The whole reason geelong makes all that money is because they were gifted the upgrades by the state govt.
the $problems at Etihad continue
- Thread starter Kwality
- Start date
- Tagged users None
You blokes knocked back the greatest ever deal in Australian sporting history.
I'm lead to believe Essendon got a good deal to player at Etihad; however, it is limiting our attendances by as much as 10k IMO.
If it was up to me, we would play PA, Freo, GC, Adelaide, GWS at Etihad and all Melbourne teams + Brisbane, Sydney, WC at the MCG.
But it's not.
In 1999, our last year at the MCG, we got
50,324 against Sydney
62,928 against St Kilda
61,783 against Geelong
55,230 against Western Bulldogs
68,831 against NM
55,096 against WC
We play these teams at Etihad now and we can't really get 50k thee. It's just a dirty plague that ground. Consequentely our growth has stopped.
If it was up to me, we would play PA, Freo, GC, Adelaide, GWS at Etihad and all Melbourne teams + Brisbane, Sydney, WC at the MCG.
But it's not.
In 1999, our last year at the MCG, we got
50,324 against Sydney
62,928 against St Kilda
61,783 against Geelong
55,230 against Western Bulldogs
68,831 against NM
55,096 against WC
We play these teams at Etihad now and we can't really get 50k thee. It's just a dirty plague that ground. Consequentely our growth has stopped.
Hearts to hearts
Premium Gold
- Mar 16, 2001
- 25,240
- 63,374
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Wales, Eastwood, West Ham
Guessing you are talking about the relocation package - you obviously don't understand what the offer was, but it wouldn't have been worth killing the cloub for anyway. Presumably you're not sorry your merger didn't go through?
Agree it's ridiculous to compare with other stadium deals. The point is that the AFL insisted on rationalising grounds, so it should be faciliatating a reasonable rate of use for all clubs at all grounds. It's not good for the competition to have a few clubs paying off investors in some grounds - if it's an AFL ground, the AFL should take responsibility for it. If we're pretending it's commercial, clubs should be free to enter other arrangements with other grounds that suit them, but the AFL won't do that. It's forced the duopoly in Melbourne, it needs to make it work better for the competition.
You also passed up the Tasmanian offer.
Have it your way then.
I'm not fussed.
I'm not fussed.
They also contributed money to the MCG as their Melbourne play. However, they're not going to gift the AFL a boutique stadium that will be under utilised and is not required.
tazaa
Hall of Famer
That fixture between us has been well and trule ****ed by the afl. the above figure proves that.
Remember though, you guys were top of the ladder then. If you think you would get those crowds while being a middle of the road club now, then you're dreaming.
No it doesn't. It probably had something to do with the fact that in 1999 both of you were up and about. Since 2001 though, neither of you have been.
- May 5, 2006
- 63,036
- 70,454
- AFL Club
- West Coast
NM vs WB drew 68,000 in Rd 22, 1998.
The same teams have played at the MCG 4 times in the last 6 years and have averaged around half that.
35,000 at the MCG is a better financial result than 35,000 at Etihad, but playing at the MCG doesn't automtically translate to 50,000+ crowds.
The same teams have played at the MCG 4 times in the last 6 years and have averaged around half that.
35,000 at the MCG is a better financial result than 35,000 at Etihad, but playing at the MCG doesn't automtically translate to 50,000+ crowds.
- Thread starter
- #115
Yes BUT ... Collingwood has a dream deal at the G, the Bomboms a great deal at Etihad, both of which are at the expense of other clubs - why are you guys tazaa prepared to be done over so comprehensively.
Its not the AFL that has screwed you over, its the Pies & the Bomboms.
What on earth are you on about? The teams losing their shirt are the ones effectively paying for the stadium on behalf of the AFL. If I was one of them I'd be livid, handouts? is it a handout when you're the one paying off the loan to give AFL House a stadium?
The more they didn't the cleverer they are.
Its not clever, its just an opportunity based on their location.
In 100 alternate reality's 95 of them would have a home ground in Geelong.
