GWS why?

[dragit]

Just hearing about Sydney's recent 'record breaking' membership tally of 30,000, this is a club that has had exclusive access to a population of what 4,000,000 people? For decades now, won the premiership, 2nd in 10 years, absolutely flying.

On the other hand we are supposedly battling, with 32,000 members, this is after a catastrophic start to the season and a grim short term future, in a city where 10 clubs are fighting it out for support.

If Sydney aren't as big as the smallest victorian clubs, why are we funding the launch of a new one up there? 10 flags on a row & they're still not going to have 30,000 members.

Gold Coast I can understand, as they have always played AFL there, but western Sydney? I get the theory, but really if Sydney don't have 50,000+ members at this point, then what hope does the next side have? How much has it cost the rest of the clubs already?

[Cairnsman]

30k membership in the NRL heartland is nothing to scoff at.

[dragit]

30k membership in the NRL heartland is nothing to scoff at.

But if it doesn't sustain us, surely it doesn't Sydney either? How much extra money dies the AFL kick in to them each year I wonder?

Sydney have the South Melbourne legacy advantage over GWS too, plenty if old timers in Melbourne cheer on the bloods.

[SaintPav]

30k membership in the NRL heartland is nothing to scoff at.

But if it doesn't sustain us, surely it doesn't Sydney either? How much extra money dies the AFL kick in to them each year I wonder?

Sydney have the South Melbourne legacy advantage over GWS too, plenty if old timers in Melbourne cheer on the bloods.

I read a report somewhere that the AFL will be pumping $250 million into GWS and GC over 5 years.

[saintspremiers]

Dimwit is paranoid that he needs to try and either destroy or limit NRL's influence at all costs.

All businesses hate competition

[Munga]

I agree. Waste of time, effort and money. They may as well start a team in Brazil.

[bergholt]

But if it doesn't sustain us, surely it doesn't Sydney either?

It's much easier to pick up sponsors in a two-team town. They've got QBE, Citigroup, VW, Coke, ISC (?) and Cellarbrations. We've got 13LEDS, Centrebet, ISC (?), UD Trucks, Jeld-Wen and Wellington Tourism. Big difference in quality and presumably dollars there.

[Richter]

It's to do with having televised games in Sydney every weekend. It does have an effect. I was up that way over Easter (on a train somewhere near Liverpool) and overheard blokes talking about the sport on. They started with the NRL stuff, but then mentioned the AFL, Swans and Giants. So the AFL is putting $250m over 5 years... what's the TV rights? $1billion over 5 at last count? No doubt that having 9 games including at least one from every major state makes a difference in driving that up...

[SydneySainter]

The Swans are a fashion trend in Sydney and Sydney is bandwagon country.

For every die hard supporter, there are 3 fickle dimwits who carry on like they barrack for the Rolls Royce of footy teams when they win, and when they lose, it's a conspiracy from the Melbourne umpires and when they lose 3 in a row, it just becomes GayFL.

So by definition, 30k is good.

In 2007 they were cashed up with a million in the bank, but in 2008 they had 19k to a final at ANZ, so I wouldn't get carried away with the perceived success the media carries on about!

[bigcarl]

If Sydney aren't as big as the smallest victorian clubs, why are we funding the launch of a new one up there? 10 flags on a row & they're still not going to have 30,000 members.

TV rights and AFL greed.

[perfectionist]

Is GWS related to BWS?

[Scollop]

You've got the offspring of Rugby league legends playing Aussie rules and that wouldn't have been an option for many kids 30 years ago. It's a symbol of the attraction of our game vs NRL or union. Put it this way...would the founding fathers of the game have envisioned where the great game of aussie rules would have been 50 or 100 years after the birth of the VFL?

As you say, the game of Aussie rules has infiltrated the harbour city now for 3 decades and you've got mums and dads that are making decisions for their kids that will benefit our game long into the future. The Swans only realising a premiership in the last decade is also a great marketing tool for the AFL as is a team based right in the heart of one of the highest population growth areas in the country.

