CONFIRMED: Tas Gov Deal Done -AFL claims it delays Tas' own team *KEEP IT HERE PLEASE**

[eldorado]

Jeff Kennett...has never had Hawthorns best intentions at heart.

How do you come to this conclusion?

 

[mchawk]

What Don Scott about Hawthorn relocating to Tassie is on the mark. Once the shine of our premiership win wears off and once we begin to really struggle on field, we will lose members and money in Melbourne. Once that happens we will be completely dependant on Tasmanian money and Tasmania will be ready for their own AFL side. When this happens, it not to hard to see the AFL pushing us into a corner and forcing a relocation upon us.

You have to remember our current president who knocked back 7.5 million to stay in 100% in Melbourne is the same guy who 14 years ago was one of the major driving forces for the Melbourne - Hawthorn merger. Jeff Kennett isn't good for this football club and he has never had Hawthorns best intentions at heart. He is a egostical, narcissistic businessman.

I am 100% sure that we will be in Tasmania within the next decade. I mean why else would we knock back a 7.5 million dollar handout when we already have 45k+ members in Melbourne? We are financially viable in Melbourne now and there is no need to play games in Tasmania. The only reason we are ( that I can see ) is that we are one day going to become a Tasmanian football side.

I have been a Hawthorn member going on 22 years now since I was 6 and when we do finally relocate, I won't be supporting the Tasmanian Hawks.

FINALLY!!!!!


Congrats someone that can see beyond next week. The AFL wanted Norf to relocate to Tasmania but our good President has put the Hawthorn hand up for us without a vote by the members. All I'm asking for is a vote for god's sake. If the vote I lose I can live with it. Well I couldn't but at least I won't die trying. This issue is the making and breaking of our club. Jeff would make alot of Hawthorn people a little easier on the situation if he said if the season goes to 24 games then we'll play in Tassie 5 times but hey don't worry. This is the last increase of Tasmanian games, we've got FTA rights with the tv networks. But no Jeff doesn't do that.

WHY?

 

[Lord Mud of Glenferrie]

I'm not Tasmanian but I did live in Hobart for a couple of years and the North/South dynamic is very real, at least at a political level. I think this prism needs to be applied in the whole North/Hawks saga. Cricket Tasmania
is almost wholly based in the south of the state and bringing AFL games to Bellerive delivers them an additional revenue stream (it hosts local league games in the winter) and the ability to develop the oval.

Amongst Australian states, Tasmania is unique in the way their population is spread. Drawing a 'Mason-Dixon' would achieve a fairly even population split.



Firstly, I understand that you are neither presenting nor supporting a case for the AFL to locate a team in Tasmania, merely highlighting the North South divide.

I have never lived in Tasmania and it is 18 years since I was last there so I have no option but to accept your point.

Therefore, accepting that dynamic to be real, how is locating North Melbourne in Hobart going to “unite the island”? Would not the North then feel aggrieved that the South would have the monopoly on AFL games? This is one area where the AFL’s statement that their proposal was in the best interest of all Taswegians is contradictory, and could be construed as sophistry.

I recognize that Lane’s argument, even though poorly presented, is to have a stand-alone Tasmanian team located in Hobart. If the division is so real, again, would not the North still feel aggrieved that all games are played at Hobart, especially if the better facilities remain at Aurora stadium?

Just some thoughts in an attempt to divert the sincere but inflammatory comments from the anti Kennett lobby towards a calm debate on our Tasmanian deal and to bring the actions of Demetriou in this saga to the forefront so that he, more than Kennett, is placed under the microscope.

Also, a beginning in highlighting the deficiencies in logic of Tim Lane's article.

 

[Lord Mud of Glenferrie]

I actually don't have a problem with Jeff - my problem is with the AFL. They knew for months this deal was on the table and they also knew that North were in talks with Hobart and had already been told that no govt. funding would be available.

If the AFL were dead set keen on getting north down there they would have started due process back in June and notified all parties what they had in mind - not do it a week out from the signing of a new contract.

The AFL has come out looking like the good guy - look what we tried to do for Tassie

North have come out looking like the poor hard done by because they put forward such a great deal (no word of how they were going to fix bellvrie oval to AFL standards included in that deal)

and then of course the hawks come off once again looking like the bad guy because they didn't come to the party.

