equalisation fund - suck on it Joffa

[riccardo]

Until I physically see Eddie McGuire hand Buttress a packet of money, I will never agree tht Collingwood money has been soley responsible for keeping St Kilda alive.
St Kilda and other clubs may need to draw on funds that all teams contribute to, but in the commercialised and capitalistic nature of the game now, it's the only way some teams can stay alive. Having Fitzroy and The Bears and South Melbourne would be more attractive to me right now than be turning a $2 billion profit. History and traditio should always win out over greed and monitary persuits.
If you doubt St Kilda's drawing power, look at the fact that we have filled Telstra Dome (40,000 +) on more than one occassion, and 30,000 showed up for the game Vs Brisbane.
I just wonder how much revinue is gained from bieng on TV, since St Kilda have been on twice (and once was Vs Collingwood) and Collingood get on alot more than this.
Our membership is on the rise, but I've said before you can't go from 25,000 to 40,000 in a day. It taes time and effort.
If we, and other Victorian based clubs with 100 or more years of history, need the $$ to survive, I assumed you'd only be to happy to help in the interest of keeping the history and tradition of our game alive.
What I'm hearing is you'd rather keep all the money for yourselves and set up a super league, with 6 or 7 teams in it. Good luck getting anyone to watch that. I'd rather watch The Extreme World Championships of Chess!

 

[Cyclops]

Re: Re: No

Originally posted by Joffaboy
I asked for proof of Collingwood money in St.kilda pockets. You gave me equalisation figures.

Therefore no Collingwood money has gone into St.Kilda pockets directly.

I know this is a private quarrel, but I can't help feeling Morgoth has you on a moral point Joffa.

Money in Collingwoods hand (from memberships) goes to AFL equalisation fund, money from fund goes to St Kilda. You can split hairs but there is a flow of money and it goes one way.

Anyway my house was robbed the other day by three junkies. I actually spotted them burning away in the distance. Now I'm not making value judgements or imposing sterotypes, but I'm sure they were all St Kilda supporters (one had a yellow and white beanie). They nicked some chocolate, a bottle of whisky and my change jar-at least $11. There you have it, proof positive!

 

[morgoth]

nope

Riccardo

It is not about keeping them alive, it is about $1 of Pie money going to the Aints.

 

[Fred]

Seems to me it's people arguing different things and wondering why they can't agree.

 

[Fred]

My thoughts:

Do Collingwood contribute to St Kilda? - Indirectly, yes.

Is the draw rigged? - Yes.

Is Collingwood advantaged over the Saints by this? - Yes.

Do the Saints get a fair go with televised games? - No.
(I probably won't see them on TV or live at all this year)

I seriously doubt that the TV situation will ever change, no matter how good the Saints might become, while the "Eddie factor" is still there.
It's up to us to do the best we can, both on and off the field and see what develops. It's much easier to bargain from a position of strength.

 

[morgoth]

once again

Once again the Eddie factor is blamed. You will get on when you rate, that is the be all and end all at 9. Packer cares about one thing $$$$$, if showing Pies games cost him money he won't do it, regardless of Eddie.

Why don't you instead question why it is a contractual arrangement that the Swans get shown every week. Due to 10's desire to cut costs they will piggy back off this for telecasts into the Southern States. This effectively means that one of the key slots is taken every week. It is not based on performance it is based on an unfair contract the AFL inisted on in order to get Sydney exposure on FTA TV which as you point out has it benefits when it comes to securing sponsorship. We get our coverage based on one fact; we RATE. They get theirs cos they need help.

Don't neccessarily disagree with the SWan TV policy but that is a far bigger hurdle for you than the Pies where at least you have a chance of getting us off the box.

 

[Fred]

Re: once again

Originally posted by morgoth
Once again the Eddie factor is blamed. You will get on when you rate, that is the be all and end all at 9. Packer cares about one thing $$$$$, if showing Pies games cost him money he won't do it, regardless of Eddie.

Why don't you instead question why it is a contractual arrangement that the Swans get shown every week. Due to 10's desire to cut costs they will piggy back off this for telecasts into the Southern States. This effectively means that one of the key slots is taken every week. It is not based on performance it is based on an unfair contract the AFL inisted on in order to get Sydney exposure on FTA TV which as you point out has it benefits when it comes to securing sponsorship. We get our coverage based on one fact; we RATE. They get theirs cos they need help.

Don't neccessarily disagree with the SWan TV policy but that is a far bigger hurdle for you than the Pies where at least you have a chance of getting us off the box.

Who said anything at all about blaming Eddie? IMO, it's a fact of life. I doubt if you'd find anyone that wouldn't agree you're better off with Eddie there than without him.

 

[Joffaboy]

Re: why bother

Originally posted by morgoth
Joffa

Nothing more to be said you won. I really am an idiot who knows nothing, I accept defeat and offer you my unconditional surrender.

As you are corerct lets get rid of equalisation for Collingwood as it won't matter to the Saints income from this fund will it? Dare you to answer that one.

I agree with everything you have just said.

