Apple Isle Showdown: Tas Govt threatens to end Hawks, North deals if no plan for 19th side

[Canberra Pear]

Wet Toast 106k members. Optus Oval has a capacity of 60k

Does that make you think that maybe 106 doesn't fit into 60?

Does that make you think that maybe a chunk of that 106k, say 46k might like to get into the football in Perth at some stage?

Maybe they don't like Freo as its the enemy of Perth. So maybe a team actually named Perth might attract some attention & members???

Anyway, just a thought.

If they were desperate for some live footy, to the point they're willing to jump off the Eagles, there are 20k free seats every fortnight at Freo games.

I've never been to Perth so I can't speak with any authority on any anti-Fremantle sentiment, but I assumed it was just an area of Perth. People haven't been too put off with suburban names in Melbourne. Port Adelaide is similar to Fremantle in a geographic comparison and they're only a few thousand members behind the Crows.

I say this with absolutely no bias in wanting the 20th team in Canberra

 

[kranger]

‘it could be 10 home games. Hawks and Roos get 10 each in Melbourne not 7

Each club get 11 home games and 11 away games. Hawks and Roos sell 4 each to Tasmania. How do they get 10? Is it some sort of deal with other Melbourne clubs to boost their away crowd?

 

[madmug]

If they were desperate for some live footy, to the point they're willing to jump off the Eagles, there are 20k free seats every fortnight at Freo games.

I've never been to Perth so I can't speak with any authority on any anti-Fremantle sentiment, but I assumed it was just an area of Perth. People haven't been too put off with suburban names in Melbourne. Port Adelaide is similar to Fremantle in a geographic comparison and they're only a few thousand members behind the Crows.

I say this with absolutely no bias in wanting the 20th team in Canberra

Yes, I wrote that as a bit tongue in cheek. However I think theirs a grain of truth.
Maybe some Freo members don't really like Freo, but hate WCE. Maybe they get membership to get a seat when they feel like going to watch some other teams?? Who knows.
A team called 'Perth' might bridge the gap & encourage more to go to games & use that brilliant stadium a bit more.

 

[The_Wookie]

Each club get 11 home games and 11 away games. Hawks and Roos sell 4 each to Tasmania. How do they get 10? Is it some sort of deal with other Melbourne clubs to boost their away crowd?

For H&A games Hawks sell 4, Roos sell 3.

 

[Pessimistic]

Each club get 11 home games and 11 away games. Hawks and Roos sell 4 each to Tasmania. How do they get 10? Is it some sort of deal with other Melbourne clubs to boost their away crowd?

‘if the comp goes to 19 or 20 teams, the temptation will be to go to 19 or 20 rounds, which would be 10 home games each. It’s something which seems to be not factored.

‘Thinking about tassie, even if the intention is to get a tassie team, if the AFL appears to be obstructive, they will stir up negative emotions and ironically boost the support for a team in the F_U sense. Would be a great marketing strategy.

 

[fargothegreat]

‘if the comp goes to 19 or 20 teams, the temptation will be to go to 19 or 20 rounds, which would be 10 home games each. It’s something which seems to be not factored.

‘Thinking about tassie, even if the intention is to get a tassie team, if the AFL appears to be obstructive, they will stir up negative emotions and ironically boost the support for a team in the F_U sense. Would be a great marketing strategy.

I very much doubt we'd bring in a new team and have less games. It doesn't make sense to reduce the number of games and receive less broadcast dollars.

 

[kranger]

‘if the comp goes to 19 or 20 teams, the temptation will be to go to 19 or 20 rounds, which would be 10 home games each. It’s something which seems to be not factored.

Oh, I see what you mean now. I thought you were meaning at present Hawks and Roos get 10 home games in Melbourne, hence my confusion.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Yes, I wrote that as a bit tongue in cheek. However I think theirs a grain of truth.
Maybe some Freo members don't really like Freo, but hate WCE. Maybe they get membership to get a seat when they feel like going to watch some other teams?? Who knows.
A team called 'Perth' might bridge the gap & encourage more to go to games & use that brilliant stadium a bit more.

I do like the name Perth. IMO that should have been West Coast's name in the first place.

I think a third Perth team would eventually be a decently successful club, but not the instant success everyone thinks. Adelaide is footy-crazy and it took Port quite a while to get into a position of strength in the AFL. It took Freo nearly a decade to average 30k crowds.

WA3 would eventually be success in 30+ years, but if with that commitment, why not plant a flag in a new market

 

[Pessimistic]

I very much doubt we'd bring in a new team and have less games. It doesn't make sense to reduce the number of games and receive less broadcast dollars.

It would be more games in fact (with 20 teams)

 

[Walshawk]

It would be more games in fact (with 20 teams)

19th team adds 11 games.

 

[Engimal v3]

Gutwein was suggesting he'd have the report by early this week, but haven't seen anything leak yet. Hopefully something comes out this week.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Gutwein was suggesting he'd have the report by early this week, but haven't seen anything leak yet. Hopefully something comes out this week.

He said he would have it by Wednesday and release it for Tasmanian's to see soon after.