I don't have a problem with deal that is in place but if I'm honest would have preferred them to let north take it but at the end of the day I have to take a face value that the club knows what it is doing and be prepared for whatever the AFL decides it is going to dish out to the hawks over the next few years and see if we can ride the waves out.

Without reading all posts in this thread I find this to be the one that most accurately reflects my thoughts.

Although I do differ on letting North take over. I believe that with the effort (never supported by the AFL) we have put into Tasmania obliges us to remain.

A retreat would have had disastrous consequences on our reputation in both Tasmania and the wider AFL community. It would have made our presence appear to be nothing more than a cynical money grab.

Maybe we have made a rod for own back;only the future will tell.

 

[Tas]

North have come out looking like the poor hard done by because they put forward such a great deal (no word of how they were going to fix bellvrie oval to AFL standards included in that deal)

I think the media is making it sound that way because it suits their agenda.

We only came into the picture because the AFL denied Richmond to play games in Tasmania and even then we were only looking at the Hobart games initially.

The shit hit the fan when Bartlett approached us/the AFL about what we would be prepared to offer to take over Hawthorn's contract.

The AFL is pissed with him because he knocked back what the AFL believe is a better offer. AFL have been forced to look at a Tasmanian team because of political pressure. Financially, for the AFL, having a Tasmanian team wouldn't create any more revenue for the AFL, wouldn't impact ratings or market share, so for them, it doesn't suit them to have a side there but there was a lot of political pressure to have a team from there.

They don't want to lose the Melbourne broadcasting revenue from the extra Melbourne games but would be prepared to make some sacrifices to keep the peace and down the track if the NSW and QLD sides start to generate something positive in the broadcasting revenue sense, then they could afford to see a team eventually move there permanently.

I don't have a problem with deal that is in place but if I'm honest would have preferred them to let north take it but at the end of the day I have to take a face value that the club knows what it is doing and be prepared for whatever the AFL decides it is going to dish out to the hawks over the next few years and see if we can ride the waves out.

Bartlett is coming under a lot of heat in Tasmania now, they want to see more transparency in terms of the numbers, if he can't get the numbers to swing in his favour then politically he is a dead man walking.

For us, I think it is the best result. Unless we have major financial incentive to consider a strong ties with a secondary partner, I just don't think the angst of selling games and the stigma that gets associated with that for my club is worth it in the long run.

I am sure the AFL wanted us there committed long-term before they talked about their intention to buy-out Colonial stadium a lot sooner than letting the lease agreement expire.

I think they wanted us there locked away before that little gem made the public arena.

 

[HAWKS HEROES]

Wont happen ! Part of the heritage listing of waverley is that there has to bee a footy presence we are that presence

 

[eldorado]

Congrats someone that can see beyond next week.

I think those who appreciate the financial strength the deal gives the club are also looking beyond next week.

 

[Messenger]

Firstly, I understand that you are neither presenting nor supporting a case for the AFL to locate a team in Tasmania, merely highlighting the North South divide.

I have never lived in Tasmania and it is 18 years since I was last there so I have no option but to accept your point.

Therefore, accepting that dynamic to be real, how is locating North Melbourne in Hobart going to “unite the island”?

My understanding of the proposed NMFC agreement was that they would play some games (?2) at Aurora.

The other thing to appreciate about the Mason/Dixon line is that political power lies predominately to the South.

 

[cantos_tevez]

Wow. So after reading through some of the replies from Pess, mchawk and co. I have pretty much come to a conclusion that Hawthorn is definitely moving to Tasmania. Clearly this is correct, as even Don Scott has said so.

Honestly, I cannot believe the amount of garbage that is getting posted in this thread. We sign a deal that contributes to a stable future of the club, and all there is is whining from Hawthorn supporters who clearly have a personal hatred of Jeff. He may not be the world's greatest bloke, but he has been fantastic for the HFC. Where is the congratulations to the management team at the club for making us such a powerhouse club financially??

Yes, it sucks we miss out on 4 games in our reserved seats per year - I love watching the Hawks live just like everyone else on this board. However, if it is going to support the future of the club in an extremely positive way, I'm happy to cop it and have a few tinnies watching it on the TV. We have to continue to push growth of the Hawthorn name, the Hawthorn Nation. Man Utd isn't the club it is today for being only based in Manchester. The have millions of walking billboards half way around the world from where they play FFS!!!

