The Stadium!

[Not Important]

There's always a major beneficiary in each stadium build, as each stadium requires content to pay the bills. The difference with this is, the Tasmanian government demanded a team, then the afl had to put it's hand in it's own pocket for the team to meet the criteria they set out



What other league in Australia has contributed to a new stadium build? The recent stadiums I can think of are Townsville, Parramatta, Sydney football stadium in the rectangular world, of course no contribution from major beneficiaries the nrl (who don't even contribute to their own expansion sides these days) and the A league.

In the oval stadium world we have Adelaide oval, Carrara stadium, Sydney showgrounds stadium (all AFL contributions), Perth the only one with no AFL contribution, Tasmania (AFL contribution).

I ask again, why is the AFL the only league in Australia required by government to drain it's coffers and chip in? Particularly when cricket uses all these stadiums as well and never contributes?



I think you'll find Albanese did pressure the AFL to chip in 'we want to see a bigger contribution from the AFL' were his words when he wanted to drain their coffers.

Of course he doesn't ask that of his mates the NRL, despite giving them 650 mill in funding for infrastructure and a sports team with no benefit to the Australian public at all.

Also of note, the afl generally only make profits of 20 mill per year, so their contribution is basically a whole years worth of profits to the Tasmanian stadium (they're also contributing to the training centre for some reason).

Again, compare that to the AFL's main competitor the nrl, that have made around 3x the profits of the AFL in the past couple of years, that then get 3x the amount of government funding for png compared to the tassie stadium. All with zero requirement for any contribution from the nrl either, the double standards are extrodinary. It definitely pays to have mates in government is all I can say.

it’s not merely a major beneficiary, though. the only reason for the stadium is for afl football. sure, there are other uses, but they are not material to the primary need.

countless sporting organisations tip in when they are the major beneficiaries. your club invested heavily in the hangar using its funds and resources. and i think that applies to all clubs with their respective developments. the grand prix corp tips in millions annually. tennis australia contributes not only to the tennis centre but to facilities across the country.

don’t recall albo or the state gov’t making demands. the afl played them on a break.

 

[Bjo187]

it’s not merely a major beneficiary, though. the only reason for the stadium is for afl football. sure, there are other uses, but they are not material to the primary need.

No the new stadium is to have adequate facilities to obtain entry into the number one sporting league in the country. Something that the state government demanded and were met with some bare minimum requirements for, to achieve entry into the competition. It happens in practicality every new club's entry, in every sport in the world and the league's practically never chip in, particularly in situations where they didn't want to expand and a state government forced their hand.

It's also a significant asset for the state, the afl aren't making a profit off the stadium, so shouldn't have chipped in at all.

countless sporting organisations tip in when they are the major beneficiaries. your club invested heavily in the hangar using its funds and resources. and i think that applies to all clubs with their respective developments. the grand prix corp tips in millions annually. tennis australia contributes not only to the tennis centre but to facilities across the country.

Ok so by that you're saying the Tasmanian devils should be the ones to pay for the new stadium, as well as the Hobart hurricanes, not the AFL.

The afl literally contribute more than any other sporting organisation in the country to facilities and disadvantage themselves as a sport overall. Particularly when it's closest competitors never put their hand in their pockets for anything really (NRL, A league, NBL, cricket, rugby union etc) and have their stadiums fully government funded. It's a double standard and disadvantage to the code, particularly when you have afl fans themselves pedaling this bias like you are.

don’t recall albo or the state gov’t making demands. the afl played them on a break.

Well you might not recall it, but he was on 3aw and so was anika wells stating they wanted a bigger contribution from the AFL. The AFL then put in basically all last years profits towards the stadium and more for the training facility. Funny, I didn't see albo asking his mates in the NRL to chip in anything for their new club, despite it having no benefit to the Australian public or economy and being triple the amount of money as the Hobart stadium contribution his federal government made. It's a massive conflict of interest when he's a super fan of the NRL and close friends with Peter Vlandy's, who's openly hostile towards the afl and tries to block it's progress wherever possible. Drain the coffers of my favourite sports biggest competitor, whilst filling the coffers of my favourite sport on the public purse. See the link?

