20th AFL Team

[Purple Suit]

The majority of clubs don't use pokies any more, including the Cats and Crows, which get the same distro.

Freo is definitely a giver more than a receiver, but they're more mid-level than that graph made it appear.

Point is that WA3 will probably be a middling club based on distro, receiving less than the Giants and Suns, but probably more in line with the Bulldogs and Melbourne.

No its not. See the list below. From 10th to 16th it's almost the same amount with a lot hidden behind the lists. Not sure on the calcs or what it also includes but there are basically 9 rich clubs and 7 middle earners and 2 poor clubs. Tassie will probably be in the middle ground but only with state government support for how ever long the contract is. I recon the AFL would prefer to add a 20th team on a path to the rich list to keep the balance rather than another mouth to feed.


2023 Distributions

1. Gold Coast ($25 million)

2. GWS Giants ($25 million)

3. Brisbane Lions ($18-19 million)

4. North Melbourne ($18-19 million)

5. St Kilda ($18-19 million)

6. Melbourne ($16 million)

7. Western Bulldogs ($16 million)

8. Port Adelaide ($16 million)

9. Sydney Swans ($16 million)

10. Fremantle ($11.5-12.5 million)

11. Carlton ($11.5-12.5 million)

12. Adelaide Crows ($11.5-12.5 million)

13. Geelong ($11.5-12.5 million)

14. Essendon ($11-11.5 million)

=15. Richmond ($10.5-11 million)

=15. Hawthorn ($10.5-11 million)

=15. Collingwood ($10.5-11 million)

=15. West Coast ($10.5-11 million)

Remember, the WA clubs pay a royalty to the WAFL to pay for grassroots footy. The other AFL clubs don't do this and grassroots is funded by the AFL in all other states.

 

[Canberra Pear]

No its not. See the list below. From 10th to 16th it's almost the same amount with a lot hidden behind the lists. Not sure on the calcs or what it also includes but there are basically 9 rich clubs and 7 middle earners and 2 poor clubs. Tassie will probably be in the middle ground but only with state government support for how ever long the contract is. I recon the AFL would prefer to add a 20th team on a path to the rich list to keep the balance rather than another mouth to feed.


2023 Distributions

1. Gold Coast ($25 million)

2. GWS Giants ($25 million)

3. Brisbane Lions ($18-19 million)

4. North Melbourne ($18-19 million)

5. St Kilda ($18-19 million)

6. Melbourne ($16 million)

7. Western Bulldogs ($16 million)

8. Port Adelaide ($16 million)

9. Sydney Swans ($16 million)

10. Fremantle ($11.5-12.5 million)

11. Carlton ($11.5-12.5 million)

12. Adelaide Crows ($11.5-12.5 million)

13. Geelong ($11.5-12.5 million)

14. Essendon ($11-11.5 million)

=15. Richmond ($10.5-11 million)

=15. Hawthorn ($10.5-11 million)

=15. Collingwood ($10.5-11 million)

=15. West Coast ($10.5-11 million)

That still doesn't answer my question. Your graph said Freo made $15m more, but got the same distro as the Crows or Geelong (who don't have pokies).

That commercial revenue clearly isn't clear cut profit, otherwise Freo would be receiving a lost less distro than these teams.

Remember, the WA clubs pay a royalty to the WAFL to pay for grassroots footy. The other AFL clubs don't do this and grassroots is funded by the AFL in all other states.

$1.84m. Still doesn't explain the $15m difference. But does that mean WA3 will have to pay that as well?

That'll, combined with the government and stadium deals, will give Canberra about a $6-7m annual leg up over WA3.

 

[Fire]

So now you shift from "Number bigger stupid"?