Relocation???? HAHAHAHA!!! Surely some people are only bringing up such bulldust to annoy the shizen out of other people. Tasmania cannot support their own team at the moment. Even if they could, the AFL wouldn't bother with it because it is not a major growth city, and they already love their footy. The HFC have therefore taken advantage of this and used it to contribute to our brand - more members and more cash. Besides, why would we leave Melbourne after establishing such a stronghold out at Waverley?

This is the worst thing about the off-season. Things we would never talk about when the footy is on are completely blown out of proportion. A bit of discussion about our deal is nice, like I don't normally mind the contrasting views from some posters, but this has just gone too far, and people really are saying some stupid things. Let it go guys - the deal has been done. Let's embrace it, make the most of it, and continue to support the club we all love. Thanks to this deal, the HFC will be around for a long time yet.

 

[Tas]

My understanding of the proposed NMFC agreement was that they would play some games (?2) at Aurora.

The other thing to appreciate about the Mason/Dixon line is that political power lies predominately to the South.

Yeah, was meant to be a split of 5/2 or 4/3 between Hobart and Launceston.

 

[Pessimistic]

Wow. So after reading through some of the replies from Pess, mchawk and co. I have pretty much come to a conclusion that Hawthorn is definitely moving to Tasmania. Clearly this is correct, as even Don Scott has said so.

Honestly, I cannot believe the amount of garbage that is getting posted in this thread. We sign a deal that contributes to a stable future of the club, and all there is is whining from Hawthorn supporters who clearly have a personal hatred of Jeff. He may not be the world's greatest bloke, but he has been fantastic for the HFC. Where is the congratulations to the management team at the club for making us such a powerhouse club financially??

Yes, it sucks we miss out on 4 games in our reserved seats per year - I love watching the Hawks live just like everyone else on this board. However, if it is going to support the future of the club in an extremely positive way, I'm happy to cop it and have a few tinnies watching it on the TV. We have to continue to push growth of the Hawthorn name, the Hawthorn Nation. Man Utd isn't the club it is today for being only based in Manchester. The have millions of walking billboards half way around the world from where they play FFS!!!

Relocation???? HAHAHAHA!!! Surely some people are only bringing up such bulldust to annoy the shizen out of other people. Tasmania cannot support their own team at the moment. Even if they could, the AFL wouldn't bother with it because it is not a major growth city, and they already love their footy. The HFC have therefore taken advantage of this and used it to contribute to our brand - more members and more cash. Besides, why would we leave Melbourne after establishing such a stronghold out at Waverley?

This is the worst thing about the off-season. Things we would never talk about when the footy is on are completely blown out of proportion. A bit of discussion about our deal is nice, like I don't normally mind the contrasting views from some posters, but this has just gone too far, and people really are saying some stupid things. Let it go guys - the deal has been done. Let's embrace it, make the most of it, and continue to support the club we all love. Thanks to this deal, the HFC will be around for a long time yet.

Not suer how you get that from my posts. To clarify - I meant Scoot makes a better case for tasmanias 'own' team then Lane.

My stanc is I am OK with the arrangement in principle, I would just prefer some things done better. And I think our activities there should be tempered by the fact it could all end very abruptly, as nearly happened this week.
In other words have a plan B (and definitely no plan (n)Z

 

[medusala]

Thanks to this deal, the HFC will be around for a long time yet.

????

One assumes you think Jeff is either an idiot or a liar when he stated Hawthorn would be better off financially if the club left Tasmania.

If Tasmania does not bring in substantial NET $ then what is the point of the exercise.

Rather than simply criticise others how about you provide a rational explanation for this policy.

 

[Rioli magic]

????

One assumes you think Jeff is either an idiot or a liar when he stated Hawthorn would be better off financially if the club left Tasmania.

If Tasmania does not bring in substantial NET $ then what is the point of the exercise.

Rather than simply criticise others how about you provide a rational explanation for this policy.

I think Jeff's statement was in regards to the $7.5 mil offer from the AFL to leave Tassie. The non-sponsorship component of our deal is not worth $7.5 mil, so assuming we took it and picked up a new sponsor with the same income, we would be slightly better off. Of course this ignores the 'clean stadium' aspect of the deal, any loss of Tasmanian membership, the effort required to find a new sponsor, the stigma associated with 'up and leaving' and also makes the assumption the new sponsor will provide the same revenue for the club. I think the statement was made for the people of Tasmania after a week of criticism about our lack of committment to the State.

