Expansion Canberra

[MelbourneGWS]

Seeing this BBL announcement (which we all know means an upgraded Manuka), hours after Barr posted how unfeasible a rectangular stadium on the West Basin is, definitely lines up that way. It may be a leap, but things are lining up in that direction.

You also keep going on about the economics. Manuka is getting upgraded independently. Can you please explain to me how a full-time team would be more expensive for the ACT Government than the current situation?

Are you saying that the $ given by the ACT Government to any full-time AFL team, will not be more than the $ currently given to the Giants?

 

[Canberra Pear]

Are you saying that the $ given by the ACT Government to any full-time AFL team, will not be more than the $ currently given to the Giants?

The Giants already get more than the Raiders or Brumbies. I've always run off the assumption that that $2.85m would transfer to a 20th team (maybe a slight boost with inflation, but the same boost that would've happened to the Giants partnership).

If the ACT Government wants to pay more, great, but I really don't think it's necessary.

And the Giants have a return on investment based on three games. That money over 11 games (plus finals) will be a much bigger return on investment - and be a boost to the ACT economy.

 

[Giant YoYo]

Are you saying that the $ given by the ACT Government to any full-time AFL team, will not be more than the $ currently given to the Giants?

Even if it is, someone will crunch the numbers and see how it stacks up.

If the amount they pay for the club is repaid back many times over by travelling fans, they will see it as worth it.

You already have a few potential sellout games, Canberra v Giants and the Swans. Couple of big Victorian clubs.

My understanding is that Sydney and Melbourne tourists are already the biggest contributors to the tourism market and would be a huge net positive for the ACT/Canberra economy. Happy to be corrected.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

Even if it is, someone will crunch the numbers and see how it stacks up.

If the amount they pay for the club is repaid back many times over by travelling fans, they will see it as worth it.

You already have a few potential sellout games, Canberra v Giants and the Swans. Couple of big Victorian clubs.

My understanding is that Sydney and Melbourne tourists are already the biggest contributors to the tourism market and would be a huge net positive for the ACT/Canberra economy. Happy to be corrected.

Fair point. Whilst there has been no public ACT government push for a full time AFL team, Barr has some time to decide what he wants to do as our current contract with the Giants only expires in 2032. I guess this will be dependent on what the AFL Commission wants post Tasmania 19? The fan surveys that the AFL sent out months ago, seem to indicate that Team 20 is most likely going to happen, but I don’t know the process the AFL will use - will it be an expression of interest as soccer used, or will the AFL Commission unilaterally decide? I guess something for the Team 20 thread!

 

[MelbourneGWS]

The Giants already get more than the Raiders or Brumbies. I've always run off the assumption that that $2.85m would transfer to a 20th team (maybe a slight boost with inflation, but the same boost that would've happened to the Giants partnership).

If the ACT Government wants to pay more, great, but I really don't think it's necessary.

And the Giants have a return on investment based on three games. That money over 11 games (plus finals) will be a much bigger return on investment - and be a boost to the ACT economy.

if so, that would work politically and withstand criticism from other codes, if the total ACT Government expenditure for a full time Canberra team playing 11 matches is the same as the $ spent for 3 AFL games (and 2 AFLW games).

However, would there be enough sponsorships and fundings available from the private sector and memberships/ merchandise to make a full time AFL Canberra team viable?

I also doubt that the AFL will spend the same $ supporting the Canberra team that they have spent on us (and Gold Coast). I think realistically you could expect about the same distribution $ that other clubs (that are not Giants/ Gold Coast/ struggling Victorian clubs) get, especially as the AFL will now be able to sell 10 games a week instead of the current 9?

 

[Canberra Pear]

if so, that would work politically and withstand criticism from other codes, if the total ACT Government expenditure for a full time Canberra team playing 11 matches is the same as the $ spent for 3 AFL games (and 2 AFLW games).

However, would there be enough sponsorships and fundings available from the private sector and memberships/ merchandise to make a full time AFL Canberra team viable?

Well the Giants currently survive on just $2.85m a year of government funding, and all indications so far suggest that Canberra would have stronger support.