Below is the state by state break down

State	Population 2010 (millions)	Population 2024 (millions)	Percentage Growth (%)
New South Wales	6.75​	8.2​	21.49​
Victoria	5.15​	6.7​	30.15​
Queensland	4.09​	5.4​	31.95​
Western Australia	2.05​	2.9​	41.3​
South Australia	1.59​	1.8​	13.36​
Tasmania	0.51​	0.57​	11.8​
Northern Territory	0.23​	0.25​	8.74​
Australian Capital Territory	0.37​	0.46​	24.89​
Total	20.74​	26.28​	26.71​

Now if we take the states that have historically been called football states

Football States	Population 2010 (millions)	Population 2024 (millions)	Percentage Growth (%)
Victoria	5.15​	6.7​	30.15​
Western Australia	2.05​	2.9​	41.3​
South Australia	1.59​	1.8​	13.36​
Tasmania	0.51​	0.57​	11.8​
Total	9.3​	11.97​	28.71​

Either way you cut it, the population growth of the Traditional Football states as well the nation has outpaced the growth in total attendance over the same period.

This is OT, but I think its a bit concerning longer term that the smallest states are growing the slowest.

 

[Purple Suit]

So now you shift from "Number bigger stupid"?

Below is the state by state break down

State	Population 2010 (millions)	Population 2024 (millions)	Percentage Growth (%)
New South Wales	6.75​	8.2​	21.49​
Victoria	5.15​	6.7​	30.15​
Queensland	4.09​	5.4​	31.95​
Western Australia	2.05​	2.9​	41.3​
South Australia	1.59​	1.8​	13.36​
Tasmania	0.51​	0.57​	11.8​
Northern Territory	0.23​	0.25​	8.74​
Australian Capital Territory	0.37​	0.46​	24.89​
Total	20.74​	26.28​	26.71​

Now if we take the states that have historically been called football states

Football States	Population 2010 (millions)	Population 2024 (millions)	Percentage Growth (%)
Victoria	5.15​	6.7​	30.15​
Western Australia	2.05​	2.9​	41.3​
South Australia	1.59​	1.8​	13.36​
Tasmania	0.51​	0.57​	11.8​
Total	9.3​	11.97​	28.71​

Either way you cut it, the population growth of the Traditional Football states as well the nation has outpaced the growth in total attendance over the same period.

The interesting thing with those stats is that WA is growing the fastest too. Sounds like a good reason to have another team to get those bums on seats.

That still doesn't answer my question. Your graph said Freo made $15m more, but got the same distro as the Crows or Geelong (who don't have pokies).

That commercial revenue clearly isn't clear cut profit, otherwise Freo would be receiving a lost less distro than these teams.



$1.84m. Still doesn't explain the $15m difference. But does that mean WA3 will have to pay that as well?

That'll, combined with the government and stadium deals, will give Canberra about a $6-7m annual leg up over WA3.

The graph isn't profit, it's revenue from football operations. Some teams get money in other ways and all the financial reports are different with yearly anomalies so comparison is hard. The teams on smaller distributions aren't doing it tough.

There are also a lot more people on here who know more about it than me but it's clear that WA teams are very profitable.

 

[Canberra Pear]

The graph isn't profit, it's revenue from football operations. Some teams get money in other ways and all the financial reports are different with yearly anomalies so comparison is hard. The teams on smaller distributions aren't doing it tough.

Then what was the point of showing it? Surely the distro is a better measure of what the AFL will be looking for.

There are also a lot more people on here who know more about it than me but it's clear that WA teams are very profitable.

Freo is profitable. Not denying that. But they're still on the lower end of profitable clubs. They're middle of the pack for distro.

WA3 will not be as profitable as Freo. They just won't. Which means they'll be in the lower half of profitability, at least for the first decade or so.

 

[Bjo187]

Yes the w.a clubs get their income from football operations (attendance/membership). Not much from sponsorship and other income streams which is odd and shows poor management as they should be making truckloads from other revenue streams too.

 

[Purple Suit]

Then what was the point of showing it? Surely the distro is a better measure of what the AFL will be looking for.



Freo is profitable. Not denying that. But they're still on the lower end of profitable clubs. They're middle of the pack for distro.

WA3 will not be as profitable as Freo. They just won't. Which means they'll be in the lower half of profitability, at least for the first decade or so.

Middle of the road but in the top financially flourishing group. No other State has all their teams in that space. The Top 3 are in another tier all together which WC is one.

Of course WA3 won't be as profitable as Freo as they will get less attendance but they will enter the comp in a better space than 1/3 of the teams in the comp and needing less distributions as time goes on. Canberra isn't going to be able to generate anywhere as much revenue as a start up due to the size of the market so will take longer from a financial viable point of view in my opinion.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Middle of the road but in the top financially flourishing group. No other State has all their teams in that space. The Top 3 are in another tier all together which WC is one.