 

[mchawk]

Excellant post

Now just waiting for mchawk and medusala to take the bite.

Thanks Goldhawk because if we don't agree with you its insult time right?

 

[medusala]

I think Jeff's statement was in regards to the $7.5 mil offer from the AFL to leave Tassie. .

Not sure why you think that. Sounded like he was talking NET to me. He even listed costs of playing in Tas such as the $600k cost of travel, clinics etc and the $300k re the contribution to York Park. As for losing Tasmanian members, its a red herring. Playing games in Tas costs Vic members, costs average $ per membership and costs re designated away games. Further many Tas member ie 2k odd would stay as full paying members even if the club left (see how many Tas members Richmond, St Kilda, North etc have down there)

Now just waiting for mchawk and medusala to take the bite.

Not entirely sure why you are so high up on your hobby horse. I have made an argument based on known facts and the verbatim quote from the president. I have not said Hawthorn is or will fully relocate, merely that the financial benefit of playing in Tasmania is vastly overestimated by the fanbois on here.

I havent seen anything from you to counter this.

Perhaps you might like to try.

NB if you think Tasmania can not support its own team I have grave doubts about your understanding of finance.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Not sure why you think that. Sounded like he was talking NET to me. He even listed costs of playing in Tas such as the $600k cost of travel, clinics etc and the $300k re the contribution to York Park. As for losing Tasmanian members, its a red herring. Playing games in Tas costs Vic members, costs average $ per membership and costs re designated away games. Further many Tas member ie 2k odd would stay as full paying members even if the club left (see how many Tas members Richmond, St Kilda, North etc have down there)




Not entirely sure why you are so high up on your hobby horse. I have made an argument based on known facts and the verbatim quote from the president. I have not said Hawthorn is or will fully relocate, merely that the financial benefit of playing in Tasmania is vastly overestimated by the fanbois on here.

I havent seen anything from you to counter this.

Perhaps you might like to try.

NB if you think Tasmania can not support its own team I have grave doubts about your understanding of finance.

Tasmania cannot support an AFL team without the support of the State government, which means it would need to be a privately owned team

 

[Rioli magic]

Not sure why you think that. Sounded like he was talking NET to me. He even listed costs of playing in Tas such as the $600k cost of travel, clinics etc and the $300k re the contribution to York Park.

What about the sponsorship component? How much would we make on these low drawing games if they were in Melbourne next year and how many would attend? Not sure how anyone can compare without making assumptions. I'm not taking Jeff's statement to heart, it's a successful partnership with many intangible benefits.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Passionate, vigorous debate = Good

Name calling and petty crap = Bad

Don't prod each other, don't try and lure people into emotional reactions, don't attack people on here

Just discuss the ****ing issue.

I really don't want to be handing out cards on this board.

 

[Goldhawk]

Not entirely sure why you are so high up on your hobby horse. I have made an argument based on known facts and the verbatim quote from the president. I have not said Hawthorn is or will fully relocate, merely that the financial benefit of playing in Tasmania is vastly overestimated by the fanbois on here.

I havent seen anything from you to counter this.

Perhaps you might like to try.

NB if you think Tasmania can not support its own team I have grave doubts about your understanding of finance.

I'm not on my high hobby horse at all, i just have an agenda with all the negativity and false information being forwarded by certain persons here on BF and twisting things around about the Tassie deal.

All the hysteria being put forward regarding playing 5 home games in Tassie just won't happen because if it were to come to fruition then there would have to be an increase of the H & A to 24 games. We all know that won't happen and if it did in the worse case scenario i could cope with it, if it were a 24 game fixture.

In regards to the financial benefits of course Hawthorn will be far better off playing mainly against the smaller clubs in Tassie than playing at for e.g. Etihad Stadium.

As for Jeff Kennett saying that Hawthorn would be better off financial playing in Melbourne , that's just a throw away line or spin by Jeff in order to please the Tasmanian community.

Of cause there will be extra cost involved when Hawthorn do School and community work around Tassie such as airfares, accomodation etc. but the benefits far outweigh the cost when one considers the effects they may have on providing happiness to the young kids in general around Tasmanian communities and school programs and maybe turning them into Hawthorn supporters who may become members in the future and the branding of the name of Hawthorn which may also generate sponsorship, it all has a flow on effect.