The game isn't really dependent on local sponsors any more. Pretty much all major sponsors are national or international brands.

KFC, McDonald's, Hyundai, Toyota, MG, Jaguar, Optus, Bupa, Sharp, Fujitsu, Toyota Tires, Nissan, Zurich, Hertz, Mazda, HSBC, Volkswagen, Mission etc have no connection to the cities of the teams they sponsor.

As has also been mentioned on the 20th Team thread, Canberra would benefit from the private sector looking for an audience with government departments.

 

[WesternSydneyHawk]

The increase in capacity for cricket, will also benefit Aussie Rules, but I remain pessimistic that given the huge $$ Barr has spent/ will spend on the Tram, that there will be much $ left for other areas, including for a full time AFL team.

I'm not sure that spending on the trams and spending on the AFL need to be mutually exclusive things.

I mean, the next phase of the light rail is set to extend it south over the Commonwealth Ave bridge to Parliament House, then southwest to Woden.

Well, as nice as trams to Woden would be, perhaps that can be branch line that's built later.

And instead, the trams could run southeast from Parliament to Canberra train station.

After all, it does make sense to finally connect the train station to Parliament and Civic using light rail. Multimodal public transport.

And there's a nice, wide median strip right along Canberra Avenue they could run down.

And as a happy coincidence, it would be perfect for moving thousands of people from an expanded 50,000 seat Manuka Oval after a game when the Canberra BBL or the 20th AFL team play

 

[Canberra Pear]

I'm not sure that spending on the trams and spending on the AFL need to be mutually exclusive things.

I mean, the next phase of the light rail is set to extend it south over the Commonwealth Ave bridge to Parliament House, then southwest to Woden.

Well, as nice as trams to Woden would be, perhaps that can be branch line that's built later.

And instead, the trams could run southeast from Parliament to Canberra train station.

After all, it does make sense to finally connect the train station to Parliament and Civic using light rail. Multimodal public transport.

And there's a nice, wide median strip right along Canberra Avenue they could run down.

And as a happy coincidence, it would be perfect for moving thousands of people from an expanded 50,000 seat Manuka Oval after a game when the Canberra BBL or the 20th AFL team play

Luckily the line to Woden will swing around the eastern side of Parliament House.

It won't be the doorstep of Manuka, but a stop will be between 700m to 1km from Manuka (depending on the route the choose). For comparison, Adelaide Oval is 550m from the train and Carrara is 2km from the train.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I don’t know about making that leap! The increase in capacity for cricket, will also benefit Aussie Rules, but I remain pessimistic that given the huge $$ Barr has spent/ will spend on the Tram, that there will be much $ left for other areas, including for a full time AFL team. As it is there is criticism that Barr’s Tram $ is taking $ from hospitals, health, education and other infrastructure. In any case Barr will soon need to deal with requests for more $ from the Canberra United female soccer team, and undoubtedly the long delayed Canberra male soccer team whose Aleague entry this year was delayed due to investment/ funding issues, will also be asking for $ from the ACT Government.

What you're missing with this analysis is that nobody is proposing a Canberra team right now, but in 8-10 years' time. The light rail is a large capital cost, no argument there, but transport projects lead to better budgets in future, not directly, but through reduced travel times increasing productivity and increased density around stations adding to tax revenue. By the time the ACT are paying for a full-time team, the light rail extension expense will have already been outlaid and producing benefits.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

What you're missing with this analysis is that nobody is proposing a Canberra team right now, but in 8-10 years' time. The light rail is a large capital cost, no argument there, but transport projects lead to better budgets in future, not directly, but through reduced travel times increasing productivity and increased density around stations adding to tax revenue. By the time the ACT are paying for a full-time team, the light rail extension expense will have already been outlaid and producing benefits.

I think you’ll find that the Tram is the gift that keeps taking! But yes, if Canberra is to have a full time AFL team, it will only be in 8-10 years at the earliest

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I think you’ll find that the Tram is the gift that keeps taking!

I think you have an agenda, or at least very strongly held beliefs.

 

[Canberra Pear]

I think you have an agenda, or at least very strongly held beliefs.