 

[Not Important]

of course, the afl will benefit financially in many ways.

never listen to 3aw. and if that’s the best you can come up with, it’s far from albo or anyone applying real pressure.

i repeat, the stadium would not be needed if it weren’t for the afl.

they will benefit in many ways, not the least in terms of media rights.

the present cost is $775m, of which the afl contributes a fixed pittance of $15m. mclachlan has screwed the two governments.

anyway, it’s become circular. we don’t agree.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

No the new stadium is to have adequate facilities to obtain entry into the number one sporting league in the country. Something that the state government demanded and were met with some bare minimum requirements for, to achieve entry into the competition. It happens in practicality every new club's entry, in every sport in the world and the league's practically never chip in, particularly in situations where they didn't want to expand and a state government forced their hand.

It's also a significant asset for the state, the afl aren't making a profit off the stadium, so shouldn't have chipped in at all.


Ok so by that you're saying the Tasmanian devils should be the ones to pay for the new stadium, as well as the Hobart hurricanes, not the AFL.

The afl literally contribute more than any other sporting organisation in the country to facilities and disadvantage themselves as a sport overall. Particularly when it's closest competitors never put their hand in their pockets for anything really (NRL, A league, NBL, cricket, rugby union etc) and have their stadiums fully government funded. It's a double standard and disadvantage to the code, particularly when you have afl fans themselves pedaling this bias like you are.



Well you might not recall it, but he was on 3aw and so was anika wells stating they wanted a bigger contribution from the AFL. The AFL then put in basically all last years profits towards the stadium and more for the training facility. Funny, I didn't see albo asking his mates in the NRL to chip in anything for their new club, despite it having no benefit to the Australian public or economy and being triple the amount of money as the Hobart stadium contribution his federal government made. It's a massive conflict of interest when he's a super fan of the NRL and close friends with Peter Vlandy's, who's openly hostile towards the afl and tries to block it's progress wherever possible. Drain the coffers of my favourite sports biggest competitor, whilst filling the coffers of my favourite sport on the public purse. See the link?

Look as much as I agree the Feds are dodgy I don't think this one is the NRL love fest you think it is.
If also really wanted to help vlandys vs other codes and hurt afl he would have given the nrl a cash injection to put a team in Perth (which afl wouldn't have wanted). Beyond the PR win (which is massive) the PNG team won't do much for NRL fiscally as it will be decades before its making money (a bit like gws in afl) and PNG is already rugby league mad anyway and the NRL have that part of the Polynesian market cornered so it isn't helping them take anything off other codes (not compared to how a Perth team or an extra Queensland team would).

Albo is only giving the money because they are trying to pork barrel PNG for non sport political reasons ie they are worried about china's influence and they want PNGs loyalty first. Vlandys is lucky he's in the right place at the right time but that's all it really is in this case.

 

[Bjo187]

Look as much as I agree the Feds are dodgy I don't think this one is the NRL love fest you think it is.
If also really wanted to help vlandys vs other codes and hurt afl he would have given the nrl a cash injection to put a team in Perth (which afl wouldn't have wanted). Beyond the PR win (which is massive) the PNG team won't do much for NRL fiscally as it will be decades before its making money (a bit like gws in afl) and PNG is already rugby league mad anyway and the NRL have that part of the Polynesian market cornered so it isn't helping them take anything off other codes (not compared to how a Perth team or an extra Queensland team would).

Albo is only giving the money because they are trying to pork barrel PNG for non sport political reasons ie they are worried about china's influence and they want PNGs loyalty first. Vlandys is lucky he's in the right place at the right time but that's all it really is in this case.

Alright so even if I was to give you the money for the PNG club as for 'soft diplomacy', how do you explain the other half of the allocated money of around $310 million worth?

