Greatwhiteshark wrote:
Bazza wrote:
jardine wrote: Baz I just see games on Friday night and Saturday arvo as nothing that different. And pokies will never get the green light from government anyway. If it did then that would be huge, but this is the nanny state. It wont happen.
Having 9 teams is not many really (should be only 8 we all know) , six seems extreme when the SANFL are running with 10 clubs.
All in all I just don't see much different other than your proposal to cut 3 traditional clubs and fix the WAFL on just 6 teams. Imagine cutting Perth, Swans and Claremont for example, yet keep the Peel club who has caused most of the damage? . That could actually make things worse I think.
I agree my idea would be hard to get off the ground. I know that.
It needs someone or something quite powerful to make it a reality.
It is extreme, but it would definently get noticed.
Nothing else we do gets the attention of the public.
my idea isn't unrealistic, but its bloody hard I know. I just cant think remotely conservative anymore. We are dying here.
There is absolutley no way local WAFL clubs could susatain all the costs assiciated with playing games interstate every second, week, they can barely afford to get teams from fremantle to bassendean, how on earth are they going to get a squad with support staff to adelaid every second week, when clubs like South are alrady losing $300,000 a year playing in local suburban comp.
You would be talking about adding $100,000's of dollars to running expenses to the clubs that have virtualy no resources as it is, also why would the two AFL clubs want their Host Club players being hauled off to Adelaide every second week and then sent back again, limiting access to their players and all the associated problems with that during an AFL season.
Then on top of that you would have to get SANFL to agree to it, all their clubs are far stronger than ours both financialy and in comp sense , the SANFl attracts double the crowds we get and they run things far better - always have done, so whats in it for them??, knowing that they would have to drag a squad to Perth every week? Really its a question of whats in it for them except more cost, dont forget they just did a big deal with the Adelaide Oval as the new home of footy there, they have their shit together unlike the halfwits here at the WACA.
I don't know what your background is in business or finance but the last thing you do when you business is going down finacially and under increasing burdens and lack of sales or patronage, is go on an expensive expansion programme that would explode costs.
Instead you would look for is efficientcies, and to rationalise and respond to the market forces, the current market forces show fewer and fewer people are interested in WAFL they also show it will be harder and harder to compete and be viable with the host club deal on the field, so embarking on some highly expensive interstate national competition when some clubs can barely pay their power bills is just plain fantasy.
lets get things right and running here in a smart, modern updated, smaller, tighter comp.
Good post Bazza but you did miss a couple of things Jardine has pointed out.
firstly in Jardines idea he said a Commercial TV network could be interested in such an idea. Now of course a TV network is not going to pay what the AFL get but you might get 20 million over 5 years??? A majority of that would easily cover travel costs.
He also mentioned an airline partner which would reduce some of those costs.
Sponsors who at the minute are not interested because of lack exposure may come on board as they will then get greater exposure.
Jardine has floated an idea which has some merit, you may be 100% right that no one will get behind it financially and of course under that proviso it could not work because like you said some of our clubs can't afford to play in the WAFL as it is.
The SANFL is now heading for doom like the WAFL, their golden goose Footy Park is no longer used as an AFL venue so income streams from that is gone. The AFL are almost certain to get the licenses of the two AFL clubs off the SANFL so that income stream will also be reduced.
They also have two clubs now in their comp they don't want there in Adelaide and Port Adelaide.
Whenever we look at a hyypothetical we have to look at it as it could be and not as we see it now.
I am in no way saying you are wrong I am just pointing out that with the right sponsors and a TV network there is no reason such a comp could not go ok?
But also like I said in a previous post the AFL would never allow such a comp to get off the ground.
getting a airline on board as a sponsor to cover all the travel costs - would be a very very big ask given the current state of the airline industry in this country, even then I doubt they would cover all the costs or travel, you need accomodation etc for an entire squad every second week.
the media deal, yep thats a big one, ch 9 and Ch 10 , would they come aboard?h 9 looked into it just for WAFL ( a very restricted coverage ) would cost them 1 million a year and they looked for a sponsor to cover it, and failed to find one. the financial realities of finding a station that would cover a interstate comp would need probably 2 million and yet another sponsor on board to cover that in addition to an airline...very tough...and thats if you could get all the various parties on board..
Don't worry about the SANFL moving from footy park, they have done a deal with the SACA for income flows from the Adelaide Oval as part of the move. They also sold the land for a cashed up bank.
Yep SANFL may merge a couple of teams, they have done it before and will do it again if they need too, they don't stuff around there.
Also just on the sale of licences back to the AFL..
This is another avenue the WAFC should seriously look at.
The West Coast Eagles this year I think got valued at $32.6 Million and the Dockers at $24.3 Million.
Sale of the two would represent a massive bank for WAFL to build on, and you really have to wonder why they remain in the mysterious hands of WAFC? and are not totally independant incorporated private businesses.
Survival scenario/plan for the WAFL in this case would be;
Sell both the WCE and Dockers back to the AFL for their valuations - this would earn approx $57 Million in capital for the WAFC/WAFL.
With the dosposal of the AFL licences this would mean the widing up of the WAFC as it would be defunct under its constition.
Replace it by a board of WAFL Governors with the $57 Million in funds managed under trust as a working capital.
The host club deal would in turn fall away with the departure of the AFL clubs from WAFC management - in anycase the 5 years would be up by then.
At basic and secure bank interest rates and very conservatively @ 5% would produce $2.85 Million each year in income for the WAFL.
Abolish Peel.
revert to a 8 team comp, $2.85 spread equally to the 8 teams would give each club around $485,000.00 each year in operating income.
Further, a stronger and independant WAFL free of WAFC and AFL intereference, would be in a position to re negotiate, player clearances/recruitment and drafting payments, in other words increase them a great deal if AFL clubs want to get their hands on players.
