Western Bulldogs sniff around for home ground as Ethihad isn't viable

[Greystache]

WESTERN Bulldogs will look at playing home games at grounds other than Etihad Stadium if they cannot maximise gate returns at the indoor venue.
Demon tapes may explain tactics
Crows go in to bat for Bailey

Ballarat's Eureka Stadium and Geelong's Simonds Stadium could host Dogs' home games against low-drawing interstate teams.

The Dogs would prefer to play 11 games a season at Etihad to keep growing support in Melbourne's west, one of the country's fastest growth corridors.

But crowds less than 25,000 at Etihad Stadium put financial strain on clubs, forcing the Dogs to consider more profitable options.

Dogs chief executive Simon Garlick said he had had brief talks with the AFL about looking into Ballarat as an alternative venue, but he was adamant Etihad Stadium was the priority.

"Ballarat is one which potentially might be worth us looking at down the track," he said yesterday.

"We've had a few discussions in passing with them (AFL) about it.

"There is a bit of a synergy there - it is west of Melbourne.

"We want to play as many as we can at Etihad and preferably get to 11 (a season).

"But when we get less than 25,000 - which at the moment happens for us if you are playing a low-drawing interstate team or when our on-field (performance) isn't good - then it impacts us.

"We just don't get the return on the seat that you would get if you were at Simonds or at the MCG.

"For that reason we do run numbers and have a look at alternative venues.

"That's something we will continue to do."

Eureka Stadium so far has failed to secure the Government funding it requires to become a suitable regular-season AFL venue.

It hosts NAB Challenge games between the Bulldogs and North Melbourne, which has lobbied hard to play home games in Ballarat.

Geelong also has pushed for other clubs such as the Bulldogs to use Simonds Stadium.

"We would be quite happy if another club wanted to play a couple of games, but the (Geelong) council owns the ground," Geelong president Colin Carter said.

"The AFL is not supportive as far as I am aware.

"They've got fixturing responsibilities at Etihad and MCG.

"The Doggies, I understand, expressed some interest, but I don't think it went any further."

LINK

[bornadog]

I would really hate for this to happen, although I understand the clubs financial position.

Last season we had the worst average crowds attend our games since 1996 and the AFL overall attendance was down around one million. I think live TV has impacted attendances dramatically, but the AFL won't admit it.

If we continue to play rubbish football, the long term consequences may effect our viability.

Out of Geelong and Ballarat, I think Geelong would be a better venue with some great facilities being built.

[LostDoggy]

It's staggering to think. Any other nation wide sport would be thrilled to get 25000 spectators to their stadium (a-league, BBL, NBL, even NRL!). But our AFL club has to get over that before any money is made.
Maybe they should leave the Docklands if it is that much of a fiscal parasite.

[Ghost Dog]

When do we get to renegotiate a new deal?

[Cyberdoggie]

I hope this I just talk to try and sway a better deal.

I'd hate to see us become the nomad's of the AFL, that only leads to talk about moving interstate or mergers.

We need stability and direction, not Band-Aid fixes that will reveal a bigger scab later on.

[BornInDroopSt'54]

We don't have to still deal with Ian Collins do we? Who owns Etihad Stadium and why do we have to lose money in using it? Surely it is there for the AFL and its clubs not vica versa.

[Greystache]

I hope this I just talk to try and sway a better deal.

I'd hate to see us become the nomad's of the AFL, that only leads to talk about moving interstate or mergers.

We need stability and direction, not Band-Aid fixes that will reveal a bigger scab later on.

I think that's exactly what it is.

We're trying to threaten Etihad to give us a better deal or we'll go elsewhere. It's no co-incident that Melbourne Victory had the choice to play at Etihad or not and therefore were able to make a tidy profit from 15,000 at a game, yet being locked into a non-negotiable contract we can't even break even from 25,000.

The problem is we don't really have a viable alternative option to back up the threat. Ballarat is a pipe dream, and Geelong has been brought up and knocked back before. It's worth making some noise but I don't Etihad management will blink first.

[bornadog]

We don't have to still deal with Ian Collins do we? Who owns Etihad Stadium and why do we have to lose money in using it? Surely it is there for the AFL and its clubs not vica versa.

In answer to your questions:

* Collins retired.

* The stadium is owned privately and they have shareholders who need to make money. They are not a charity.

* The stadium will be owned by the AFL in 2020 (from memory), hopefully we still exist.

As I said in my post above, if we dish out rubbish like last season, we won't attract anyone to our games, no matter where its played.

[AndrewP6]

We don't have to still deal with Ian Collins do we? Who owns Etihad Stadium and why do we have to lose money in using it? Surely it is there for the AFL and its clubs not vica versa.

Once owned by Channel 7, it's currently owned by James Fielding Funds Management. As per the terms when it was built, the AFL assumes ownership in 2025.

[bornadog]

If you look at last years attendances we couldn't even get 25,000 to the Hawks, Carlton, Sydney, North, Saints games in the second half.

There were 40,000 for the Essendon game, but is was their home game, and I think myself and 10 other doggies supporters were there.

[Greystache]

We don't have to still deal with Ian Collins do we? Who owns Etihad Stadium and why do we have to lose money in using it? Surely it is there for the AFL and its clubs not vica versa.

Stadiums Management Limited own Etihad Stadium, they are controlled predominantly by superannuation funds.

Stadium Management Limited has created a highly complex subsidiary structure that prevents aspects of game day revenue being counted under the existing contract between the club and the stadium.

[Ghost Dog]

Lobby their board. Shame them into giving us a better deal. Greedy bunch.

[Eastdog]

Could play some home games at the MCG against the higher drawing clubs. It's a shame we can't get a better deal at Etihad and frustrating we don't make revenue from there.

[Throughandthrough]

Lobby their board. Shame them into giving us a better deal. Greedy bunch.

Its the duty of the Directors of that company to maximise and sustain profits.

But yep this is simply us crying Wolf.

And I hope something better comes out of it for the Dogs.

Silly question, but if we were playing Gold Coast, Power etc how much fixing up would Whitten Oval need?

And would we make more $$ from 10,000 there then 15,000 at Etihad?


Would we make more $$$ playing at WO vs Nallarat?

[bornadog]

Lobby their board. Shame them into giving us a better deal. Greedy bunch.

They are not a charity.

Here is a list of homes games last season at Eithad

Collingwood... 38155
Geelong... 29118
St Kilda... 28971
West Coast... 24977
Hawthorn... 24754
Carlton... 24615
North Melbourne... 21599
Brisbane Lions... 20146
Sydney... 19396
Port Adelaide... 16036

10 home games and only three above 25k - piss poor.

We donot have any bargaining power.