Sharks look at leaving home

[gong_eagle]

Sharks look at leaving home

By David Riccio | April 19, 2009

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/sport/nrl/story/0,26799,25351931-5006066,00.html




CRONULLA will explore giving up home games to their opposition to ensure the club's financial stability. Sharks officials are looking at shifting at least one of their Toyota Stadium fixtures next season to the venue of an out-of-town rival.
The development emerged as Cronulla stand to cash in on hosting the Cowboys at Adelaide's Hindmarsh Stadium today. Club officials see the plan as a short-term funding solution ahead of a $110million hotel and residential development proposal that would transform the club from the pauper to the prince.
"It would be short-term pain for long-term gain,'' Sharks chief executive Tony Zappia said.
Struggling to attract home crowds, the Sharks' season average of 10,109 is well short of the numbers required to ensure financial stability.
In contrast, the Broncos boast an average home crowd of 41,368 this season. Under the latest plan, the Sharks would reap the financial benefit of a match played in front of a crowd almost certainly double what they would get at home.
It would provide a much-needed cash injection while also warding off any threat of relocation.
"In these tough economic times, I can fully appreciate the impact the current economy has had on fans and families coming to the footy,'' Zappia said.
"But like our recent $40 family packages, it's important we always look outside the square during this trying period.''
The Sharks are poised to receive more than $300,000 over the next three years from the South Australian Government by bringing rugby league to the city of churches for the first time since 2006.

 

[Vossy]

another scare tactic at the fickle shire fans who dont show up

 

[Dogs Of War]

Why would they suddenly get double the crowd playing elsewhere. Who the hell wants to watch the Sharks anyhow.

 

[Special K]

I assume they mean taking a home game against the Broncos to Brisbane or a home game against the Cowboys to NQ..

 

[imasharkie]

I assume they mean taking a home game against the Broncos to Brisbane or a home game against the Cowboys to NQ..

Besides the 3 games over 3 years in Adelaide, I think you've hit the nail on the head SK.
If we took our home games against Brisbane to Brissy we'd probably get 25,000 + to the game. we'd be lucky to get 10,000 at Shark Park.

 

[LeagueXIII]

Exactly, a few clubs already look at alternatives when playing the Storm or Cowboys.

Taking a couple of games a year to Adelaide would be good, similar to how Hawthorn take a few games to Tasmania in AFL. As well as this the NRL should bring a SA team into the JB Cup as the Reds have done and ensure NRL games are shown on FTA at a reasonable time in SA. This will help the profile of the game and give them a presence. At least it is an attempt to grow the game and the audience, which will benefit RL in the long term. Surely 50-100,000 viewers is better than what we have now.

 

[butchmcdick]

Exactly, a few clubs already look at alternatives when playing the Storm or Cowboys.

Taking a couple of games a year to Adelaide would be good, similar to how Hawthorn take a few games to Tasmania in AFL. As well as this the NRL should bring a SA team into the JB Cup as the Reds have done and ensure NRL games are shown on FTA at a reasonable time in SA. This will help the profile of the game and give them a presence. At least it is an attempt to grow the game and the audience, which will benefit RL in the long term. Surely 50-100,000 viewers is better than what we have now.

Hawthorne take games to tassie as the Tasmanian State government signed a 5 year 15 million dollar sponsership deal with Hawthorne that included a certain amount of games be played in Launceston. How a state governemnt gets away with spending taxpayers money on a footy team is beyond me. Can you imagine if your state governement paid money to sponsore a team you hated using your tax dollars ? ALthough I guess Queensland rail sponsore the Queensland reds and they are a governement owned business.

www.abc.net.au/tasmania/stories/s1733013.html


Is it money well-spent on Hawthorn?

Tuesday, 5 September 2006
Reporter: Peter Newlinds

Hawthorn: it's a good deal for them, but...
Picture: Getty Images

The state government has signed a deal with AFL team Hawthorn that guarantees them $15 million over five years, in return for playing 25 games in Tasmania. Good deal - or not? Here's ABC Sports reporter Peter Newlinds' view.
So Tassie finally has its own AFL team? Well, not really, not even close actually. What's happened is that Hawthorn has gleefully taken up Tasmania's (and when I say Tasmania, I mean the state government) offer of 15 million bucks over five years to play four premiership and one pre-season game each year.

The Hawks are in clover. Not only are they bearing up well in Melbourne's very tight AFL market, they've got a promising young team, a gleaming new headquarters at Waverley, some pretty savvy leadership, and now boatloads of money to play games at York Park, where they already have a very healthy home ground advantage - 8 wins from 12 games.

All Hawthorn has to do is turn up, play, fulfil their commitments to game development and wear on its jumper, the word Tasmania. At Hawks HQ in Melbourne, when they answer the phone, it'll be with the cheery 'Good morning, Tassie Hawks', and the word will be spread.

It's a great deal, enough to make Jeff Kennett turn his blazer inside out
It's a great deal,

 

[Russell Crowe's Band]

short term thinking by the sharks.

we should be looking to get more games at a venue that we own.

im sure we could give sydney FC a cheaper deal than the SFS.

 

[Engine]

I am a longterm sharks hater. But, from this news, I'll tell you this.

I think the future of the sharks organisation is very cloudy.

 

[bluey]

Yeah i must say i am real concerned for the sharks future, Gould today on the roast basically gave us 2 years and said we are in real trouble.
Scary stuff.

 

[Didgi]

That's cheating!

Damn good idea IMO.

 

[nqcowboy87]

come to cairns

 

[$$Poor Boy Blues$$]

Besides the 3 games over 3 years in Adelaide, I think you've hit the nail on the head SK.
If we took our home games against Brisbane to Brissy we'd probably get 25,000 + to the game. we'd be lucky to get 10,000 at Shark Park.

The rent would kill them then. Its something like 20-25K to break even.

 

[ozjet1]

Besides the 3 games over 3 years in Adelaide, I think you've hit the nail on the head SK.
If we took our home games against Brisbane to Brissy we'd probably get 25,000 + to the game. we'd be lucky to get 10,000 at Shark Park.

but i thought freezing ya tits off at shark park, then ripping the skin off ya old fella while screwing a leather-skinned 40yo+ trashbag ya just picked up from biggles was the perfect saturday night in the shire. :shock:

 

[$$Poor Boy Blues$$]

Yeah i must say i am real concerned for the sharks future, Gould today on the roast basically gave us 2 years and said we are in real trouble.
Scary stuff.

I give you two years as well

Move.

 

[_Johnsy]

writing is on the wall, ciao

 

[Nightward]

The rent would kill them then. Its something like 20-25K to break even.

The crowd figures were what killed the Reds' ability to play at Suncorp.

If the Sharks do send their home game against the Broncos up to us, they may make a bit of quick cash, but they then have to play in front of a hostile "home" crowd. Given that you basically need to win all of your home games and about half of your away games to get solidly into the 8, it would be more than a little foolish to cede such an advantage.

 

[RedVee]

from their logic they may as well play all their "home" games at the oppos ground.

 

[Kiki]

doesn't look good for the Sharkies.

 

[adamkungl]

I worry for their future...I'd hate to see any team go under. Tbh I don't think they will. They've been in worse positions before.