 

[Hawkk]

Would be one of the biggest acts of betrayal ever if north or hawthorn voted against it considering the money they have made down here

Coming from a St Kilda fan, the largest beneficiary of AFL financial aid of all clubs, is a tad rich...

 

[Liam Boy]

I do like the name Perth. IMO that should have been West Coast's name in the first place.

I think a third Perth team would eventually be a decently successful club, but not the instant success everyone thinks. Adelaide is footy-crazy and it took Port quite a while to get into a position of strength in the AFL. It took Freo nearly a decade to average 30k crowds.

WA3 would eventually be success in 30+ years, but if with that commitment, why not plant a flag in a new market

They couldn't just introduce a new club called Perth without stepping on the Perth Demons, which is why West Coast are called that in the first place. The AFL basically just got lucky that the old Adelaide and Fremantle clubs disbanded and their names were available.

 

[madmug]

They couldn't just introduce a new club called Perth without stepping on the Perth Demons, which is why West Coast are called that in the first place. The AFL basically just got lucky that the old Adelaide and Fremantle clubs disbanded and their names were available.

Why?

The name 'Perth' isn't owned. Certainly not by the Perth Demons. Otherwise we wouldn't have the Perth Wildcats.

Perth Sharks, or whatever, wouldn't clash with the Demons or any other club.

 

[Pessimistic]

19th team adds 11 games.

198 now. I don’t think play everyone once at 18 games - 9 home would be an option, but if went to 20 teams 20 games that’s 200. But of course some 70-80 of those games would be involving recent expansion teams so the games left not involving expansion teams (120-130) would be well down on traditional 16x11=176 games in the 16 team competition

so the biggest argument against having more expansion teams is the ones we have already

it should have been tassie and one of Gold Coast or GWS last time, with the other team in the next round

 

[Verdun]

Coming from a St Kilda fan, the largest beneficiary of AFL financial aid of all clubs, is a tad rich...

Hypocrite the Hawks would have gone broke without the millions they have leeched out of Tasmania.

 

[The_Wookie]

Hypocrite the Hawks would have gone broke without the millions they have leeched out of Tasmania.

which is ironic given the Saints went to Tasmania at the same time the Hawks did, but bailed.


Tasmania

A goldmine for Hawthorn, while St Kilda turned its back on Launceston.

St Kilda and the Hawks both began their Launceston experiments in 2001; each played home games – predominantly against the non-Victorian clubs – at Aurora Stadium. The Saints left Launceston in 2006, shortly after the notorious “Sirengate” game in which the AFL handed the premiership points to Fremantle days after the game.

St Kilda didn't enjoy Launceston, believing that it didn't perform well at the ground, and vacated. St Kilda was then making healthy profits with a lean business operation and had been close to the flag in 2004-05.

Then St Kilda president Rod Butterss acknowledges that “as a club we probably didn't embrace the move”. The decision to leave was largely football-based, not financially driven. “The football department struggled to embrace it,” said Butterss, whose once-fraternal relationship with senior coach Grant Thomas had soured by this stage.

No sooner had the Saints left Launceston, than the Hawks pounced. They would turn the stadium into a gold mine, worth several hundred thousand dollars a game, receiving a hefty sponsorship from the Tasmanian government. Jeff Kennett renegotiated the deal, in defiance of the AFL's wish to make Tassie the second (seven-game) home of North Melbourne, in late 2010.

Today, the Hawks have four home games in Launceston, in an arrangement that earns them close to $3.5 million. Moreover, the impact is far greater when considering the spin-offs, and the fact that they've had the market to themselves (until North landed two games in Hobart).

Hawthorn and St Kilda: different sides of the equalisation debate

A few key decisions explain Hawthorn's emergence as one of the AFL's most powerful clubs while St Kilda, despite getting a lot right, is rubbing shoulders with the stragglers.

www.watoday.com.au

 

[Verdun]

which is ironic given the Saints went to Tasmania at the same time the Hawks did, but bailed.


Tasmania

A goldmine for Hawthorn, while St Kilda turned its back on Launceston.

St Kilda and the Hawks both began their Launceston experiments in 2001; each played home games – predominantly against the non-Victorian clubs – at Aurora Stadium. The Saints left Launceston in 2006, shortly after the notorious “Sirengate” game in which the AFL handed the premiership points to Fremantle days after the game.

St Kilda didn't enjoy Launceston, believing that it didn't perform well at the ground, and vacated. St Kilda was then making healthy profits with a lean business operation and had been close to the flag in 2004-05.

Then St Kilda president Rod Butterss acknowledges that “as a club we probably didn't embrace the move”. The decision to leave was largely football-based, not financially driven. “The football department struggled to embrace it,” said Butterss, whose once-fraternal relationship with senior coach Grant Thomas had soured by this stage.

No sooner had the Saints left Launceston, than the Hawks pounced. They would turn the stadium into a gold mine, worth several hundred thousand dollars a game, receiving a hefty sponsorship from the Tasmanian government. Jeff Kennett renegotiated the deal, in defiance of the AFL's wish to make Tassie the second (seven-game) home of North Melbourne, in late 2010.

