Kennett's Letter to Hawks Members

[Dr. Gonzo 22,401]

They had Kennett on SEN before to discuss the letter he had written to Hawks members this afternoon.

https://www.hawthornfc.com.au/news/704788/jeff-s-letter-to-members

The critical part of it was he has put the death of clubs back on the table;

Quote

 

That said, it does not reduce the need for the AFL Commission and the AFL to be substantially restructured to be reduced in size and cost, in the same way that the club’s expenditure is being significantly reduced. 

The rivers of gold that have flowed to the AFL have finished. We must reduce our costs, not only to limit the draw down on the debt facility secured, but to position ourselves for a future unexpected event. 

Whether we are an Assisted or Unassisted Club we must all work together with the AFL to secure our future. 

I hope that in the not too distant future we can agree on a set of KPIs for all clubs, which in part will ensure an improvement for all clubs, and the AFL’s financial position. 

The timeline for these KPIs should be three years with an evaluation taking place in the third year of performance. If clubs and their Boards do not meet the KPIs set, they should be relegated to the VFL. 

No longer can non-performance be supported. This is not directed at any club and is only prospective. Emotion alone is not sufficient a reason for non-performance.  

The AFL must take a more commercial view to the conduct of our code. 

Please remember in 1996, Hawthorn, Geelong and Collingwood were in serious financial trouble. Each was able to rebuild. The same opportunity exists for every club, and every club must improve its current position. 

But enough of that for the moment. Suffice to say, the whole code is going to be involved in structural change in the years ahead. 

 

This is the guy who tried to destroy the state and now he is trying to destroy the competition with his economic rationalist views.

I hope our club defends itself in no uncertain terms as it is clear we are one of 4 clubs (along with North, Saints and Dogs despite their current financial position) whose necks are on the chopping block.

You could say it's just a blowhard but the fact he is on the competitions coronavirus committee means his position holds more weight than most and it would be unlikely if he has gone out and said this publicly without similar discussions being had privately.

He has given clubs 3 years to get their finances in order. 3 years despite not knowing how the next season or two will play out. 3 years to try and overcome decades of financial inequities in the competition.

If the competition were serious and the clubs had a backbone they would demand a revenue sharing model as compensation for the AFL's crowd/revenue maximisation policies. Of course the AFL has crippled most clubs so that they are reliant on the AFL and dare not speak out against city hall lest they be punished with poor fixtures and stadium deals and any other decisions the AFL decides on a whim. Look at the way they punished Sydney for daring to steal Buddy Franklin from under the noses of the Giants! Could you imagine if Collingwood or Hawthorn were banned from trading for two trade periods?

Average supporters do not understand the long-term financial ramifications of competition policies over several decades dating back to the impact of the player zoning system and then over more recent decades revenue/crowd maximisation policies and ground rationalisation policies. Clubs need to start standing up for themselves otherwise at some point in the (near?) future the AFL and big clubs will decide it is no longer in their interest to keep clubs on life support and will let them fold despite being victims of AFL policies and the fact their weak financial position was manufactured to balloon the financial positions of the bigger clubs and the AFL executives.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Dr. Gonzo
Link added

[Clintosaurus 6,418]

Hawthorn are where they are due to Ian Dicker, pokies and Tasmania. Easy to [censored] on others from a superior position.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,401]

8 minutes ago, Clintosaurus said:

Hawthorn are where they are due to Ian Dicker, pokies and Tasmania. Easy to [censored] on others from a superior position.

Hawks did a great job after 1996 - noone can deny that.

But there also needs to be some acknowledgment of the impossible task some clubs have in trying to get themselves out of the financial hole.

Clubs do need to do better. But the AFL also needs to support them to get better when their policies over decades have contributed to those clubs being in the position they are in. I'm [censored] off about it as a Melbourne supporter, if I were a North, Saints or Doggies supporter I would probably be 10x as furious.

[grazman 6,419]

6 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

But there also needs to be some acknowledgment of the impossible task some clubs have in trying to get themselves out of the financial hole.

Clubs do need to do better. But the AFL also needs to support them to get better when their policies over decades have contributed to those clubs being in the position they are in. I'm [censored] off about it as a Melbourne supporter, if I were a North, Saints or Doggies supporter I would probably be 10x as furious.

