Fixture Hawks after Tasmania? Sponsorship extended to 2025!

[tommyk72]

The equalisation policies, the soft cap and the redistribution of funds from rich to poor makes me far less inclined to sell off games than i was in the past. I would only want to do it if we think there's a clear W/L benefit, and I'm not sure there is for Cairns.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Must be 8 minimum at the MCG. 9/1/1 the best outcome.

You, like so many don't understand how the afl works. We have a contract for 7 mcg home games, yet still play 1 at Marvel

 

[peetoo]

The equalisation policies, the soft cap and the redistribution of funds from rich to poor makes me far less inclined to sell off games than i was in the past. I would only want to do it if we think there's a clear W/L benefit, and I'm not sure there is for Cairns.

Also a better deal for clubs playing docklands or mcg since then

 

[Hawkk]

You, like so many don't understand how the afl works. We have a contract for 7 mcg home games, yet still play 1 at Marvel

We don’t have a contract - which is precisely why we are in this mess. A terrible move by Robson and Kennett - I emailed them on this back in 2006; I’ll see if I can track down the email I posted here…

When it comes to contracts, the only clubs that have tenancy agreements are Collingwood (14 home and away games at the MCG, Essendon (7/4 between Marvel and the MCG) and Carlton (6/5).

When these were all signed (in the 2000s), these were the ‘big 3’ clubs that all had ‘anchor’ agreements with the two major stadiums.

Our agreement to take the Saints games and play 4 in Tasmania did not have any formal assurance over MCG games - the language in the 2006 media statement stated that the club hoped the AFL would honour the club's wish to play seven home games at the MCG, as well as all co-tenant away games (in 2007, we played Collingwood at Marvel). So, that was never honoured from the get-go.

Without question, the best hope we had of securing a co-tenant agreement was in 2010 - when North wanted to relocate to Tasmania, and we were one of the biggest crowd drawers in Melbourne.

Had we struck a deal with the AFL - secured a tenancy agreement back in Melbourne - we would have broken the 1 million mark for home and away attendances in all years from 2011 to 2016, 2018 and probably this year, would have marquee games against Essendon (round 1), Geelong (Easter Monday) and would have never played Carlton or Essendon at Marvel again.

Instead, despite being easily the 5th biggest club in Victoria, we are far behind Collingwood, Essendon, Carlton and Richmond in the pecking order and risk being outflanked by the Saints for more MCG home games (as per Caroline Wilson).

This is despite drawing 65,000 plus to 6 of our last 13 MCG games and likely 40,000 to our next home game against the Crows.

This begs the question, what are we doing when kicking around in Cairns? If it's anything like Tasmania, there will be no fan development or growth, and those games will be shunted off-Broadway.

As far as the MCC is concerned, Hawthorn will always be behind Melbourne and the Big 4, so we need to play to our strengths or lose our standing at the ground.

I would love to see the club actually clarrify there position on this - as it’s been kicking around for years. Former president Geoff Lord actually put a ticket together and tried to challenge Kennett on this more than a decade ago.

 

[HedgeFund]

This begs the question, what are we doing when kicking around in Cairns?

I dunno, maybe promoting our AFLW program / team and increasing the profile of the club in a relatively new market?

 

[peetoo]

Shall we all consider our next home game at mcg is now nearly august. Marvel too

Home games outside melbourne AB SO LUT ELY a need to be limited to 2 at most

 

[Walshawk]

Shall we all consider our next home game at mcg is now nearly august. Marvel too

Home games outside melbourne AB SO LUT ELY a need to be limited to 2 at most

No home games for seven weeks is a joke.

If we can draw 36k v Crows when a bottom six club, there is absolutely no need to be selling games. We are not the Bulldogs or North.

 

[Hawkk]

No home games for seven weeks is a joke.

If we can draw 36k v Crows when a bottom six club, there is absolutely no need to be selling games. We are not the Bulldogs or North.

Exactly.

That’s our last 14 MCG games (since round 1 last year).



Of those games, six are 60,000-plus (five are 65,000-plus) and three (against non Victorian clubs) drew 35,869 (Brisbane), 27,951 (Fremantle) and 38,052 (Sydney - Sunday Twilight) in addition to the 36,000 plus today.

How many Victorian clubs could average 35,000 against non Victorian clubs as a bottom 4 team?

Imagine what this club could do if it backed itself in to become a big club.

Would this 35,000 to 45,000 fixture be an example of a game shifted to Cairns?

 

[Walshawk]

Gowers was on 3AW yesterday. Caroline Wilson asked if was still our plan to play ‘one home game in Launceston and one of the Gold Coast?’.

