NRL panicked in Sydney!

FuManchu · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by grayham
Unless you have terminal cancer and arent expected to live more than a couple of years, you will find you are wrong about the second sydney team.
Crowds for Swans matches have never been beaten by RL in Sydney since the mid 90's, and Sydney could easily support two teams with prime time coverage on 10 every saturday night....or saturday arvo, or Sunday 1pm.
The AFL toyed with the idea on the last Swans surge (post 96), they will go in much harder on this coming surge.

Therein lies your problem, the theatre goers dont have the ability to wait for surges. They need constant re-inforcement, not the seven year twitch that you give them.

If their team is not succesful, they will and do drop off like they did after 96. Then you'll have two basket cases asking for money in an already subsidised city, rather than one welfare dependant team, both asking for 15% cap concessions.

morgoth · Sep 17, 2003

Grayham

I agree with you, the AFL model will be to have two teams in Sydney, once that happens the assualt on NRL will begin in earnest. The Swans are the beach-head and invasion force is ready to come ashore.

Eddie knows it and he is making sure we become the number one interestate enemy.

grayham · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by FuManchu
Therein lies your problem, the theatre goers dont have the ability to wait for surges. They need constant re-inforcement, not the seven year twitch that you give them.

If their team is not succesful, they will and do drop off like they did after 96. Then you'll have two basket cases asking for money in an already subsidised city, rather than one welfare dependant team, both asking for 15% cap concessions.

The lowest the swans averaged at home post 96 is about 25,000.
The only reason they lost money last year was because the swans have one of the highest expenditures of any club. A bit of poor management in expecting a better result last year, and having to subsidise the AFL's push into Sydney with promotions and $2.5 mill into Stadium Australia.
All easily addressed, and in fact solved by another club sharing the burden in Sydney.
One run as lean as the roos could quickly become profitable on a smaller scale than the swans for example.

Not to say that a second team wouldnt need to be drip feed by the AFL for at least 5 years, but any expansion in any code has had to do that. Rest assured the second team into Sydney will be a lot easier than the first.

Dean Moriarty · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by morgoth
Grayham

I agree with you, the AFL model will be to have two teams in Sydney, once that happens the assualt on NRL will begin in earnest. The Swans are the beach-head and invasion force is ready to come ashore.

Eddie knows it and he is making sure we become the number one interestate enemy.

The AFL would love to have two teams in Sydney - trying to market to both the Eastern Suburbs/North Shore silvertails and the Westie battlers is difficult - but if they try to do it on the basis of one big Swans season, it will be the most premature thing since Jason Biggs in American Pie. The Swans are finally getting respectable crowds and you want to slice them in two.

How many of this Saturday's crowd will become regular attendees? Not many. Some, no doubt. But the Swans are just about breaking even as it is. Don't kid yourself that we're ready for a second team yet.

morgoth · Sep 17, 2003

Mate

It may not happen next year or the year after but as soon as the Swans string together a number of successful years it will be on.

The AFL is awash with cash and could easily prop up another team in Sydney especially if it means more TV dollars. It would be a relocation, as such the club should retain a lot of its support in Vic and sponsorship would go up due to increased TV coverage.

Say it takes $25M to run a club in Sydney, the exisitng club still pulls say $17M, do you reckon the AFL would get another $8M a year in TV rights? That is all it would take to make it break even.

Derbies, a game every week, the prospect that one of them will always be in finals. It does not take much to get it to work as long as Sydney people are prepared to consider it. The Swans are ensuring this.

Everything else will follow.

MightyFighting · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by Dean Moriarty
The AFL would love to have two teams in Sydney - trying to market to both the Eastern Suburbs/North Shore silvertails and the Westie battlers is difficult - but if they try to do it on the basis of one big Swans season, it will be the most premature thing since Jason Biggs in American Pie. The Swans are finally getting respectable crowds and you want to slice them in two.

How many of this Saturday's crowd will become regular attendees? Not many. Some, no doubt. But the Swans are just about breaking even as it is. Don't kid yourself that we're ready for a second team yet.

I think you hit the nail on the head there. Then you took another swing and smashed it into your thumb.

The fact is; the Swans and the second team would be marketed totally differently and so would have two very different supporter bases. It would not be splitting the Swans' support base in two.

grayham · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by morgoth
Grayham

I agree with you, the AFL model will be to have two teams in Sydney, once that happens the assualt on NRL will begin in earnest. The Swans are the beach-head and invasion force is ready to come ashore.

Eddie knows it and he is making sure we become the number one interestate enemy.

morgoth, you are usually on my ignore list, but seeing as you agree with me, I have ventured into your posts.