I had this conversation with a friend today, but there's a potential seismic shift in terms of the income streams for clubs.  Clubs rely heavily on membership dollars to not only generate income, but to attract sponsors.  COVID will continue to loom large over the confidence individuals have in committing their disposable income to a product that is no longer a guaranteed commodity in an uncertain world. 

[Diamond_Jim 11,694]

12 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Clubs do need to do better. But the AFL also needs to support them to get better when their policies over decades have contributed to those clubs being in the position they are in. I'm [censored] off about it as a Melbourne supporter, if I were a North, Saints or Doggies supporter I would probably be 10x as furious.

The Bulldogs president backed JK on this

The Foxtel deal ends in 2022. If the AFL can't get a good deal out of Foxtel then watch this issue become number 1 on the hit parade.

[whatwhat say what 18,829]

1 minute ago, Diamond_Jim said:

The Bulldogs president backed JK on this

The Foxtel deal ends in 2022. If the AFL can't get a good deal out of Foxtel then watch this issue become number 1 on the hit parade.

Extended to end of 2024

[Diamond_Jim 11,694]

5 minutes ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

Extended to end of 2024

It was only the Channel 7 section. Will post the full story in a moment

Here it is......

https://tvblackbox.com.au/page/2020/06/11/new-extended-broadcast-agreement-announced-for-the-afl-afl/

TV Blackbox understands Foxtel has also secured a reduced payment deal with the AFL. However, at this stage it has been unable to negotiate an extension to its broadcast deal which will expire in 2022. Late last month Foxtel negotiated an extension to its NRL agreement until 2027.

Foxtel had hoped to lock in extended broadcast deals for both codes in a move that would have provided long-term certainty for Fox Sports and Kayo while also locking out international streaming rivals such as Amazon.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Diamond_Jim

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,120]

Kennett won me over the other day when he declared that neither he or his board would be attending the Hawks game this week - whilst the rank and file were unable to attend.

He makes a point here but it’s hard to cop as a supporter of an also ran.

A part of me wishes he took over the MFC presidency in 2013.

And Peter Gordon gives me the [censored] when he talks down at clubs. Just remember Pete, you almost got taken over by Fitzroy in 1989 - FITZROY of all clubs!! You probably should’nt  throw stones at glass houses.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Bring-Back-Powell

[Little Goffy 12,539]

He should be careful what he wishes for, Hawthorn are on the edge of an age cliff the likes of which hasn't been seen since Demons 2007.

Then again, maybe that's why he is saying three years.  If he can see to it that some clubs are killed off soon, the Hawks can feed on the carcasses.

[MyFavouriteMartian 572]

13 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

It was only the Channel 7 section. Will post the full story in a moment

Here it is......

https://tvblackbox.com.au/page/2020/06/11/new-extended-broadcast-agreement-announced-for-the-afl-afl/

TV Blackbox understands Foxtel has also secured a reduced payment deal with the AFL. However, at this stage it has been unable to negotiate an extension to its broadcast deal which will expire in 2022. Late last month Foxtel negotiated an extension to its NRL agreement until 2027.

Foxtel had hoped to lock in extended broadcast deals for both codes in a move that would have provided long-term certainty for Fox Sports and Kayo while also locking out international streaming rivals such as Amazon.

Maybe its time for C7 to do both free to air;   and to stream thru clubs,  the clubs games,  which could be packaged thru club memberships.?

 

Stuff Rupert's long tight pockets.

[MyFavouriteMartian 572]

1 minute ago, Little Goffy said:

He should be careful what he wishes for, Hawthorn are on the edge of an age cliff the likes of which hasn't been seen since Demons 2007.

Then again, maybe that's why he is saying three years.  If he can see to it that some clubs are killed off soon, the Hawks can feed on the carcasses.

Maybe those clubs should target young talented Hawks players.

[Sir Why You Little 34,430]

I heard Jeff on Radio today. Hated him as Premier with a Passion, but i had to agree with him today. 
clubs have to get stronger, they have to make decisions with more care

10 Clubs in Victoria won’t last. Covid has just accelerated that situation 

The Support Networks just won’t be there. 
We the MFC must become more astute and ruthless. I have said it for years, but we keep stumbling...

Cannot afford to anymore. 
 