And I will agree to the complete dismantling of the equalisation fund once all clubs are treated fairly. That means no blockbusters guaranteed every year, Anzac Day taken off Eassendon and Collingwood, Friday night football shared nationally not just for the four big Vic clubs, No Showdowns guaranteed every year, no local derbies guaranteed every year, no 115% for Brisbane salary cap, no help for Sydney, every Vic team to travel interstate 6 times a year, PF in the home state of the highest team etc etc etc.

The whole point of this was to show your hypocricy towards Brisbane, Sydney, Equalisation etc etc, when your team is a chief receipient of welfare.

Get over it. None of the above will occur. It wouldn't matter if the Saints won five GF's in a row, the advantaged four have got into bed with the AFL and will continue to reap the benefits at the expense of the other Vic clubs.

 

[Joffaboy]

Re: Re: Re: No

Originally posted by Cyclops
I know this is a private quarrel, but I can't help feeling Morgoth has you on a moral point Joffa.

Money in Collingwoods hand (from memberships) goes to AFL equalisation fund, money from fund goes to St Kilda. You can split hairs but there is a flow of money and it goes one way.

Anyway my house was robbed the other day by three junkies. I actually spotted them burning away in the distance. Now I'm not making value judgements or imposing sterotypes, but I'm sure they were all St Kilda supporters (one had a yellow and white beanie). They nicked some chocolate, a bottle of whisky and my change jar-at least $11. There you have it, proof positive!

Its not a private argument, anyone can join in, just please have something constructive to say.

What moral point? Collingwood take far more from the competition than they give. Where is the morals in that? Anyway morals are a moot point. It is basic economic competition rules. If the AFL was subjected to the same business rules as normal companies the ACCC would be down on them like a tonne of bricks.
Colusion is a serious offence under Corps Law and the AFL would be guilty of it for rigging the draw, with the connivance of the advantaged four clubs.

So dont talk about morals, or good governance or anything else similiar, because that is not the issue.

Point two of your little example. Well think before you come up with something so lame.

 

[Joffaboy]

Re: once again

Originally posted by morgoth
Once again the Eddie factor is blamed.

Great to see you getting back to the old chestnuts Morgoth. You must have one hell of a persecution complex.

Nobody blamed Eddie. Actually praised him and his spruiking on behalf of Collingwood and said I wish he was a Saints supporter, or we had someone as high profile as Eddie who could influence the AFL in favour of our club.

You RATE as you put it because you hog the premier TV night, along with the other three advantaged teams in Victoria. Who knows what other teams would rate on a friday night, cause they never get the chance.

And Sydney deserve their FTA TV slots ahead of Collingwood ATM as they have a better win loss ratio are are well embedded in the 8.

Geez fella, your arguments get more hysterical the more you are cornered.

 

[Cyclops]

Re: Re: Re: Re: No

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Its not a private argument, anyone can join in, just please have something constructive to say.

How is any of this constructive?

Originally posted by Joffaboy
What moral point? Collingwood take far more from the competition than they give. Where is the morals in that? Anyway morals are a moot point. It is basic economic competition rules. If the AFL was subjected to the same business rules as normal companies the ACCC would be down on them like a tonne of bricks.
Colusion is a serious offence under Corps Law and the AFL would be guilty of it for rigging the draw, with the connivance of the advantaged four clubs.

OK moral point meaning the sense of the argument rather than the exact terms tortured out of all shape by semantics, not moral point as in ten commandments.

Money goes from Pies to AFL to Saints. Say it ain't so.

Originally posted by Joffaboy
So dont talk about morals, or good governance or anything else similiar, because that is not the issue.

I'm not. I would never put the word "moral" in the same sentence as the words "St Kilda"....ooops I just did.

Originally posted by Joffaboy
Point two of your little example. Well think before you come up with something so lame.

I wasn't making it up, my joint was knocked over by a trio of junkies. None of them actually said "Tell Joffa we work for St Kilda's finance committee", but I am going a bit deaf, they might have.

 

[morgoth]

get real

Persecution is it?

Gee Fred when you say "I seriously doubt that the TV situation will ever change, no matter how good the Saints might become, while the "Eddie factor" is still there.

That would sugges that you see Eddie as unfairly influencing who gets on FTA would it not? Fact is he has very little say, ratings do as they lead to $$$$

Re the Swans, Joffa you need to learn to read, the Swans have no impact on the Pies at all, we still get on. I actually said I have no problem but that if you want air time you should be looking at that deal. Do they rate in Vic? Why are they on all the time? They were on last Sat, were you?; you should have been, surely Port v Aints was bigger than Dogs v Swan.

You are obsessed with Eddie and the Pies, look outside there is a whole other world and other teams taking air time.

 

[Joffaboy]

Re: get real

Originally posted by morgoth

You are obsessed with Eddie and the Pies, look outside there is a whole other world and other teams taking air time.

I couldn't care less about Eddie.

As i have said in the past I think he has done a great job of promoting the Pies.

Paul Keating once said, "In a race, always back self interest, at least you know it is trying". Thats exactly what Eddie does. Self interest in his guise as Collingwood president. Just please dont insult the rest of our intelligence in trying to get us to believe he does it for the good of football.

And as for other teams taking air time, I could name at least three in Melbourne who would be as guilty as Collingwood. Now let me see Collingwood plus three others, cant think who they would be, can you?