News NMFC & Tassie (the mass debate re our future there, the academy, attending advice)

[gokangas]

I know for a fact that the AFL, NMFC Board and CEO want North to have exclusive rights to Tasmania with increased games played down there. Best we all get used to the idea of North playing more games in Tassie once the Hawks deal expires.

No secret there. Been on the agenda for several years. Original plan was for 7 games in Tassie.

 

[BoomerRoo]

I understand the concern etc but having strong ties to footy here in Tassie, some of you might be missing the main point, "Scott Wade". As far as I see and know it, the TSL clubs have been calling for his head for years, he's so unliked here in the state, by the clubs and supporters it isn't funny! Champagne (OK, it's was probably more likely Passion Pop) sales went through the roof statewide

I'm hearing the AFL (Garlick report?) basically said Tasmanian football was stagnating/divided and getting worryingly more so under his "care". Apparently removing him is more of an attempt to appease the clubs and build a stronger/coherent/happy TSL competition. It's a little more harder to explain than that, but that's my simplistic version of things.

 

[Horace]

The Club needs to find a balance. I think most of us Melbourne based members understand the financial benefits it brings to the table but the thought of losing more games to Tassie threatens the very heart of what we love. At the end of the day going and watching our club is what we all hold passionately, take that away and it leaves a big hole and a lot of disappointment and angst.

This is where the Club shouldn't be so flippant with the 'replacement' game garbage and look into like for like replacements. The worst thing the club can do is treat it's rusted on members like mugs.

I briefly looked into heading down for the Richmond game, but even then as a Schimma member it was going to cost me $33 to reserve a seat. Not that it is a great deal of money, but it is the principle. They subtracted a reserved seat game off the membership a year ago and now charge extra for it. At the end of the day it is still a 'home' game.

Yes $33 is not a lot of money in itself, but when you factor in airfares or travel on the Spirit, accommodation and the inevitable extra costs when away from home, going to see a game in Tasmania is something very few supporters can afford to do.

I have never ever had to fly or go by boat to a game in Melbourne, (just the occasional low flying on the freeway when I've been running late) and the difference in cost is quite substantial.

I wonder if the AFL and the club have actually tried to assess how much would be lost in diminished revenue from Victorian based supporters for each extra game played in Tasmania? I would certainly give up paying for an ordinary membership presently at $185 a season for 8 games, if more games are relocated. Instead I would just continue with my AFL membership and at some stage when the number of games played in Tasmania got to a totally unacceptable level, change my club support membership to another club.

One of the important lessons I learnt from an experience with a business I was associated with (it never cost me anything but it did cost some other people significant amounts of money), is that you should never take your clients for granted. Those people who are members of the club through the process of handing over their cold hard earned (often without proper rational thought process going in to the matter) are essentially clients of the club. Take your clients for granted and they begin to feel like they are being treated like idiots. Eventually the clients walk away because they get sick of being treated like idiots. They never come back as these people found out to their severe detriment.

This is the risk our club faces as it would appear they may well be contemplating playing more games in Tasmania.

 

[Viper2Jester]

5? 5 would be an absolute disgrace and a spit in the face to the Melbourne based members.

LOL.

Yeah, just like Melb based Hawks supporters have been so upset and disgraced with their near identical deal over many recent years......

......whilst winning three premierships straight and increased membership over double to around 80,000.

 

[Zondor]

I know for a fact that the AFL, NMFC Board and CEO want North to have exclusive rights to Tasmania with increased games played down there. Best we all get used to the idea of North playing more games in Tassie once the Hawks deal expires.

Not an idea I want to get used to. Time to get that Wonder Brayshaws Effigy out of the closet ready for a good burning. :stern look

 

[Event Horizon]

"Wade and his former state football board — disbanded by the AFL which now rules Tasmania from head office..."
This bit and yesterday's (?) reference to his achievement being new governance arrangements were the bit that raised my eyebrows. AFL now pulls the strings in Tassie football.

I've been on record as saying I'm okay with co-location and don't see it as re-location, so long as 'home' is Arden St, there is a ceiling on Tassie games (4, maybe 5) and that the substitute games issue is sorted out. I wasn't happy with the constitutional amendment being knocked on the head.

4-5 games is hardly co-llocation. 7-8 is however.

 

[Zondor]

LOL.

