, you should know this as an accountant. We the Victorian clubs - include non football related revenue in our turnover, the SA clubs don't. In terms of turnover for football related reveune, Victorian clubs have nothing on Adelaide and West Coast. It's the way their clubs are structured.

I think you need a good stable membership base but we have increased our revenue stream some four fold over the last 10 years despite a relatively low membership base. The key is to grow your supporter base as that will directly relate to long-term growth. The problem is you have to live long enough to reap the seeds you sow.

8 years ago we became the first club in Victoria to break 32,000, now 4 clubs have 32,000+ members. As the years go by, the acceptable membership rate increases, my query is whether the Kangaroos can keep up. If they had a 10 year spell like Hawthorn, Richmond, St.Kilda etc. would they still have a decent membership?

I still think clubs will be very vulnerable, once you establish a symbiotic relationship you become dependant on the other partner and you can't detach yourself without it killing you in the process

.

I support less teams in Melbourne, because it would increase the corporate pie share and open up some room to negotiate a better deal with the MCG and Dome.

I think its great Hawks have found a good market in Tasmania, I just think in 20 years time you will be a Tasmanian side playing some games in Melbourne than vice versa. It is not a dig at the Hawks, I think the same of any club that spends that much time in one spot, especially if your interstate membership grows while your Melbourne based membership declines.

The aim is 40,000+ members by 2009 - 6,000 being from Tasmania. We have the best people at our club in terms of marketing - Booste Juice owner, the ex NBA general manager for SE Asia, ex marketing manager for Quantas etc. Our Tasmanian membership will never over take our Melbourne based membership - do you see us having 30,000+ Tasmanian members in 20 years time? That would make us an enormous club, even then we would require 75% of members to agree to it. By then there will be less teams in Melbourne and 7 home games would be acceptable

That will be the same fate for my club if we do not grow our membership base.

I agree on your behalf, but Hawthorn has had 34,000 members in the recent past - playing 2 home games in Tasmania, we are in a bit of a trough, but with an increase in MCG games and on field performance we will surpass that figure either next year or 2007.

 

[Bretski]

It is North Melbourne Football Club, always has been, always will be. We are as much the Kangaroos as Adelaide are the Crows.

You can't notice it from my avatar logo but it says North Melbourne Football Club under the Kangaroos name.

the ladder just says kangaroos, u cant say "we WILL always be north melbourne" you should be saying "we will always CALL our selves north melbourne" its just the facts

 

[wog777]

What a coincidence!!!!

My VirginSensor went off when I read your post.

And if we didn't have internet down Frankston way, how the hell am I on here, you f**kwit.[/quote]

bahahahahahaha good point

 

[Scotland]

Quantas

Argh! It's Qantas. Queensland And Northen Territory Air Service.

 

[Hawkk]

Argh! It's Qantas. Queensland And Northen Territory Air Service.

You serious, it actually stands for something.

I just thought it was a crappy name.

Now it's a crappy name that stands for a crappy service.

Who said you don't learn new things on bigfooty

 

[sdrawkcab]

You may have Anti-Moron™ software but you obviously don't have spell check.

There's every cliche in the book their Nimrod

 

[wog777]

Which clubs 'offical' names include the mascots?

Western Bulldogs
Sydney Swans
Kangaroos
Brisbane Lions

Any others?

West Coast Eagles???

 

[GoldenSky]

You serious, it actually stands for something.

 

[Hawkk]

I'm not into airlines, I'm not that way inclined.

 

[NimChief]

What a coincidence!!!!

My VirginSensor went off when I read your post.

And if we didn't have internet down Frankston way, how the hell am I on here, you f**kwit.

bahahahahahaha good point

They do in jail.