You have a bad stadium deal when...

[Life Long Saint]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/a ... 6813277202
The article talks about the AFL helping us search for a CEO but this line about revenue caught my attention...

In 2011 the Saints worked out they would be $2.3 million dollars better off if the MCG was their permanent home ground.
This year they made as much money from their Wellington game as they did from eight Etihad Stadium games.

[Dis Believer]

That's disgraceful. As the AFL (all the clubs as a collective) will eventually own the stadium, that means we are subsidising everyone elses purchase !!!

[gringo]

Matt Finnis was saying that the poorer clubs also subsidise the Collingwoods by taking lesser fixtures. There isn't a lot of equity in the AFL. It creates a heap of teams that play ham strung financially. Until they actually do something we will continue to struggle. Collingwood get $1000 000s of dollars in interest from government money while we pay huge interest on our debt in the meantime. the poor clubs should unionise and call the AFLs bluff until we get some more parity in income streams.

[joffaboy]

the poor clubs should unionise and call the AFLs bluff until we get some more parity in income streams.

Could get some officials from the CFMEU soon. Could also get bikies to beat up any CEO's of Presidents from rival clubs we dont like.

[saintspremiers]

Piss off Dimwit. You should not allow this to happen.

We should be playing 4 games a year at Welly for the ca$h.

[gringo]

the poor clubs should unionise and call the AFLs bluff until we get some more parity in income streams.

Could get some officials from the CFMEU soon. Could also get bikies to beat up any CEO's of Presidents from rival clubs we dont like.

Eddie does it so why not us? Corporate stand over men are winning not us so we need to do something.

[Jacks Back]

You have a bad stadium deal when...

You have to pay them to play there!

[bobmurray]

You have a bad stadium deal when...

You have to pay them to play there!

And the effect is worse when we are back at the bottom part of the ladder, members drop off, supporters drop off, commercial interest wanes and on it goes.

[Megamaguire]

The more I think about the american system (football that is) of all teams putting their combined gate receipts into one almighty total and then dividing it by the number of teams in the competition the more it appeals. If implemented here it would mean all afl clubs receive exactly the same ammount of cash ( from gate receipts that is). The reason they do it that way is because they want all participating clubs to be financially stable and healthy regarding revenue streams. The result is that all clubs are more viable and no club gains financial advantage at the expense of others at the gate.
Even if this strategy is implemented the big rollers (Colliew; Hawthorn etc. ) will still make more dollars by other means. This would however close the gap and bring the competition closer to a level playing field. Don't get upset Eddie sometimes it is in the interests of everyone to have the least powerful given a bit of assistance too.

Also heard on the grapevine that the afl are looking at taxing the high rolling clubs for every dollar spent in their football depts. over an afl approved limit. They must know there is a problem looming to even countenance such a thought.
Well they (afl) are at least recognising now that there is a problem - we have to believe and be positive that they will in fact deliver but please make it soon!

To me it's a no brainer. Everyone wins especially the poorer clubs, the rich clubs with the advantage will have a bit less of an advantage derived from simply having more dollars but crowds overall will probably increase and they can take some solace in that. Ah, the gate-receipts ! and the advertising dollars ! There will probably be even more dollars rolling into this code but less will be siphoned off to the comfortably rich amongst us to make them even more comfortably rich or something like that.
If it was Collingwood or Hawthorn being screwed @ the Dome I think they would have more means with which to cope with it and yes it wouldn't be right (looking at it impartially) having them effectively pay for a slice of property that the rest of the clubs could enjoy when the afl takes full ownership of the stadium. Unfortunately it is the Melbourne clubs with the least financial stability that are funding this afl arrangement.

AFL TO BUY OUT THE STADIUM DEAL AHEAD OF TIME ! WHOO HOO!!!!

GO SAINTS!

[gringo]

The more I think about the american system (football that is) of all teams putting their combined gate receipts into one almighty total and then dividing it by the number of teams in the competition the more it appeals. If implemented here it would mean all afl clubs receive exactly the same ammount of cash ( from gate receipts that is). The reason they do it that way is because they want all participating clubs to be financially stable and healthy regarding revenue streams. The result is that all clubs are more viable and no club gains financial advantage at the expense of others at the gate.
Even if this strategy is implemented the big rollers (Colliew; Hawthorn etc. ) will still make more dollars by other means. This would however close the gap and bring the competition closer to a level playing field. Don't get upset Eddie sometimes it is in the interests of everyone to have the least powerful given a bit of assistance too.

