Analysis Should we be pursuing a secondary market post-Hobart? If yes, then where?

Remove this Banner Ad

Jen Watt haters in shambles
How so? Genuinely curious why you would think this unless you think continuing to sell more games is a good thing. I want less games in Hobart and more games in Melbourne. Taking some from Hobart to WA is not a win.
 
How so? Genuinely curious why you would think this unless you think continuing to sell more games is a good thing. I want less games in Hobart and more games in Melbourne. Taking some from Hobart to WA is not a win.
9 in Melbourne, 2 in WA, none in Hobart is a win (especially if the $$$ are as good as Hobart in total as has been suggested). Fingers crossed for that outcome.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Only way we can get out of this cycle is to develop and investment fund. Might take a few years but a panel that invests a certain amount each year is essential to long term independence.

Until then, we sell games.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Agree. I suggested the same thing 15+ years ago. I know our Football Dept spending was behind the times. I know we had to scrape for those profits, but IMO our only hope of being fully financially independent is to build a genuine warchest trust that makes a dividend each year and builds so that in 10-15 years we are bullet proof and have enough income that we don't even touch the capital. We don't need to be richer than everyone, but we do need to be better off than the worst teams like St Kilda at the moment as the AFL can't squeeze our finances and minimum spend if they have to do the same to other more favoured clubs.
 
9 in Melbourne, 2 in WA, none in Hobart is a win (especially if the $$$ are as good as Hobart in total as has been suggested). Fingers crossed for that outcome.
I think the fact it’s somewhere warm and will be in a single block will make this a much more attractive sell to players and any Melbourne members who want to fly out there for that period.

I haven’t had much motivation to head over to cold windy and rainy Hobart for the games we have sold there. But I can definitely see myself heading to Perth for a week or two the family.
 
Do you like this deal, Zondor? Or not prepared to say?
Ideally “All” our home games should be played in Melbourne. After all we are the North “Melbourne” Football Club. So “Like” is not the term I’d be using. :stern look

Now it has yet be announced by the club what the break up of Home Games will be. We can speculate all we like. I’ll pass judgement once that Announcement is made. :stern look
 
Aside from feeling bad for Tassie members who have already paid, if the deal is as speculated for 2025 (2 home games in Hobart, 2 in WA), then that's fine. I think most of us could live with that.

The big question is 2026 and beyond. Is it 'only' 2 WA games forever? Or if is it going to be 3?

Eagerly awaiting details from the club.
 
Agree. I suggested the same thing 15+ years ago. I know our Football Dept spending was behind the times. I know we had to scrape for those profits, but IMO our only hope of being fully financially independent is to build a genuine warchest trust that makes a dividend each year and builds so that in 10-15 years we are bullet proof and have enough income that we don't even touch the capital. We don't need to be richer than everyone, but we do need to be better off than the worst teams like St Kilda at the moment as the AFL can't squeeze our finances and minimum spend if they have to do the same to other more favoured clubs.
We have no revenues outside core business so some kind of warchest that generates interest or dividends would be terrific. Hopefully Jen and the executive team have plans.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)



Danielle Laidley: Why North Melbourne and Western Australia home games deal is a win for all involved​

Danielle Laidley
The West Australian
Thu, 31 October 2024 2:00AM

What a great day for both West Australian footy fans and my beloved Kangaroos!

Well done to everyone involved in getting this three-year deal done, that truly benefits all parties involved. The deal will see the Eagles and Dockers play an extra game in WA, while North Melbourne receive $2 million per year.

Congratulations to Fremantle chief executive Simon Garlick and West Coast boss Don Pyke for fighting the fight and perhaps opening the door for this venture.

It’s a no-brainer for the West Australian teams, it alleviates the extra travel that has occurred from the introduction of the highly successful Gather Round in Adelaide.

For the footballing public, it’s a chance to see their team play at Optus Stadium or in Bunbury for the extra game.

The AFL continues to grow and showcase the game around the country and it is money well spent, particularly in WA, where we have such a rich football history.

Could I even be a little mischievous and say having a match played down south could be a precursor to introducing the 20th team in years to come? And, no, it won’t be North Melbourne relocating.

Apart from the benefit to all AFL clubs, it’s a massive opportunity for WA tourism in the South West.

Thousands of North supporters will come for a holiday to escape the Melbourne winter, fly directly into Busselton to stay a couple of weeks and enjoy what the local industry has to offer.

Let’s not forget grassroots football too — I know North’s DNA, they will engage the football community by having clinics, coaching nights and functions. The local community will get to meet, talk and engage with the stars of the AFL and it could become a mini gather round.

On the other hand, it is a smart financial and forward thinking move by North Melbourne president Sonja Hood and chief executive Jen Watt.

As a past North Melbourne player and senior coach myself, I know how our club thinks.

During my time as coach, we played three home games in Canberra for a number of years then when that deal expired we also played three home games on the Gold Coast each season.

