Fat Ed wants QB as a Collingwood home game.

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

Whos birthday is it again....The Queens or Eddies?

[hemingway 7,631]

Although I understand arguments about the origins of this game and the historical significance of the MFC-MCG, times and circumstances change. The MCG is no longer solely our home ground. It has not been this way for a long time. All the other clubs that play their home games at the MCG regard the ground as their home ground and supporters feel a connection to it. 

What is fair and reasonable today?

There may be other issues associated with the fixture at large, but for most Melbourne supporters this is an iconic match and probably the biggest home game for the year. It is mid season and a measuring point not only for the annual comparison with the Pies but also our overall performance at this time of the year.  

We need Collingwood's agreement to continue with the QB match.

So on the face of it, it seems reasonable that the home ground status and revenue returns alternate each year.

 

[ManDee 7,222]

Wadda We Sing 

"Whos birthday is it again....The Queens or Eddies?"

 

Neither, the Queen was born April 26th 1926. It will remain a holiday after the monarchy is gone.

 

 

 

Edited June 5, 2018 by ManDee
Ernie snuck in

[ding 5,126]

3 hours ago, Nasher said:

I’ve been meaning to permanently ban you for a while now. Thanks for the reminder.

This could end up being one of the most liked posts in Demonland history.

Thanks.

[sue 9,145]

15 minutes ago, hemingway said:

So on the face of it, it seems reasonable that the home ground status and revenue returns alternate each year.

 

The bolded bit is important.  As PJ is stating there are plenty of other considerations that go into the draw and so taking the obvious option of alternate turns may be too simplistic.  If we move to alternate turns hopefully the Club will benefit elsewhere (and C'Wood suffer elsewhere).

[Dante 2,739]

Melbourne have 6 Home games at the G left for the year.

Collingwood, Saints, Bullies, Suns, Swans and GWS, how are we supposed to make money and survive if that's what we get?

Crowds will probably be Saints 35,000 maybe, Dogs 35,000, maybe, Suns 20,000 maybe, Swans, 40,000 maybe and GWS 20,000, maybe, we are deprived of genuine crowd drawing games and the QB is the AFL's way of offsetting that, a little bit.

To be quite honest, I'd imagine we sell a lot of memberships on the basis that we get admission to both the Tigers and Pies blockbusters games and I'd imagine we'd lose revenue if we lost that appeal, who's going to buy in when we've got games against the lowest drawing clubs in the comp.

Melbourne should ask the AFL to schedule us against Essendon on the Queens Birthday Game, which would be more appropriate given the MND appeal and the Daniher connection and allow Essendon to use the facilities in the Ponsford stand like the Pies do at present.

We could also ask to play an away game against Essendon to ensure they get a good slice of the pie, the crowds will turn up for that.

[censored] Collingwood.

[DeleteUser 638]

5 minutes ago, Dante said:

To be quite honest, I'd imagine we sell a lot of memberships on the basis that we get admission to both the Tigers and Pies blockbusters games and I'd imagine we'd lose revenue if we lost that appeal, who's going to buy in when we've got games against the lowest drawing clubs in the comp.

 

[censored] Collingwood.

Hmm allow me to unpack this

Does one buy a membership based on the games (ie who we will play) or does one buy a membership to a) support the club and b) go to the games regardless?

[Sir Why You Little 37,136]

5 minutes ago, Dante said:

Melbourne have 6 Home games at the G left for the year.

Collingwood, Saints, Bullies, Suns, Swans and GWS, how are we supposed to make money and survive if that's what we get?

Crowds will probably be Saints 35,000 maybe, Dogs 35,000, maybe, Suns 20,000 maybe, Swans, 40,000 maybe and GWS 20,000, maybe, we are deprived of genuine crowd drawing games and the QB is the AFL's way of offsetting that, a little bit.

To be quite honest, I'd imagine we sell a lot of memberships on the basis that we get admission to both the Tigers and Pies blockbusters games and I'd imagine we'd lose revenue if we lost that appeal, who's going to buy in when we've got games against the lowest drawing clubs in the comp.

Melbourne should ask the AFL to schedule us against Essendon on the Queens Birthday Game, which would be more appropriate given the MND appeal and the Daniher connection and allow Essendon to use the facilities in the Ponsford stand like the Pies do at present.

We could also ask to play an away game against Essendon to ensure they get a good slice of the pie, the crowds will turn up for that.

[censored] Collingwood.