Also heard on the grapevine that the afl are looking at taxing the high rolling clubs for every dollar spent in their football depts. over an afl approved limit. They must know there is a problem looming to even countenance such a thought.
Well they (afl) are at least recognising now that there is a problem - we have to believe and be positive that they will in fact deliver but please make it soon!

To me it's a no brainer. Everyone wins especially the poorer clubs, the rich clubs with the advantage will have a bit less of an advantage derived from simply having more dollars but crowds overall will probably increase and they can take some solace in that. Ah, the gate-receipts ! and the advertising dollars ! There will probably be even more dollars rolling into this code but less will be siphoned off to the comfortably rich amongst us to make them even more comfortably rich or something like that.
If it was Collingwood or Hawthorn being screwed @ the Dome I think they would have more means with which to cope with it and yes it wouldn't be right (looking at it impartially) having them effectively pay for a slice of property that the rest of the clubs could enjoy when the afl takes full ownership of the stadium. Unfortunately it is the Melbourne clubs with the least financial stability that are funding this afl arrangement.

AFL TO BUY OUT THE STADIUM DEAL AHEAD OF TIME ! WHOO HOO!!!!

GO SAINTS!

But Eddie said it will make all teams like Mc donalds ? WTF does that mean? That we will all be exactly the same as collingwood or build s*** in places where people don't want them like the Gold Coast or Western Sydney.

[plugger66]

The more I think about the american system (football that is) of all teams putting their combined gate receipts into one almighty total and then dividing it by the number of teams in the competition the more it appeals. If implemented here it would mean all afl clubs receive exactly the same ammount of cash ( from gate receipts that is). The reason they do it that way is because they want all participating clubs to be financially stable and healthy regarding revenue streams. The result is that all clubs are more viable and no club gains financial advantage at the expense of others at the gate.
Even if this strategy is implemented the big rollers (Colliew; Hawthorn etc. ) will still make more dollars by other means. This would however close the gap and bring the competition closer to a level playing field. Don't get upset Eddie sometimes it is in the interests of everyone to have the least powerful given a bit of assistance too.

Also heard on the grapevine that the afl are looking at taxing the high rolling clubs for every dollar spent in their football depts. over an afl approved limit. They must know there is a problem looming to even countenance such a thought.
Well they (afl) are at least recognising now that there is a problem - we have to believe and be positive that they will in fact deliver but please make it soon!

To me it's a no brainer. Everyone wins especially the poorer clubs, the rich clubs with the advantage will have a bit less of an advantage derived from simply having more dollars but crowds overall will probably increase and they can take some solace in that. Ah, the gate-receipts ! and the advertising dollars ! There will probably be even more dollars rolling into this code but less will be siphoned off to the comfortably rich amongst us to make them even more comfortably rich or something like that.
If it was Collingwood or Hawthorn being screwed @ the Dome I think they would have more means with which to cope with it and yes it wouldn't be right (looking at it impartially) having them effectively pay for a slice of property that the rest of the clubs could enjoy when the afl takes full ownership of the stadium. Unfortunately it is the Melbourne clubs with the least financial stability that are funding this afl arrangement.

AFL TO BUY OUT THE STADIUM DEAL AHEAD OF TIME ! WHOO HOO!!!!

You do realise gate receipts are getting less and less with more members now. I still say running the club properly is the best option. North made a heap of money this year and didnt even make the finals. WB lost bugger all. yes we want to look at issues without blaming the club but I think they are the real problem. Remember we get nearlly 3 million a year because of poor stadium deals.

GO SAINTS!

[Captain Impossible]

I've read about how bad this deal is for years. When does it end? Surely it can be re-negotiated?

[bergholt]

Mega, I wouldn't love the NFL too much:

http://m.washingtonpost.com/sports/reds ... story.html

[samuraisaint]

This is exactly what I have posted in another forum. But there were people on this site posting that I didn't know what I was talking about and that the AFL were doing such a great job in subsidising us. What these posters missed was my point; as a foundation member of the VFA/VFL/AFL, and the only club south of the yarra we should be demanding better, because we DESERVE better.

[samuraisaint]

Piss off Dimwit. You should not allow this to happen.

We should be playing 4 games a year at Welly for the ca$h.

I think this will probably end up happening SP.

[bergholt]

What these posters missed was my point; as a foundation member of the VFA/VFL/AFL, and the only club south of the yarra we should be demanding better, because we DESERVE better.

That makes no sense. Fitzroy were a "foundation member". They'd won 8 flags before we won 1.

There's no "deserve" in this game. We're still a strong brand, and that's what the AFL should see. Stronger than Brissie or GWS or GC, probably Port, Freo, North or the Bulldogs. You don't just waste a long-established brand by destroying it.

