Fans abandon Force

yob · Post by **yob** » Thu May 21, 2009 8:15 pm

Demand exceeds supply.

Start another club.

I just saved the tax payer $1 billion. And lowered Subiaco's marginal costs - what could the WAFC do with that I wonder? Charge a lower rent to its customers... that it owns? Invest in some property somewhere?

Where's my fee.

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Thu May 21, 2009 8:41 pm

If the AFL had brains they would start up a new AFL club over Western Sydney...

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Thu May 21, 2009 8:41 pm

Simmo79 wrote:and by "running at a profit" do you mean the annual revenue of the stadium is greater than the cost of running it?

Yes.

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Thu May 21, 2009 9:25 pm

Egan wrote:If the AFL had brains they would start up a new AFL club over Western Sydney...

What, in Perth?

Perth people already watch AFL. What's in it for them to split the revenue one more way for pretty much no increase in potential popularity?

Perth won't get another team for the same reason Tassie won't get one.

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Thu May 21, 2009 9:27 pm

Gate receipts, revenue from people currently not watching AFL because they shut out of games. Another strong AFL club to take up the massive costs of Western Sydney. Its about strengthening your base to ward off the potential nightmarish costs that Western Sydney will become...

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Thu May 21, 2009 9:39 pm

Egan wrote:Gate receipts, revenue from people currently not watching AFL because they shut out of games. Another strong AFL club to take up the massive costs of Western Sydney. Its about strengthening your base to ward off the potential nightmarish costs that Western Sydney will become...

An extra Perth team won't make any extra dollars for the AFL. It will drain an extra share of the leagues profits every year for no real gain though.

Gate receipts don't go to the league anyway.

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Thu May 21, 2009 11:58 pm

You don't think you would get a 25,000 a week average for a third team?

You are saying that Perth and Adelaide have a fully stretched market for AFL?

I would hesitate to suggest there is a rather large market that the AFL would be able to target in Perth that presently are not attending the games...

yob · Post by **yob** » Fri May 22, 2009 12:01 am

Rob wrote:
Egan wrote:Gate receipts, revenue from people currently not watching AFL because they shut out of games. Another strong AFL club to take up the massive costs of Western Sydney. Its about strengthening your base to ward off the potential nightmarish costs that Western Sydney will become...
An extra Perth team won't make any extra dollars for the AFL. It will drain an extra share of the leagues profits every year for no real gain though.

Gate receipts don't go to the league anyway.

Sometimes it's not about what you have, but where you put it. An AFL license will be up for grabs when North Melbourne go under - turns out James Brayshaw's master plan for North Melbourne was a financial white knight that never materialised. The AFL could stand to have 3 clubs fighting over a mmedium sized pie instead of 9 fighting over a big one. Especially when demand exceeds supply in the former.

And it doesn't cost $1 billion.

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Fri May 22, 2009 12:09 am

Well said Yob...

Personally I hope it doesn't happen with the resurgence of the WAFL this year. But if I was the AFL I would look closer at the Perth situation, I personally can see getting a club that has a working class, team for the masses, community orientated team that is not currently being represented by the Dockers, would work in Perth. I think there is a large marketplace that doesn't want to support a club that oozes upper class and nobility values. With the other club, Fremantle representing a city very different to the rest of the metro area. Does the rapidly expanding hills district have anything in common with Freo or Weagles? Not really What about the huge amount of pommie migrants that have flowed into WA with the mining boom? Not in the slightest and they are a huge base to be tapped by the AFL.

There is a marketplace for them, especially if families know they can get a membership for all of them at 50% of the cost of the Weagles and Dockers extortion.

You would probably still see the club in profit, you expand the competition and you further cement the AFL's dominant position.

Taking a leaf out of the NRL's book of cementing the base. Especially with one expansion club being launched, go back to a traditional base, so you don't lose a huge sum of money.

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Fri May 22, 2009 1:02 am

Egan wrote:You don't think you would get a 25,000 a week average for a third team?

I'd say that would be a reasonable target.

You are saying that Perth and Adelaide have a fully stretched market for AFL?

I would hesitate to suggest there is a rather large market that the AFL would be able to target in Perth that presently are not attending the games...

That doesn't reconcile with the need for a 3rd licence though.

What i'm saying is that financially, it will be negative for the AFL. How will they raise additional revenue with the addition of a 3rd Perth side, given that they'll need to pay out $6m or so a year in additional dividends? The only way you could justify it is if you're bringing new supporters to the game. IMO, a 3rd team in perth won't bring enough.

I'm not categorically opposed to the idea, but I think you're talking a long way off, probably 30 years.

gyfox · Post by **gyfox** » Fri May 22, 2009 1:06 am

Rob wrote: That doesn't reconcile with the need for a 3rd licence though.

What i'm saying is that financially, it will be negative for the AFL. How will they raise additional revenue with the addition of a 3rd Perth side, given that they'll need to pay out $6m or so a year in additional dividends? The only way you could justify it is if you're bringing new supporters to the game. IMO, a 3rd team in perth won't bring enough.

I'm not categorically opposed to the idea, but I think you're talking a long way off, probably 30 years.

What the AFL are after is a share of the Qld/NSW market which accounts for 56% of total advertising revenue in Australia and hence would increase the price of their TV rights by squillions.

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Fri May 22, 2009 1:09 am

gyfox wrote:What the AFL are after is a share of the Qld/NSW market which accounts for 56% of total advertising revenue in Australia and hence would increase the price of their TV rights by squillions.

A bigger share, yes. Vlad might be a fuckwit of the highest order, but he's not stupid.

Simmo79 · Post by **Simmo79** » Fri May 22, 2009 8:29 am

Egan wrote:
Simmo79 wrote:and by "running at a profit" do you mean the annual revenue of the stadium is greater than the cost of running it?
Yes.

and have the profits yielded over the course of its life paid off the initial investment yet?

yob · Post by **yob** » Fri May 22, 2009 8:43 am

Simmo79 wrote:
Egan wrote:
Simmo79 wrote:and by "running at a profit" do you mean the annual revenue of the stadium is greater than the cost of running it?
Yes.
and have the profits yielded over the course of its life paid off the initial investment yet?

(principle + interest)

And does this stadium investment offer a comparable rate of return compared to say... if that money were put in an alternative investment?

Such as bank interest?

Hell, such as inflation linked bonds?

Fark, what else is there that pays SFA but promises long term absolute return?

Nines · Post by **Nines** » Fri May 22, 2009 12:11 pm

yob wrote:i've honest to god fukn had it with this guy

Don't be too hard . I don't think he's out of school yet from what he said about his parents driving him to footy games . Obviously hasn't done the high school economics or maths for that matter or english .

Egan says we can build a $ 1billion stadium because there is a $ 0.4 billion surplass when the governments forecasts a long term budget deficeit of $ 19billion . He cannot understand that an urgent need (for people to watch sport) can be superceded by a more urgent responsibility(like transport and hospitals to get people to the games alive )Also a big investment in schooling so we don't have dummies proposing such flawed ideas .

.