The light rail will be an ongoing project for decades to come. This is just stage 2. We're slated for at least two more stages after this. We'll probably be talking light rail well past 2050.

But it'll have very little effect on an AFL team's finances. Manuka's already getting upgraded. There's already $2.85m being spent on an AFL team, that'll just transfer over.

The finances of the light rail are relatively inconsequential to a team.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

I think you’ll find that the Tram is the gift that keeps taking! But yes, if Canberra is to have a full time AFL team, it will only be in 8-10 years at the earliest

Tasmania comes in 2028 having to have a buy team each week sit out will get old very quickly , I can’t see them staying at 19 for to long, wa3 , and Canberra are the only realistic options , will come down to how much the act government are prepared to fork out I imagine it will have to be significantly more than currently for the giants games , the afl are getting a redeveloped Launceston and brand new Hobart stadium plus 12 million a year from the Tasmanian government it won’t be a cheap exercise for the act government

 

[Canberra Pear]

Tasmania comes in 2028 having to have a buy team each week sit out will get old very quickly , I can’t see them staying at 19 for to long, wa3 , and Canberra are the only realistic options , will come down to how much the act government are prepared to fork out I imagine it will have to be significantly more than currently for the giants games , the afl are getting a redeveloped Launceston and brand new Hobart stadium plus 12 million a year from the Tasmanian government it won’t be a cheap exercise for the act government

I don't see why the ACT government will have to fund more than they currently are.

Canberra's already getting a redeveloped Manuka for BBL.

If the ACT replicates the stadium conditions they used to entice the Giants, over 11 games, Canberra would earn almost $2.5m. Add that to the $2.85m, and Canberra already has more than a $5m annual jump over WA3.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

I don't see why the ACT government will have to fund more than they currently are.

Canberra's already getting a redeveloped Manuka for BBL.

If the ACT replicates the stadium conditions they used to entice the Giants, over 11 games, Canberra would earn almost $2.5m. Add that to the $2.85m, and Canberra already has more than a $5m annual jump over WA3.

I don't see why the ACT government will have to fund more than they currently are.

Canberra's already getting a redeveloped Manuka for BBL.

If the ACT replicates the stadium conditions they used to entice the Giants, over 11 games, Canberra would earn almost $2.5m. Add that to the $2.85m, and Canberra already has more than a $5m annual jump over WA3.

The revenue and costs required to run a full time afl club is extremely high look at the funding gws receive each season just to operate and that’s being based in the largest corporate catchment area in the country the act government would have to significantly increase their funding each season. Apart from a redeveloped stadium they aneed to build a training and administration base there’s another 50-100 million

 

[Canberra Pear]

The revenue and costs required to run a full time afl club is extremely high look at the funding gws receive each season just to operate and that’s being based in the largest corporate catchment area in the country

Canberra will have a bigger off-field base than the Giants. Bigger crowds, more expensive tickets and memberships.

Corporate catchment doesn't matter as much these days. Every major sponsor is national or international.

the act government would have to significantly increase their funding each season.

Canberra's will be in a better situation than GWS, even without government funding.

Throw in the annual $5-6m I've mentioned above, we're going to be going much better off-field than the Giants have been for their first decade.

Apart from a redeveloped stadium they aneed to build a training and administration base there’s another 50-100 million

This will be our one long-term expense, but WA3 will need it, too.

 

[MelbourneGWS]

I think you have an agenda, or at least very strongly held beliefs.

This is not a politics website, but the implications of the ongoing tram $ (not just to woden but to Belco and the airport), will be reductions in other government expenditure including health, housing, education etc. Stanhope has an ongoing weekly column that shows how the tram $ has adversely affected the budget and financial position of Canberra, and constrained the ability of our government for new initiatives.

 

[Canberra Pear]

This is not a politics website, but the implications of the ongoing tram $ (not just to woden but to Belco and the airport), will be reductions in other government expenditure including health, housing, education etc. Stanhope has an ongoing weekly column that shows how the tram $ has adversely affected the budget and financial position of Canberra, and constrained the ability of our government for new initiatives.