It's important for the AFL to keep re-investing in the future. The GWS team is a long term investment similar to infrastructure investing and major nation building investment.

[SaintPav]

It's to do with having televised games in Sydney every weekend. It does have an effect. I was up that way over Easter (on a train somewhere near Liverpool) and overheard blokes talking about the sport on. They started with the NRL stuff, but then mentioned the AFL, Swans and Giants. So the AFL is putting $250m over 5 years... what's the TV rights? $1billion over 5 at last count? No doubt that having 9 games including at least one from every major state makes a difference in driving that up...

TV rights are $1.13 billion but there are no guarantees that the AFL will not get the same sort of deal or not in real terms anyway. I could be wrong but given that both CH10 and CH9 are pretty much well insolvent I don't think we will see the same competitive tension for the next rights; not that Seven West Media's balance sheet is that much better. It will only get worse WHEN there's another major credit crunch.

This does not even take into account the prospect that the current rights may have to be re written if there's one less team in the competition later this year or next season if you know what I mean.

This has implications for the survival of struggling Victorian clubs as the current TV right deal basically underwrites their survival only for the length of the current deal.

[BigMart]

Tassie would have a team that would have had support straight up....

Also the way they were introduced was stupidity of the highest order..... 30 kids between 18-20 winning percentage @ 5% and they want to grow a base.... After 4 years they'll have 12 or so wins ..... If the improve...

There was a better way.

They want to try and gift them a flag.... Kids will bail, a losing culture will be normal and they have no soul! They are a claytons footy team with how many supporters?!

[plugger66]

They are doing exactly the right thing. No point in going to Tassie. they are to small to support their own side and wouldnt generate the money needed by an AFL club. What happens now with Tassie is the way to go. And also no point in starting these new sides so that they can win 5 games in a year but not improve enough to eventually make the finals. Start off a low base and then improve is the way to go. Hope it works because as may as many may hate it they will be staying because they will be worth a lot of money to the AFL long term where as a state like Tassie is worth bugger all.

[SaintPav]

I agree with Plugger. The Tassie market is too small and Hawks and Roos playing there is a subtler form of relocation. Our decision to stop playing games in Tassie was one of the most short sighted and dumbest decisions the club ever made. We are now playing a game in NZ to look for new markets.

It's hard to escape the fact that there are too many clubs in Victoria.

I also agree a bit with BM though on GWS. It will take 50 years for it to work if it works at all.

[BigMart]

Couple of things SP

Why does the AFL need to find 'new markets' is the game struggling??

Consolidation of the brand, before expansion.... The game is not even entrenched in the north, but we think by chucking two unsuccessful Mickey Mouse teams in there, is going to harbour more support...

Most businesses that fold, are ones that are not happy being successful and get greedy

Gotta start somewhere I suppose.... Perhaps looking after a current supporter base is a start.


AFL (and in particular StK) owes Tasmania a huge thank you for enriching the game (club) for a state that is worth bugger all to the game...

It has produced quite a few legends, and has die hard (sustainable) fans. Anyone who thinks the state is irrelevant is nothing more than an arrogant prick with their head up there arse.... Tassie houses 1/2 a Million... Of which 50% would support AFL at a conservative guess....

Anyone who has lived in NSW would know, and I lived in coogee for 3 years..... Knows footy is about as relevant as the storm

Not sure why AFL has to grow to become the biggest sport in the world and take over Rugby (won't happen north of the border) only arrogance and ignorance of Sydney would assume as much.

Tassie not only should have a team.... It deserves one. It would unite a state, it would see a team with the sort of passionate loyal following that foundation clubs already have....
GWS..... What a joke.... How about making Sydney sustainable first.... They have had ten years of amazing success and are a minute away from trouble if the go down the ladder..... At least their competition won't steal too much from them

I hope (know) these ventures are pathetic, which is good for StK but I am Sad my home state has copped it in the arse from arrogant, greedy power trippers that want to leave a legacy.