Yeah, just like Melb based Hawks supporters have been so upset and disgraced with their near identical deal over many recent years......

......whilst winning three premierships straight and increased membership over double to around 80,000.

**** Hawthorn and their module of selling their soul. We are North Melbourne. Our focus should be Melbourne. Not some backward Hillbilly conclave primarily known for the natives penchant for inbreeding. :stern look

 

[numchuks]

There's a reason we haven't been able to announce Tasmania officially as a recruiting zone yet.

I'll give you all a hint.

We're not getting the whole Apple aisle with playing just 3 games down there a year.

There are strings attached.

 

[Kimbo]

4-5 games is hardly co-llocation. 7-8 is however.

Some would suggest it is. 5/11 home games?

 

[Boozeroo]

**** Hawthorn and their module of selling their soul. We are North Melbourne. Our focus should be Melbourne. Not some backward Hillbilly conclave primarily known for the natives penchant for inbreeding. :stern look

Do you realise that Hawthorn turned over TWICE nmfc's turnover last year? We used to be the Innovators. Propagate or perish.

 

[Boozeroo]

http://www.themercury.com.au/sport/...a/news-story/b3ee297ccd3897af4da1fa98e9740d8d

Gaining traction now

 

[Arden]

Best we all get used to the idea of North playing more games in Tassie once the Hawks deal expires.

**** getting used to the idea. If we "got used to the idea" of playing on the Gold Coast 9 years ago, we wouldn't have a club anymore.

And I don't give a shit if the AFL, our board and CEO want it to happen. Our board and CEO act on behalf of the members, not the other way around. We ain't owned by shareholders anymore. Where the hell is Euge when you need him?

 

[Zondor]

Do you realise that Hawthorn turned over TWICE nmfc's turnover last year? We used to be the Innovators. Propagate or perish.

Look, now if you were to bend over for a dollar, I have no doubt you would earn twice as much as me. :stern look

We don't cheer for Turnover and Profit Margins in AFL. We cheer for our clubs. What they are. North Melbourne. Not some hybrid half Kangaroo half Tasmanian Devil with two heads up above and down below. :stern look

You say Propagate or Perish. Propagate into what? The Hybrid nonsense I mentioned above? That is perishing. :stern look

 

[Event Horizon]

Hawthorn has grown in Melbourne at a cosmic rate. Tasmania games have not hindered that at all. Provided the club sends a clear message that it's here to stay, and wins flags, the rest is immaterial.

 

[KangaRooster]

I would consider setting up shop in Tas for 3/4 weeks and playing our entire NAB campaign there, and would go as high as 4 regular season games there providing the cash and membership infusion would set us up as a powerhouse in Victoria.

Any more than that would be the first step to losing our club.

 

[gokangas]

Hawthorn has grown in Melbourne at a cosmic rate. Tasmania games have not hindered that at all. Provided the club sends a clear message that it's here to stay, and wins flags, the rest is immaterial.

Good point but I'm not sure we are capable of delivering the flags or the right message. Anyway it doesn't matter what we think. We will have to wait and see what Eddie thinks. He seems to be running the AFL agendas at the moment.

 

[Viper2Jester]

**** Hawthorn and their module of selling their soul. We are North Melbourne. Our focus should be Melbourne. Not some backward Hillbilly conclave primarily known for the natives penchant for inbreeding. :stern look

The derogatory Tas comments are unnecessary and add nothing to the issue at hand.

Hawthorn sold their soul? Right.....

Our focus is Melb. Thats why we are developing the secondary market to enable us to stay in Melb long term.

 

[Arden]

I would consider setting up shop in Tas for 3/4 weeks and playing our entire NAB campaign there

I wouldn't. NAB Challenge games sound like nothing but are an important way to build momentum with the membership base. Imagine if our first game each year played in Melbourne wasn't until late March/early April, the early membership surges we are now seeing would taper off and people would be more likely to sign up at round one, or form depending, not at all.

Sure play one NAB game down there but don't squirt in the face of your homeland by taking chunks of a year away

 

[Arthur Cloke]

Zondor likes this.

Funny you mention that. I was with him when this news filtered through in the wireless and his reaction was gold. He stood up, stroked his beard, skulled his lime milkshake, and in a moment of fury, grabbed his tamagotchi and hurled it across the room like a discus straight into his cats litter box.

