JeffDunne
TheBrownDog
The only surprising thing about this is how unsurprising it is. 
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 7 - Pride Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Dome in $3m bid for Blues
- Thread starter True_Blue
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- May 1, 2002
- 11,945
- 20,071
- AFL Club
- Carlton
If the AFL and the Government want the Carlton Football Club to move out of OO then they need to pay, and pay big, else we will continue to play there and demand games scheduled at OO after 2006.
I'm happy for Carlton to stay at Optus Oval, we might not get more than 32-35K members but will still be making a nice profit from our games.
We move to another ground, whether being TD or MCG, then we should get at the very least the equivilant best offer available. Admit it or not, we have the drawring power to demand this and everyone knows it.
I'm happy for Carlton to stay at Optus Oval, we might not get more than 32-35K members but will still be making a nice profit from our games.
We move to another ground, whether being TD or MCG, then we should get at the very least the equivilant best offer available. Admit it or not, we have the drawring power to demand this and everyone knows it.
Have any of you idiots read the article. The $3mil is not coming from the TD. It is probably from the AFL +/- Channel 7, so there is no conflict of interest there. The TD are basically offering Carlton the same deal as Essendon. That is because despite St Kilda getting good crowds this year, it is entirely form related. Once their on field stocks fall, so will their attendances. Carlton's 2 home games at the G this year have been in the top 3 crowd attendances this year despite the club struggling on the field.
The TD board and owners will not let Collo or anyone offer a deal that is not financially licrative to them. They are in the business of making money.
So enough with this mock anger and outrage. Basically it is jealousy that Carlton gets a good deal. The outrage is that the Kangas and Dogs look like getting $1mil per year indefintely to reward years of mediocrity
The TD board and owners will not let Collo or anyone offer a deal that is not financially licrative to them. They are in the business of making money.
So enough with this mock anger and outrage. Basically it is jealousy that Carlton gets a good deal. The outrage is that the Kangas and Dogs look like getting $1mil per year indefintely to reward years of mediocrity
There seems to be a lot of TD shareholders on bigfooty.
What is the problem? If both carlton and TD agree on terms that are acceptable to them then why shouldn't the deal go ahead? If Collo has done a deal not in the best interests of either party he will probably lose his position. Carltons financial situation means nothing to TD shareholders just the number of people they get through the gates. And they will probably get more through the gates than the Kangas, WB and StKilda in the long run. Plus StKilda made their deal when they weren't expected to get big crowds.
This COI affects no one but TD and Carlton.
What is the problem? If both carlton and TD agree on terms that are acceptable to them then why shouldn't the deal go ahead? If Collo has done a deal not in the best interests of either party he will probably lose his position. Carltons financial situation means nothing to TD shareholders just the number of people they get through the gates. And they will probably get more through the gates than the Kangas, WB and StKilda in the long run. Plus StKilda made their deal when they weren't expected to get big crowds.
This COI affects no one but TD and Carlton.
It should probably be comperable to Essendon, maybe a bit less lucrative. It should be better than St. Kilda. That's just based on supporter numbers, crowds of away supporters they attract and the bankability of competitvness over a long period. The intangible is timing. What is a deal worth now v two or three years ago? Lots has changed. It isn't as easy as you might assume. IMO it isn't even as relevant anyway.
This a commercial deal between 2 commercial organisations. How much do TD want another big club. How much do carlton need to get out of OO. What alternatives do either pary have? If I were a Carlton member I'd want to be at the G. That's their decision though and only theirs. If they are happy we have no right to anything but an irelevant opinion.
Anyway that's my last word on a tpoic I really don;t care about either way. carlton can do what they like and so can TD. As long as it isn't Collingwood that has to have the joint as a home ground. My only hope is that Carlton use it more leading to us using it less. We have our home ground and we should play all our home games there. That's another issue though.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #32
Voice of reason yet again Mark.
If the Blues could swing no more than 20,000 members and their crowd figures at TD or MCG home games were poor, then TD would be doing themselves a disservice to take us on. TD are not going to give into a charity case and Carlton are not going to uproot themselves and alienate some supporters for pittance.
We have to be convinced to move and TD have to see the long term benefit. I'm pretty sure Blues crowds and memberships will improve after this.
For the record I'm nostalgic and if we could make OO viable, that is where I want to be or at least on a par with the MCG. I don't like the TD surface and feel team's can be at a disadvantage playing indoors too often. It the deal is right though and it ensures our financial viability, we have to do what is best for the club.
If the Blues could swing no more than 20,000 members and their crowd figures at TD or MCG home games were poor, then TD would be doing themselves a disservice to take us on. TD are not going to give into a charity case and Carlton are not going to uproot themselves and alienate some supporters for pittance.
We have to be convinced to move and TD have to see the long term benefit. I'm pretty sure Blues crowds and memberships will improve after this.
For the record I'm nostalgic and if we could make OO viable, that is where I want to be or at least on a par with the MCG. I don't like the TD surface and feel team's can be at a disadvantage playing indoors too often. It the deal is right though and it ensures our financial viability, we have to do what is best for the club.
