If North had gone to the GC it would have remained a 16 competition.

By not going it became 17 teams when the GCS were created.

Add GWS and we now have 18 teams.

Too many in my view but I seem to belong to a small group on this subject.

Don't see why, more games, more money.

The '18 team deal' is simply the TV rights agreement of 9 games a week...

Where is the groundswell for another team or a place for relocation?

Don't be so paranoid as to think that the AFL wants to destroy us on a whim, or because of some deepseated unease about the amount of teams in Melbourne.

The AFL don't want to prop us up, they want us to thrive and an adverse ruling will cripple us - they won't deliver it.

We are not going to agree on this one rpfc.

They could not give two hoots about the survival of the MFC, North or the Bulldogs in the medium term.

They will not force the issue but they would love one of the above teams in Tassie around the end of this decade.

North must be the most likely but if the MFC went out backwards they would give one blink before moving on.

The rest in window dressing

The '18 team deal' is simply the TV rights agreement of 9 games a week...

Where is the groundswell for another team or a place for relocation?

Don't be so paranoid as to think that the AFL wants to destroy us on a whim, or because of some deepseated unease about the amount of teams in Melbourne.

The AFL don't want to prop us up, they want us to thrive and an adverse ruling will cripple us - they won't deliver it.

Where's the paranoia that you speak of? In the past 5 years or so, the AFL offered North massive dollars to go North. They rejected it, which would be a fair kick in the testicles of AD Inc. Do you think the AFL will do all in their power to support NOrth when the inevitable comes when they ask for further handouts?

And in reagrds to the MFC, we are far, far from being out of the woods. Yes, we got rid of our massive debt. Yes, we made a small profit in the year from hell, but at this stage, we are relying on memberships and sponsorships to help keep us afloat. A drop in either will damage us, regardless of the outcome of the tanking saga. If we don't start winning games, and doing it in a hurry (1-5 years), we will be less appealing to new sponsors, and we will continue to find it hard to build our supporter base.

Making a profit isn't the be all and end all, some debt is/can be good. But considering our asset base is one of the lowest in the league, and that our performance has been pitiful, we cannot rest on our laurels, just because we made some profit during 2013 - The Year of Shite ©. Not to mention the fact that our gross turnover is way off what the big clubs is.

If North had gone to the GC it would have remained a 16 competition.

By not going it became 17 teams when the GCS were created.

Add GWS and we now have 18 teams.

Too many in my view but I seem to belong to a small group on this subject.

GWS was already on the cards before North rejected the AFL's offer. So that would've been the 17 team comp, but given The Tassie Project © more airplay.

Don't see why, more games, more money.

Only if in the medium term someone watches the games.

How many watched the Dees vs GWS last year on foxtel?

based on the attendance at the ground I would think about 20 000.

Do you think Collingwood or Carlton supporters spend their time watching 2nd last play 3rd last on a sunday afternoon.

Not much value to an advertiser.

How do we know the current sponsorship deals are "lucrative", rumpole? I'm the first to say that any $ received from sponsorship is vital/valuable, but considering we all knew how much Energy Watch were meant to be giving us ($5.9m over 3 years or something), as it was the biggest deal in the Club's history, and the fact that nothing has been mentioned as to the financial contributions either Webjet or Opel were required to pay, I am willing to bet that what Webjet and Opel are paying is well under what most would expect. That's not to say they aren't paying market value.

http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/melbourne_demons_signs_opel_as_joint_major_sponsor/

Although financial details of the agreement were not released, EnergyWatch's sole major sponsorship of Melbourne was worth US$2 million annually. As such, Opel's commitment to Demons as a joint major sponsor is estimated to be worth US$1 million annually

http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/demons_extend_partnership_with_webjet/

The Australian rules football club signed the original agreement in April, estimated to be worth in the region of US$1 million annually,

The way I read reports after Opel had signed was that we had more than matched the money that EnergyWatch would have provided us. These articles seem to articulate the same thing...

GWS was already on the cards before North rejected the AFL's offer. So that would've been the 17 team comp, but given The Tassie Project © more airplay.

Either I have said it poorly or you are not reading it properly billy.

If North had gone to the GC there would have remained 16 teams in the competition.

When they rejected the offer the AFL created GCS thus 17 teams.

They then added GWS to make 18

If North had gone to the GC we would now have 17 teams.

