20th AFL Team

[kranger]

ABS today released the latest ‘Regional’ population data. So last week was States, this week Regional means Cities.

Regional population, 2023-24 financial year

Statistics about the population and components of change (births, deaths, migration) for Australia's capital cities and regions

www.abs.gov.au

Someone has already updated Wikipedia which is great, as the ABs website is not great at looking at cities other than the 8 capitals.

List of cities in Australia by population - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

View attachment 2263571

Things I noticed, based on the last 10 years growth rate.

In 10 years time, both Newcastle and Canberra will reach 600,000. One year later Canberra (including Queanbeyan) will overtake Newcastle and become the 7th largest city in Australia. The largest without an AFL team.

In 10 years time, Sunshine Coast will have 525,000 residents, and is the fastest growing Region in Australia, just beating Geelong.

Darwin is small, and not growing much.

New South Wales and Queensland (outside of SEQ) are growing slow.

SEQ (Brisbane, Gold Coast, Sunshine Coast and Toowoomba) has 4m residents.

In 10 years time, the population of the big 5 will be:
Melbourne 6.1m
Sydney 5.8m
SEQ 4.8m
Perth 2.8m
Adelaide 1.6m
Being mindful that Sydney excludes the nearby Wollongong, Central Coast and Newcastle, which would add another 1.2m onto the general catchment area (maybe exclude Newcastle, it’s a bit further away).

Based on this latest ABS data release, I’ve put together the following table and graphs. I trust everyone can come to understand them.

List of cities in Australia by population - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Any sports league that have average crowds below 6,000, such as the ABL or AFLW have been left out.

As we all should know, population alone should not be the deciding factor. Considering the number of existing teams taking resources (corporate and spectators) assists.

An AFL or NRL team takes a lot more resources to be viable than a NBL or Super Netball team, so evenly dividing a cities population between teams from all leagues is not equivalent. Many people could be interested in teams from multiple leagues. However it is reasonable as a simple metric of comparison.

Launceston is a standout, as they will only have the AFL team part time, which throws the mathematical formula out.

Another consideration is the actual level of interest in the relevant sport, for if it can attract attention in that city. I have not factored that into this data, so despite showing Auckland, their interest level in AFL would be very low.

I’m not drawing any conclusions as to where a 20th AFL team should go based on this data. Just sharing it for everyone.

 

[RedV3x]

I’ve put together the following table and graphs. I trust everyone can come to understand them.

Pretty much meaningless and a waste of effort because:

1. An AFL team draws a lot more than a NRL team and both draw more than an A_League team
so adding the number of unequally sized teams is meaningless.
2. Each sport basically appeals to different markets though there is some cross-code appreciation
so dividing the market equally between the different codes is meaningless.

 

[loco3]

You might need to put a modifier (say 0.5) for any team that isn’t afl, nrl or super rugby in Auckland. The support for these codes are so much bigger than the others.

And on Auckland, I believe they have two super rugby clubs? That would draw their numbers closer to the other bigger cities if so.

 

[kranger]

You might need to put a modifier (say 0.5) for any team that isn’t afl, nrl or super rugby in Auckland. The support for these codes are so much bigger than the others.

This seems like a suitable thing to do. But it also just makes it all a lot more arbitrary. For example, why not 0.3 multiplier for the smaller sports and give AFL a 1.5 multiplier.

Like RedV3x alludes to, there isn’t too much of a point to delve too much into it, except for this simplistic comparison.

And on Auckland, I believe they have two super rugby clubs? That would draw their numbers closer to the other bigger cities if so.

Ah your right, I forgot about Moana Pasifika being based in Auckland.

 

[speedpeck23]

Yes - spot on. There’s an unhealthy percentage of Darwin’s population totally reliant on Centrelink for income, which then all too often goes on booze and cheap drugs, rather than food and other essentials. The resulting social problems of intoxication and/or drug abuse are tragic and immense - but the drastic measures required to solve them are politically unpalatable to the voters of the big cities down south, who are mostly blissfully ignorant of the true extent and horrific situation of so many (e.g. there are whole communities where severe domestic violence and child sexual abuse is so rampart that it’s accepted as normal behaviour) in the NT. I’ll say no more on this.