Winning will give us a better draw, a better draw gives us better exposure and Sponsorship deals.....

[whatwhat say what 18,829]

the notion that faang give a hoot about our tiny domestic sporting competitions is laughable

[Cards13 9,117]

Stuff you Kennett, stuff you!!! 

[markc 975]

I think you will find the once powerful Hawks are a little more than Shaky at the moment , when and its not if its a when they loose Tassie, thats going to hurt them even more. after selling of the social club many years ago and renting it back .   

something tells me iI can see them hand in pocket over the next few years. 

I could be totally wrong but things are not all good at Hawks thats for sure 

[Dr. Gonzo 22,401]

1 hour ago, Diamond_Jim said:

The Bulldogs president backed JK on this

The Foxtel deal ends in 2022. If the AFL can't get a good deal out of Foxtel then watch this issue become number 1 on the hit parade.

Bulldogs are in a good financial position at the moment on the back of their 2016 flag. But how sustainable it is long term is questionable. If they continue to be treated as a second class team fixture wise and continue to get minimal returns from home games at Docklands it won't be long before they're fighting to keep their heads above water again

[Diamond_Jim 11,694]

26 minutes ago, markc said:

I think you will find the once powerful Hawks are a little more than Shaky at the moment , when and its not if its a when they loose Tassie, thats going to hurt them even more. after selling of the social club many years ago and renting it back .   

something tells me iI can see them hand in pocket over the next few years. 

I could be totally wrong but things are not all good at Hawks thats for sure 

Have a look at their balance sheet. It's very strong. If Tassie goes but there are say two less clubs in Melbourne he wins.

I'd be gaming a Carlton merger to have up my sleeve if I was the MFC. In reality North and Saints are easier pickings for the axe so we could be safe.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,401]

1 hour ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Kennett won me over the other day when he declared that neither he or his board would be attending the Hawks game this week - whilst the rank and file were unable to attend.

He makes a point here but it’s hard to cop as a supporter of an also ran.

A part of me wishes he took over the MFC presidency in 2013.

And Peter Gordon gives me the [censored] when he talks down at clubs. Just remember Pete, you almost got taken over by Fitzroy in 1989 - FITZROY of all clubs!! You probably should’nt  throw stones at glass houses.

Peter Gordon's current stance is disappointing. I've thought for a long time the weaker clubs should be forming a bloc to support each other and fight the AFLs inequitable policies. Doesn't have to be solely Vic teams either, Port and Freo could easily be included.

[picket fence 15,078]

Love Jeff Kennett

He would make a worthy State Premier or maybe sneak a job at MFC

Anyway I love what he has to say!!

 

[Dr. Gonzo 22,401]

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I heard Jeff on Radio today. Hated him as Premier with a Passion, but i had to agree with him today. 
clubs have to get stronger, they have to make decisions with more care

10 Clubs in Victoria won’t last. Covid has just accelerated that situation 

The Support Networks just won’t be there. 
We the MFC must become more astute and ruthless. I have said it for years, but we keep stumbling...

Cannot afford to anymore. 
 

Winning will give us a better draw, a better draw gives us better exposure and Sponsorship deals.....

A better draw (with the financial implications that entails) shouldn't be something that can be used as a carrot/stick incentive for clubs. The draw should be as equitable and fair as possible - it should be randomised and not a tool to reward or punish.

I agree clubs need to get better at administering their affairs. They also need to be working on a level playing field. Collingwood for example has benefited from the AFLs revenue maximisation policies for 3 decades. This is not in a vacuum, their advantage has come at the disadvantage of others. There's other issues too like the zoning history going back to the 50s-80s which adversely impacted some clubs, the ground rationalisation policies etc

If it's going to come down to clubs surviving or dying then the AFL needs to get fair dinkum about appropriate compensation for these decades of inequitable policies and rectifying them moving forward. You can't expect clubs to become financially sustainable while hamstringing with inequitable policies. And you can't expect them to turnaround decades of disadvantage in 3 years.