Gowers responded that ‘that has not been decided yet’ but that we would like to play once a year in Tasmania (did not specify home or away). He later said that we may or may not end up playing home games in Launceston.

First I have heard GC mentioned, Not sure if she meant Cairns or if we, like Collingwood, are looking at hosting the Suns there.

 

[Flukey!]

I hope members get to vote on where we play our home games.
Is that at all likely?

 

[Philhawk]

Ideally, 2 home games in Lonnie a year, 1 being a “home” game with the Devils.

There really is a huge commercial opportunity if we can build up a big rivalry against them - and we absolutely should maximize it.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

I hope members get to vote on where we play our home games.
Is that at all likely?

No, that’s why the board exists.

 

[Hawkk]

Gowers was on 3AW yesterday. Caroline Wilson asked if was still our plan to play ‘one home game in Launceston and one of the Gold Coast?’.

Gowers responded that ‘that has not been decided yet’ but that we would like to play once a year in Tasmania (did not specify home or away). He later said that we may or may not end up playing home games in Launceston.

First I have heard GC mentioned, Not sure if she meant Cairns or if we, like Collingwood, are looking at hosting the Suns there.

Full interview:

Evidently, we now have 85,000 members according to Gowers

 

[Walshawk]

I hope members get to vote on where we play our home games.
Is that at all likely?

Gowers did says what the members would have a say in where we play.

 

[Walshawk]

Ideally, 2 home games in Lonnie a year, 1 being a “home” game with the Devils.

There really is a huge commercial opportunity if we can build up a big rivalry against them - and we absolutely should maximize it.

Why would we give up home ground advantage? And if the Tas government is not paying us, how would 20k in Launceston make us more money than 30k in Melbourne?

 

[MrPremiership]

Can someone tell me the benefit for a wealthy, big club like Hawthorn, of selling home games?

 

[Philhawk]

Why would we give up home ground advantage? And if the Tas government is not paying us, how would 20k in Launceston make us more money than 30k in Melbourne?

I’m not 100% sure what the current system is, but half a decade ago, clubs received $100k a game + 36% of match returns for home games played at Marvel. A % of ad revenue generated from the match was also distributed towards the home team.

At UTAS, the current deal sees us receive $850k per game + a significantly higher percentage of the gate + ad revenue.

Post our deal, I expect we’d sign a deal with the Tas government for $500k for 1 home game per year, with the same conditions for a clean stadium.

For those who might say, “why not compare to our MCG returns” - you just can’t because the AFL won’t be putting all our games there post Tassie.

 

[Hawkk]

I’m not 100% sure what the current system is, but half a decade ago, clubs received $100k a game + 36% of match returns for home games played at Marvel. A % of ad revenue generated from the match was also distributed towards the home team.

At UTAS, the current deal sees us receive $850k per game + a significantly higher percentage of the gate + ad revenue.

Post our deal, I expect we’d sign a deal with the Tas government for $500k for 1 home game per year, with the same conditions for a clean stadium.

For those who might say, “why not compare to our MCG returns” - you just can’t because the AFL won’t be putting all our games there post Tassie.

The interview actually said Hawthorn is open to ‘multiple’ games in Launceston. And stressed that the clubs ‘nearly 10,000 members’ are clustered in the north of the state.

Which begs the question, why would the Tasmanian State Government give $500,000 per game to prop up Devil’s greatest threat to establish long term support?

As for the MCG, which has not been mentioned by Gowers at all, this is from 2013:

Hawks plan to call MCG home for years to come

Hawthorn president discusses the club's future with AFL.com.au

www.afl.com.au

Hawthorn will only play six MCG home games in 2013 and with Carlton announcing its goal to play up to eight games there in the near future, plus Collingwood, Richmond and Melbourne also committed to the vast majority of their home games there, fears are growing of a squeeze for spots at the MCG.

"I don't think we will ever leave the MCG because of the size our supporter base," Hawthorn president Andrew Newbold told AFL.com.au.

Hawks on hunt for second training ground

Hawthorn had 65,000 members in 2012 and has already passed 50,000 members for this season more than a week before its first game of the season.

"We're very happy there and our members and supporters rightfully expect that we will continue to play there.

"I think we're too big for Etihad," he said.

So this has been kicking around for years, except in 2024 we are in a much weaker position then we were in 2013/14.

At the time the AFL were still pushing North to Tasmania, Essendon and Carlton still had 10 years left on their Marvel deals and we had the largest membership in the AFL with Cyril and Buddy.