There are a number of key signs that the AFL is poised to add a second team to sydney, probably triggered by a swans premiership.
1) Sydney has two AFL standard grounds. (Melb has 2 for 9 teams)
2) News Ltd papers always have an indepth article about non-swans teams on Firday, probably part of the broadcast deal, to increase awareness of AFL outside the swans.
3) Collingwood, Essendon have become involved with Sydney, creating rivalries, that a second team could work off.
4) Bulldogs playing home games up here.
5) No resistance from the SCG when SA games are moved away. (Maybe they know Sydney will be hosting 22 games in the not to distant future).
6) Swans AFL games broadcast in prime time, and the odd other game as well.
7) Common occurance for vic teams to move home games outside victoria. In other words softening up the supporters to a more permanent move.

FuManchu · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by grayham
The lowest the swans averaged at home post 96 is about 25,000.
The only reason they lost money last year was because the swans have one of the highest expenditures of any club. A bit of poor management in expecting a better result last year, and having to subsidise the AFL's push into Sydney with promotions and $2.5 mill into Stadium Australia.
All easily addressed, and in fact solved by another club sharing the burden in Sydney.
One run as lean as the roos could quickly become profitable on a smaller scale than the swans for example.

Not to say that a second team wouldnt need to be drip feed by the AFL for at least 5 years, but any expansion in any code has had to do that. Rest assured the second team into Sydney will be a lot easier than the first.

So now you want to throw the loss making burden on another club just to cut your losses, now theres a great strategy.

It has taken 22 years to get you to this stage, and that is not exactly an independant club surviving on its own, forging ahead in leaps and bounds, 25 000average crowds in a city of 3.8mill does not inspire me, irregardless of what RL gets. try and maitain 38K-40K average attendance, over the good and bad years, then you may say that you have a viable ongoing and expanding base.

At the moment, you have a not quite profitable base, you rely on AFL subsidies. What are your TV ratings for Syd matches over the last 10 years? that will tell a story

And as for the AFL drip feeding another club for 5 yeasr, as opposed to the force feeding you've had over the last 20 and still not quite able to be vialbe and profitable......GOOD LUCK.

The one thing you do have in your favour is that if there is a side that sydney will support, it is already there, any other team will be seen as second class, with no established supporter base and no hope of establishing one, unless you want to put a RL team in AFL colours.(now theres an idea)

dr nick · Sep 17, 2003

even if the second sydney team were to draw 10k crowds, that would still be on a par with many sydney based RL teams, so just because they wouldnt pull as many as the other AFL teams, they'd take a great chunk of the sydney sporting market if you compare to any rugby league club.

The swans have more supporters than any sydney based RL side by an absolute mile (given that RL loyalties are split between 9 clubs), and even if the support was split between two clubs, they'd still garner bigger crowds and more paper space purely on a per club basis, and AFL would really take off with weekly games in sydney and local derbies.

having said that, there doesnt seem to be a market yet for people who are anti swans that would love to support some other team to beat them. basically (a recent daily telegraph poll showed) 98% of AFL fans in this city support the swans. it's not as if there is a very big market for anti swans - pro AFL fans, but i still reckon 10 - 12k crowds would be very achievable.

grayham · Sep 17, 2003

FuManchu, you are now talking above your intellect.
Subsidies we receive? As if. The AFL extracts far more from NSW than it injects.

MightyFighting · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by FuManchu
The one thing you do have in your favour is that if there is a side that sydney will support, it is already there, any other team will be seen as second class, with no established supporter base and no hope of establishing one, unless you want to put a RL team in AFL colours.(now theres an idea)

Now there's an idea... We'll take Souths and Parramatta; leave the NRL the rubbish.

dr nick · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by grayham
The AFL extracts far more from NSW than it injects.

e.g. $3m in one hit this saturday night... not even considering the value added to the tv rights deal.

DST · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by morgoth
Wrong DST, Stokes got access to Foxtel via the ACCC (I think) but Foxtel refused to supply him with the transmssion equipment and said buy your own.

I don't disbute that, but the legal action Kerry is taking is in relation to the cullision of the Foxtel Consortium in stalling him form gaining permission to sell his channels to Foxtel customers.

In effect the stalling gave the consortium members an unfair advantage when preparing their free to air & pat tv deal to the AFL.

Becuase Kerry & AFL were un-certain whether he could, if he won the rights broadcast on Foxtel the consortium out bid him and the AFL were happy to partner with a strong pay tv provider.

DST

MoffOnTou · Sep 17, 2003

OK Geniuses, tell me how much Port Adelaide v Fremantle in a week 2 finals game would draw at the MCG?

Thats the equivalent, FFS, we have one team that is in another country!

Cheers,
Moffo

Andrew Mc · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by MightyFighting
Now there's an idea... We'll take Souths...

So you want a team/club whose supporters only come to the first 1 or 2 games of the year, and includes the high-flyers and celebs... hmm, perhaps the Demons can relocate...