Soon after, the four game deal came into play for Hobart, which is still in place now. But with the Devils entering the competition in a few years, that income stream will no longer be there, so this latest venture is perfect forward-thinking.

For years the club has travelled approximately 11 times each year, like all interstate clubs and I believe this goes unnoticed.

Ex-Eagle Will Schofield stated on a podcast recently that North Melbourne were an irrelevant team — the truth is, both North and his former side West Coast have been irrelevant in recent years.

Imagine if this type of game ignites a rivalry over the coming years that was prevalent in the 1990s, with both clubs claiming to be the team of the decade — we could even call it the Adam Simpson Cup.

Fremantle and North have had many players represent both clubs, there are so many opportunities to engage the community for fun and festivities, while the clubs battle it out on the field.

North Melbourne Football Club has always thought outside the box. My tribe started Friday night football many years ago. We do what we need to thrive and not just survive to stay at our spiritual home on Arden St.
 
Interestingly it was mentioned on SEN Tassie this morning that the two games that we are giving up are likely to be picked up by other clubs. Also suggested the two games next year will be the last time we play home games in Tassie
star trek spock GIF
 
Interestingly it was mentioned on SEN Tassie this morning that the two games that we are giving up are likely to be picked up by other clubs. Also suggested the two games next year will be the last time we play home games in Tassie
I wonder how this works out as we still have a binding contract for 4 games on the map in 2025. If we reneg on the current deal and play 2, do we cop a financial penalty for dishonouring the agreement?

Just thinking about it, if you take the 2 Tassie games away, at what, $500k (?) , then throw in 2 inferior profiting games at Marvel the net gain for the club coffers would be somewhere in the region 1.25/ 1.35mil perhaps.

If we get back to 9 in Melbourne, then it's a reasonable win for the core I guess.
 
I wonder how this works out as we still have a binding contract for 4 games on the map in 2025. If we reneg on the current deal and play 2, do we cop a financial penalty for dishonouring the agreement?

Just thinking about it, if you take the 2 Tassie games away, at what, $500k (?) , then throw in 2 inferior profiting games at Marvel the net gain for the club coffers would be somewhere in the region 1.25/ 1.35mil perhaps.

If we get back to 9 in Melbourne, then it's a reasonable win for the core I guess.
If the AFL and Tasmania are able to get two better drawing clubs to play home games in Hobart and satisfy the contract, I think it will be a win for all including North.
 
If this means 9 home games in Melbourne from 2026 onwards, then it's hard not to be happy with this deal.

If we're still getting around 4-8 away games in Melbourne each year, then it's going to be a pretty manageable slate of travel. Over a five year period I doubt we'd be much worse off compared to a club like the Dogs or Saints.
 
I just can’t see myself coughing up $2000 or whatever for flights and accommodation to head over there
Same.

Whether the club likes it or not, I'm not going to support home games away from Vic financially in any way. If they're banking on our travel in any way prepare to be let down. I loved Hobart but won't go again as long as we sell home games there. Same for WA. If the club wants an extra few hundred a year out of me they can offer me more home games in Melbourne or a North Melbourne Patrons investment scheme and I'll put my hand in my pocket.

I wonder how this works out as we still have a binding contract for 4 games on the map in 2025. If we reneg on the current deal and play 2, do we cop a financial penalty for dishonouring the agreement?

Just thinking about it, if you take the 2 Tassie games away, at what, $500k (?) , then throw in 2 inferior profiting games at Marvel the net gain for the club coffers would be somewhere in the region 1.25/ 1.35mil perhaps.

If we get back to 9 in Melbourne, then it's a reasonable win for the core I guess.

It is in both parties (ie. the AFL and Tasmania) best interests now that there is a theoretical team incoming to have us out of there sooner rather than later. Agree with you that 9 is obviously better than 7 home games.
 
Same.

Whether the club likes it or not, I'm not going to support home games away from Vic financially in any way. If they're banking on our travel in any way prepare to be let down. I loved Hobart but won't go again as long as we sell home games there. Same for WA. If the club wants an extra few hundred a year out of me they can offer me more home games in Melbourne or a North Melbourne Patrons investment scheme and I'll put my hand in my pocket.

It's not really the club that's banking on any of us travelling to WA for games; it's the WA government.
 
If the AFL and Tasmania are able to get two better drawing clubs to play home games in Hobart and satisfy the contract, I think it will be a win for all including North.
Yes the Tasmanians appear to have become disinterested in watching us live in Hobart so it will be in the AFL's interests to send some other teams down there until their own team debuts in 2028 (or whenever it is).
 
How so? Genuinely curious why you would think this unless you think continuing to sell more games is a good thing. I want less games in Hobart and more games in Melbourne. Taking some from Hobart to WA is not a win.
Two games is the most we’ll be selling, until it inevitably moves to three….then back to four after the club becomes overly reliant on the cash.

It’s their only play.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis Should we be pursuing a secondary market post-Hobart? If yes, then where?

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top