Stanhope is ridiculously anti-Barr and the light rail. Anything he writes on the subject should be taken with more than a grain of salt.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

This is not a politics website, but the implications of the ongoing tram $ (not just to woden but to Belco and the airport), will be reductions in other government expenditure including health, housing, education etc. Stanhope has an ongoing weekly column that shows how the tram $ has adversely affected the budget and financial position of Canberra, and constrained the ability of our government for new initiatives.

Cities that want AFL teams need to grow up and have big city infrastructure like light rail. Any Lions or Suns fan will tell you all about how buses aren't good enough for moving several thousand people at once.

 

[kranger]

Canberra will have a bigger off-field base than the Giants. Bigger crowds, more expensive tickets and memberships.

Corporate catchment doesn't matter as much these days. Every major sponsor is national or international.

I say this in the context as someone who prefers Canberra as team 20, but not sure when that will be.

The major sponsors, the ones shown on uniforms etc, do tend to be national and international companies. However the companies that tend to be on the boundary fencing are not so much. And the corporates that don’t get mentioned are generally local companies.

These smaller companies such as a Patio installers or office supply distributor, don’t need to be names for exposure but instead buy up lots of corporate boxes to be used. These corporate boxes sales as a collective generate a lot of revenue for the club.

The smaller companies give the boxes to employees of the month or are used when trying to woo a company. You shouldn’t be quick to dismiss the benefit these smaller local companies have to clubs financially.

Canberra should have a sufficient number of companies that these corporate facilities can be sold to.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Remember, I say this in the context as someone who prefers Canberra as team 20.

The major sponsors, the ones shown on uniforms etc, do tend to be national and international companies. However the companies that tend to be on the boundary fencing are not so much. And the corporates that don’t get mentioned are generally local companies.

These smaller companies such as a Patio installers or office supply distributor, don’t need to be names for exposure but instead buy up lots of corporate boxes to be used. These corporate boxes sales as a collective generate a lot of revenue for the club.

The smaller companies give the boxes to employees of the month or are used when trying to woo a company. You shouldn’t be quick to dismiss the benefit these smaller local companies have to clubs financially.

Canberra should have a sufficient number of companies that these corporate facilities can be sold to.

On top of more direct-to-club elements such as player sponsorships.

An expectation that e.g. the Tasmania team won't be able to generate revenue of this nature, even with its new stadiums, given population and economy size constraints is part of the basis of the Tasmanian government paying $12 million per year for the team ongoing.

 

[WesternSydneyHawk]

I've posted the following on the other thread about a 20th AFL club, but I'm cross-posting it because it's relevant here too.

Here's a quick back-of-the-envelope rundown of what an AFL team in Canberra would look like financially, if it were based on one of the big Canberra footy clubs (like Ainslie or Eastlakes).

Keep in mind this is very similar to the model the Canberra Demons used in the NEAFL (with that club being basically a rebadged Eastlakes).

The short version is there is scope in Canberra to do what some have suggested thry should have done on the Gold Coast by giving Southport an AFL licence:

Here's Ainslie's annual report for 2023, if you're interested: https://ainsliegroup.com.au/wp-cont...SLIE_Annual-Report-2023-FINAL-WEB-REDUCED.pdf

The short answer is that it had $28.3 million in revenue in 2023, and $34 million in net assets (that's assets after debt and other liabilities).

The club's assets include its main social club at Alan Ray Oval in Ainslie, as well the Gungahlin Golf Club.

Yes, it owns a golf course.

Its total profit for the year was $850,000 (after just under $1 million in community donations).

That might not sound like much, but keep in mind that profit is after funding many of the expenses that a standalone AFL club would need to fund out of its own pocket.

So it already funds a board of directors and full-time managers. A standalone club would need to pay those salaries out if revenue.

It funds a senior men's and women's team in the AFL Canberra competition. A standalone club would need to fund a reserves team.

It already has general admin staff, member services staff, IT, marketing, bookkeepers/accountants, and many of the off-field staff that an AFL club would also need to operate.

It already has junior boys and girls teams. A standalone club would need to build and fund an academy/development programming from scratch.

