18th club, whose next?

[Wb1234]

Is it? AFL seem set on keeping the Giants & Suns where they are, so they keep a Sydney derby and a SEQ derby.

It'd be a huge public backdown if they move either - and practically an admission of failure.

If gws don’t move Canberra will get their own side

Is it? AFL seem set on keeping the Giants & Suns where they are, so they keep a Sydney derby and a SEQ derby.

It'd be a huge public backdown if they move either - and practically an admission of failure.

Their crowds will be a laughing stock till they move

every time they play at home all those empty seats is all people will know of the club

western Sydney just isn’t afl territory

 

[Perth Red]

Politis knows the game, content and metro presence.
You can mock GWS but $300mill in revenue more than us should be telling you something.

 

[AlwaysGreen]

 

[Perth Red]

View attachment 71907

 

[Pneuma]

View attachment 71908

Whinger

 

[taipan]

Politis knows the game, content and metro presence.
You can mock GWS but $300mill in revenue more than us should be telling you something.

We can mock GWS ,with valid stats.The Tv deal was one thing (and again the comparisons on many points are dubious such as timing, teams, markets and contract expiry dates) , however the perpetual pouring of money into the Gnats and getting little in return is another.
The AFL basically responded to Sheedy's optimistic comments in effect, Western Sydney is ripe for an AFL team, because a lot of people want it and there's 3 billion people living there.
AFL management (the epitome of all that is good) needed to do a bit more research,

 

[Perth Red]

We can mock GWS ,with valid stats.The Tv deal was one thing (and again the comparisons on many points are dubious such as timing, teams, markets and contract expiry dates) , however the perpetual pouring of money into the Gnats and getting little in return is another.
The AFL basically responded to Sheedy's optimistic comments in effect, Western Sydney is ripe for an AFL team, because a lot of people want it and there's 3 billion people living there.
AFL management (the epitome of all that is good) needed to do a bit more research,

They wanted more content to sell. They had all the AFL cities tied up. Where would they get more content? Regional clubs dont work in AFL generally, they want a bigger Sydney presence, they have the revenue to cover the investment, that investment in more content and metro markets has landed them a mammoth tv deal. It has also given them a consistent footprint in another city (Canberra) fully funded by someone else!

Are GWs going well? No. Is the AFL hoping they'll go better, I m sure they are. Was it a bad idea to introduce GWS? Probably not given what it has led to in revenue growth for the game. In reality GWS are costing them $13-15million a season more than if they had brought in a club that needed a smaller grant. Its chump change when your landing $550mill a year Tv deals. I expect when the bonanaza money starts flowing for them in 2025 Qlnd and NSw will see a massive uplift in money thrown at their game there. They've already said if Tassie comes in they will invest $120mill in grass roots in Tassie. Because thats what you an do when you have lots of money!

Politis knows this hence his call for 20 teams with perth and adelaide. Adelaide or Wellington could well be our GWS but if it helps us land us a $600mill tv deal , guess what, it wont matter!

 

[Gobsmacked]

They wanted more content to sell. They had all the AFL cities tied up. Where would they get more content? Regional clubs dont work in AFL generally, they want a bigger Sydney presence, they have the revenue to cover the investment, that investment in more content and metro markets has landed them a mammoth tv deal. It has also given them a consistent footprint in another city (Canberra) fully funded by someone else!

Are GWs going well? No. Is the AFL hoping they'll go better, I m sure they are. Was it a bad idea to introduce GWS? Probably not given what it has led to in revenue growth for the game. In reality GWS are costing them $13-15million a season more than if they had brought in a club that needed a smaller grant. Its chump change when your landing $550mill a year Tv deals. I expect when the bonanaza money starts flowing for them in 2025 Qlnd and NSw will see a massive uplift in money thrown at their game there. They've already said if Tassie comes in they will invest $120mill in grass roots in Tassie. Because thats what you an do when you have lots of money!

Politis knows this hence his call for 20 teams with perth and adelaide. Adelaide or Wellington could well be our GWS but if it helps us land us a $600mill tv deal , guess what, it wont matter!

Geez your kidding yourself mate.
The next team will be NZ 2 , They will announce they are interested in any bids outside of Auckland.
19 and 20 could very well be NZ3 and Brisbane 3 .
After 25 ? Yeah of success! In a city of 5 nearly 6 million only got 10k last week ( Melbourne Storm)
Melbourne is a relevant city and I'm happy we have a presence there.
What does Perth or Adelaide mean to anyone on the East Coast? 0, those places have 0 relevance here .. 0. the last time we got news of WA here was a Danny Green fight.
We have clear data on just how little impact RL has in an AFL state or vis versa and ignoring that would be incredibly stupid.
They will be a void of interest and a financial drain.

Any AFL state will be a GWS .

Lucky we have plenty of better options.