Of course WA3 won't be as profitable as Freo as they will get less attendance but they will enter the comp in a better space than 1/3 of the teams in the comp and needing less distributions as time goes on. Canberra isn't going to be able to generate anywhere as much revenue as a start up due to the size of the market so will take longer from a financial viable point of view in my opinion.

There's no way WA3 starts off bigger than Port, Sydney or Melbourne.

WA3 will possibly have a bigger fanbase than Canberra, but when you add in all of the stuff I've mentioned, both Canberra and WA3 would probably sit between 5 and 6 on that distro list you posted.

 

[WesternSydneyHawk]

There's less corporate facilities to sell, and the total number of truly rich individuals in absolute terms (not relative terms) is lower.

Fair point on the corporate boxes, but I would say we have enough contracting companies vying for the government dollar to fill that hole.

For corporate hospitality, Canberra is likely to be a far stronger market than you would imagine.

The public perception is that the major market for private corporate suites is for high-net-worth individuals and executive entertainment.

And while they're an important market for corporate hospitality at sports events, they often prefer coterie groups and match day events where they can network and make contacts with other business leaders.

(I'll have more to say about coterie groups in a sec.)

A far bigger market for those private suites tend to be executive-level B2B sales leaders, who are responsible for building or maintaining relationships with enterprise clients (such as ASX-100 companies, universities, and government departments). Many of Australia's largest companies maintain corporate suites basically to schmooze current or potential customers.

A (usually) smaller but still important market are lobbyists, businesses, governments, and industry groups who use them as part of their lobbying efforts.

Here's where Canberra punches above its weight.

You want to sell corporate boxes to companies that are trying to win big-dollar contracts with enterprise clients?

Well, Canberra is home to pretty much all if the federal departments and agencies. That includes some, like Defence, that aee responsible for multi-billion-dollar tenders and procurements. That's why most major government suppliers and contractors maintain a sales office somewhere in Civic.

And let me assure you that Canberra has no shortage of government lobbyists, businesses, embacies, and industry groups looking to influence government policy. And many would gladly pay for a corporate suite where they can host government ministers, ministerial staff, and departmental secretaries.

As for the coterie groups, if it is known that a particular minister or departmental secretary is a member, there will be lobbyists looking to join so they can network with them.

Now, if you think this lobbying activity isn't great for democracy.

But I will assure you that if you offer corporate boxes for a Canberra-based AFL club, it won't be too difficult to find buyers.

 

[WesternSydneyHawk]

Oh, just one more thing on the corporate box market.

A large part of the corporate hospitality market in WA is the resources sector.

That's an industry that's already got access to local private suites at AFL games with Freeo and West Coast.

But it has shown it's an willing to spend big on its lobbying efforts in Canberra. That's both on securing favourable federal policies and ensuring any exploration licence bids that need a federal sign-off are looked at favourably.

Paradoxically, a Canberra-based AFL team would be better placed to sell corporate boxes to WA mining companies looking to entertain federal ministerial staff or public servants than a 3rd WA team.

 

[Bjo187]

Oh, just one more thing on the corporate box market.

A large part of the corporate hospitality market in WA is the resources sector.

That's an industry that's already got access to local private suites at AFL games with Freeo and West Coast.

But it has shown it's an willing to spend big on its lobbying efforts in Canberra. That's both on securing favourable federal policies and ensuring any exploration licence bids that need a federal sign-off are looked at favourably.

Paradoxically, a Canberra-based AFL team would be better placed to sell corporate boxes to WA mining companies looking to entertain federal ministerial staff or public servants than a 3rd WA team.

Are you going to the giants game on Saturday night in your area up there mate or you just stick to watching the hawks on tv?

 

[Purple Suit]

For corporate hospitality, Canberra is likely to be a far stronger market than you would imagine.

The public perception is that the major market for private corporate suites is for high-net-worth individuals and executive entertainment.

And while they're an important market for corporate hospitality at sports events, they often prefer coterie groups and match day events where they can network and make contacts with other business leaders.

