- May 3, 2007
- 40,133
- 23,345
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Man City, Valencia, Lazio, Panthers
freo made finals in their 9th year. (1995-2003)
Time to move Gold Coast suns to Tasmania.. Could we? Should we?
- Thread starter mick500
- Start date
- Tagged users None
The notion that GC has to die for Tassie to enter completely underlines the inability of many fans to truly see how the AFL works...
The Suns are there, alongside GWS, for tv revenue reasons as their number 1 reason for existence. Yeah, it's great that they are building the great game, and the path of GWS in particular as they've done things like a pro footy club has been an impressive sight to watch, but there is a great inequality in terms of AFL attention spans here and a clear agenda. When the Lions were big about 15 years ago, Channel Ten made the move in Brisbane to televise all Saturday Night footy regardless of whether the Lions were playing or not. Both the Lions and Swans already dominated Sat night fixturing, and it was seen as their zone. The move was not as successful as predicted, with Lions games getting healthy ratings but all-Melb games being outrated by whatever movie was on 9 or 7 - headlines were gleefully printed by the pro-NRL Courier Mail up here when a Footscray v Melbourne game was beaten by Scooby Doo..."Dogs outrated by a dog"...
The three biggest tv markets are Victoria, NSW and Qld. All networks are committed to beating the other two at any given time in all three states at once. Victoria is already an AFL given, but the other two are made up of 10 million people who follow RL first, and the attractiveness of the AFL product wasn't there. It was at this time the big push for GC and a western Sydney team suddenly appeared. GC had been on the radar, but more as a Lions expansion idea, as they played a game or two at Carrara during the night series and then when the Melbourne Commonwealth Games necessitated some venue transfers in 2006. But the ratings response created waves up here, and within 2 years the AFL was all about expansion. NM were strongarmed into relocation negotiations, and when they told the AFL to stick it up their arses, all the cards were on the table. Somewhere along the line, tv execs had pinned Andy onto the bonnet of his gold-plated limo and told him to put more local content (i.e. 2 local teams ensuring a home game every weekend in that state) into the roster for tv coverage purposes if he wanted to see an extra billion dollars paid out for the coverage. All this happened. Well, maybe not the limo bit, but nothing makes any sense unless tv execs pushing new teams for boosting their Sat night coverage was a primary request. And while we often disagree about the AFL's actions and motives, we can't label them as stupid - they have always been in control of their universe...
So what's that got to do with Tassie? We aren't in in the first place because we don't contribute to tv rights negotiations. Suits don't give a f### about 1960/90 wins over Victoria, 4 TOTC champs, Brownlows and accolades, and a state population rabid with the sport. For the side to be successful with the 268 page submission Gill is currently reading, we need to show viability with little input from the AFL, because unlike the easy "we pay $200m and they give us an extra billion" maths the GC and GWS bring to the table, we need to do it solo - outside the dividends that every club receives from the AFL as generated by sponsorship and tv. The Tas govt will pump huge amounts into it as a vote winner, which will be a primary argument in this submission, but without the GC, there are no big tv bucks, and without the big bucks, this whimsical notion of Tassie monstering mainland f###s on a weekly basis will never be anything more than that.
So ironically, the GC and GWS are our best mates. We Tassie fans should be buying up GWS and GC memberships as a vote for our own team...!
The Suns are there, alongside GWS, for tv revenue reasons as their number 1 reason for existence. Yeah, it's great that they are building the great game, and the path of GWS in particular as they've done things like a pro footy club has been an impressive sight to watch, but there is a great inequality in terms of AFL attention spans here and a clear agenda. When the Lions were big about 15 years ago, Channel Ten made the move in Brisbane to televise all Saturday Night footy regardless of whether the Lions were playing or not. Both the Lions and Swans already dominated Sat night fixturing, and it was seen as their zone. The move was not as successful as predicted, with Lions games getting healthy ratings but all-Melb games being outrated by whatever movie was on 9 or 7 - headlines were gleefully printed by the pro-NRL Courier Mail up here when a Footscray v Melbourne game was beaten by Scooby Doo..."Dogs outrated by a dog"...