$60 million split between all the other 17 NRL clubs based in Australia and New Zealand, how does that help soft diplomacy for Australia?

And what about the other $250 million going towards 'rugby league development' across countries outside of png, where the sport isn't even popular? How exactly does that help Australia anymore than $250 mill towards Australian football or rugby grassroots development in the Pacific would (as an example)?

It's all a convenient way to strengthen the prime minister's favourite sport on the public purse and people have amazingly fallen for it.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

$60 million split between all the other 17 NRL clubs based in Australia and New Zealand, how does that help soft diplomacy for Australia?

Because the other NRL teams rightfully understood that a PNG team would be a drag on the league and had to be placated/reimbursed for the drag that it produces.

It really isn't all that complicated.

 

[Bjo187]

Because the other NRL teams rightfully understood that a PNG team would be a drag on the league and had to be placated/reimbursed for the drag that it produces.

It really isn't all that complicated.

How would it be a drag on the league when the competition is contributing nothing financially to the clubs creation and grassroots development, plus the league gets extra money through the additional games it produces for tv anyway? A new club added 20 mill to the tv rights money in 2023 and the nrl distribution to clubs is only 17 mill per year. So it will be running at a profit for the game, at least for the first decade.

It was a way to line the pockets of the entire competition. I don't remember the afl clubs getting 60 mill when the suns and giants came in the comp and those clubs were an actual cost on the league, their entire existence wasn't paid for by the Australian tax payer. It's really isn't that complicated.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Alright so even if I was to give you the money for the PNG club as for 'soft diplomacy', how do you explain the other half of the allocated money of around $310 million worth?

$60 million split between all the other 17 NRL clubs based in Australia and New Zealand, how does that help soft diplomacy for Australia?

And what about the other $250 million going towards 'rugby league development' across countries outside of png, where the sport isn't even popular? How exactly does that help Australia anymore than $250 mill towards Australian football or rugby grassroots development in the Pacific would (as an example)?

It's all a convenient way to strengthen the prime minister's favourite sport on the public purse and people have amazingly fallen for it.

Because firstly that money was the bribe to get the PNG government to do it (because albo is desperate for them to do it lest china use sport or anything else to get a foothold in PNG the way the Saudi investment fund has done with its sportswashing).

As for the other money split between the 17 clubs and development that was to get the existing 17 clubs to vote for it and not vote the bid down (most of them don't want a PNG club partly due to logistical issues and that they don't want to travel there regularly and also because it reduces their share of profits/distribution) and also was desperate enough to get it through to pay that).

My point stands correct that if albo wanted to screw afl as much as you say he would have pork barrelled the NRL to get a team in Perth or an extra qld team which were the preferred bids. And the NRL arguably would have made more money both in TV rights and commercial from that.
So he's not doing this to benefit the NRL or screw the AFL it's because of China.

As I said right place right time for vlandys and he's probably hoping that letting albo do this means they will get great help down the line for wherever he wants their 19th team (which is a fair bet).

 

[threenewpadlocks]

How would it be a drag on the league when the competition is contributing nothing financially to the clubs creation and grassroots development, plus the league gets extra money through the additional games it produces for tv anyway? A new club added 20 mill to the tv rights money in 2023 and the nrl distribution to clubs is only 17 mill per year. So it will be running at a profit for the game, at least for the first decade.

It was a way to line the pockets of the entire competition. I don't remember the afl clubs getting 60 mill when the suns and giants came in the comp and those clubs were an actual cost on the league, their entire existence wasn't paid for by the Australian tax payer. It's really isn't that complicated.

Fewer Australians will be willing to watch PNG on TV than the Dolphins, in large part because the Dolphins represent an Australian region and that PNG represents PNG. The people of PNG don't tend to have a lot of money too. It will be costly to ensure that the PNG team flies around and has a competent team. There a possibility that the PNG team does not play competitive games.