There is a potential for Carlton to gain an unfair fianancial advantage out of a sweetheart deal. If they were to benefit from a deal that was not "market value" then other clubs have been ripped off. That makes it everybody else's business.
If Carlton can prove unequivocally that the deal is at arms length and at fair market value, then the COI issue does not arise.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #37
Okay ...
- Banned
- #38
I don't think so hotpie. If carlton get a better deal than we're worth then it is a matter for the shareholders of TD to address. It has absolutely nothing to do with any of the clubs other than Essendon, and the only reason it has something to do with them is the fact their contract states no other club can get a better deal than them at TD. If our deal is equal to theirs then there is no issue for them either. If 3mill is paid as a sign on fee by a 3rd party then I would imagine any Essendon complaints will have no founding.
StKilda Footscray etc have to negotiate their own deals, if they can't get the deals as sweet as essendon or carlton then it's basically stiff goulies that my friend is business.
kahuna71
Club Legend
that's true, but the presidents of st kilda and the bulldogs aren't running the stadium now, are they deej? get your blinkers off.
Carlton average crowds would increase by a move to TD, but is it only cultural & historical ties keeping Carlton playing home games there?
Maybe its bcoz John Elliot built a new beaut stand and it would go to waste by not playing there?
Somebody might be able to set me str8..
Perhaps the Melbourne Storm should set up camp there to play home games if Carlton move on.
How far from the CBD is Optus Oval?
How accessible is it?
A 30,000 capacity stadium is ideal for the Storm, despite it not being a rectangular football field. However, that could be easily solved by locating the actual field of play slightly to the side of the main new beaut grandstand.
Maybe its bcoz John Elliot built a new beaut stand and it would go to waste by not playing there?
Somebody might be able to set me str8..
Perhaps the Melbourne Storm should set up camp there to play home games if Carlton move on.
How far from the CBD is Optus Oval?
How accessible is it?
A 30,000 capacity stadium is ideal for the Storm, despite it not being a rectangular football field. However, that could be easily solved by locating the actual field of play slightly to the side of the main new beaut grandstand.
Cant compare Essendon and the Saints with this deal at all. There are different deals to accommodate the individual fotball club. Essendon are an anchor tenant because of their supporter base and potential to draw constantly large crowds.
The Saints worked an agreement with Telstra and the AFL to guarantee home game receipts at TD. May have backfired a little this year but previously the smaller Saints home game attendances were making considerable losses. Saint admin prudently decided that surety of income and a virtual guaranteed positive CF would enable long term financial forecasting and planning.
Previous to this the Saints had a guaranteed CF from the AFL to compensate for the loss of members. AFL guaranteed up to 23,000 members and made up any shortfall. This ended last season (Saints had 23,450 members last season so the deal was well timed). This season with the Saints having between 29-30k members that CF cash flow is ahead by about 600-700k.
SO Carlton and Essendon cant be compared to the Saints deal.
Good luck to Carlton.
COI hmmmm, yeah well, so what? The AFL is a small community in the higher Admin.
Really, on the surface, a storm in a teacup.
The Old Dark Navy's
Moderator
- Moderator
- #43
Two years ago Carlton were still one of the bigger drawcards with a history of success. We are coming out of a two year period of instability and poor onfield performance. Surely we should be forced to make a deal reflective of a bottom placed club based on two years alone?
The Blues are still a bankable commodity and TD would recognise this, Collo or no Collo.
If we are getting the same deal Essendon are getting, then I don't see the problem. No egos are affected. The Bombers generally have more members than us but then the Blues had more last season so the potential is certainly there.
The Blues are still a bankable commodity and TD would recognise this, Collo or no Collo.
If we are getting the same deal Essendon are getting, then I don't see the problem. No egos are affected. The Bombers generally have more members than us but then the Blues had more last season so the potential is certainly there.
Correct. Not all clubs are the same. In the previous post, I outlined the Saints deal with TD and the AFL. Can't see how a deal with Carlton could affect the deal thet already have in place with them.
Up to their Admin to get the best deal and what is right for their club. If for example the Saints keep getting the House Full dusted off at TD, i'm sure they will be in a position to negotiate from a position of power.
So in this case, I am with you all the way on this Deej.
- Banned
- #46
Still has no relevence to the other clubs. And if Collo stands aside in Carlton board meetings then he's broken no laws. You're just desperate hotpie, it's a non-issue. But you watch PatrickSmith have a crack at us! Perish the thought Carlton getting as sweet a deal as his beloved bombers eh.
Yup go Blues.
- Banned
- #49
My concern from the Article in the Age was that no club can get a better deal than Essendon. Pretty stupid clause that seems to nothing but hold back the progress of the AFL. Surely this is ludacrous and I doubt it would hold up in court.
marcuz
Norm Smith Medallist
Carlton will be working for essendon now. Remember any merchandise you sell in the stadium a percentage goes to us.
Good to have you on board.