Zahki
Norm Smith Medallist
- Aug 13, 2009
- 5,548
- 529
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
North had the opportunity to solve all their financial issues by moving out of Victoria, they turned it down. No more assistance should be offered to help them survive by the AFL, they said they could survive on their own merit lets see them do it. The situation they're in is entirely of their own making, the squealing and crying about stadium deals and whatnot got old a long time ago.
- Thread starter
- #121
Paying off the stadium scraw, what was the sale price - its rubbish, untrue, an urban myth ...
Truth is your mob are screwing the clubs you refer to, with Etihad management dry cleaning the dirty mitts of the Bomboms ... your president is big on the Essendon family, Tony Soprano was a family man.
The Bombons get rich at Etihad whilst all the time teams are losing their shirt ... its simple IF you care to open your eyes.
tazaa
Hall of Famer
i was referring to our rivalry.. it was always a blockbuster game..
North and essendon have played eachother the least amount of times of any two sides in the past 15 or so years..
Its at the expense of clubs such as mine because they didn get in first or make a move.. Collingwood has Eddie to thank alot for.. And the Bombers got in first at Etihad for a shit deal which 4 other teams have jumped on which makes the Dons deal look good..
Finally in the past 4 years weve had an admin in place who have the members interest at heart.. but unlike the pies and dons and hawks and cats who are reaping rewards of building blocks placed a decade ago where only in the infancy of growing the brand of North as a united club.. sadly for us all the main ships have sailed.. and thats where it hurts.. we didn make the right moves in the 90s when other clubs did.. not sure if the climate back then allowed for it either but along with Pagan, Carey leaving we ditched the G and signed on Etihad thinking well be fine but as you can see its not.. easy choice it seemed..
And I think the club signed on at Etihad (which itself was a 25 year lease which i cant comprehend how it would make someone money???) so the Melbourne supporters shut up and the club banked on selling games to make coin so the club prospers etc.. pussy option which has worked so alot of clubs do it now..
the issue is back then was the time to make a risky move.. there was no talk of relocation or merger as the AFL was hellbent on getting Birsbane and Sydney a flag.. we missed that chance and were back to square one.. no premiership.. no stadium deal.. and selling games interstate..
back then we had an admin who were looking to send us to another state rather than make the most of the 90s era.. The clubs structure and facitlites were all over the joint.. As adventurous as the clubs been in its history at the start of the noughties the club needs to take further risks and it didnt..
Were not asking for assistance.. We are given asistance because we are paying off the AFLs own debt.. thats ****ed in itself..
The only reason this issue is getting more airtime is that ever since Etihad got up and running any team based there hasnt been making money while others have.. Its gotten to a point where Etihad is starting to hold ALL clubs back rather than mine and the dogs etc.. Thats why Eddie is having a sook..
How can Collingwood increase its revenue stream over the next 10 years.. you will have a down period soon and paying off Etihad will be a burden there..
Like i said the private investors who built the dome are the ones laughing but who can blame them.. both my and the afl admin at the time ****ed up.. Its jus the ones that got in early to see the **** ups who didnt mind the last 10 years..
If it makes people feel better I think the original investors took a huge haircut soon after it was brought into use
Its a business like any other. Unfortunately it has little to do with North and you're somewhat reliant upon things changing for Saints, which isnt a bad thing for you. They're the mob showing the impossible nature of the stadium and will at least help the push. Not that there's much u can do anyway.
Realistically the only reason the issue is getting more airtime right now is because of the Saints. They have been a real and significant money spinner for Etihad and represent a kind of mid road supporter base within the AFL. 40K odd ??? membership plus a decent entrenched sleeper fan base when up and about.
If they are well behind the 8 ball there's realistically no chance for anyone.
I've checked that out too and you're not quite right. For 1998 (We finished 8th - same as this year and 14th in 1997) these are Essendon's crowds for home games at the MCG we now play at Etihad:
67,157 against WB
53,905 against St Kilda
56,093 against Geelong
35,384 against Brisbane (this is before our rivalry and they were awful)
62,866 against Sydney
45,277 against WC
37,685 against Port (the newest team)
Bolded are crowds we couldn't get now at the dome.
I haven't looked at other less powerful clubs but gee if things are like that for them, I feel sorry for them.
Remember this is 1998 and AFL has grown since.Similar threads