I don't remember the afl clubs getting 60 mill when the suns and giants came in the comp and those clubs were an actual cost on the league, their entire existence wasn't paid for by the Australian tax payer. It's really isn't that complicated.

Yes, because there isn't some geopolitical benefit to the Suns and Giants. There is some geopolitical benefit to having an NRL PNG team.

 

[Bjo187]

Because firstly that money was the bribe to get the PNG government to do it (because albo is desperate for them to do it lest china use sport or anything else to get a foothold in PNG the way the Saudi investment fund has done with its sportswashing).

The PNG government have wanted a team in the competition for years, they didn't need convincing, especially when the Aussie tax payer is footing the bill on top of it. The 300 mill would have been more than enough without the additional 300 mill to strengthen the league and code as a whole. That's where the massive conflict of interest comes in.

I don't think people realise how much $650 million actually is. The PNG currency is only 30c Australian, so that 650 mill becomes billions in local money. As a comparison the absolute truckload of money the afl have themselves poured into the giants and suns only works out at about 200 mill each, over nearly 14 years. So we're talking triple the amount of money for one club, where wages are tiny in comparison and across less years. It's a staggering amount.

As for the other money split between the 17 clubs and development that was to get the existing 17 clubs to vote for it and not vote the bid down (most of them don't want a PNG club partly due to logistical issues and that they don't want to travel there regularly and also because it reduces their share of profits/distribution) and also was desperate enough to get it through to pay that).

It should have been funded by the NRL then, not the Australian tax payer. Seeing as they're putting literally none of their own money towards a news licence in a country with 10 million people, that creates new fans, whether or not they're rich or poor.

They wouldn't be adding a new team there if they didn't think it was good for the game overall, they need players and identified the Pacific as a breeding ground. This was a pipe dream till their mate decided the Australian government will spread the English code throughout the Pacific on their behalf.

$3.5 million per club is massive for the 17 NRL clubs, most afl clubs make an annual profit in the few hundred thousand dollars and some even lose money each year.

My point stands correct that if albo wanted to screw afl as much as you say he would have pork barrelled the NRL to get a team in Perth or an extra qld team which were the preferred bids. And the NRL arguably would have made more money both in TV rights and commercial from that.
So he's not doing this to benefit the NRL or screw the AFL it's because of China.

Well firstly if you look at the federal political funding, albo continually under funds afl development projects, forces the afl to chip in millions of their own money, yet fully funds his portion of NRL projects. It's very clever, drain the afl coffers so they have less to put into expansion in nsw and qld, whilst paying for the NRL's expansion and infrastructure, so that they can invest those saved dollars into nsw and qld, to hold the fort against afl growth there.

A federal government wouldn't have jurisdiction to fund a new club in an Australian state. But you can be assured albo has been visiting Roger Cook to get that deal across the line too, two days after his visit to W.A, the W.A government just so happen to 'up their offer' to the nrl for a Perth team. He should be on the books at the nrl, his regular lunch catch ups with pvl have been amazing for the NRL.

You'll see another ridiculous deal for the Perth team soon as w.a premier Cook is a leaguie. I don't mind governments chipping in for infrastructure and if a team needs some money to simply survive, but in no way should they be lining the pockets of an entire league and paying for grassroots development of an entire code on the public purse. This is what they're doing in png and apparently Perth and it is without precedent in any new Australian franchise deals in any other sports.

You'll also notice albo helped fund a training headquarters in Ipswich for if the nrl wanna put a new team there too, once they aligned with his Newtown jets. So this is a state league club, that he funded with more federal money than afl clubs playing in a professional sports league. How is that not dodgey? The hawks for example are chipping in 70 mill of their own money for their new facility, governments only putting in about 30 from memory.

As I said right place right time for vlandys and he's probably hoping that letting albo do this means they will get great help down the line for wherever he wants their 19th team (which is a fair bet).