And even the relatively well off half of Darwin has a lot of itinérants - a lot of tradies make very good money but only stay a year (many don’t make it through the oppressive build-up to the wet season). Some last 2-3 years before having enough of their tropical experience and head off to their next adventure . And then there are the numerous army and air-force defence personnel - they also tend to come and go.

Smaller places like Ballarat and Bendigo have a much more stable and overall wealthier population than Darwin and would be thus more able to support an AFL side - and no, I wouldn’t consider actually basing teams in either of these places. But Darwin would be an even worse choice

The whole ethos of a team in NT is about what the game can do for NT rather than the other way round. The critical income factor for NT would be the share of broadcast rights....which is central to all professional sports.

Look at NRL in Sydney last week 10,000 at Rabbitohs v Panthers....the money comes from Broadcast rights.....

It's simply a way to get direct focus on NT, interest in to NT , money into NT on the back of AFL. It clearly has to well researched, managed and developed. It would be radical . The pay back for AFL in kind would be enormous. For the above reasons it's worth exploring.

 

[RedV3x]

The whole ethos of a team in NT is about what the game can do for NT rather than the other way round.

i agree.

The critical income factor for NT would be the share of broadcast rights

Unfortunately the N.T. would dilute each AFL's team share rather than build each share.

It's simply a way to get direct focus on NT, interest in to NT , money into NT on the back of AFL. It clearly has to well researched, managed and developed.

It would be a government money model.

The pay back for AFL in kind would be enormous.

Unfortunately the AFL is a business.

 

[Canberra Pear]

The whole ethos of a team in NT is about what the game can do for NT rather than the other way round. The critical income factor for NT would be the share of broadcast rights....which is central to all professional sports.

Look at NRL in Sydney last week 10,000 at Rabbitohs v Panthers....the money comes from Broadcast rights.....

Broadcast rights are incredibly important, but it's just one aspect. And an NT team would require so much more than any team currently gets. Pretty much the same as Port and the Suns combined. It's not just a case of "broadcast is king, so the the rest doesn't matter".

A stable crowd is still an important factor for funding a team. And a large market is also important for the broadcasting to be valuable. An NT team will be more valuable nationally than the Suns or Giants, but it's not adding much to the broadcast pie. The 20k tuning in in Darwin aren't increasing rights.

That's also not that bad a crowd for NRL, a predominately TV game. The equivalent in the AFL would be getting 18,666, which Darwin wouldn't consistently get.

It's simply a way to get direct focus on NT, interest in to NT , money into NT on the back of AFL. It clearly has to well researched, managed and developed. It would be radical . The pay back for AFL in kind would be enormous. For the above reasons it's worth exploring.

An NT team would very much have to be about what's best for NT, not the AFL. It would no doubt be great for the territory.

But the AFL will have to go into it with zero expectations of any returns, because financially, there never will be.

 

[Fletched]

Surely you could find a way to make it a Territory team and have the Canberra team play a few games in the NT

 

[speedpeck23]

Broadcast rights are incredibly important, but it's just one aspect. And an NT team would require so much more than any team currently gets. Pretty much the same as Port and the Suns combined. It's not just a case of "broadcast is king, so the the rest doesn't matter".

A stable crowd is still an important factor for funding a team. And a large market is also important for the broadcasting to be valuable. An NT team will be more valuable nationally than the Suns or Giants, but it's not adding much to the broadcast pie. The 20k tuning in in Darwin aren't increasing rights.

That's also not that bad a crowd for NRL, a predominately TV game. The equivalent in the AFL would be getting 18,666, which Darwin wouldn't consistently get.



An NT team would very much have to be about what's best for NT, not the AFL. It would no doubt be great for the territory.

But the AFL will have to go into it with zero expectations of any returns, because financially, there never will be.

As I said it would have to be a radically different set up to any other club. Membership cost would be targeted to optimize numbers. Look at Tassie 200,000 Members $10 bucks a throw. You could sell membership at normal prices and promote sponsored membership. You could sponsor a local kid or family to go to the footy. Sponsored membership would easily give you a 20 or 30,000 crowd. Stick it on TV it would be sensational.