(I'll have more to say about coterie groups in a sec.)

A far bigger market for those private suites tend to be executive-level B2B sales leaders, who are responsible for building or maintaining relationships with enterprise clients (such as ASX-100 companies, universities, and government departments). Many of Australia's largest companies maintain corporate suites basically to schmooze current or potential customers.

A (usually) smaller but still important market are lobbyists, businesses, governments, and industry groups who use them as part of their lobbying efforts.

Here's where Canberra punches above its weight.

You want to sell corporate boxes to companies that are trying to win big-dollar contracts with enterprise clients?

Well, Canberra is home to pretty much all if the federal departments and agencies. That includes some, like Defence, that aee responsible for multi-billion-dollar tenders and procurements. That's why most major government suppliers and contractors maintain a sales office somewhere in Civic.

And let me assure you that Canberra has no shortage of government lobbyists, businesses, embacies, and industry groups looking to influence government policy. And many would gladly pay for a corporate suite where they can host government ministers, ministerial staff, and departmental secretaries.

As for the coterie groups, if it is known that a particular minister or departmental secretary is a member, there will be lobbyists looking to join so they can network with them.

Now, if you think this lobbying activity isn't great for democracy.

But I will assure you that if you offer corporate boxes for a Canberra-based AFL club, it won't be too difficult to find buyers.

Interesting, maybe Canberra is a shoe in with that info as I’m sure the AFL big wigs would be more concerned with Federal networking than making more money or giving the WA teams less travel.

The big question is are three games a year already the perfect amount or do they want eleven?

 

[SplintWhisky]

Enough said.
I'm enjoying my football and I'm not even one of the 1.3 million Australians that are members of an AFL club.
That's 5% of Australians that are members of an AFL club. That's an astonishing statistic.
The AFL is the most watched domestic league in the world on a per capita basis.
I don't care what any other code is doing but we all should be proud of a truly Australian product.
In a world screaming out to maintain diversity, Australian Football should be promoted not "fought".

Then you are nothing but the archetypical 'Useful Idiot'. You can enjoy something and know its faults. I like Star Wars but there are a lot of flaws, plot holes and issues in that universe.

We can be proud of what the AFL has done. But if we don't want a slow death then the sport needs to make some decisions that don't prioritise a short term injection that hurts the long term product.

The AFL is the most watched domestic league in the world on a per capita basis.

I find it very funny that now you want to talk about a per capita/average figure. I thought you were all about the total figures?

 

[Canberra Pear]

For corporate hospitality, Canberra is likely to be a far stronger market than you would imagine.

The public perception is that the major market for private corporate suites is for high-net-worth individuals and executive entertainment.

And while they're an important market for corporate hospitality at sports events, they often prefer coterie groups and match day events where they can network and make contacts with other business leaders.

(I'll have more to say about coterie groups in a sec.)

A far bigger market for those private suites tend to be executive-level B2B sales leaders, who are responsible for building or maintaining relationships with enterprise clients (such as ASX-100 companies, universities, and government departments). Many of Australia's largest companies maintain corporate suites basically to schmooze current or potential customers.

A (usually) smaller but still important market are lobbyists, businesses, governments, and industry groups who use them as part of their lobbying efforts.

Here's where Canberra punches above its weight.

You want to sell corporate boxes to companies that are trying to win big-dollar contracts with enterprise clients?

Well, Canberra is home to pretty much all if the federal departments and agencies. That includes some, like Defence, that aee responsible for multi-billion-dollar tenders and procurements. That's why most major government suppliers and contractors maintain a sales office somewhere in Civic.

And let me assure you that Canberra has no shortage of government lobbyists, businesses, embacies, and industry groups looking to influence government policy. And many would gladly pay for a corporate suite where they can host government ministers, ministerial staff, and departmental secretaries.

As for the coterie groups, if it is known that a particular minister or departmental secretary is a member, there will be lobbyists looking to join so they can network with them.

Now, if you think this lobbying activity isn't great for democracy.

But I will assure you that if you offer corporate boxes for a Canberra-based AFL club, it won't be too difficult to find buyers.

That's very well put. I used to work for a small contracting firm who would do everything they could to put themselves in front of the big departments.

