I reckon we should play those Games against GWS GC and Port and Freo at skilled.
We play the ground well not far at all to travel and we would make cash lets do it!
I tend to agree with BAD.
We are in an incredibly weak position. We know it, Stadium Management know it and the AFL knows it.
I just hope that when the stadium is handed over for $1.00 in 2025, and it is eventually sold the clubs whose supporters subsidised its purchase extremely heavily since it was built enjoy the profits.
That ain't gonna happen though.
First bit of negative preseason news. Hopefully the club can sort something out and continue to turn us around financially.
Rocket Science: the epitaph for the Beveridge era - whenever it ends - reading 'Here lies a team that could beat anyone on its day, but seldom did when it mattered most'. 15/7/2023
Is there like a crowd figure threshold we have to reach in order to make a profit? Even if we are below that threshold why don't we still make a bit of profit still.
Whatever way you look it stinks that a team in the same comp can get less attendees at their venue and make more money.
Good luck to them but really it stinks to high heaven.
Don't piss off old people
The older we get the less "LIFE IN PRISON" is a deterrent...
I emailed Cam Rose a Few years back with a proposal of playing games at WO. He said each venue has to be approved by the league and thy o that by assessing the facilities etc. he said even with the development we were not close to meeting the standards and that it was cost prohibitive to go down this path.
I doubt things have changed, so i Can assume this will never happen. Pity really, although we get to see Footscray at the WO next year. Yeh!
Rocket Science: the epitaph for the Beveridge era - whenever it ends - reading 'Here lies a team that could beat anyone on its day, but seldom did when it mattered most'. 15/7/2023
Eureka isn't an AFL standard venue in fact it's just an average VFL stadium.
My understanding is that you can only sell home games to emerging football areas so even Geelong doesn't fit the requirements.
Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"
Pretty much clubs with healthy supporter bases at Etihad get a profit and club like us with a low supporter base have to increase it to get revenue. But Remi made point that some clubs with home games at their venue with low supporter bases still make profit. Why is Etihad different to other venues.
This is the elephant in the room, and I suspect, the reason why most clubs are for equalisation to some extent.
It would be completely foolish for any club administration to argue that this inequity is how things should be, and how they should remain.
Eastdog - Docklands was constructed as a means to rationalise (strip back, or reduce) the number of teams within Melbourne on a long term basis, and take football from a suburban game to a more commercial venture.
The AFL decided it could have marquee clubs play at Docklands, and make a profit, while clubs with lesser support could subsidise its fixed costs and help pay the bills. It was never the intention of the AFL to create a level playing field (revenue generation and profit) among the clubs that were selected and or forced into tennancy at Docklands. Which is why they mandated that each club should strike its own deal with the stadium.
The result was marquee clubs receiving a beneficial deal from the stadium, and clubs along for the ride (like the Bulldogs and North) received poor deals. I think perhaps you could question the negotiation tactics of our club during this process, but ultimately it's hard to negotiate a deal when you have a gun to your head, which we effectively had because we wouldn't have been able to play at the MCG, and there were no other grounds available.