Currently the AFL uses it's image to promote all sorts of things...why not this? I question your logic about no returns for the AFL....it would have a lot more credence than playing in Las Vegas. The profile for the AFL would skyrocket. It would be the best advertisement the Australian Game could ever get.

Interesting you say 10,000 is not a bad crowd for NRL ?? 2 local Sydney clubs....One has just one 4 flags in succession the other has the biggest membership in Sydney.

 

[RedV3x]

The profile for the AFL would skyrocket.

IMO it's more like filling in the gaps.

It would be the best advertisement the Australian Game could ever get.

"the best advertisement the Australian Game" domestically would be either
extra time being played at the G.F., a competitive S.O.O. series or an Australian premier's championship.

"the best advertisement the Australian Game" internationally would be either
a resumption of the International Rules series, AFL being widely promoted on international streaming services,
AFL games played outside of Australia, the AFL resuming it's N.Z. endeavour, somebody making a movie with AFL as the backdrop or a resumption and heavy promotion of the International Cup in host cities.

 

[Canberra Pear]

As I said it would have to be a radically different set up to any other club. Membership cost would be targeted to optimize numbers. Look at Tassie 200,000 Members $10 bucks a throw. You could sell membership at normal prices and promote sponsored membership. You could sponsor a local kid or family to go to the footy. Sponsored membership would easily give you a 20 or 30,000 crowd. Stick it on TV it would be sensational.

I appreciate your out-of-the-box thinking. But it's just going to take an absolutely monumental amount of out-of-the-box thinking. And even more importantly, it's going to take a lot to sustain it. With a population this small, it's incredibly hard to keep momentum up for so long. For instance, by the end of the NT Thunder, their crowds have dropped 78%.

I think a sponsored membership is a cute idea, but you're not going to be selling 10-20k seats every game from somebody down south paying for a local.

Tassie getting 200k members was some marketing genius. And it's a good fluffy number to sell to sponsors. But considering most clubs' memberships cost more than $200, it's less than the financial equivalent of 10k members. And it's also off a wave of enthusiasm in the early days of the club (and those keen to be a foundation member). Happy to be proven wrong, but I don't think there'll 200k paid up Tassie members this year.

Tasmania will also be surviving on goodwill from the mainland. If an NT team comes in, that goodwill of financial support from afar will be split two ways.

I appreciate your ideas. And keep them coming. But Tasmania was borderline in its financial viability. And the gap between Tasmania and the NT's entries are huge. A few cute gimmicks aren't going to close the gap. The only solution is a shit-tonne of government funding.

Currently the AFL uses it's image to promote all sorts of things...why not this? I question your logic about no returns for the AFL....it would have a lot more creedence than playing in Las Vegas. The profile for the AFL would skyrocket. It would be the best advertisement the Australian Game could ever get.

By no returns, I mean that the team can ever pay for itself. The Suns and Giants were drains the AFL was willing to sink money into because their demographic make up means they'll eventually be able to sustain themselves. The NT doesn't fit into that category.

I've worked internationally with the AFL. They barely give a stuff about their international profile (I wish they did). They could already be a lot bigger overseas if they'd ever put any effort in. An NT team isn't the thing that's stopping it.

Interesting you say 10,000 is not a bad crowd for NRL ?? 2 local Sydney clubs....One has just one 4 flags in succession the other has the biggest membership in Sydney.

A bit off track, but Sydneysiders don't travel for the NRL on Thursdays. It's a TV product. And they still managed to get half of the NRL's average crowd. A Darwin team won't be getting half the AFL's average.

 

[Bjo187]

A bit off track, but Sydneysiders don't travel for the NRL on Thursdays. It's a TV product. And they still managed to get half of the NRL's average crowd. A Darwin team won't be getting half the AFL's average.

I see this excuse for the NRL all the time and it just shows how their media mates and propaganda they push out on their behalf has worked a treat. The old adage of 'if you repeat a lie often enough, people will start to believe it' is true here.

Their crowds are shithouse, yet they have somehow fabricated that they get a pass, coz of the fake tv figures they put out annually.