As for the regular airfares that Hawthorn encounter for the players and officials when they play their Home games in Tassie...don't worry they are paid by the AFL.

And to your remarks in the last paragraph , i run my own business so i do think i have an understanding of finances.

 

[Jaworskyj 1971]

The way i interpret it ,if we hadn't renewed our agreement and Nth Melb had started playing games out of Hobart ,that would've almost certainly resulted in them relocating there permanently if you believe A.D.That would also be an advantage having one less team in Melbourne to compete with for sponsorship dollars.

 

[mollyfud]

Re: UNCONFIRMED: Tas Gov agree to deal with Hawthorn - AFL Tasmania 'filthy'

Jeff has set himself up for a get out of jail clause. He knows the season will be extended and he'll blame the AFL to us for the 5th Tassie game. Not any what if, more when. Jeff shouldn't be trusted he is setting us up for loss

Your still at it? Are you having people blocked here as well or just on your little facebook page that no one reads and that you lost control of because someone pointed out all the issues with your silly arguments?

Have you pointed out here that you believe that Jeff is personally moving the team to Tassie?

Now, there is one huge issue with your argument here. Jeff has a history of taking ownership for decisions that he and his colleagues make! He did it in Government (like how he said that schools need to be closed and he closed and merged them, not like the current labor government that does every thing to paint school councils into a corner and vote the schools closed so then they can blame the parents for the school closures, but I digress into politics) and he has done it in his time at Hawthorn. He has said for 2 years now that if the league goes to 24 games a year, he would be interested in giving the extra game to Tassie! So no one should be surprised and not sure why he would blame anyone else.

On Jeff "setting us up for loss", where is your evidence of that? Is it by us having 2m+ profits every year for the last 4 years? Is it the fact we haven't had a loss in like the last 8-10 years? Is it the fact that we have 15m+ in future revenue already signed away that you think the Loss is coming? I don't understand. You can't keep claiming the children are overboard without giving us some facts on why you have the position you have!

 

[mollyfud]

The way i interpret it ,if we hadn't renewed our agreement and Nth Melb had started playing games out of Hobart ,that would've almost certainly resulted in them relocating there permanently if you believe A.D.That would also be an advantage having one less team in Melbourne to compete with for sponsorship dollars.

I personally disagree with this logic. If North get the Cash injection of the Tassie deal, why would they need to move (unless there Melbourne supporters revolted and refused to buy membership)? They would be cashed up and stable!

The only way Tassie gets a team is another license becomes available. Its hard to see new licenses being created, so a team needs to go under. The prime candidate (I am sorry to say) is North. They were willing to give 7 games up from 2 or less. That shows a level of issue. By Tassie not giving North a life line it means they have to find income else where or they could go under. If they go under, the license could be moved to tassie for them to create a team from scratch like the Suns and Giants.

 

[TAITA]

Passionate, vigorous debate = Good

Name calling and petty crap = Bad

Don't prod each other, don't try and lure people into emotional reactions, don't attack people on here

Just discuss the ****ing issue.

I really don't want to be handing out cards on this board.

Seeing as my post seems to be the one deleted here LP, can I assume this is directed at me?

My post was certainly provocative - it was provoking mchawk to act by getting some knowledge on the subject and making a positive effect on the future of the Hawthorn Footy Club rather than running around like a headless mc chook, inciting the masses with gross misinformation, and setting himself up to be a laughing stock.

He has made his hollow threats and now only has whinging, whining responses such as 'low blow' or 'insults' to back up his ill prepared arguments.

If that is cardworthy - put me on the bench brother.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

TAITA, there've been quite a few posts given the disappearing trick. It's not directed at one or two posters.

Just try to keep it calm, guys.

 

[Rioli magic]

The way i interpret it ,if we hadn't renewed our agreement and Nth Melb had started playing games out of Hobart ,that would've almost certainly resulted in them relocating there permanently if you believe A.D.That would also be an advantage having one less team in Melbourne to compete with for sponsorship dollars.

If North got the deal it would have cost us our major sponsor. Surely in terms of 'sponsorship' we'd be more advantaged keeping the lucrative deal in place while it's available.