The other variable is the additional income in Victorian-based memberships (which make up the vast majority of the 85,000-plus ‘members’) with 36% more product.

 

[speedpeck23]

Can someone tell me the benefit for a wealthy, big club like Hawthorn, of selling home games?

In terms of supporter base we are not in the same league as Coll,Carl,Ess,Rich....they have all had significant success since the very start of the VFL competition. High population density inner city suburbs whose rivalries go back at least 100 years.....we weren't even in the comp then. When we were in the comp we struggled for another 36 years to get any notoriety during which those clubs just got bigger. Of course then we had extraordinary success which catapulted us in to the top bracket of successful clubs in terms of premierships.....but still generationally we can't match those clubs.

Even Melbourne who have the added advantage of being the MCC footy club can't quite match them either. Melbourne is interesting in that it sort of did the same thing as Hawthorn except 30 years earlier. They had limited success in the early days of the VFL....it wasn't until the late 1930's that they really got going. Even then they represented the establishment who didn't have the numbers that the working class clubs had.

Hawthorn was cornered by that as well......many of the establishment lived in Hawthorn and followed Melbourne of course instead of the Hawks who during Melbourne's successful period (1939 to 1964 10 flags) won nothing until that incredibly momentous year 1961.

Membership numbers are extremely important for any club but supporter base and latent supporter base pushes a club to the top in terms of blockbuster attendances and ratings. It also has an add on effect for each big club they hate each other....supporters of these clubs would generally rather see a victory against any of the other 3 , particularly at a packed out G than most other clubs. And of course the particular club everyone wants to beat is Collingwood. They are more valuable to the AFL for the number of people who hate them and want to see them lose ahead of the number who want to see them win.

The Hawks.....we play to win. On and off the field. You have to play to your strengths. We have an image of a very successful club...we would certainly have the most successful supporters of any club ( most flags seen per supporter) so those people will stick and as a successful club others like to beat us.....but not as much as Collingwood.

In terms of whether to sell matches or not....you have to do the numbers.....the club knows that. Remember even the Cats sell some of their home games back to the G. It pays them and the AFL to have 2 home venues. And Coll/Carl/Rich/Ess are given preferential treatment because of their overwhelming drawing power. In the end it's more about the matches and the AFL expansion rather than the clubs individually.

 

[Hawkk]

In terms of supporter base we are not in the same league as Coll,Carl,Ess,Rich....they have all had significant success since the very start of the VFL competition. High population density inner city suburbs whose rivalries go back at least 100 years.....we weren't even in the comp then. When we were in the comp we struggled for another 36 years to get any notoriety during which those clubs just got bigger. Of course then we had extraordinary success which catapulted us in to the top bracket of successful clubs in terms of premierships.....but still generationally we can't match those clubs.

Even Melbourne who have the added advantage of being the MCC footy club can't quite match them either. Melbourne is interesting in that it sort of did the same thing as Hawthorn except 30 years earlier. They had limited success in the early days of the VFL....it wasn't until the late 1930's that they really got going. Even then they represented the establishment who didn't have the numbers that the working class clubs had.

Hawthorn was cornered by that as well......many of the establishment lived in Hawthorn and followed Melbourne of course instead of the Hawks who during Melbourne's successful period (1939 to 1964 10 flags) won nothing until that incredibly momentous year 1961.

Membership numbers are extremely important for any club but supporter base and latent supporter base pushes a club to the top in terms of blockbuster attendances and ratings. It also has an add on effect for each big club they hate each other....supporters of these clubs would generally rather see a victory against any of the other 3 , particularly at a packed out G than most other clubs. And of course the particular club everyone wants to beat is Collingwood. They are more valuable to the AFL for the number of people who hate them and want to see them lose ahead of the number who want to see them win.

The Hawks.....we play to win. On and off the field. You have to play to your strengths. We have an image of a very successful club...we would certainly have the most successful supporters of any club ( most flags seen per supporter) so those people will stick and as a successful club others like to beat us.....but not as much as Collingwood.

In terms of whether to sell matches or not....you have to do the numbers.....the club knows that. Remember even the Cats sell some of their home games back to the G. It pays them and the AFL to have 2 home venues. And Coll/Carl/Rich/Ess are given preferential treatment because of their overwhelming drawing power. In the end it's more about the matches and the AFL expansion rather than the clubs individually.

I agree we are behind, but pretty much all supporter metrics puts Hawthorn behind the big four but well ahead of all others.

How does playing 36% of our home games in a city of 60,000 help us close the gap?