The three biggest tv markets are Victoria, NSW and Qld. All networks are committed to beating the other two at any given time in all three states at once. Victoria is already an AFL given, but the other two are made up of 10 million people who follow RL first, and the attractiveness of the AFL product wasn't there. It was at this time the big push for GC and a western Sydney team suddenly appeared. GC had been on the radar, but more as a Lions expansion idea, as they played a game or two at Carrara during the night series and then when the Melbourne Commonwealth Games necessitated some venue transfers in 2006. But the ratings response created waves up here, and within 2 years the AFL was all about expansion. NM were strongarmed into relocation negotiations, and when they told the AFL to stick it up their arses, all the cards were on the table. Somewhere along the line, tv execs had pinned Andy onto the bonnet of his gold-plated limo and told him to put more local content (i.e. 2 local teams ensuring a home game every weekend in that state) into the roster for tv coverage purposes if he wanted to see an extra billion dollars paid out for the coverage. All this happened. Well, maybe not the limo bit, but nothing makes any sense unless tv execs pushing new teams for boosting their Sat night coverage was a primary request. And while we often disagree about the AFL's actions and motives, we can't label them as stupid - they have always been in control of their universe...
So what's that got to do with Tassie? We aren't in in the first place because we don't contribute to tv rights negotiations. Suits don't give a f### about 1960/90 wins over Victoria, 4 TOTC champs, Brownlows and accolades, and a state population rabid with the sport. For the side to be successful with the 268 page submission Gill is currently reading, we need to show viability with little input from the AFL, because unlike the easy "we pay $200m and they give us an extra billion" maths the GC and GWS bring to the table, we need to do it solo - outside the dividends that every club receives from the AFL as generated by sponsorship and tv. The Tas govt will pump huge amounts into it as a vote winner, which will be a primary argument in this submission, but without the GC, there are no big tv bucks, and without the big bucks, this whimsical notion of Tassie monstering mainland f###s on a weekly basis will never be anything more than that.
So ironically, the GC and GWS are our best mates. We Tassie fans should be buying up GWS and GC memberships as a vote for our own team...!
Last edited:
- Moderator
- #128
Gold Coast to remain in AFL
AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan believes the Gold Coast Suns will remain in the competition 'forever' and doesn’t see a team playing out of Tasmania within the next five years.
He said the introduction of the Suns and Greater Western Sydney Giants were generational decisions and that everyone within the AFL backed the long-term view of those clubs.
"At some point, there'll be someone else here and they may have a different view. But these clubs were established with generational decisions and there is not one person in this building who has any intention of, or has a different view to that."
"On Tasmania, I said at the time we've got commitments in a whole series of areas for five years. I couldn't see it being within five years."
AFL CEO Gillon McLachlan believes the Gold Coast Suns will remain in the competition 'forever' and doesn’t see a team playing out of Tasmania within the next five years.
He said the introduction of the Suns and Greater Western Sydney Giants were generational decisions and that everyone within the AFL backed the long-term view of those clubs.
"At some point, there'll be someone else here and they may have a different view. But these clubs were established with generational decisions and there is not one person in this building who has any intention of, or has a different view to that."
"On Tasmania, I said at the time we've got commitments in a whole series of areas for five years. I couldn't see it being within five years."
Cochrane's reply -
Suns strike back hard over AFL funding drama
TONY Cochrane says even the biggest pessimist can see Gold Coast have more than paid their way on the back of reports the AFL injected a record $27.5 million into the Suns last season.
... Cochrane said reports had failed to put into context the value of the club, overlooking the significance of the Suns to the current $2.508 billion broadcast rights deal, the inclusion of the salary cap every club gets in the investment and the futureproofing of the game in Queensland.
“The very first point I would make is that every club gets the payments for the players that is circa $13 million (per year),” Cochrane said. “Many make it sound like we get $27.5 million and everyone else gets zero.
“The second is by adding a ninth game some years ago to the media rights deal, even the biggest pessimist would say that is worth $50 million per year to the AFL.
“My third point is that it was a really smart business decision by the AFL to invest heavily in the northern states, including NSW. “Fifty per cent of the population lives in those two states and South East Queensland is the third biggest advertising market in Australia so it makes all the sense in the world to have a team in the growth corridor at the Gold Coast.
“You only have to look back at the success of the junior programs too. If you go back 10 years there wasn’t even 30,000 participants in Australian rules in Queensland. “Last year we had nearly 300,000 and we have the second highest number of females, second only to Victoria.
“The AFL Commission has done a superb job of investing in the future, we are the envy of every other sport including the NRL. “The only issue we have in Queensland and the Northern NSW Rivers is that we don’t have enough fields, despite 25 being new ovals being made in the last five years. “Success is our biggest problem, not failure, and we are going to become a successful footy club. ...