 

[KangaRooster]

I wouldn't. NAB Challenge games sound like nothing but are an important way to build momentum with the membership base. Imagine if our first game each year played in Melbourne wasn't until late March/early April, the early membership surges we are now seeing would taper off and people would be more likely to sign up at round one, or form depending, not at all.

Sure play one NAB game down there but don't squirt in the face of your homeland by taking chunks of a year away

I agree of course, but if we are forced to sacrifice NMFC games i would throw all three NAB games at Tas without a thought if it meant keeping one/two in Melbourne.

 

[Firestarter]

Hopefully we find out the conditions of the new deal if it happens.

 

[Limerick]

Any Club has 11 home games. North, and Hawthorn, have 8 Vic, 3 Tassie with 3 away games as "home" games. These "home" games aren't the same as a normal home game. 6 or more home games in Tassie is relocation not co-location. For me 5 games in Tassie with 6 "home" games in Melbourne where we have the full home game experience e.g. North end with seating, other areas that are North only etc is the limit of co-location and even at that I don't like it but probably would reluctantly accept it.

 

[Woodson]

Any Club has 11 home games. North, and Hawthorn, have 8 Vic, 3 Tassie with 3 away games as "home" games. These "home" games aren't the same as a normal home game. 6 or more home games in Tassie is relocation not co-location. For me 5 games in Tassie with 6 "home" games in Melbourne where we have the full home game experience e.g. North end with seating, other areas that are North only etc is the limit of co-location and even at that I don't like it but probably would reluctantly accept it.

Shouldn't that read NINE Melbourne located 'home' games? Nevermind the AFL 'home field' gauge …they still schedule MCG tenant teams at 'Etihad' vs North because contracts with Etihad for the X quota of games needs to fulfilled. Which is amusing as it is. So no loss on North members. The AFL can always work the schedule so members get their 11 game quota regardless if North were to play 5 in Tassie.

 

[Limerick]

Shouldn't that read NINE Melbourne located games? Nevermind the AFL 'home field' gauge …they still schedule MCG tenant teams at 'Etihad' vs North because contracts with Etihad for the X quota of games needs to fulfilled. Which is amusing as it is. So no loss on North members. The AFL can always work the schedule so members get their 11 game quota regardless if North were to play 5 in Tassie.

No problems with your comment but I'm looking for 11 home game experiences in Melbourne. For me its booked seats in the North End with other North members.

 

[Only Forwards]

Any Club has 11 home games. North, and Hawthorn, have 8 Vic, 3 Tassie with 3 away games as "home" games. These "home" games aren't the same as a normal home game. 6 or more home games in Tassie is relocation not co-location. For me 5 games in Tassie with 6 "home" games in Melbourne where we have the full home game experience e.g. North end with seating, other areas that are North only etc is the limit of co-location and even at that I don't like it but probably would reluctantly accept it.

THere are already issues with the replacement home games.

Any further games on the map and these are not likely to be remedied.

When we are compared to the Hawthorn it is not a like for like comparison. Hawthorn have 60k members with approximately 9k coming from Tasmania. So 50k that need to be replacement games in Melbourne.

Thier replacement games are
vs Geelong @ MCG(40K or so) ie they could all basically attend
vs Bulldogs @ Etihad (30K) 60% of members should fit
vs Richmond @ MCG (60k) 80% of members should fit
vs Melbourne MCG (35K) all members should fit

compare the pair
Say we hit where we are aiming (45k) with approx 5k tassie members
Vs St Kilda Etihad (30K) 5k likely not to fit
vs scum etihad (60K) SFA members fit and we have to pre book tickets
Vs Geelong Etihad (40K) 50% of members likely to fit

There is no 'replacement' game where all our members should fit if they rocked up. The fact that we have the scum game as a replacement is an absolute f***ing disgrace. THe only way that game is viable as a replacement is to have it at the G.

This is before we even get into what you actually get as a 'replacement' home game, H&A membership you get nothing. Reserverd seat membership you are worse off.

As soon as they took Ballarat off us it was always on the cards that we would be seeing a strengthening of the alignment to Tassie, with a real prospect of a push to a one team model.

If we wind up with an academy, as the only side in Tassie, its only going to be a short push to being a team from Tassie.