Their tv numbers come second too, don't believe the averages metric, more games in prime time and no 2 games ever on at the same time to split their audience like the afl does. They count the same viewer as 8 individual viewers every weekend. The tv money shows the real picture, unless the broadcasters are just dumb and like to give more money every time this century to the "less viewed" AFL.

AFL stretches lead over NRL in TV viewership despite NRL’s rise - Roy Morgan Research

www.roymorgan.com

 

[Canberra Pear]

I see this excuse for the NRL all the time and it just shows how their media mates and propaganda they push out on their behalf has worked a treat. The old adage of 'if you repeat a lie often enough, people will start to believe it' is true here.

Their crowds are shithouse, yet they have somehow fabricated that they get a pass, coz of the fake tv figures they put out annually.

Their tv numbers come second too, don't believe the averages metric, more games in prime time and no 2 games ever on at the same time to split their audience like the afl does. They count the same viewer as 8 individual viewers every weekend. The tv money shows the real picture, unless the broadcasters are just dumb and like to give more money every time this century to the "less viewed" AFL.

AFL stretches lead over NRL in TV viewership despite NRL’s rise - Roy Morgan Research

www.roymorgan.com

I'm not saying it's a good crowd, but it was plucked to imply that a Darwin AFL team could survive on subpar crowds. Just saying it's not an apt comparison.

 

[RedV3x]

The Suns and Giants were drains the AFL was willing to sink money into

No. from the very start the AFL determined that the increase in media right would underwrite the expansion teams.
Tasmania wont significantly increase the media rights because they already watch AFL on television.
Similarly N.T. w.r.t. media rights.
Canberra is seen as a potential growth area so media rights will play a role.

because their demographic make up means they'll eventually be able to sustain themselves.

The Suns and Giants are sustaining themselves - they get back what they produce.
It's quite possible that they'll be a real asset soon.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Thought I'd carry on the theme of data comparisons.

I've made a comparison of all the median incomes for cities and potential expansion spots.

I included the population data from the recently updated ABS list, but excluded places like Toowoomba, Wollongong or the Central Coast that have never been in the conversation. While they aren't specific cities, I've also included North Brisbane, North Perth and Southwest WA, as they've been pretty frequent in the discussions.

I think median income is one of the most important measures of economic viability as it shows what the middle-most person will be able to afford when supporting a team, rather than an average income, which can be inflated by high-end earners.

While it's not a perfect measure, it shows how much of a population will be able to support a team financially (memberships, merchandise, value to sponsors etc). There are obviously nuances that I can't factor in here.



The obvious front runner is Canberra.

The clear second winner is Darwin. I was surprised at first, but it makes a lot of sense when you consider how many high paying jobs there are in such a small population.

To roughly break it down, it means that a greater percentage of people in Darwin and Canberra are going to be able to afford to go to the footy. Doesn't mean greater in overall numbers, but greater as a percentage.

So some rough analysis against prospective bids, and how that percentage relates to overall numbers.

Marketwise, Canberra-Queanbeyan's 510,641 people is equivalent to:

• 802k in North Brisbane
• 709k in North Perth
• 802k in Adelaide
• 777k in Newcastle
• 808k in Sunshine Coast
• 870k Tasmanians
• 751k in Cairns
• 544k in Darwin (but 652k Territorians)
• 826k in the Southwest

This shows that while Canberra is a smaller market, it's economic power is of that of a much greater market. For instance, we might be a similar size to Newcastle, but our ability to host a third team from kranger's list is much greater.

Marketwise, Darwin's 138,567 is equivalent to:

• 184k in North Brisbane
• 180k in North Perth
• 130k in Canberra-Queanbeyan
• 191k in Cairns
• 210k in the Southwest

By this measure, Darwin actually leapfrogs Cairns and the Southwest as a market. While it's still not enough to make Darwin a viable market, it shows how small the Southwest and Cairns are well.

I'll use North Perth as the third measure as it's the most spoken about other option. It's arbitrary what their population is, but I'll put it as 425,441, which represents 18% of Perth. That's in line with a reddit poll in r/Perth asking who would consider supporting a new team.