I think the problem is here, people are letting their political bias outweigh things and will justify anything Albanese does for his mates in the nrl, because their political affiliation is stronger than their affiliation to the sport of Australian football/ AFL.

Fewer Australians will be willing to watch PNG on TV than the Dolphins, in large part because the Dolphins represent an Australian region and that PNG represents PNG. The people of PNG don't tend to have a lot of money too. It will be costly to ensure that the PNG team flies around and has a competent team. There a possibility that the PNG team does not play competitive games.

That's not the way the nrl works, rugby league fans typically watch all games not just their own clubs. The fact the games are shorter in play time and pretty much never overlap helps this, we also know it artificially inflates the perception of 'more viewers', coz the audience isn't split like with afl games, which are often 2 on at the same time.

Yes, because there isn't some geopolitical benefit to the Suns and Giants. There is some geopolitical benefit to having an NRL PNG team.

The benefit is minor imo, as I said elsewhere, Vlandy's let slip that there is no change to the terms if PNG do business with China anyway. The PNG public reportedly don't want the team and would prefer it be put to helping out people living in poverty.

 

[jj15]

Cricket and the Hurricanes need to get better crowds.

5k for the Aus 20/20 and 7k for Hurricanes in the new stadium will look horrible.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

The 300 mill would have been more than enough without the additional 300 mill to strengthen the league and code as a whole.

We're getting off topic, but

Your insistence that a PNG team strengthens the code is strange. It's bizarre. It doesn't. There are very few (any) PNG players in the national league, their fans have little money, and there will be fewer fans and TV interest in the games that they play when compared to the theoretical double-up game played between non-PNG fans in the same timeslot. Fans will be less willing to watch a game in Australia when PNG is the away team.

he PNG currency is only 30c Australian, so that 650 mill becomes billions in local money. As a comparison the absolute truckload of money the afl have themselves poured into the giants and suns only works out at about 200 mill each, over nearly 14 years. So we're talking triple the amount of money for one club, where wages are tiny in comparison and across less years. It's a staggering amount.

That's not how any of this works. Have you actually looked at the financials of the team?

It should have been funded by the NRL then, not the Australian tax payer. Seeing as they're putting literally none of their own money towards a news licence in a country with 10 million people, that creates new fans, whether or not they're rich or poor.

You're literally squaring to things together that doesn't make sense. It cannot be true that the "creation of new fans" is good for the other NRL teams minus the logistical cost of the new team, hence why they voted it down in the first place.

You're just making up the fact that PNG's presence is good for the code generally, when it's not. At all. It will be an annoyance to create a competitive team and an annoyance to travel to and from the country, their away attendance will be lower, and the likelihood of uncompetitive games will be higher.

They wouldn't be adding a new team there if they didn't think it was good for the game overall, they need players and identified the Pacific as a breeding ground.

They're adding a new team there because they're being paid to add a new team there.

It's not good for the game overall, without the taxpayer money, which is why the taxpayer money is necessary, to overcome the fact that it will harm the game overall.

A federal government wouldn't have jurisdiction to fund a new club in an Australian state. But you can be assured albo has been visiting Roger Cook to get that deal across the line too, two days after his visit to W.A, the W.A government just so happen to 'up their offer' to the nrl for a Perth team. He should be on the books at the nrl, his regular lunch catch ups with pvl have been amazing for the NRL.

You'll see another ridiculous deal for the Perth team soon as w.a premier Cook is a leaguie. I don't mind governments chipping in for infrastructure and if a team needs some money to simply survive, but in no way should they be lining the pockets of an entire league and paying for grassroots development of an entire code on the public purse. This is what they're doing in png and apparently Perth and it is without precedent in any new Australian franchise deals in any other sports.

You'll also notice albo helped fund a training headquarters in Ipswich for if the nrl wanna put a new team there too, once they aligned with his Newtown jets. So this is a state league club, that he funded with more federal money than afl clubs playing in a professional sports league. How is that not dodgey? The hawks for example are chipping in 70 mill of their own money for their new facility, governments only putting in about 30 from memory.

