Congratulations, Western Sydney Wanderers!

[mdemon 266]

The enormity of the achievement by WSW should not be in any way underestimated - truly amazing for a team that has only been in existence for the proverbial "5 minutes".

Having said that, the seeds of WSW were certainly cast on fertile ground.

Sadly, the AFL (as noted by other posters) took a rather hubristically market- orientated approach which meant that they conveniently ignored (or under-appreciated) the fact that the GWS seeds were being cast on VERY stony ground.

Ordinarily I wouldn't give a fat rodents clacker about the issue, except for the fact that the generous draft concessions gifted to GWS have meant that the supposed rewards for teams like ours finishing at the bottom of the AFL ladder for the past few seasons have been hard to realise.

[snomed 54]

Why the AFL did not bring a team to Tasmania is just a joke they would fill a 35,000 stadium from round one down there. Western Sydney is no chance in the next ten years of being a AFL club with soccer up there now it could be the biggest fail in AFL history.

2 million people in Western Sydney who probably know nothing about AFL - convert a few percent of them and they'll get more members than we have. 500k people in Tasmania (Although in reality a team would either be based out of Hobart (217K) OR Launceston (106k)) (who already follow football - not a lot of money to be made that they aren't already via TV rights. Bringing a new team into Tasmania won't challenge rugby league. While I would personally love to see a team there and think they deserve one, from a purely business perspective it make more sense trying to break into the GWS market

While I work and live in Melbourne, I work for an office based outside of Sydney. Something I find quite interesting when I have my social chats with the guys in the office is that when GWS came about, anyone that followed Sydney (albeit I wouldn't call them die hard supporters - rather they love talking about them when they are winning and most turned off the TV early in the Grand Final this year) no-one who lives in Western Sydney changed clubs when GWS came about - they follow the Swans. However, EVERY one of them that lives in Western Sydney (all of whom either were born of have parents who were born in countries with backgrounds from Soccer playing nations such as South America) switched from Sydney to WSW (and passionately turn up to home games, which they never did due to distance when they used to follow Sydney FC for the sake of following Sydney).

Western Sydney were crying out for a soccer team. This was always going to be an easy in for WSW, no matter what the AFL did. The AFL is only trying to get a slice of the action, not dominate the market. They always knew this was going to take time. One thing that WSW has done sooo much better than the AFL is get a highly competitive, successful team from day 1. It irks me still that the AFL let GWS start as the basket case that they did.

I would be much more concerned if I was an NRL administrator. This win will have a much bigger negative impact on them than the AFL (and if Melbourne Victory won it there'd be celebrations galore in the city, but wouldn't affect AFL at all in this city)

[1964nowMORE 488]

A stunning achievement by WSW. While I still live for the Demons as my number 1 love soccer has taken a foothold in our house also. I've been to two World Cups and cannot imagine a better experience in sport as a fan than Timmy Cahill scoring in Kaiserslauten in 2006. Yes I struggle to imagine the Dees winning a flag could be better than the emotion at the end of that game 8 years ago.

We truly do live in the worlds sporting capital and I love it.

Go Victory, Go Demons ... fail soon Western Sydney and stay down GWS..

[Cards13 9,117]

http://www.wswanderersfc.com.au/video/acl-champions---airport-arrival/1033842

Looks a little exciting at the airport.

[Whispering_Jack 29,928]

I think it should be said that the AFL saw its responsibility was to spread the game into new and different markets and the decision to locate in Western Sydney was in accordance with that aim. The problem that I have is with the choice of location for the second Sydney team, the way in which it was conceived and then executed, particularly to the detriment of other longstanding clubs.

The worst aspect from my perspective was that the AFL sanctioned the poaching of one of our players, a teenager in a way in which we were never able to even counter the ridiculous offer made to him using the league's money was repugnant and made a "mockery" of the concept of an AFL competition.

I will always support the game but the sight of big crowds at Wanderers games and the success of that team will always bring me enjoyment.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Putting a soccer team in Western Sydney was always an obvious move and one which was overdue due the popularity of the sport in the area.

However, for me the real success has been the overall branding of the club. It's name, logo and colours are all very classy and traditional, not some cartoon gimmick "that kids will like". They look like they have been around for decades and should the the benchmark for all sporting codes who introduce new teams.