MightyFighting · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by Andrew Mc
So you want a team/club whose supporters only come to the first 1 or 2 games of the year, and includes the high-flyers and celebs... hmm, perhaps the Demons can relocate...

I want the club with the great history and tradition. You can keep all the blow-ins from the 1940s-90s.

BTW I said Parramatta because of their geographical location.

Andrew Mc · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by MightyFighting
I want the club with the great history and tradition. You can keep all the blow-ins from the 1940s-90s.

BTW I said Parramatta because of their geographical location.

Hmm, so you want to divide the very supporter base that the Swans are trying so hard to tap into...?

Dean Moriarty · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by MightyFighting
I think you hit the nail on the head there. Then you took another swing and smashed it into your thumb.

The fact is; the Swans and the second team would be marketed totally differently and so would have two very different supporter bases. It would not be splitting the Swans' support base in two.

Ow, that hurt!

Seriously though, the Swans have been working on developing the generalist market - you can't just turn around and make them a silvertail team. And the Westie support just isn't there at the minute for the second team - sure, they're interested, and a good few of them will be out this Saturday night, but don't count on them as a fanbase to build a new team on just yet.

People in Sydney want to back a winner, so they're taking a look at the Swans. It's all very new to a lot of them. Someone else mentioned the pro-AFL, anti-Swans base that you need to bring in a new side - it just isn't there apart from the ex-Victorians who all have clubs to follow already.

Eventually there will be two Sydney teams, I'm sure. But not in the next few years - that's too soon.

Andrew Mc · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by Dean Moriarty
Someone else mentioned the pro-AFL, anti-Swans base that you need to bring in a new side - it just isn't there apart from the ex-Victorians who all have clubs to follow already.

Bingo! People in Sydney either support the Swans, or are ex-pats (or siblings of such) and already support an existing club. A totally new club would have no supporters, and a club that moved (and they'd have to be in pretty bad shape to do so) would have a very limited amount of supporters.

billy big ears · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by Andrew Mc
They were actually refering to the game which will be live into Melbourne this weekend on Sunday... whether or not they will get 500,000 watching is yet to be seen, but that's what was being talked about.

NO they were not! this was BEFORE they knew who the Storm was playing!!

MightyFighting · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by Dean Moriarty
Ow, that hurt!

Seriously though, the Swans have been working on developing the generalist market

No they havn't. I've seen those ads showing Barrie Hall and Adam Goodes taking high marks to the sound of opera music.

That'll get the westies going.

(Perhaps they should try the same thing, but with Jimmie Barnes.

)

M29 · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by Dean Moriarty
If my uncle was a woman, he'd be my aunty.

The Swans won't draw 50,000 unless they're playing as well as they are right now. When the excitement dies down, I'd guess there will be 20-25k at Swans games. That's still a healthy core support (16k wasn't unusual a couple of years ago) but it's a bloody long way from killing off the NRL.

When 50k turn out for Swans vs Freo on a wet winter night, there might be cause for the NRL to be worried.

They'd still get more than a 4k rabbitohs vs melb storm game in the wet though.

Andrew Mc · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by billy big ears
NO they were not! this was BEFORE they knew who the Storm was playing!!

And? The opponent didn't have a bearing on when and where the game was being played. Show me a link or source and I might believe you - I can find plenty of stories filed on the 15th/16th relating to it, but nothing from last week... I'll give you this one to start with: http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,7280478-23214,00.html

Bomber Spirit · Sep 17, 2003

Originally posted by MoffOnTou
OK Geniuses, tell me how much Port Adelaide v Fremantle in a week 2 finals game would draw at the MCG?

Probably more than it would at Football Park.

Only kidding

But as for a second team in Sydney, I'd like to see it. For a reason that Grayham's already hinted at - that the fortunes of the game wouldn't then be dependant just on the on-field performances of one club.
Even the best clubs have bad seasons. But while one team's struggling, the other team may be doing better. Plus there'd be a game in Sydney every week, so someone would have an interest in an upcoming game; even if it's not the same people every week.

Aucklander · Sep 17, 2003

Who said Rugby League held no interest in Melbourne?

Five pages dedicated to it. Fanbloodytastic.

Make sure you all watch channel 9 at 3pm and cheer on your Melbourne Storm against the Bulldogs.

NFL Week 6 🏈 NCAA Week 7

NRL panicked in Sydney!

Newbie

Brownlow Medallist

Cancelled

Draftee

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Cancelled

Newbie

Brownlow Medallist

Cancelled

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Premiership Player

Club Legend

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Draftee

Brownlow Medallist

All Australian

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Norm Smith Medallist

The Ultimate Warrior

NRL panicked in Sydney!

Similar threads

Log In or Create New Account