Today, the Hawks have four home games in Launceston, in an arrangement that earns them close to $3.5 million. Moreover, the impact is far greater when considering the spin-offs, and the fact that they've had the market to themselves (until North landed two games in Hobart).

Hawthorn and St Kilda: different sides of the equalisation debate

A few key decisions explain Hawthorn's emergence as one of the AFL's most powerful clubs while St Kilda, despite getting a lot right, is rubbing shoulders with the stragglers.

www.watoday.com.au

Your righteousness is embarassing wokie

This thread is titled apple-isle-showdown-tas-govt-threatens-to-end-hawks-north-deals-if-no-plan-for-19th-side.

Why is it ironical?

 

[The_Wookie]

Your righteousness is embarassing wokie

This thread is titled apple-isle-showdown-tas-govt-threatens-to-end-hawks-north-deals-if-no-plan-for-19th-side.

Why is it ironical?

wait I was being righteous here? and your hypocritical take on Hawthorns leeching - which your club started too - is what exactly?

Your complaint about Hawthorn was ironic given your clubs position was somewhat different when the tassie adventure started, and your club is leeching off the game in general now.

 

[Verdun]

wait I was being righteous here? and your hypocritical take on Hawthorns leeching - which your club started too - is what exactly?

Your complaint about Hawthorn was ironic given your clubs position was somewhat different when the tassie adventure started, and your club is leeching off the game in general now.

Stick to the topic of the thread ya hypocrite:

apple-isle-showdown-tas-govt-threatens-to-end-hawks-north-deals-if-no-plan-for-19th-side

My complaint is justified yours is just a self indulgent rant.


Curious - Why did you feel the need to reply to my post, nothing to do with you.

Your posts on this forum are self indulgent and add absolutely nothin

 

[Hawkk]

Hypocrite the Hawks would have gone broke without the millions they have leeched out of Tasmania.

Not quite.

A $60m NTA and 25 years of year on year profit would suggest otherwise

You will always have Seaford

 

[Hawkk]

which is ironic given the Saints went to Tasmania at the same time the Hawks did, but bailed.


Tasmania

A goldmine for Hawthorn, while St Kilda turned its back on Launceston.

St Kilda and the Hawks both began their Launceston experiments in 2001; each played home games – predominantly against the non-Victorian clubs – at Aurora Stadium. The Saints left Launceston in 2006, shortly after the notorious “Sirengate” game in which the AFL handed the premiership points to Fremantle days after the game.

St Kilda didn't enjoy Launceston, believing that it didn't perform well at the ground, and vacated. St Kilda was then making healthy profits with a lean business operation and had been close to the flag in 2004-05.

Then St Kilda president Rod Butterss acknowledges that “as a club we probably didn't embrace the move”. The decision to leave was largely football-based, not financially driven. “The football department struggled to embrace it,” said Butterss, whose once-fraternal relationship with senior coach Grant Thomas had soured by this stage.

No sooner had the Saints left Launceston, than the Hawks pounced. They would turn the stadium into a gold mine, worth several hundred thousand dollars a game, receiving a hefty sponsorship from the Tasmanian government. Jeff Kennett renegotiated the deal, in defiance of the AFL's wish to make Tassie the second (seven-game) home of North Melbourne, in late 2010.

Today, the Hawks have four home games in Launceston, in an arrangement that earns them close to $3.5 million. Moreover, the impact is far greater when considering the spin-offs, and the fact that they've had the market to themselves (until North landed two games in Hobart).

Hawthorn and St Kilda: different sides of the equalisation debate

A few key decisions explain Hawthorn's emergence as one of the AFL's most powerful clubs while St Kilda, despite getting a lot right, is rubbing shoulders with the stragglers.

www.watoday.com.au

The Saints went to Tasmania 2 years after Hawthorn. They followed Hawthorn to Waverley Park and NZ too.

Always the follower and never the leader, that’s why they are a minnow whilst Hawthorn is financial powerhouse (who ironically keeps the Saints solvent at the bequest of the AFL) I guess?

 

[kranger]

I would have to wonder, why would Tasmania not be able to sustain an AFL team, like many suggest?

In the Big Bash League, despite their much smaller population than the mainland states, Tasmania still has one team the same as WA, SA and QLD. And VIC and NSW only have 2 teams.

The crowds at the Tasmanian BBL games on average are smaller than the mainland states, but they aren’t to be scoffed at when you consider the population difference.

Since VIC has 10 AFL teams, why not give Tasmania one.

 

[The_Wookie]

Stick to the topic of the thread ya hypocrite:

apple-isle-showdown-tas-govt-threatens-to-end-hawks-north-deals-if-no-plan-for-19th-side

My complaint is justified yours is just a self indulgent rant.

As far as Im concerned your complaint wasnt justified either. Hawthorn arent leeching so much as having had money thrown at them. Its hardly their fault for taking 4m a year from a government offering it.

Curious - Why did you feel the need to reply to my post, nothing to do with you.

because i can, if you want to have private conversations then there are other ways to accomplish that.

Your posts on this forum are self indulgent and add absolutely nothin

Sure. You should feel free to report such offensive posts to the moderating team.