Oh god not sure why I am continuing with this!

http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/melbourne_demons_signs_opel_as_joint_major_sponsor/

Although financial details of the agreement were not released, EnergyWatch's sole major sponsorship of Melbourne was worth US$2 million annually. As such, Opel's commitment to Demons as a joint major sponsor is estimated to be worth US$1 million annually

http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/demons_extend_partnership_with_webjet/

The Australian rules football club signed the original agreement in April, estimated to be worth in the region of US$1 million annually,

The way I read reports after Opel had signed was that we had more than matched the money that EnergyWatch would have provided us. These articles seem to articulate the same thing...

Cheers for that DD, it took some finding! I must have missed the Club announcing that to the members.

I think receiving $1m from Opel and Webjet is far from lucrative, but on the otherhand, the $2m from EW was way overs (alarms bells rang for me at a President's Lunch function I attended when Polis was there).

I think, for whatever reason, $2m total is about a $500k-$1m short of market value (I value front and back at up to $3m total). In no way would I call $2m total sponsorship "lucrative". CS went in to damage control after the EW saga, I just hope that in the renegotiations of contracts, that Opel and Webjet are paying a bit more this time around.

Cheers for that DD, it took some finding! I must have missed the Club announcing that to the members.

I think receiving $1m from Opel and Webjet is far from lucrative, but on the otherhand, the $2m from EW was way overs (alarms bells rang for me at a President's Lunch function I attended when Polis was there).

I think, for whatever reason, $2m total is about a $500k-$1m short of market value (I value front and back at up to $3m total). In no way would I call $2m total sponsorship "lucrative". CS went in to damage control after the EW saga, I just hope that in the renegotiations of contracts, that Opel and Webjet are paying a bit more this time around.

don't forget that on top of the $2M we also got some money from EW before we terminated

don't forget that on top of the $2M we also got some money from EW before we terminated

I haven't.

Stop stalking me.

OD - I am not saying that the AFL has a vested interest in the Demons being around in 2016.

What I am saying is that they do until 2015.

AND until they have found an alternative - I don't care what people say about 'the spectacle' - the AFL has 9 games now and 18 teams and they will not go backwards from here.

I think we all need to worry less about the Evil AFL kicking us out...

I think we all need to worry less about the Evil AFL kicking us out...

They won't kick us out rpfc

But if they were to successfully sanction us in a serious manner

Then it could mortally wound us.

We would probably struggle on past 2015.

But I don't think that will happen ( seriously sanction us) as we will go to court

My comment was initially based around the fact that I think the AFL sees us as expendable in the medium term.

I know you will not agree but I still believe it.

OD - I am not saying that the AFL has a vested interest in the Demons being around in 2016.

What I am saying is that they do until 2015.

AND until they have found an alternative - I don't care what people say about 'the spectacle' - the AFL has 9 games now and 18 teams and they will not go backwards from here.

I know that but I can wish can't I?

I know that but I can wish can't I?

. Why do you wish this...sadist.

. Why do you wish this...sadist.

He's not hoping for a Melbourne less AFL - he is hoping for a smaller AFL.

He old.

He's not hoping for a Melbourne less AFL - he is hoping for a smaller AFL.

He old.

You got it rpfc

and my major reason is the talent pool is spread to far.

IMO there are approx. 80 players on club lists now that are not AFL standard.

We saw that last year when I reckon the Dees had 15 of them.

As you suggest I am firmly in the minority.

But I will go on dreaming

You got it rpfc

and my major reason is the talent pool is spread to far.

IMO there are approx. 80 players on club lists now that are not AFL standard.

We saw that last year when I reckon the Dees had 15 of them.

As you suggest I am firmly in the minority.

But I will go on dreaming

You are not wrong about the depth of talent but it's not something I really care about as any changes back to 16 teams will firmly put us in the spotlight.

Thankfully, the AFL is pretty set on expansion or maintenance of the status quo and that is fine by me. The spread of talent will be fixed soon enough and footy will be back to the halycon days of pre-2011 when no teams had bad players and every footy game was won by 2 goals or less.

I remember that time very vaguely, almost like it never happened...

You got it rpfc

and my major reason is the talent pool is spread to far.

IMO there are approx. 80 players on club lists now that are not AFL standard.

We saw that last year when I reckon the Dees had 15 of them.

As you suggest I am firmly in the minority.