Suns strike back hard over AFL funding drama
TONY Cochrane says even the biggest pessimist can see Gold Coast have more than paid their way on the back of reports the AFL injected a record $27.5 million into the Suns last season.
... Cochrane said reports had failed to put into context the value of the club, overlooking the significance of the Suns to the current $2.508 billion broadcast rights deal, the inclusion of the salary cap every club gets in the investment and the futureproofing of the game in Queensland.
“The very first point I would make is that every club gets the payments for the players that is circa $13 million (per year),” Cochrane said. “Many make it sound like we get $27.5 million and everyone else gets zero.
“The second is by adding a ninth game some years ago to the media rights deal, even the biggest pessimist would say that is worth $50 million per year to the AFL.
“My third point is that it was a really smart business decision by the AFL to invest heavily in the northern states, including NSW. “Fifty per cent of the population lives in those two states and South East Queensland is the third biggest advertising market in Australia so it makes all the sense in the world to have a team in the growth corridor at the Gold Coast.
“You only have to look back at the success of the junior programs too. If you go back 10 years there wasn’t even 30,000 participants in Australian rules in Queensland. “Last year we had nearly 300,000 and we have the second highest number of females, second only to Victoria.
“The AFL Commission has done a superb job of investing in the future, we are the envy of every other sport including the NRL. “The only issue we have in Queensland and the Northern NSW Rivers is that we don’t have enough fields, despite 25 being new ovals being made in the last five years. “Success is our biggest problem, not failure, and we are going to become a successful footy club. ...
Last edited:
I always find it amusing when southerners suggest we should be shut down to service 'footy heartland' areas like Tasmania who will supposedly appreciate having a team more than us. The truth of the matter is that the population and potential growth in Tassie isn't at all comparable (the Gold Coast alone has more than triple the population of Hobart and is growing at a fast rate of 2.07% per annum with a further 3 million people living within a 90 minute drive of the GC). One of the most important factors in the last $2.5 billion broadcasting rights deal was the growth opportunities that were on offer in New South Wales and Queensland and that was particularly appealing to Murdoch and co. The broadcasters aren't begging to see more games played in the Apple Isle to service Tasmania's small population of 500k; they want more exposure in the nation's largest market of Sydney (5 million+) and the country's third largest market of South East Queensland (3.5 million+). The population is also growing at a much faster rate in South East Queensland (1.7% per annum) when compared to Tasmania (0.29% per annum).
If that wasn't enough reason to end any kind of discussion (and it really should be enough) then you need look no further than the NRL. They currently putting together plans to establish a third franchise in the South East Queensland market and that will most certainly affect the Lions and Suns. Sorry to all the Taswegians who have their heart set on stealing our AFL licence but there is absolutely zero chance of the AFL shutting up shop on either Queensland club when the NRL is directly targeting our market with the establishment of a third franchise.
If that wasn't enough reason to end any kind of discussion (and it really should be enough) then you need look no further than the NRL. They currently putting together plans to establish a third franchise in the South East Queensland market and that will most certainly affect the Lions and Suns. Sorry to all the Taswegians who have their heart set on stealing our AFL licence but there is absolutely zero chance of the AFL shutting up shop on either Queensland club when the NRL is directly targeting our market with the establishment of a third franchise.
BringBackTorps
Club Legend
- Jan 5, 2017
- 2,963
- 1,827
- AFL Club
- GWS
Ch.9 WWOS C.Wilson 16.3
"The AFL is on the verge of extending its TV rights deal for 2 years... The AFL receives $418m per year, and according to Wilson, the same agreement (@ $418m pa- my words) will now continue to 2024".
"It will be announced in months, possibly 1 month" said Wilson, a multi-award winning, very experienced AFL journalist.
wwos.nine.com.au
The AFL, in particular, will gain further comparative advantages over the NRL, RA, & the FFA/A League (who are/will experience significant financial stress).
In general, GR AF will also gain further comparative advantages.
"The AFL is on the verge of extending its TV rights deal for 2 years... The AFL receives $418m per year, and according to Wilson, the same agreement (@ $418m pa- my words) will now continue to 2024".
"It will be announced in months, possibly 1 month" said Wilson, a multi-award winning, very experienced AFL journalist.
AFL set to extend TV deal amid COVID pandemic
'It's Gil's finest hour and his best ever deal'
The AFL, in particular, will gain further comparative advantages over the NRL, RA, & the FFA/A League (who are/will experience significant financial stress).
In general, GR AF will also gain further comparative advantages.