So marketwise, North Perth's 425,441 is equivalent to:

• 481k in North Brisbane
• 307k in Canberra-Queanbeyan
• 451k in Cairns
• 495k in the Southwest
• 327k in Darwin

While Perth has a stronger economy than most of Australia, it doesn't give it a per capita advantage over Darwin or Canberra. It does reinforce that a Perth team is the only West Australian option, with both the median income and population stronger than the Southwest.

At the end of the day, these are just numbers and can't paint the full picture, but it still helps inform the choices. And more importantly, it highlights that I had too much time on a Sunday.

 

[RedV3x]

Thought I'd carry on the theme of data comparisons.
I've made a comparison of all the median incomes for cities and potential expansion spots.

You'd have to include a comparison of all the median expenditure for cities and potential expansion spots.

There are many factors.
Disposable income.
Alternative expenditures.
Demographic factors.
Business factors.
Government factors.
Media factors.
History.
Grassroots.
Travel distance to stadium, stadium experience and ease of travel.
Even climate is a factor.

 

[Canberra Pear]

You'd have to include a comparison of all the median expenditure for cities and potential expansion spots.

There are many factors.
Disposable income.
Alternative expenditures.
Demographic factors.
Business factors.
Government factors.
Media factors.
History.
Grassroots.
Travel distance to stadium, stadium experience and ease of travel.
Even climate is a factor.

Like I said, it paints a good picture, but it doesn't paint the full picture.

I said I had too much time on a Sunday, but I don't have that much time. Or the ability to even quantify a few of those.

 

[Badger17]

I honestly just want to proove that you're a nutter - no dishonesty involved at all.
What is the N.T. but one big "bush league".
You're entitled to your opinion, but really it's ridiculous and laughable.

Even if you don't realise it you're chronically dishonest. You intentionally twist everything anybody you don't like says into the worst light possible, going so far as to chop up paragraphs and sentence to intentionally misrepresent their content.

You only think I'm a 'nutter' because you exist in a bubble where Aussie Rules is accepted as unimpeachably the greatest sport, that everybody falls in love with at first sight, and is always succeeding and growing. I exist outside that bubble and have first hand experience and knowledge that contradicts the narratives you believe, and you find that uncomfortable because it challenges your world view.

A better word for how you see me would be heretic. You're a code wars type, the sporting equivalent of a religious zealot that proselytises your code to anybody that'll listen like an overbearing born-again preacher, and denigrates any other competing "religion" and their "followers" on face value without really knowing anything about them.

The irony is that despite all your passion people like you going around attempting to bully anyone the offends your sensibilities is a sure fire way to turn away new potential fans. That's especially true when expressing having had any interest in another code is all it take to set you off.

 

[RedV3x]

You intentionally twist everything anybody you don't like says into the worst light possible, going so far as to chop up paragraphs and sentence to intentionally misrepresent their content.

I analyse what people write, then highlight appropriate sections.

You only think I'm a 'nutter' because you exist in a bubble where Aussie Rules is accepted as unimpeachably the greatest sport, that everybody falls in love with at first sight, and is always succeeding and growing.

I think you live in a N.T. bubble where in your opinion Aussie Rules is accepted as unimpeachably the greatest sport, that everybody falls in love with at first sight, and is always succeeding and growing, where the N.T. can support a N.T. AFL team.

I exist outside that bubble and have first hand experience and knowledge that contradicts the narratives you believe, and you find that uncomfortable because it challenges your world view.

I think you must live in a N.T. bubble whereas I have first hand experience and knowledge that contradicts the narratives you believe, and you find that uncomfortable because it challenges your world view.

A better word for how you see me would be heretic.

No. I think I'll stick with nutter..

You're a code wars type,

How do you get "a code wars type" out of my views on N.T. football.

your code

I thought you were the one proposing N.T. to anybody that'll listen like an overbearing born-again preacher, the sporting equivalent of a religious zealot that proselytizes and denigrates any other competing "religion" and their "followers" on face value without really knowing anything about them.

That's especially true when expressing having had any interest in another code is all it take to set you off.

So when have you expressed interest in another code?
IMO you're a nutter for continuing on about the possibility a N.T. AFL team.
Have you just exposed yourself ?