It already has a training ground.

The profit is with all if those expenses already accounted for.

And long term, if you wanted to convert the golf course into an elite training facility like the one Hawthorn is building in Dingley, it already owns the land to do it.

So, assuming you could get the ACT government to accept those community grants going to fund an AFL team, that's $1.8 million.

Add in $3 million from the ACT government and that's $4.8 million.

Add in TV rights distributions from the AFL and that's between $11 million at the low end (Collingwood, West Coast, Essendon, Hawthorn, Richmond) to $25 million (Gold Coast, GWS). Middle of the road is Sydney with $16 million.

Source: https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/af...s/news-story/3425722d96a28b632b3eeae1a17c5a6b

So that's $15.8m funded like Collingwood or West Coast, $20.8m funded like Sydney, or $29.8m funded like GWS or Gold Coast, with many expenses already covered by existing operations.

On to stadium deals. Here's a good thread explaining clean and non-clean stadium deals: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...the-sa-footy-paradigm-shift-happening.554729/

And here's an excellent article that discusses stadium deals in the ACT: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/st...ghts-changes-loom-for-canberras-new-afl-deal/

The thing that could make an Ainslie or Eastlakes bid compelling is they both already own and operate hospitality and catering businesses.

So you could potentially have a situation where an Ainslie-based AFL club pays a peppercorn rent to the ACT government for an expanded Manuka Oval or a new oval stadium, and then gets the catering contract for that venue.

All of this is before a single corporate box or sponsorship has been sold. It's before a single ticket has been sold. And it's before a single AFL membership has been sold.

(On that last point, it's worth noting Ainslie already has around 40,000 junior footy/AFL Canberra/social club members. That's a good database to start promoting AFL memberships and tickets to.)

Please note that a lot of what I've written above is all back-of-the-envelope calculations.

There's likely to be some additional startup funding needed from either the AFL or the ACT government, especially for a stadium.

And like an AFL club, it won't be viable long term if it can't grow a strong membership and sponsorship base.

But.

It would have a very solid asset base, would have a strong starting position, and go a long way towards being viable even before sponsorships and memberships are taken into account.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

On top of more direct-to-club elements such as player sponsorships.

An expectation that e.g. the Tasmania team won't be able to generate revenue of this nature, even with its new stadiums, given population and economy size constraints is part of the basis of the Tasmanian government paying $12 million per year for the team ongoing.

I’m not so sure a Tasmanian team will have absolutely no competition whatsoever in their market A local afl team they will also be based in a 100% afl state . A Canberra team will have direct competition from well established local super rugby and nrl teams to compete with for support in what is a relatively small market and sponsorship it’s also not the preferred code at the moment , I’m not saying a Canberra team won’t work but it definitely won’t be a walk in the park like some here are making out it will take significant government and afl funding to make work

 

[MelbourneGWS]

I've posted the following on the other thread about a 20th AFL club, but I'm cross-posting it because it's relevant here too.

Here's a quick back-of-the-envelope rundown of what an AFL team in Canberra would look like financially, if it were based on one of the big Canberra footy clubs (like Ainslie or Eastlakes).

Keep in mind this is very similar to the model the Canberra Demons used in the NEAFL (with that club being basically a rebadged Eastlakes).

The short version is there is scope in Canberra to do what some have suggested thry should have done on the Gold Coast by giving Southport an AFL licence:

Back in the days of the NEAFL, the AFL wanted a combined Canberra team to play in the NEAFL - instead of the seperate teams that were fielded by Ainslie and Eastlake. Ainslie did not agree to this joint funding/ team model, and wanted to be the sole Canberra team, and went back to the ACT AFL when their proposal was rejected. Eastlake however continued as Canberra Demons in the NEAFL, until the NEAFL was disbanded with the Reserves of Sydney/ Giants/ Brisbane and Gold Coast (as well as Southport) moving to the VFL.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

It'd be nice if Ainslie and Eastlake could learn to cooperate with each other. It'd be hard to keep Canberra out of the league if they were willing to work together for a VFL team, and then an AFL team.