TOPIC:

I am of the knowledge that the WAFL Owns the AFL Licence for WCE and FFC.
So why would the revenue totally dry UP.
What is needed is to up the rent to USE the licences form both clubs?????

Swans75 wrote: I am of the knowledge that the WAFL Owns the AFL Licence for WCE and FFC.
So why would the revenue totally dry UP.
What is needed is to up the rent to USE the licences form both clubs?????

Correct the WAFC owns the licences for WC and Freo and receives substantial annual income from the profits made by the two AFL clubs.

The issue is that the WAFC are the stadium managers of Subi Oval and generate another $11m each year above the dividends paid by WC and Freo. This extra income is derived through facility hire from football, concerts and other events, stadium naming rights and sublease agreements. The new stadium will be managed by Venues Live with the profits being taken by them rather than the WAFC meaning this substantial funding for all levels of football will not exist moving forward.

Based on the current set up for dividend payments from WC and Freo to the WAFC, the two clubs would need to make a combined increased profit of $20m pa to offset the loss of future revenue from the WAFC management arrangement at Subi Oval. Given that WC is the most profitable club in the AFL at ~$5m pa it is fair to presume that the new stadium will not generate 300% extra profit for WC and Freo.

Freo couldn't fill a 43,000 seat stadium last year and both clubs had corporate boxes available. Moving to a stadium that is 50% bigger will not even generate 50% extra profit let alone the required 300% to offset the WAFCs loss of stadium management income.

Tiger Tales wrote:

Swans75 wrote: I am of the knowledge that the WAFL Owns the AFL Licence for WCE and FFC.
So why would the revenue totally dry UP.
What is needed is to up the rent to USE the licences form both clubs?????

Correct the WAFC owns the licences for WC and Freo and receives substantial annual income from the profits made by the two AFL clubs.

The issue is that the WAFC are the stadium managers of Subi Oval and generate another $11m each year above the dividends paid by WC and Freo. This extra income is derived through facility hire from football, concerts and other events, stadium naming rights and sublease agreements. The new stadium will be managed by Venues Live with the profits being taken by them rather than the WAFC meaning this substantial funding for all levels of football will not exist moving forward.

Based on the current set up for dividend payments from WC and Freo to the WAFC, the two clubs would need to make a combined increased profit of $20m pa to offset the loss of future revenue from the WAFC management arrangement at Subi Oval. Given that WC is the most profitable club in the AFL at ~$5m pa it is fair to presume that the new stadium will not generate 300% extra profit for WC and Freo.

Freo couldn't fill a 43,000 seat stadium last year and both clubs had corporate boxes available. Moving to a stadium that is 50% bigger will not even generate 50% extra profit let alone the required 300% to offset the WAFCs loss of stadium management income.

More pertinent to ask and comment about is how incompetent were the WAFC in attempting to get the stadium rights of the new stadium? For instance, had they been told that they would not be appointed the new stadium managers? How much money did they subsequently spend on what was always going to be a failed bid?

With respect to your comments about Freo not filling Subiaco Oval last year. I don't recall too many games at Subiaco Oval that were at capacity. For anyone who had been to Subiaco Oval in recent years it is not surprising that there were fewer people going to SUbiaco Oval given its condition.

Swan42, yep Subi is basically never at capacity, maybe with finals but home and away its a few grands short or more all the time..

and your right about the WAFC competence, to me their entire history has been of one of a walk up start in other words, give up something for nothing and then we will do what we can to rip as much from the deal as well can.

Bazza wrote: Swan42, yep Subi is basically never at capacity, maybe with finals but home and away its a few grands short or more all the time..

and your right about the WAFC competence, to me their entire history has been of one of a walk up start in other words, give up something for nothing and then we will do what we can to rip as much from the deal as well can.

Bazza good to see that we agree on something! One only has to go back to Gary Walton who was so embarrassed by his views and opinions about WA footy that he didn't want his unexpurgated comments to be viewed on this forum.

I don't see why football should be given the rights to manage the new stadium and profit from concerts and other sporting events. But they should have full control over the running of the stadium on match days so they can maximize their profits. There should be no excuses for poor crowds in the new stadium as I expect every seat to be a good seat in a state of the art new stadium. Sort it out like grown men.