[plugger66]

Some people can never see the long term. There are people who would still have the VFL which was completely stuffed at the time. There is no way Tassie should have a team. They would get no extra money to the AFL so it wouldnt help clubs like ours. Short term thinking. And Im pretty sure no one deserves side. You have to eventually help the comp. Its easy now to say GWS and GC arent worth it but TV rights suggest they may have paid for themselves.

[joffaboy]

10% of the population of Australia live in Western Sydney.

If you people cant see why it is imperative to have a presence where 2.2 million people live, you really are insular.

GWS is a long term project and will eventually be successful.

[SaintPav]

BM, I'm sympathetic to your views and don't disagree. Growth isn't my mantra but unfortunately, the world changes. Always.

It's about the $$ and the TV rights and of course the bonuses that come from that.

The AFL isn't really worried about people like you or me. It's time frame is 30 years. Ask a 12 year old who Fitzroy was. Poor Fitzroy bastards.

[dragit]

10% of the population of Australia live in Western Sydney.

If you people cant see why it is imperative to have a presence where 2.2 million people live, you really are insular.

GWS is a long term project and will eventually be successful.

No need for insults mate, 25% of the population of Australia live in Sydney, they've now been there 30 years, have won premierships but still have less members than the poorest Victorian clubs.

How long are we talking, 100 years?

[plugger66]

10% of the population of Australia live in Western Sydney.

If you people cant see why it is imperative to have a presence where 2.2 million people live, you really are insular.

GWS is a long term project and will eventually be successful.

No need for insults mate, 25% of the population of Australia live in Sydney, they've now been there 30 years, have won premierships but still have less members than the poorest Victorian clubs.

How long are we talking, 100 years?

I think you will find Sydney have more members and by a fair way than any Sydney NRL club. Sydney people arent used to buying memberships. It isnt their way of doing thing. I think Storm are right up there in memberships.

[joffaboy]

10% of the population of Australia live in Western Sydney.

If you people cant see why it is imperative to have a presence where 2.2 million people live, you really are insular.

GWS is a long term project and will eventually be successful.

No need for insults mate, 25% of the population of Australia live in Sydney, they've now been there 30 years, have won premierships but still have less members than the poorest Victorian clubs.

How long are we talking, 100 years?

Not insulting but FACT. I was born and bred in Sydney and lived there 28 years before moving to Melbourne. I understand both cities sporting culture. Club memberships are not a priority for Sydneysiders. they will watch sport on TV in the same proportion as Melbournites but not attend games in the same numbers.

When I left AFL was still absolutely hated, RL and Rugby was not even mentioned in Melbourne. Not we have a popular Rl team, and a Super Rugby team. Soccer was a periphy sport. Now Melbourne has two A league teams, and Sydney has a brand new western suburbs team that is challenging to win in its first year.

I dont like the fact that as a Saints fan we have had to sacrifice all the quality in the draft, but if AFL is to be relevant in 2050, it needs to be strong in the populated states on the east coast.

It might be unpalatale, but it is a fact.

And for AFL to survive it cannot hope to be popular in just the Southern, less populous states.

[SaintPav]

It's a two edged sword. The current TV rights deal underwrites 9 games a round for 5 years and underwrites the survival of the weaker clubs which includes us.

However, when the operator and regulator own two teams and change the rules as they go along to promote them (eg draft concessions etc) , it's going to p!ss traditional supporters off.

Are TV ratings in NSW for footy any good? I reckon they would be average but I'm just guessing.

[plugger66]

It's a two edged sword. The current TV rights deal underwrites 9 games a round for 5 years and underwrites the survival of the weaker clubs which includes us.

However, when the operator and regulator own two teams and change the rules as they go along to promote them (eg draft concessions etc) , it's going to p!ss traditional supporters off.

Are TV ratings in NSW for footy any good? I reckon they would be average but I'm just guessing.

I think they are terrible at the moment.