Last edited:
Brisbane and Gold coast to merge and be Qld bears or suns or something
Lions to de merge and take up residence in Tasmania
Lions to de merge and take up residence in Tasmania
That's the difference in mindset right there. Tasmanians don't talk of franchises or demographics or Rupert Murdoch, they talk footy. The Gold Coast never will. GWS and GC between them are as hospitable to footy as Mars is to life. The "end of discussion" comment deserves an emphatic FU, but I won't, because you were responding to criticism of your own side...fair enough, and if GC supporters are similarly telling others to GF when pushed, then that's good for their footy...at least it matters that much to you. 23 years later though, the crowds that showed up in drabs of bugger all to Skase's team based in a city of 200k were better proportionately than those now spasmodically attending a great stadium in a town 3 times bigger. Demographic growth be damned, still none of your immigrants or their kids are showing up to the footy. Tassie matches those crowds every time without even necessarily following the sides playing there, and the Devils consistently doubled the next best VFL sides when playing teams Tasmanians had never heard of...if the business case can show that profits won't be adversely affected, then the discussion won't be ending any time soon, and nor should it...
What GC do bring, and this is their considerable worth, is that suit mentality that pays out big bucks. By being there, GC is one of the most valuable teams in the comp because they enable the bulk of the footy population to follow their own teams in an era of financial security, Covid conveniently ignored for the minute. I for one want GC and GWS to thrive despite the realities of their footy scene - a) because the game deserves better than disinterested free ticket holders who don't understand the game following a franchise that's been a joke for the last decade, so if they're there for good, I want to see them on my tv demonstrating that they're worth their spot, and b) because GC and GWS ensure the viability of the AFL in the eyes of Murdoch, Stokes and Packer, whimsical notions like a Tasmanian side actually make it onto AFL boardroom tables...
Speaking of Covid, I'd also not be thumping the chest about any of the NRL's plans beyond this year, or even the coming months. It's very possible the league might get that shakeup many have wanted for decades, but new expansion sides might be sowing their roots in amongst the ashes of a nuclear fallout, not the fertile ground that welcomed GWS and GC last decade...
Why would Tasmanians want a team that wears McDonald's franchise colours?
They would not, just a stupid idea.
Tasmania at worst, might stomach a relocated Vic based club that had links to Tassie footballers like a Hudson or Baldock but even then, what they truly want is their own real team with colours and jumper the identifies it is first and foremost a club for Tasmanians.
A relocation as Southern Saints with Baldock coach and Lockett star in mid to late 80's might have worked but this is 2020 now so if Tassie get their own team it will be a whole new club from scratch like Eagles or Bears were in 1987 or Giants were more recently. Then you at least building up something anew and create your own culture and history..
People saying lets just move Suns there have no idea what Tasmanians want themselves.
Let the Suns live their path and a new Tassie team do theirs.
They would not, just a stupid idea.
Tasmania at worst, might stomach a relocated Vic based club that had links to Tassie footballers like a Hudson or Baldock but even then, what they truly want is their own real team with colours and jumper the identifies it is first and foremost a club for Tasmanians.
A relocation as Southern Saints with Baldock coach and Lockett star in mid to late 80's might have worked but this is 2020 now so if Tassie get their own team it will be a whole new club from scratch like Eagles or Bears were in 1987 or Giants were more recently. Then you at least building up something anew and create your own culture and history..
People saying lets just move Suns there have no idea what Tasmanians want themselves.
Let the Suns live their path and a new Tassie team do theirs.
Unfortunately, we live in a capitalist society, where demographics and Rupert Murdoch actually matter. If crowds were the be all and end all, obviously the Gold Coast wouldn't have a team right now. But crowds aren't the be all and end all, money is. And that's what Gold Coast bring to the table more than Tasmania does at present, even with the low crowds.
Also, "never" is a very strong word. Who knows what a generation or two of winning could do? I might remind you that your own favourite club were once perennial losers who took 30 years in the VFL even to make the finals, then became a powerhouse due to two generations of consistent success. That shows you that change does happen and winning can create a real fanbase.
If the NRL ends up killing off the Titans due to the heavy losses from coronavirus and its aftermath, the Suns will have a golden opportunity to bed in AFL support in the culture of the Gold Coast.
- Apr 2, 2013
- 12,090
- 18,675
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Great post. Explains the situation beautifully.
I'll add a couple of things.
The struggling clubs voted in favour of 2 new teams as a condition in them receiving increased AFL assistance. Clubs aren't stupid either they knew the AFL couldn't let them sink while completely funding 2 expansion sides.