Would be funny if one our biggest sponsors ended up being a WA mining company.

Interesting, maybe Canberra is a shoe in with that info as I’m sure the AFL big wigs would be more concerned with Federal networking than making more money or giving the WA teams less travel.

A whole new team is a huge commitment if the main reason is for West Coast and Freo to travel for one less game a year.

There are easier ways to eachieve that.

The big question is are three games a year already the perfect amount or do they want eleven?

Three is definitely not enough. All three games sold out this year.

There would also be a boost in crowds for an actual team of our own.

The closest example I can think of is the Gold Coast. They were also receiving three games a year. Then when they received a team of their own, the average crowd went up 45% over the first five years, despite playing 11 games compared to three.

If we mirrored that 45% boost from actually getting our own team, Canberra would be averaging 18,821 to games (capacity allowing). Probably more considering the base was capped.

 

[neogh]

In the scenario BOTH WA3 and Canberra gets in, who will be the 22th to avoid having unwanted byes?

I would love to see a SA3, a footballing passion state that ironically doesn't want to a third between Crows and Pear, and population isn't backed.

NSW3 and QLD3 has cases but maybe even riskier than Suns and Giants.

WA4 in the countries maybe too early.

NT? Yeah nah...

 

[neogh]

Australia is a nation descended from immigrants.
Immigrants are the backbone of Australian Football.

Still needs to do better getting them more active in AFL. Still see a big racial difference at match days, and this is someone who is culturally diverse but loves footy.

If there is a 20th team be WA3 or Canberra, like to see cross code influences in culture.

 

[Saucy]

A WA3 team would have over 50,000 members in 5 years. I guarantee it.

You offer people the chance to attend 11 games at Optus Stadium, you're going to get a takers. And people will change teams. Don't underestimate kids just wanting to go and watch games. It's a safe bet.

 

[Canberra Pear]

In the scenario BOTH WA3 and Canberra gets in, who will be the 22th to avoid having unwanted byes?

I would love to see a SA3, a footballing passion state that ironically doesn't want to a third between Crows and Pear, and population isn't backed.

NSW3 and QLD3 has cases but maybe even riskier than Suns and Giants.

WA4 in the countries maybe too early.

NT? Yeah nah...

If the 21/22 expansion does happen, I can't see it happening before 2050.

If GWS is fully embedded by then, a third Sydney team might be on the cards.

Newcastle/Hunter will be home to a million people by then. Plus draw on the Central Coast. If they build up Newcastle with a few games a year, they could be ready.

Northern SEQ (northern Brisbane/Sunshine Coast) will be pretty big and untapped by then.

If Auckland finally has an AFL-ready stadium, the AFL would probably be keen to have a full-time presence there.

Adelaide will shrink in comparative population, so I think their case will be even weaker for a third team by 2050.

Still can't see Darwin growing enough by then. Climate change will make the playing conditions even trickier though (and probably hamper population growth).

FNQ will probably still be too small by then unless they manage to get a high-speed rail between Cairns and Townsville.

So somewhere out of Sydney, Newcastle, SEQ and Auckland.

 

[RedV3x]

If GWS is fully embedded by then, a third Sydney team might be on the cards.

Syd3 would be faced with the same problem as WA3 - nominal location.

Newcastle/Hunter will be home to a million people by then. Plus draw on the Central Coast. If they build up Newcastle with a few games a year, they could be ready.

The AFL have to do more in Newcastle. I cannot believe they leave this historic hub untouched.

Northern SEQ (northern Brisbane/Sunshine Coast) will be pretty big and untapped by then.

The Sunshine Coast feels like a GC2.

If Auckland finally has an AFL-ready stadium, the AFL would probably be keen to have a full-time presence there.

It's a total shame that Covid and council stopped this heavily invested enterprise.
Australian Football is full of couldabeen circumstances.

Adelaide will shrink in comparative population, so I think their case will be even weaker for a third team by 2050.

Ade3 faces the same problems as WA3 and weaker technically.

Still can't see Darwin growing enough by then. Climate change will make the playing conditions even trickier though (and probably hamper population growth).

Can't see it happening for other reasons.