[Sir Why You Little 37,016]

GW$ is all about TV ratings on the East Coast of Australia.

That is the sole purpose. Selling more advertising via the TV or internet.

The new Broadcast dealings have begun

$1.4-$1.6 Billion is the starting figure.

Could even be a 10 year contract.

Better be good or the MFC is going to struggle.

[Qwerty30 196]

You mean MFC is not struggling already?

A successful TV rights negotiation for the AFL is critical for the health of the competition and the survival of minnows like us.

[Sir Why You Little 37,016]

You mean MFC is not struggling already?

A successful TV rights negotiation for the AFL is critical for the health of the competition and the survival of minnows like us.

You think we get a good deal from the broadcast rights now?

I don't.

If what i am hearing from inside, that it may well be a 10 year contract. Then it has got to be fantastic. Otherwise 18 clubs won't survive it.

[Qwerty30 196]

You think we get a good deal from the broadcast rights now?

I don't.

If what i am hearing from inside, that it may well be a 10 year contract. Then it has got to be fantastic. Otherwise 18 clubs won't survive it.

Did I say that? Why do you try to distort discussions all the time?

The commitment of the AFL to 9 games a week and 18 teams in the competition is critical ingredient to the TV rights value. And that is one of the key issues that provides some level of assurance for MFCs survival at least in the short term. We like any struggling club are not guaranteed it longer term

As far as the broadcasting rights are concerned, MFC are a poor drawing TV item that plays poor quality football. TV numbers for our games are poor like our attendances. While MFC has been good to other clubs % when they play us twice! they would barely budget a profit from hosting MFC as a home game.

A successful TV rights negotiation has been and will be critical to the future of the game to finance struggling clubs like ours. What other armchair handouts do you expect MFC to get? What's your issue with the current Broadcasting rights for MFC?

[STN91 32]

Agreed with C Bizkit, the branding of the club has been excellent.

The locals chose the name "The Wanderers". (I've been told from a few soccer fans that the name was taken from the movie "The Wanderers"). The fans chose the colours. They chose the songs and chants.

It really is there club. Where as the Giants is an AFLmanufactured brand which has no flair and no affinity with the locals.

[Sir Why You Little 37,016]

Did I say that? Why do you try to distort discussions all the time?

The commitment of the AFL to 9 games a week and 18 teams in the competition is critical ingredient to the TV rights value. And that is one of the key issues that provides some level of assurance for MFCs survival at least in the short term. We like any struggling club are not guaranteed it longer term

As far as the broadcasting rights are concerned, MFC are a poor drawing TV item that plays poor quality football. TV numbers for our games are poor like our attendances. While MFC has been good to other clubs % when they play us twice! they would barely budget a profit from hosting MFC as a home game.

A successful TV rights negotiation has been and will be critical to the future of the game to finance struggling clubs like ours. What other armchair handouts do you expect MFC to get? What's your issue with the current Broadcasting rights for MFC?

Personally i do not like Foxtel, I will not buy any Rupert Murdoch product if i have a choice

It is appalling that people must pay for a subscription to a network that then saturates the broadcast with commercials.....Double dipping i call it.

Personally i think 9 games is far too many as at least 40-50% of them are boring...This i think will damage the AFL going forward.

I would like to see the 'derbies" of SA & WA on free to air as they are always fought out at 100mph...But these are never shown into Victoria anymore apart from Foxtel.

It is not just the MFC being shafted...i think about 12 clubs get an ordinary deal whist the top 1/3 get the majority...

Like i said earlier if the new contract is going to stand for 10 years then i would hope our CEO is well aware of the fine print because which ever network wins the contract is going to want to make good money early, because nobody can predict production costs a decade in advance.

For the record...Channel 7 break even during the 22 game home & away fixture, they make a profit in September

Foxtel i have no info as their breakdown is a lot different

[daisycutter 29,610]

For the record...Channel 7 break even during the 22 game home & away fixture, they make a profit in September

thats not unusual in business wyl. take away 4/26th's of most companies business and they'd be lucky to break even

[Sir Why You Little 37,016]

thats not unusual in business wyl. take away 4/26th's of most companies business and they'd be lucky to break even

I know that DC, but the outlay is massive over 9 months....TV is not the cash cow it used to be...