[Megamaguire]

Mega, I wouldn't love the NFL too much:

http://m.washingtonpost.com/sports/reds ... story.html

Berg,
my love is somewhat limited to the financial guarantees to the off-field stability of each club rather than the scandals and corruption played out by some of the players over there. Thanks for the article but I don't confess to know that much about their football code. I'm more in the same camp as Peter Gordon (from the Bulldogs).
and his concern for the financial security of the Melbourne afl teams being taken for a ride @ the Dome.
The framework of the NFL system or the business model if you like is worthy of consideration here as Demetriou and co know. There was an afl fact-finding mission recently to the U.S. to investigate how they support each individual club in their comp.
I heard Peter Gordon talking about this on the KB show and it makes a lot of sense to me.

Sportspeople behaving like underbelly folk is real boring entertainment and ultimately depressing in my book. However like the concept of the draft that came from the U.S. I believe the equalisation initiative
(of team finances) is a very good one.
GO SAINTS!

[Cairnsman]

I've read about how bad this deal is for years. When does it end? Surely it can be re-negotiated?

Hi Captain impossible! Good to see a new face on the site although looking at your registration date it would seem you've been around for a while. Do you only come to the site to read only or have you just not been around for a while?

To answer your question I too agree it would be great to see a new deal re-negotiated. It would also be great to hear what the new president thinks.

[Wrote for Luck]

Piss off Dimwit. You should not allow this to happen.

We should be playing 4 games a year at Welly for the ca$h.

I think this will probably end up happening SP.

makes me sick to think how much Geelong rakes in. all that revenue we have been pumping into the Dome should have gone into our own 40,000 seater. instead yes indeed Welly makes sense.

[samuraisaint]

What these posters missed was my point; as a foundation member of the VFA/VFL/AFL, and the only club south of the yarra we should be demanding better, because we DESERVE better.

That makes no sense. Fitzroy were a "foundation member". They'd won 8 flags before we won 1.

There's no "deserve" in this game. We're still a strong brand, and that's what the AFL should see. Stronger than Brissie or GWS or GC, probably Port, Freo, North or the Bulldogs. You don't just waste a long-established brand by destroying it.

I think we arguing at cross purposes here. We are definitely a strong brand. In the outer southern suburbs where I live, work and play, St Kilda is extremely well supported. My point is the AFL need to look after us otherwise they will lose a lot of punters. There is a million people in our catchment zone.
The club built this base therefore we 'deserve' to be looked after. Remember when I talk about us, I am talking about ordinary supporters, kids wearing the jumper at Auskick, rank and file members, and sponsors who have stuck by the club through thin and thin - and in that context I believe that WE deserve a little better than johnny come latelies, which is more or less exactly what you said.

[Megamaguire]

Piss off Dimwit. You should not allow this to happen.

We should be playing 4 games a year at Welly for the ca$h.

I think this will probably end up happening SP.

makes me sick to think how much Geelong rakes in. all that revenue we have been pumping into the Dome should have gone into our own 40,000 seater. instead yes indeed Welly makes sense.

Yes Millarsaint Geelong do indeed have a cosy set-up down there. I did notice they have I think a significantly higher debt than oursaintlyselves but having our own stadium wow what a luxury - we would have better negotiating power in dealings with the afl @ least.
Hopefully the new admin and board can get some creative thinking happening and get somelong-term planning into the planning processes as well as the vitally important short term planning. A big ask but our club needs to get smarter with the financials I believe.

GO SAINTS!

[philtee]

Bizarre that we are playing at Geelong on Feb 19 in the NAB Challenge, when we're not even playing the Cats.
I'm tempted to ask how much the game is contributing to the Cats' income, but then - it's probably
financially better for the Saints than playing at Docklands.

[saintspremiers]

Bizarre that we are playing at Geelong on Feb 19 in the NAB Challenge, when we're not even playing the Cats.
I'm tempted to ask how much the game is contributing to the Cats' income, but then - it's probably
financially better for the Saints than playing at Docklands.

It's stupid. Play a praccy at Poncess Park

[plugger66]

Bizarre that we are playing at Geelong on Feb 19 in the NAB Challenge, when we're not even playing the Cats.
I'm tempted to ask how much the game is contributing to the Cats' income, but then - it's probably
financially better for the Saints than playing at Docklands.

It's stupid. Play a praccy at Poncess Park

Then you would say Geekong. Doubt geelong get a cent out of the game. Its a practice match and they just need locations. Doesnt seem as bizarre as some on here wanting real home games down there.

[saintbrat]

all is not rosy at the excellant Adelaide oval-
margins are reduced
http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-pre ... 6913047587