QB is a fixture because of the 1958 Record Attendance between these 2 sides on QB

it has nothing to do with Essendrug...

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,909]

26 minutes ago, ManDee said:

Neither, the Queen was born April 26th 1926. It will remain a holiday after the monarchy is gone.

 

You may be right. 

[Corporate gobbledygook alert...] What I should have said was that if I worked for the MFC and did a risk assessment, I would conclude that there's an unacceptable level of risk that QB will disappear as a public holiday after the death of the Queen and that the club should be planning accordingly to ameliorate that risk.  

[Red and Bluebeard 2,101]

2 hours ago, Dee Zephyr said:

MCC predicting 79,000 next Monday which would make it a record for a QB clash. We’d love it if we can get 80k+. 

In recent times, yes. But the record crowd for any home and away game ever is 99,256 who attended on QB back in 1958.

[ManDee 7,222]

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

You may be right. 

[Corporate gobbledygook alert...] What I should have said was that if I worked for the MFC and did a risk assessment, I would conclude that there's an unacceptable level of risk that QB will disappear as a public holiday after the death of the Queen and that the club should be planning accordingly to ameliorate that risk.  

Ski opening weekend holiday! That's how I think of it.

[What 18,810]

Was mentioned on the afl.com news wrap video yesterday that the MFC is lobbying the AFL for a Round 1 Friday night blockbuster vs the Pies next season.

[Nasher 33,617]

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

I don't quite agree with this.  All clubs are asked for their wishlist and input re the next season's fixture.

The AFL wouldn't have a blockbuster where one team year after year is the home team and pockets the funds without the largesse of the other club involved.  We wouldn't have had this fixture as long as we have without Collingwood's agreement.

Yep - I’m not challenging that Collingwood agree to it. I’m challenging the view that has been peddled on here (see page one) regarding their motives: that kind, caring Collingwood and generous Ed give us this purely out of the goodness of their own hearts, therefore we should give back.

They agreed in the past to forego the home game (and associated benefits with gate receipt and so on) in exchange for other fixturing perks (less travel). If we were to give up this particular perk, it should come with some other leveller, ie fewer interstate trips, or at least more interstate trips for Collingwood. 

[Dante 2,739]

2 minutes ago, timbo said:

Hmm allow me to unpack this

Does one buy a membership based on the games (ie who we will play) or does one buy a membership to a) support the club and b) go to the games regardless?

Some do, some don't, do you think we'd sell more memberships if we played all our home games at the G, do you think we might sell more memberships if we had an attractive draw?

If you say no to either of the above I'd question your judgement.

Some, like myself, buy in every year irrespective, but there are many who choose wisely where they want to spend their entertainment dollar. 

[Lucifers Hero 40,364]

From the article in the op I noticed this:

"Agreements have been made, it's going to alternate," the Pies president told AFL.com.au.  

Then,

"McGuire said he had spoken to former Melbourne board member, and a driving force behind 'Fight MND', Bill Guest about the prospects of next year's fifth event being a Collingwood home game".

Obviously the agreements haven't been made with Jackson/MFC so is it Bill Guest Eddie reached agreement with?  Guest is Chairman of 'Freeze MND' but its decades since he was an MFC Board member. 

Eddies is super sharp and knows full well the fixture and financial results for them if this game alternates.  But Eddie always has an angle...

It sounds to me that Eddie wants a piece of the MND action.  Good for their image and their 'Brand'.  He can then take centre stage.

[DeleteUser 638]

4 minutes ago, Dante said:

Some do, some don't, do you think we'd sell more memberships if we played all our home games at the G, do you think we might sell more memberships if we had an attractive draw?

If you say no to either of the above I'd question your judgement.

Some, like myself, buy in every year irrespective, but there are many who choose wisely where they want to spend their entertainment dollar. 

It is an interesting notion that a footy club supporter would join or not join based on their draw. I get the idea of ROI specifically i.e. being able to attend games - but less so in respect of the teams being played (assuming a spread year on year across Kardinia, MCG and ES).

I can't address the hypothesis that we'd sell more memberships if every game at the G as the idea is a non-starter and therefore does not bear consideration (leaving aside the fact it's self evident that it likely would).

On the draw, well, I can't answer without any data and evidence upon which to draw conclusions. Unfortunately I am not aware of a data set that has had confounding factors (like performance of the team or snow depth at Spencer's Creek removed) so we can't look at that much further, can we.