[beelzebub 23,321]

Personally i do not like Foxtel, I will not buy any Rupert Murdoch product if i have a choice

It is appalling that people must pay for a subscription to a network that then saturates the broadcast with commercials.....Double dipping i call it.

Personally i think 9 games is far too many as at least 40-50% of them are boring...This i think will damage the AFL going forward.

I would like to see the 'derbies" of SA & WA on free to air as they are always fought out at 100mph...But these are never shown into Victoria anymore apart from Foxtel.

It is not just the MFC being shafted...i think about 12 clubs get an ordinary deal whist the top 1/3 get the majority...

Like i said earlier if the new contract is going to stand for 10 years then i would hope our CEO is well aware of the fine print because which ever network wins the contract is going to want to make good money early, because nobody can predict production costs a decade in advance.

For the record...Channel 7 break even during the 22 game home & away fixture, they make a profit in September

Foxtel i have no info as their breakdown is a lot different

Not too dissimilar to retail 10% 0f profit taken in 90% of year, 90% profit taken in 10% of year...guess which month ho ho ho

[Sir Why You Little 37,016]

Not too dissimilar to retail 10% 0f profit taken in 90% of year, 90% profit taken in 10% of year...guess which month ho ho ho

yes but most companies don't part with a $ Billion for a slice of that profit

[beelzebub 23,321]

yes but most companies don't part with a $ Billion for a slice of that profit

horses and course....

oops

[daisycutter 29,610]

yes but most companies don't part with a $ Billion for a slice of that profit

neither do ch7, they eke it out in multiple smaller payments

and there are plenty of companies who fork out billions for a similar share

no big difference here

[Sir Why You Little 37,016]

neither do ch7, they eke it out in multiple smaller payments

and there are plenty of companies who fork out billions for a similar share

no big difference here

Of course there are, but as i said before the Television industry is not what it was. It astounds me that the base figures are so high.

[Qwerty30 196]

Personally i do not like Foxtel, I will not buy any Rupert Murdoch product .........

There you go again. Your personal preferences for Foxtel are irrelevant.

I can't see how MFC gets shafted given we get poor crowds to the games, play terrible football to watch, lose regularly and have a small and increasingly disinterested supporter base. Talk about a programming nightmare. More people watching the grass grow on Ch 31 than watching MFC. Unless we played the Pies nearly every MFC game would be a loss outcome for Foxtel and it's advertisers.

And I not sure why you are complaining about the commercials on Fox when there as bad on 7.

And the reason why you might think the minority may be benefiting from the TV rights because there the big drawing clubs that brings the viewers and fills the stadium.

The AFL needs 9 games a week to justify content for a football dedicated football changes that can broadcast repeatable football matches 24/7.

And back to the point the AFL need to ensure a good rights outcome.....it's a key need for MFCs survival.

[Sir Why You Little 37,016]

There you go again. Your personal preferences for Foxtel are irrelevant.

I can't see how MFC gets shafted given we get poor crowds to the games, play terrible football to watch, lose regularly and have a small and increasingly disinterested supporter base. Talk about a programming nightmare. More people watching the grass grow on Ch 31 than watching MFC. Unless we played the Pies nearly every MFC game would be a loss outcome for Foxtel and it's advertisers.

And I not sure why you are complaining about the commercials on Fox when there as bad on 7.

And the reason why you might think the minority may be benefiting from the TV rights because there the big drawing clubs that brings the viewers and fills the stadium.

The AFL needs 9 games a week to justify content for a football dedicated football changes that can broadcast repeatable football matches 24/7.

And back to the point the AFL need to ensure a good rights outcome.....it's a key need for MFCs survival.

The AFL want 9 Games a weekend purely because of greed

[Qwerty30 196]

The AFL want 9 Games a weekend purely because of greed

Those bastards!

Sadly it's purely for TV content and rights. C'mon you're the TV guru!

[Sir Why You Little 37,016]

Those bastards!

Sadly it's purely for TV content and rights. C'mon you're the TV guru!

Sometimes overexposure can have a negative effect.

Its a long season 9 games most weeks a big ask.

I would prefer 6-7 higher quality games. GW$ are not going to do it.

They will drain the standard down.