But I will go on dreaming

I know what your saying old dee, just wouldn't want to wish Fitzroy on anyone.

You got it rpfc

and my major reason is the talent pool is spread to far.

IMO there are approx. 80 players on club lists now that are not AFL standard.

The Australian population has increased by exactly 50% (16 million to 24 million) in the same time that the number of VFL/AFL teams has

increased by 50% (12 to 18 since 1986). The talent pool shouldn't be spread that much at all.

I received an email newsletter from the club yesterday which said:

The Melbourne Football Club Sponsorship Team is greatly appreciative of all Foundation Heroes who provided sponsorship leads following our email in October. We are again seeking the assistance of Foundation Heroes to connect us with suitable companies which have the potential to become 2013 sponsors. The Foundation Heroes are playing an increasingly important role in the development of our club and providing sponsorship leads is one of the most direct ways you can assist our financial capacity to invest in our football team.

Since our last update we have signed several 2013 partners and we are currently in negotiations with a number of additional interested parties. However, several key properties remain uncontracted for 2013. Relevant properties include: Shorts Partner ($400k+), Coaches Box Partner, Media Partner, Community Partner (all $200k+) and IT/Communications Partner ($100k+). These prices are indicative only and may increase or decrease depending on the level of inventory and activations included. We are also interested in adding entry level sponsors in the $10k-$25k price range."

I wonder how much of this shortage is due to the inquistion over the last six months.

Probably impossible to seperate from our miserable on field performance during 2013.

I don't envy the people who are trying to sell these spots

Winners are grinners and the MFC is struggling.

Can we just win a few more games in 2013

PLEASE

I received an email newsletter from the club yesterday which said:

The Melbourne Football Club Sponsorship Team is greatly appreciative of all Foundation Heroes who provided sponsorship leads following our email in October. We are again seeking the assistance of Foundation Heroes to connect us with suitable companies which have the potential to become 2013 sponsors. The Foundation Heroes are playing an increasingly important role in the development of our club and providing sponsorship leads is one of the most direct ways you can assist our financial capacity to invest in our football team.

Since our last update we have signed several 2013 partners and we are currently in negotiations with a number of additional interested parties. However, several key properties remain uncontracted for 2013. Relevant properties include: Shorts Partner ($400k+), Coaches Box Partner, Media Partner, Community Partner (all $200k+) and IT/Communications Partner ($100k+). These prices are indicative only and may increase or decrease depending on the level of inventory and activations included. We are also interested in adding entry level sponsors in the $10k-$25k price range."

Hmm on one hand it is good they are using every available resource to try and assist the club - on the other this screams amateur hour to me. There are still at least 5 sponsorship partners outstanding for a season which begins in 8 weeks (NAB Cup in 3 or so) and the club/CEO/board is unable to do their job and sign some up so they go cap in hand to the members hoping one of them may bail them out. Similar to what happened with Kaspersky, Webjet and to a lesser extent Hankook (long term MFC supporter now disenchanted from the club) - which sponsors (besides EnergyWatch) have the club actually managed to sign off their own bat in the last 4 years? Even sponsors like Opel seem to be have been acquired only through heavily discounted offers through desparation following the EnergyWatch saga.

Hmm on one hand it is good they are using every available resource to try and assist the club - on the other this screams amateur hour to me.

Agree Gonzo, amateur hour indeed. Schwab has done some good things for the MFC as CEO, but he also has done things not so well (sponsorship being one of them).

I have for quite a while now held the view that choosing Schwab over Fox as CEO is just as big a stuff-up as selecting Lucas Cook over Darling.

I sometimes wonder if any one at the club looks at other sports telecasts and thinks about the sponsors of those telecasts as potential for our club.

Jayco has an apparent stranglehold on cycling and has been in racing for so long BUPA can now do tennis???

Not to mention the overseas telecasts that have logos of products sold in our markets.

Overseas companies are now looking at Australia as one of thefew available reliable markets eg ZARA and are expanding here

the Melbourne Football Club has some obvious cachet to enter this market?

OUr Supporter base includes people overseas who may have the first hand knowledge of products expanding over there who want to get a profile in the Australian market, They /we can all contribute

Good on the sponsorship team for mining that resource however a bit of a report on success or failure would be interesting.

I did raise EMU (ugg Boots) with the club and had no response.Local company sponsored a red and blue sports car and was expanding into overseas markets. How did they do????