ATB

[Gator 17,479]

12 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Yep - I’m not challenging that Collingwood agree to it. I’m challenging the view that has been peddled on here (see page one) regarding their motives: that kind, caring Collingwood and generous Ed give us this purely out of the goodness of their own hearts, therefore we should give back.

They agreed in the past to forego the home game (and associated benefits with gate receipt and so on) in exchange for other fixturing perks (less travel). If we were to give up this particular perk, it should come with some other leveller, ie fewer interstate trips, or at least more interstate trips for Collingwood. 

Did I read recently that Collingwood's profits or balance sheet weren't as good as there were ?  If so, that could be part of the motivation.

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

1 hour ago, ManDee said:

Wadda We Sing 

"Whos birthday is it again....The Queens or Eddies?"

 

Neither, the Queen was born April 26th 1926. It will remain a holiday after the monarchy is gone.

 

 

 

Um yeah, i was kidding around MD.No idea when Eddies birthday is, but it certainly wont be Monday! But i agree yes it will remain a holiday long after the monarchy is gone.

Edited June 5, 2018 by Wadda We Sing

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

22 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Did I read recently that Collingwood's profits or balance sheet weren't as good as there were ?  If so, that could be part of the motivation.

I continually hear out there from Collingwood supporters that ND & MND have nothing to do with Collingwood and its become a game about Melbourne.......perhaps thats partially behind it as well.

[Dee Zephyr 19,269]

39 minutes ago, Red and Bluebeard said:

In recent times, yes. But the record crowd for any home and away game ever is 99,256 who attended on QB back in 1958.

Sorry, I must have wrongly read the article. I wasn’t aware the 1958 record setting game was on a QB. I thought we commenced the QB clashes against Pies in 2001.

[DeeSpencer 26,083]

20 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Did I read recently that Collingwood's profits or balance sheet weren't as good as there were ?  If so, that could be part of the motivation.

They bought some pubs a few years ago that turned in to lemons, and then had a costly training base expansion to pay for. When AFL profit sharing came in under equalisation they felt the squeeze a bit. 

Personally I feel Eddie's main motivation is to keep Melbourne down, not in a vindictive way just in the spirit of a tough competition. You can tell when commentating he loves a Victorian underdog side because if you keep the bad Victorian sides exactly where you want them - ie. in the comp but treading water to survive - then Collingwood maintain their status as one of the best Vic sides. Since 2010 Hawthorn and Geelong are as strong as ever, the Dogs nabbed a flag and the Tigers are now a powerhouse. He'll be getting nervous about the Pies position in the food chain.

[DeeSpencer 26,083]

Alternating would actually work in our favour if we get a 2nd game against the Pies in the first 5 weeks.

That way both teams can lock in a big pay day each year, and the QB'day game will grow.

With Pies fans upset about not sitting in their regular seats and having a few losses the Collingwood portion of the crowd has shrunk more than the Melbourne portion has increased in the last few years.

Alternating is the best way to grow it back up to maximise attendance.

[drdrake 3,187]

Who cares, Collingwood games aren't the be all and end all any more.  You have clubs like Richmond, Hawthorn, Essendon(when playing well) that draw crowds.  The better we play the better the draw becomes, the more people that will jump on the Melbourne Band wagon the less reliant we become on deals like this.

They didn't care about this game till you get one like next Monday both sides up and about 80K should attend

[Grimes Times 1,278]

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

From the article in the op I noticed this:

"Agreements have been made, it's going to alternate," the Pies president told AFL.com.au.  

Then,

"McGuire said he had spoken to former Melbourne board member, and a driving force behind 'Fight MND', Bill Guest about the prospects of next year's fifth event being a Collingwood home game".

Obviously the agreements haven't been made with Jackson/MFC so is it Bill Guest Eddie reached agreement with?  Guest is Chairman of 'Freeze MND' but its decades since he was an MFC Board member. 

Eddies is super sharp and knows full well the fixture and financial results for them if this game alternates.  But Eddie always has an angle...

It sounds to me that Eddie wants a piece of the MND action.  Good for their image and their 'Brand'.  He can then take centre stage.

Thats the thing that annoys me. Now that Melb has built QB into an event through MND and its more than a game of footy, Eddie wants a piece of the action.

[daisycutter 29,743]

3 minutes ago, Grimes Times said:

Thats the thing that annoys me. Now that Melb has built QB into an event through MND and its more than a game of footy, Eddie wants a bigger piece of the action.

fixed