FNQ will probably still be too small by then unless they manage to get a high-speed rail between Cairns and Townsville.

What the Giants have shown is that hybrid base teams don't work that well.
22 AFL teams would mean a 21 game H&A season which would make fans happy.
22 AFL teams would mean it's a long way to the top if you want to rock & roll which would make fans unhappy.

 

[Coolangatta]

If the 21/22 expansion does happen, I can't see it happening before 2050.

If GWS is fully embedded by then, a third Sydney team might be on the cards.

Newcastle/Hunter will be home to a million people by then. Plus draw on the Central Coast. If they build up Newcastle with a few games a year, they could be ready.

Northern SEQ (northern Brisbane/Sunshine Coast) will be pretty big and untapped by then.

If Auckland finally has an AFL-ready stadium, the AFL would probably be keen to have a full-time presence there.

Adelaide will shrink in comparative population, so I think their case will be even weaker for a third team by 2050.

Still can't see Darwin growing enough by then. Climate change will make the playing conditions even trickier though (and probably hamper population growth).

FNQ will probably still be too small by then unless they manage to get a high-speed rail between Cairns and Townsville.

So somewhere out of Sydney, Newcastle, SEQ and Auckland.

Out of those, I’d pick Newcastle and Auckland.

Brisbane and Sydney already have teams. Better for new cities to share the joy of having an AFL team IMO which is one reason why I prefer Canberra over Perth 3.

After Newy and Auck I’d leave it at 22 teams for a long time and then eventually consider Darwin and Cairns depending on growth/climate.

Then I’d probably be done. The AFL realistically can only have so many teams, as much as I’d love to see Brisbane 2, Perth 3, Sydney 3, Adelaide 3, and SW WA.

 

[RedV3x]

Out of those, I’d pick Newcastle and Auckland.

i agree.

The AFL realistically can only have so many teams, as much as I’d love to see Brisbane 2, Perth 3, Sydney 3, Adelaide 3, and SW WA.

Exactly.

 

[neogh]

Out of those, I’d pick Newcastle and Auckland.

Brisbane and Sydney already have teams. Better for new cities to share the joy of having an AFL team IMO which is one reason why I prefer Canberra over Perth 3.

After Newy and Auck I’d leave it at 22 teams for a long time and then eventually consider Darwin and Cairns depending on growth/climate.

Then I’d probably be done. The AFL realistically can only have so many teams, as much as I’d love to see Brisbane 2, Perth 3, Sydney 3, Adelaide 3, and SW WA.

Why Newcastle and Auckland over WA3? They have much less expected population growth and much smaller cities than Perth.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Why Newcastle and Auckland over WA3? They have much less expected population growth and much smaller cities than Perth.

Wouldn't say Auckand will be "much smaller" than Perth. Predicted to 2.5m v 2.9m in 2050.

But more than that, Auckland is the gateway to NZ - a market of 6 million by 2050. A team would represent the whole country, like the Warriors in the NRL, or the Blue Jays and Raptors in Toronto.

 

[Coolangatta]

Wouldn't say Auckand will be "much smaller" than Perth. Predicted to 2.5m v 2.9m in 2050.

But more than that, Auckland is the gateway to NZ - a market of 6 million by 2050. A team would represent the whole country, like the Warriors in the NRL, or the Blue Jays and Raptors in Toronto.

And even if those projections are wrong, Perth has two teams, Auckland and Newcastle don’t have any.

In other words, neogh, putting new teams in sizable cities that have no current presence grows the game more than a third in an already existing market does. That’s the reason.

 

[neogh]

And even if those projections are wrong, Perth has two teams, Auckland and Newcastle don’t have any.

In other words, neogh, putting new teams in sizable cities that have no current presence grows the game more than a third in an already existing market does. That’s the reason.

If anything in the state, Central Coast or Wollongong has more prospects than Newcastle of having an AFL team. Hunter region is a very stale, meh city in terms of growth.

I wish the AFL stop panders to growth of the sport with so little to earn and, try focus on milking more from traditional states/territories that has never got the right support, like WA and ACT.

Overall, I think the AFL is a boring, but lucky sporting organisation. Doesn't get things right but never lost anything from it because the others are much, MUCH worse.