This is just you making stuff up or ignoring all the other ways in which governments have and will spend money.

I think the problem is here, people are letting their political bias outweigh things and will justify anything Albanese does for his mates in the nrl, because their political affiliation is stronger than their affiliation to the sport of Australian football/ AFL.

There is only one bias here.

You can disagree if $600 million on sporting diplomacy for geopolitical national security reasons is the best way of spending that money, or if it will be effective, but you can't say it is without merit or logic.

PNG have literally signed pacts with Australia on the basis of this deal, and Australia have said they will withdraw funding at any time if PNG cozy up to China again.

That's not the way the nrl works, rugby league fans typically watch all games not just their own clubs.

This is untrue, you're just making stuff up.

Why are Brisbane Broncos matches receiving higher TV ratings? Could be something to do with the fact that a greater number of Brisbane Broncos fans, of which there are more than most other teams, are only watching Brisbane Broncos games?

The fact the games are shorter in play time and pretty much never overlap helps this, we also know it artificially inflates the perception of 'more viewers', coz the audience isn't split like with afl games, which are often 2 on at the same time.

But that's got nothing to do with PNG being a less desirable team than others.

PNG does add 12 home games (total viewers), but they have to play 12 away games which will get fewer viewers and fewer ticket sales than if those 12 home games by the 12 different teams were able to be a double up against a natural rival. For instance, Sydney teams hosting PNG now miss out on a double-up game against another Sydney opposition team, in which away fans would have attended. Similar for TV viewership.

The benefit is minor imo, as I said elsewhere, Vlandy's let slip that there is no change to the terms if PNG do business with China anyway. The PNG public reportedly don't want the team and would prefer it be put to helping out people living in poverty.

Australia and PNG's $600m NRL deal comes with a security condition

Australia has struck a deal with the Pacific country that will see the NRL feature a PNG side from 2028, but it comes with a catch.

www.sbs.com.au

SBS News understands PNG has agreed to sign an agreement on what's being called "strategic trust" between the two countries.

The deal would be contingent on Australia remaining the security partner of choice over China.

Australia will also be able to pull out of the deal at any time, SBS understands.

I trust SBS News of the assessment of Australia's foreign relations over V'landys

 

[Gibbke]

How would it be a drag on the league when the competition is contributing nothing financially to the clubs creation and grassroots development, plus the league gets extra money through the additional games it produces for tv anyway? A new club added 20 mill to the tv rights money in 2023 and the nrl distribution to clubs is only 17 mill per year. So it will be running at a profit for the game, at least for the first decade.

It was a way to line the pockets of the entire competition. I don't remember the afl clubs getting 60 mill when the suns and giants came in the comp and those clubs were an actual cost on the league, their entire existence wasn't paid for by the Australian tax payer. It's really isn't that complicated.

The Suns and Giants convinced fta bidders to increase the billions of dollars they were spending on TV coverage. Nine game package and stronger presence in the Northern states, ensuring blanket coverage of more than 3/4 of Australia's population simultaneously and a huge carrot fta could swing in front of advertisers...they didn't need to win the ratings in Brisbane and Sydney, but the presence of more local sides made it a lot stronger - they would never lose out to Scooby Doo again. You didn't have to give the clubs anything by way of appeasement because they were about to see an increase in AFL dividends from all that. The current version of the deal, $4b when it kicks in, is the only reason my avatar looks like it does now, because those increased dividends halted the only argument the AFL had left in procrastinating and stalling the introduction of Tassie (so then they came up with the stadium business, another story!). It was an increase of a billion dollars due to the two expansion teams back then, and Demetriou's exact quote was "100 million or whatever it takes" in stating what the AFL was prepared to pay to set up each side...a quarter of a billion to make a billion which then puts every AFL side in the black is good business no matter how you look at it...