Here is the problem with covoid and the changing TV landscape. If the networks can't provide the $$$ anymore and revenue is hit by more than is bought by expansion GWS and suns can't survive. Other clubs as well but they are first out.
Ironically with covoid it is Tassies chance. If the expansion sides die and AFL needs extra teams they will need one who can generate instant support with a minimal spend.
GF
I doubt it. If the AFL ends up having to choose which clubs to save, I don't think they're going to give up on their dream of converting NSW and QLD to being AFL states, which is an easier sell with two teams each instead of one. They'd rather sacrifice North or St Kilda I'm sure. But I don't think they'll need to sacrifice anyone, their loan against Docklands should guarantee everyone's survival.
Colonial
Premium Gold
- Apr 12, 2012
- 48,517
- 45,920
- AFL Club
- GWS
We will be going nowhere, well we won’t be 1st.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's the spirit...!
Many reasons people dont go the game here at metricon, transport links and ticket prices the two big ones. Most of the empty seats you see on tv on outer wing are upwards of $50 each.
not like the mcg and marvel with bays and bays of $20 GA areas
Just that last bit...if the expansion sides die then so does our chance, not to mention the viability of a few incumbents. Tasmania won't be a West Coast...they'll be more like a smaller Melbourne club, no pretentions there, but the presentations show they can minimise costs that all-importantly prove viability. That viability comes, however, with the insurance that every other team is currently getting in the socialist model of the AFL - the tv dividends. And if the tv coverage of the product isn't fully national, the money behind it will be proportionate. So if GC and GWS go, that's it for Tassie, they can forget it...
If Covid destroys Australian sport this year and into next, imagine a horror story AFL with Richmond, WC, Collingwood, Hawthorn (rated the 4 sides as the ones who can survive Covid outright, at least this year), with Adelaide, Essendon and maybe two others, probably Sydney and either Brisbane or Freo, all teams given massive assistance through whatever money wrangling Gill can conjure up, and a tv rights deal that's been mercilessly slashed...Sydney would be an AFL puppet, designed to give the comp a national flavour, back to square 1...! There are no guarantees, and if the nation's biggest sport is reduced to NBL or soccer levels, those comps can tell us all about it...
Hawthorn had two huge advantages in this scenario - 1) favourable zoning at the exact moment they'd pulled their fingers out and started behaving like a fair dinkum top level footy club, and 2) being in Victoria.
The equivalents for GC are 1) favourable monetary assistance and player recruitment strategies/help, and 2) being on the GC. The second one is the crux of the issue - the Hawks fan base grew when they targetted the entire eastern side of Melbourne, which was rapidly expanding after WW2 and by the time VFL Park was built was a pro-Victorian area ready for a side to embrace them. Took until the 1990's, but the building blocks were there. GC, however, don't have that. Lived there for 4 years, and believe me, noone moves to the GC to follow footy. It also doesn't help when the clubs are run poorly, which has been the case with every other GC sporting franchise - RL has been laughable, a gimme situation which they still manage to regularly screw up. GC has been ok by comparison, but it's a sure sign when you have the odd player exodus that something isn't quite right. Hawthorn could exploit the fact they were Victorian, but GC don't have that luxury...
Tassie can't impress Murdoch with massive income potential, but they can tick boxes showing they wouldn't be a millstone. If money was the be all and end all, this scenario where more than half of the teams need the dividends to stay in the black wouldn't be tolerated. Victorian teams would be culled if the Super League scenario was revisited - they were ruthless back then, and there were no rubbery criteria. The reason current AFL teams stay is the drawcard of the product, and when we say drawcards we aren't just referring to players, we also mean the teams. Back stories, rivalries, histories, that's what people turn up for, which is why Victorians don't show up to games against non-Victorian opponents. So who'd be the bigger drawcard for interested Australian footy fans - Tassie or GWS/GC? That's where our niche is, and why the sentimental argument must be considered. There has never been anything but the realisation that Tasmania's biggest opponent is financial, so the pitch is adding something good, which they would, while not breaking the bank - and progressive business is always about freshening the overall product....
- Apr 2, 2013
- 12,090
- 18,675
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Look you won't be. Posted in the other forum AFL NEEDS 18 clubs. Whole financial strucutre depends on it. They will cut all staff, all runners and coaches before a team. Once two clubs go then it won't be contained. With no welfare it will be a shit fight and could cripple the league worse than 80s style.