Only 11 years ago, our ex-president (and current AFL commissioner) said that Hawthorn was ‘too big for Ethiad.’

How can we be ‘too big for Ethiad’ but not big enough not to play 4 of our home games at a stadium that doesn't even have proper media facilities?

We’ve been in the bottom 4 for the last five seasons and haven't won a final in 9 years, and yet it's plausible that we could play 5 of our 9 MCG home and away games this year before 65,000-plus (Ess, Geel, plus Rich, Carl and Coll). Plus a 35,000-plus average against non Victorian teams.

The club always underestimates the Hawks following, it even undercatered the Marvel game against the Lions - leaving supporters to scramble for seats.

As for last year, it was 4 games other than 65,000 - despite being favoured for the spoon early season and having just 9 games at the venue - when Robson and Kennett vowed to have 11 home and away games when we signed the original deal.

Given that up until 2007, we’d only played in 5 65,000-plus home and away games, that suggests rapid growth over the last 17-18 years.

Tasmania was very line ball in 2006 when Hawthorn was a middle-rung club, but on every metric, it is now clearly a bigger club than Melb, St K and Geelong; we need to act like one.

Why for example is Melbourne playing Anzac Eve instead of Hawthorn? We have one Marquee game against the Cats (hopefully two with Essendon in round 1) and yet we are wasting time looking at a potential showdown (a Fox special) with the Devils at York Park.

Every year we waste in Launceston is another year off-Broadway, with the Fox team broadcasting from Melbourne because their charter plane couldn't get clearance at the airport, which means less exposure in Melbourne and nationally.

On Saturday, Growers said that the club has not broadened its fan base, after 24 years in Tasmania, beyond a cluster of 10,000 in the north of the state.

If you look at past Annual Reports, the Hawks had the same number of members in Tasmania in 2009 (when we had 50,000 members) as in 2024 with 85,000 members.

Of course, the club loves Tasmania because it's easier to roll over a main sponsor than to find a new one. But it is not in the club's best interest in the long term at all.

 

[peetoo]

Richmond game. Sold out. the game of the round easily
Geelong game sold out
Collingwood game will be full, and finally money in our coffers. Probably game of the round
Round 22 mcg carlton. Potentially game of the round

Tassie is over. Bring them home
Receipts from mcg and marvel now much more better than when we started Tassie, which should never have been more than 3 games yearly

 

[Randy Campbell]

Can someone tell me the benefit for a wealthy, big club like Hawthorn, of selling home games?

It helped us to become a bigger, wealthier club.

 

[Hawkk]

Richmond game. Sold out. the game of the round easily
Geelong game sold out
Collingwood will be full, and finally money in our coffers

Tassie is over. Bring them home
Receipts from mcg and marvel now much more better than when we started Tassie, which should never have been more than 3 games yearly

If we can't win that by 12 goals we really shouldnt talk about finals. The Lions flogged them by 20 goals three weeks ago

 

[flinchfree]

If we can't win that by 12 goals we really shouldnt talk about finals. The Lions flogged them by 20 goals three weeks ago

Uhh, I'll take a win by 1+ points.
It's been a tough few years and happy to have the team even see the daylight ahead.
Hopes, dreams, all that stuff is just starting to feel real.
Don't be rounding down any wins on a perceived meter of arrogance, the ride has just begun.

If we enter the bye 7-7 with two weeks for the players to get the hype and hunger festering before the next game, we as a Club will be in for a treat of a ride I reckon.

 

[Walshawk]

I’m not 100% sure what the current system is, but half a decade ago, clubs received $100k a game + 36% of match returns for home games played at Marvel. A % of ad revenue generated from the match was also distributed towards the home team.

At UTAS, the current deal sees us receive $850k per game + a significantly higher percentage of the gate + ad revenue.

Post our deal, I expect we’d sign a deal with the Tas government for $500k for 1 home game per year, with the same conditions for a clean stadium.

For those who might say, “why not compare to our MCG returns” - you just can’t because the AFL won’t be putting all our games there post Tassie.

Yes but it is not that simple. We have to pay the home team $27 for every Hawthorn adult member that attends a designated away game. So, if 20k adults and 5k kids go this week v Richmond, that costs us $600k to replace that home game.

Kennett even admitted a few years back that we would be financially better off playing all games in Melbourne (as long as we find a new major sponsor). Part of the reason given for playing in Tas was a home ground advantage, particularly agains the Marvel teams. If we host Tassie in Tassie, we will be giving them our home advantage.

Richmond an Melbourne get 10 MCG home games, the club could push for, and reasonably expect to get, eight or nine.