TOPIC:

Are Ch 2 definatly out for 2015? if not the coverage is curtins.

As far as I know Baz, it's bye bye abc in regards to the televised Wafl. When one pencils in the recent budget cut-backs, reduced staff numbers etcetera and etcetera, it's looking decidedly gloomy on the horizon. The last news we heard is negotiations are still being conducted with silly 7, apparently.

Bazza wrote: Are Ch 2 definatly out for 2015? if not the coverage is curtins.

anchorman wrote: I don't see the connection with AAMI withdrawing their money and the WAFL or WAFC being negligent.
If you read the article in the West...I know most here don't don't read that heap of shit,but if you read it you will find out that they no longer need to spend that sort on money on the WAFL.They have established then selves without the need for the WAFL.
It is a bit like the GIO insurance company when they expanded out to Western Australia, they were handing out money hand over fist to any one who applied.But when they had enough from the sponsorships they with drew it all.
But I guess the conspiracy theory is still alive and growing.....well at least it is here.

A/man when would the WAFC have started negotiating for a new sponsorship deal with AAMI? Last Monday perhaps? Surely you would have expected them to start negotiations many months ago?

anchorman wrote:

Mr AFL wrote:

anchorman wrote: I don't see the connection with AAMI withdrawing their money and the WAFL or WAFC being negligent.
If you read the article in the West...I know most here don't don't read that heap of shit,but if you read it you will find out that they no longer need to spend that sort on money on the WAFL.They have established then selves without the need for the WAFL.
It is a bit like the GIO insurance company when they expanded out to Western Australia, they were handing out money hand over fist to any one who applied.But when they had enough from the sponsorships they with drew it all.
But I guess the conspiracy theory is still alive and growing.....well at least it is here.

Yes Aami have now established themselves over here in the West and now no longer need the exposure or spending as much money on promoting their brand.

However it is a financial hole that the WAFL/WAFC needs to fill with another sponsor or group of sponsors.

Mr AFL, I agree that the WAFC/WAFL have to find another sponsor to help out the competition, but for posters here to blame either the WAFC or WAFL for the withdrawal of AAMI is dumb.
But hey anything to have a whinge about those bastard AFL clubs that keep them alive every year.

Perhaps you need to be a little rational about your defence of the WAFC. Of course it is not the WAFC's fault if AAMI's reasons espoused in the media is correct. However, one can definitely hold the WAFC to account for what apparently is a very tardy and slipshod approach to finding a replacement sponsor.

swan42 wrote:

anchorman wrote: I don't see the connection with AAMI withdrawing their money and the WAFL or WAFC being negligent.
If you read the article in the West...I know most here don't don't read that heap of shit,but if you read it you will find out that they no longer need to spend that sort on money on the WAFL.They have established then selves without the need for the WAFL.
It is a bit like the GIO insurance company when they expanded out to Western Australia, they were handing out money hand over fist to any one who applied.But when they had enough from the sponsorships they with drew it all.
But I guess the conspiracy theory is still alive and growing.....well at least it is here.

A/man when would the WAFC have started negotiating for a new sponsorship deal with AAMI? Last Monday perhaps? Surely you would have expected them to start negotiations many months ago?

Who said they only started negotiations last Monday? Do you have written proof?

Barney wrote:

swan42 wrote:

anchorman wrote: I don't see the connection with AAMI withdrawing their money and the WAFL or WAFC being negligent.
If you read the article in the West...I know most here don't don't read that heap of shit,but if you read it you will find out that they no longer need to spend that sort on money on the WAFL.They have established then selves without the need for the WAFL.
It is a bit like the GIO insurance company when they expanded out to Western Australia, they were handing out money hand over fist to any one who applied.But when they had enough from the sponsorships they with drew it all.
But I guess the conspiracy theory is still alive and growing.....well at least it is here.

A/man when would the WAFC have started negotiating for a new sponsorship deal with AAMI? Last Monday perhaps? Surely you would have expected them to start negotiations many months ago?

Who said they only started negotiations last Monday? Do you have written proof?

Barney do you have proof that they didn't? The corollary to that question is have they got another sponsor for the 2015 season?

swan42 wrote: Barney do you have proof that they didn't?

I wasn't the person who made the original statement. So do you have anything in writing showning they only started negotiations with AAMI last Monday. Or did you just make a biased assumption?

Barney wrote:

swan42 wrote: Barney do you have proof that they didn't?

I wasn't the person who made the original statement. So do you have anything in writing showning they only started negotiations with AAMI last Monday. Or did you just make a biased assumption?

Barney my summation of the situation was based on sound logical thinking and yours is based on what?

swan42 wrote:

Barney wrote:

swan42 wrote: Barney do you have proof that they didn't?

I wasn't the person who made the original statement. So do you have anything in writing showning they only started negotiations with AAMI last Monday. Or did you just make a biased assumption?

Barney my summation of the situation was based on sound logical thinking and yours is based on what?

My judgement is based on reading many of your previous posts and noticing how bias, lacking in said logic and distant from the truth they usually are.

swan42 wrote:

Barney wrote:

swan42 wrote: Barney do you have proof that they didn't?

I wasn't the person who made the original statement. So do you have anything in writing showning they only started negotiations with AAMI last Monday. Or did you just make a biased assumption?

Barney my summation of the situation was based on sound logical thinking and yours is based on what?

Barney, I'll translate swan's statement. What he means is "based on my opinion"