But that is doomsday. Yet if it were the case its Giants first.
- Apr 2, 2013
- 12,090
- 18,675
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
OK IF and a big IF we are 18 months gone competition changes. Footy or AFL in that sense will never die as there are too many fans who will return in droves. However if TV and the clubs are broke you will have a shoe string comp. No more $1 m deals and the ave wage would sink back to 60-100K for players. In that sense they would be half pro and the best athletes may choose a different sport for the $$$ (similar to say WI abandoning the test team for 20/20). That been the case hard to see 18 clubs working or dreams of expansion. It would depend on what the networks are paying and who can sustain itself.
IMO what will happen = Season resumes some time in June/July for 17 games. That is a loss of 5 rounds + the no show. Clubs will still struggle. In which case questions (just like the economy need to be asked) in terms of HTF is the comp broke after a slight pause and is the model sustainable and does it need changing?
A most definite YES. But the changes won't be killing off clubs, more better stadium deals, fixture, ground and training costs and bloated admins.
Colonial
Premium Gold
- Apr 12, 2012
- 48,517
- 45,920
- AFL Club
- GWS
It really won’t be.
They will look at clubs in a flooded market still getting large amounts of funding after many decades of existence with a lot of debt and weigh it up against new clubs in frontier areas.
They will see where the growth is and make their decision.
But as you said it’s an 18 team league and they have secured funding to make sure of it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Apr 2, 2013
- 12,090
- 18,675
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
This has never made sense to me. Everyone says Melbourne is flooded but a) Population is still growing and b) Demand is still there. A club like North or St Kilda who everyone seems to want to kill off still has far more support than a Giants, Lions, Suns etc.
Seems a moot point. Restrictions "seem" to be working looking at the data and the GF will be played at 800pm NYE if need to be to get the minimum games in. Teams are going nowhere.
- Apr 2, 2013
- 12,090
- 18,675
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
A point also occuered to me. What is the go with the Broadcasters contract. My guess is they won't have to pay the whole contract. In any transaction (flight, insurance, concert etc) in the fine print it is written will not be covered in event of war, terroism, pandemic etc. I'm sure whoever wrote the deal came up with this. Hence the AFL's desperation.
Don't know what Foxs' position is. Sure they'd love the footy but they are bleeding subscribers. A 12 game season is useless to them as they won't recoup the costs and still have a payout. 7 will film grass growing as the FTA networks are bleeding regardless and want something/anything to get viewers.
Don't know what Foxs' position is. Sure they'd love the footy but they are bleeding subscribers. A 12 game season is useless to them as they won't recoup the costs and still have a payout. 7 will film grass growing as the FTA networks are bleeding regardless and want something/anything to get viewers.
Colonial
Premium Gold
- Apr 12, 2012
- 48,517
- 45,920
- AFL Club
- GWS
Just like killing off the clubs outside of vic has never made sense to me.
The clubs are growing the grassroots at an amazing rate, are growing on and off the field and yet after only 8 years they should be packed off even though they share the state with 1 club and the growth continues.
Meanwhile some other clubs have been around for 100 years in the heartland and needing almost expansion level support and yet they should be given automatic births and continuances just “because”.
I don’t want any club gone but if they have to go then it won’t be any of the non-vic sides who depart.
But as we have said no club is being kicked to the curb.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree.
I agree with this also.
Of course, nobody claims that GC is an AFL heartland at present. But it could become one. And there's enough of a potential economic reward for the AFL to persist, given they're going to hit a million people by the 2040s.
I agree. But we're talking a generational project here. Culture can change in a generation.
This is where we disagree. That "dividend" belongs to the clubs anyway, they create that TV money. It's been shown by BringBackTorps that the value of the 9th game in extra TV money marginally exceeds the allocation that the expansion clubs have collectively received over the past few years, meaning they are paying their own way, with the prospect of bigger returns to come if the expansion clubs take off.
The poorer Melbourne clubs are also paying their own way, because even if the extra eyeballs in Melbourne are worth less to advertisers than getting a further reach into markets like Sydney and SEQ, they have tens of thousands of paying members and fans at games. So I don't think a single club is a financial drain on the league at present, and the Gold Coast has the potential to be much more useful than the marginal benefit they are at present.
Neither. I agree with adding Tasmania for sentimental reasons, but it's due to their status as a heartland of the game and a historical talent factory (one that is now starting to wane due to neglect), not because of any rivalry.
Similar threads
- Poll