 

[Gobsmacked]

18 : Christchurch ( NZ2)

19: Ipswich corridor ( West Brisbane 3)

20: Wellington ( NZ 3 )

AFL states complete waste of money.

 

[Perth Red]

18 : Christchurch ( NZ2)

19: Ipswich corridor ( West Brisbane 3)

20: Wellington ( NZ 3 )

AFL states complete waste of money.

Yeh Australian TV will be falling over itself to pay $600mill for more NZ teams and the same markets it already has lol
Politis knows.

 

[taipan]

They wanted more content to sell. They had all the AFL cities tied up. Where would they get more content? Regional clubs dont work in AFL generally, they want a bigger Sydney presence, they have the revenue to cover the investment, that investment in more content and metro markets has landed them a mammoth tv deal. It has also given them a consistent footprint in another city (Canberra) fully funded by someone else!

Are GWs going well? No. Is the AFL hoping they'll go better, I m sure they are. Was it a bad idea to introduce GWS? Probably not given what it has led to in revenue growth for the game. In reality GWS are costing them $13-15million a season more than if they had brought in a club that needed a smaller grant. Its chump change when your landing $550mill a year Tv deals. I expect when the bonanaza money starts flowing for them in 2025 Qlnd and NSw will see a massive uplift in money thrown at their game there. They've already said if Tassie comes in they will invest $120mill in grass roots in Tassie. Because thats what you an do when you have lots of money!

Politis knows this hence his call for 20 teams with perth and adelaide. Adelaide or Wellington could well be our GWS but if it helps us land us a $600mill tv deal , guess what, it wont matter!

Doesn't alter the fact, they got the extra content ,but not the expected public support nor TV ratings.
IMO and I'd at least expect a Perth side to at least have the crowds compared to GWS and I would expect in Perth better TV ratings locally than GWS get in Sydney locally.And a better return on outlay in a non rl heartland state.

BTW I have no argument with Politis's 20 team view but as a business man he would want expansion teams to attract crowds and Tv ratings.
Why would you need to invest $120m in Tassie when they already have a captive population there ,and no other code to compete against.Spend money by all means but sheesh that to me is financial overkill.
The $550m a year AFL TV deal is for 18 teams, with team player numbers and team admin far in excess of NRL numbers .Again one more time no apples with apples comparisons, no contract matching contract, no employee numbers matching employee numbers, no team outside Australia ,4 teams in AFL besotted states. Don't know how many times I have to blabber on about this.
We have seen the effect of the Dolphins now on TV ratings and crowds, no ne ATT of NRL deals knew the impact, which to date has far exceeded expectations.We fished where the fish were.

 

[Perth Red]

Doesn't alter the fact, they got the extra content ,but not the expected public support nor TV ratings.
IMO and I'd at least expect a Perth side to at least have the crowds compared to GWS and I would expect in Perth better TV ratings locally than GWS get in Sydney locally.And a better return on outlay in a non rl heartland state.

BTW I have no argument with Politis's 20 team view but as a business man he would want expansion teams to attract crowds and Tv ratings.
Why would you need to invest $120m in Tassie when they already have a captive population there ,and no other code to compete against.Spend money by all means but sheesh that to me is financial overkill.
The $550m a year AFL TV deal is for 18 teams, with team player numbers and team admin far in excess of NRL numbers .Again one more time no apples with apples comparisons, no contract matching contract, no employee numbers matching employee numbers, no team outside Australia ,4 teams in AFL besotted states. Don't know how many times I have to blabber on about this.
We have seen the effect of the Dolphins now on TV ratings and crowds, no ne ATT of NRL deals knew the impact, which to date has far exceeded expectations.We fished where the fish were.

Its silly to compare NRL potential in Perth with GWS's history. We know there's an untapped market for NRL here where as the market for AFL in Sydney was already being adequately filled by Swans. They needed content, they want a greater presence in Sydney long term, they are selling their comp (very successfully to Tv and sponsors) on a perception as being the national one, GWS is costing them around $10-15mill year a more than if they'd introduced a heartland club (not that they had any options as they already have the footprint they need in their heartlands) that had financially performed better, they can afford it, its led to a bigger tv deal that dwarves the expense.

Tassie AFL investment is in grass roots and elite player development. I suspect its about appeasing other clubs concerns about player depth (sound familiar?)

re TV deal, we are getting to a point where club grant expenditure across both codes is closing (+$55mill last year difference to afl clubs). The difference being they have $250mil-$300mill a year more to spend than us. So we compromise spending in other areas. The situation was more in their favour for the 2017 TV deal yet they have blown us away in this next deal despite us offering a lot more this time around. (17 teams, Brisbane2, digital closure)

We went back to fish in a pond that has always been able to sustain two fishermen. We have known that for 25 years. The fact it has taken us this long to actually go back to that pond is a damning indictment of the weak leadership of the game over the last 25 years. The fact we still felt the need to go ask News ltd if we could and which team they'd prefer is even worse.