I also disagree that Melbourne can't support 9 clubs. It DOES support 9 clubs. Clubs have a minimum of 35k members these days and this will only keep rising over the coming decades. It will get to a stage where you won't get into games unless you hold a season ticket and clubs will benefit financially once that happens. Killing off 3 or 4 Vic clubs will alienage 100s of thousands from the game. The AFL can't afford to lose that support particularly not now.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Dr. Gonzo

[Dr. Gonzo 22,401]

47 minutes ago, markc said:

I think you will find the once powerful Hawks are a little more than Shaky at the moment , when and its not if its a when they loose Tassie, thats going to hurt them even more. after selling of the social club many years ago and renting it back .   

something tells me iI can see them hand in pocket over the next few years. 

I could be totally wrong but things are not all good at Hawks thats for sure 

While they've got the pokies they're fine. I think they profit the most out of any club and it's in the 10s of millions every year

https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/afl-clubs-fill-boots-with-pokies-cash-as-losses-hit-2-7bn-20190726-p52b1z.html

[Sir Why You Little 34,430]

2 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

A better draw (with the financial implications that entails) shouldn't be something that can be used as a carrot/stick incentive for clubs. The draw should be as equitable and fair as possible - it should be randomised and not a tool to reward or punish.

I agree clubs need to get better at administering their affairs. They also need to be working on a level playing field. Collingwood for example has benefited from the AFLs revenue maximisation policies for 3 decades. This is not in a vacuum, their advantage has come at the disadvantage of others. There's other issues too like the zoning history going back to the 50s-80s which adversely impacted some clubs, the ground rationalisation policies etc

If it's going to come down to clubs surviving or dying then the AFL needs to get fair dinkum about appropriate compensation for these decades of inequitable policies and rectifying them moving forward. You can't expect clubs to become financially sustainable while hamstringing with inequitable policies. And you can't expect them to turnaround decades of disadvantage in 3 years.

I also disagree that Melbourne can't support 9 clubs. It DOES support 9 clubs. Clubs have a minimum of 35k members these days and this will only keep rising over the coming decades. It will get to a stage where you won't get into games unless you hold a season ticket and clubs will benefit financially once that happens. Killing off 3 or 4 Vic clubs will alienage 100s of thousands from the game. The AFL can't afford to lose that support particularly not now.

The AFL hasn’t been fair for decades, and it won’t be again. The Draw maximises ratings at peak times. Teams that win regularly benefit. That’s the way it is, be it right or wrong. Post Covid will be different and i will be staggered if by 2030 there are still 10 teams out of Melbourne. 
 

[Dr. Gonzo 22,401]

1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

The AFL hasn’t been fair for decades, and it won’t be again. The Draw maximises ratings at peak times. Teams that win regularly benefit. That’s the way it is, be it right or wrong. Post Covid will be different and i will be staggered if by 2030 there are still 10 teams out of Melbourne. 
 

They use the draw to maximise their TV rights deals through higher ratings. Fair enough all clubs are signing on to these policies for the benefit of the whole competition. But the AFL then need to have a revenue sharing model to ensure that these policies don't disadvantage those clubs who are making the most sacrifices for the competition.

[Dees2014 2,377]

3 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

The AFL hasn’t been fair for decades, and it won’t be again. The Draw maximises ratings at peak times. Teams that win regularly benefit. That’s the way it is, be it right or wrong. Post Covid will be different and i will be staggered if by 2030 there are still 10 teams out of Melbourne. 
 

The fact is the AFL was originally a Victorian game, and Victoria is where the majority of supporter resides. The AFL has done a magnificent job in building a national competition, but the majority of AFL supporters are Victorian. My guess is that more than 50% of the Game’s revenue also comes from Victoria, so why can’t Victoria continue to support 10 clubs? 
 

After all, the AFL is by far the wealthiest and most powerful sporting body in the country. It will remain so, but only if it continues with its current structures. It is a winning formula, much to all other sporting bodies annoyance!

[Sir Why You Little 34,430]

2 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

They use the draw to maximise their TV rights deals through higher ratings. Fair enough all clubs are signing on to these policies for the benefit of the whole competition. But the AFL then need to have a revenue sharing model to ensure that these policies don't disadvantage those clubs who are making the most sacrifices for the competition.

It all sounds nice, but it aint going to happen. Dr. you are talking perfect world scenarios, and after Covid19 that will be so far from reality. 
Winning teams will get the exposure for the next 2-3 years at least, the rest will struggle and fight the scraps

We have been forewarned....