 

[Canard]

Saying that the next team will be NZ2 is low quality bait.

Saying the one after that will be NZ3 is a sign of meth addiction

 

[Gobsmacked]

Saying that the next team will be NZ2 is low quality bait.

Saying the one after that will be NZ3 is a sign of meth addiction

No, reading that when I typed the Brisbane 3 will be after that is a sign of meth addiction.

 

[taipan]

Its silly to compare NRL potential in Perth with GWS's history. We know there's an untapped market for NRL here where as the market for AFL in Sydney was already being adequately filled by Swans. They needed content, they want a greater presence in Sydney long term, they are selling their comp (very successfully to Tv and sponsors) on a perception as being the national one, GWS is costing them around $10-15mill year a more than if they'd introduced a heartland club (not that they had any options as they already have the footprint they need in their heartlands) that had financially performed better, they can afford it, its led to a bigger tv deal that dwarves the expense.

Tassie AFL investment is in grass roots and elite player development. I suspect its about appeasing other clubs concerns about player depth (sound familiar?)

re TV deal, we are getting to a point where club grant expenditure across both codes is closing (+$55mill last year difference to afl clubs). The difference being they have $250mil-$300mill a year more to spend than us. So we compromise spending in other areas. The situation was more in their favour for the 2017 TV deal yet they have blown us away in this next deal despite us offering a lot more this time around. (17 teams, Brisbane2, digital closure)

We went back to fish in a pond that has always been able to sustain two fishermen. We have known that for 25 years. The fact it has taken us this long to actually go back to that pond is a damning indictment of the weak leadership of the game over the last 25 years. The fact we still felt the need to go ask News ltd if we could and which team they'd prefer is even worse.

You're quite happy to compare the NRL with AFL all the time. QED I did in this case likewise.Deal with it.
I know what it is in Tassie.WE went back to a fish in a pond that can sustain more than 2 .
You lost it when you brought up the last 25 years.
SL which drained RL coffers in 97 ,had a longer term effect re crowds and clubs with cutting, merging and bringing back in.Remember also when the NRL was 50/50 with the ARL ie 50% of profits going to Fox.
Never forget Gallop bragging about the biggest Tv deal in Australian sport ,then got trumped by the AFL.
Whilst we had some less than impressive CEOs over that period, they did not have the cash assets or structural assets behind them.Which is only starting to arise now.

I'm sure the AFL are working with ch7 and Foxtel on the benefits of a Tassie side and dare I suggest a 3rd WA side.People who paid sh*tloads of money for a sport, would like some input.After all they are business partners.And if they get ratings crap they are aren't going to be happy lads.

 

[Gobsmacked]

Saying that the next team will be NZ2 is low quality bait.

Saying the one after that will be NZ3 is a sign of meth addiction

NZ 2 , Brisbane 3 and New Zealand 3 ..
will all :
*produce more talent
* get more sponsorship
*more attendance
*more television viewers*
* attract more talent
* generate more revenue

Then any Perth team ever will.

 

[nick87]

The 18th team has to be a second Canberra team so I can jump without anyone looking at me funny

 

[Perth Red]

You're quite happy to compare the NRL with AFL all the time. QED I did in this case likewise.Deal with it.
I know what it is in Tassie.WE went back to a fish in a pond that can sustain more than 2 .
You lost it when you brought up the last 25 years.
SL which drained RL coffers in 97 ,had a longer term effect re crowds and clubs with cutting, merging and bringing back in.Remember also when the NRL was 50/50 with the ARL ie 50% of profits going to Fox.
Never forget Gallop bragging about the biggest Tv deal in Australian sport ,then got trumped by the AFL.
Whilst we had some less than impressive CEOs over that period, they did not have the cash assets or structural assets behind them.Which is only starting to arise now.

I'm sure the AFL are working with ch7 and Foxtel on the benefits of a Tassie side and dare I suggest a 3rd WA side.People who paid sh*tloads of money for a sport, would like some input.After all they are business partners.And if they get ratings crap they are aren't going to be happy lads.

How does brining gws into Sydney and bringing in a perth nrl club have any relevance to each other?
there’s been a number of times since the arlc took over they could have expanded, had the funds to do so and if they had would likely have realised much greater revenue by now. just like afl did.

haha, sure afl asks news ltd if it can expand. You know like they would have done with gws and suns, or maybe they have a strategic plan, stick to it and go to market with extra content?

 

[Perth Red]

NZ 2 , Brisbane 3 and New Zealand 3 ..
will all :
*produce more talent
* get more sponsorship
*more attendance
*more television viewers*
* attract more talent
* generate more revenue

Then any Perth team ever will.

troll done good, is pippen back?

 

[Gobsmacked]

troll done good, is pippen back?

It's not a troll ...
A key clue is when you can't refute any of the points