Diamond_Jim

All he had to say is that it was something that needed to be addressed as we learn more about whether a reasonably full season will be possible. It will need to be addressed however. Donations if they are to be made should be decided by the donor not the recipient. Club members are one thing but how about companies who paid for entertainment packages, super boxes etc not to mention MCC and AFL members.The list goes on. Airlines are playing games and pushing travel credits now instead of cash refunds. Kayo is expecting full payment although there is no live sport. Tough times ahead.

it does not matter if the departing club is a negative,,,, and fwiw the Melbourne Lions supporters were ecstatic over the Brisbane 3 peat

They have no answer because in reality they have already spent (a lot?? of) the money. Have a look at airlines "refunding" money if you want a similar lesson in obfuscation. Time for some honesty,,,,, perhaps

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/captain-of-coronavirus-us-aircraft-carrier-4000-sailors-let-off-ship-die-theodore-roosevelt food for thought... this isn't a cruise ship as the article points out The captain of a US aircraft carrier, with 5,000 people onboard, including an unconfirmed number who have tested positive for Covid-19, has called for help to save the lives of his sailors. The US aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt was in the Pacific when the navy reported its first coronavirus case a week ago. It has since pulled into port in Guam, a US island territory in the western Pacific.

Two events who still haven't cancelled but they are in the "they've got to be dreaming world" Wimbledon and Tour de France. Both scheduled for June. Imagine a rolling city of a couple of thousand through rural France (even if they banned spectators). Wimbledon without spectators is a long shot but they seem to want the crowd anyway. A lot of the procrastination has to do with insurers and the events not wanting to cancel in advance of government directives etc which would trigger the insurance cover

One in six players reach 100 games so given that the training photo is five years old you would only expect five to six players at most given that the one in six is a rolling average. The median number of games is around 19. By no means is an AFL career a great outcome for most. Trading aside I see the current list as probably the most stable we have had for a while. All the more reason we need to see some success.

I read that as well. I thought they owned the AFL licence for the Power but perhaps they lost that under their last financial restructure?? PS: Having done a wikipedia search it seems that the SANFL own the Power's AFL licence

Just some thoughts.... The only rationale I have heard for the existence/continuation of the GCS is that of maintaining a media presence in a large market. The argument goes that if you only have Brisbane playing each two weeks the AFL coverage is flooded by the coverage of other sports namely NRL. As part of this is the argument saying Brisbane/Queensland needs a local live TV game each week. The downside is that it splits the local following and sponsorship etc which were available to Brisbane. Crowd wise Brisbane and GCS will always struggle. There just isn't the historical tribal base that delivers crowds week on week. You could say the same about GWS but I think that with the right product (particularly the inclusion of the ACT) that team is worth investing in. FWIW I think they made a mistake basing the team in Western Sydney. Sounded good but a central base is what was needed. Then again the Sydney Olympics saw the Sydney sporting precinct being moved a long way from central Sydney. They have struggled ever since to win the hearts of the the local as a desirable go to destination. While we are at it Port and Freo should not escape review. A few years back Port were in trouble. By keeping their old Magpie connection they alienated 70% of the local market.They need to realign and take advantage of the fact that following the Crows is financially prohibitive due to closed membership lists etc. I don't know enough about Freo but I expect they need to take a similar path. Tasmania...maybe but they need a covered stadium which they cannot afford.

A thought provoking article: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/mar/31/pause-due-to-covid-19-gives-afl-a-chance-to-build-a-more-agile-and-inclusive-game If the community the AFL is hoping will return do so, how battle weary will they be? Post-isolation, post-sickness – after experiencing a fraying of the very social fabric the game relies on – how will football serve this forever altered community? Is it ready? If survival is only for the elite, then the game will not be any more than the disappointing spectacle that was the soulless round one of the men’s competition this month. The world in which football re-emerges will be a very different one. The easy option would be to piece together a version of the old that would be just as susceptible to increasingly common global disasters. The opportunity that presents itself now is to build something new – something that will last. Something more agile and inclusive.

North to Tasmania doesn't save any money. In fact it costs money if the AFL are required to fund the transfer as they offered for North to move to the Gold Coast. GCS to Tasmania (if the Tasmanian govt is still prepared to heavily subsidise) and merge two to four of the the bottom Melbourne teams.That's money saving. The media deal has always been a strange one with Foxtel being prepared to pay more than half the total fee for the lesser games.This has meant you need lots of product. The next round will be completely different with say Netflix (or Optus) owning Friday night football and various combinations like we have not seen before. If they can match revenue wise what they got under the last deal they will be doing well.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-31/coronavirus-afl-nrl-clubs-desperate-to-keep-fans/12103818 But even if our appetite for sport remains voracious the cost of attendance has risen sharply over the years for families who might now consider club membership a discretionary item rather than a necessity. As we've observed previously, AFL clubs particularly have come perilously close to shaming supporters into purchasing membership over the past 25 years with campaigns that created the underlying assumption that "You are not a real supporter if you are not a member".

Good news but I suspect there is still a bit to play out here with lists and finances.

Interesting as the Constitution guarantees free trade between the states. While the Constitutional power is not a guarantee of free movement complete lockdown of a State could be hard to enforce.

Just looked up the length of the current media deal and as signed goes through until the end of 2021. What I had not realised is that the AFL were close to getting a 2 year extension out of Channel 7 in February this year (2020). Channel 7must be thanking its lucky stars that the deal was not signed. Would not be surprised to see an extension agreed however at a "fair price." You would not be wanting to go to the media market early 2021. PS: According to this article they were close to extending the deal as recently as two weeks ago. https://wwos.nine.com.au/afl/league-set-for-tv-broadcast-deal-extension-despite-shortened-season/605c74fd-6de4-4ca1-95a7-14a74f251bc9

Piece of trivia.........WA were the last to agree to join the federation. In fact if the previous move to federation had got off the ground it would have had NZ in and WA out. They could do a Scotland in years to come.

Money......

Thanks... I had assumed our Brayshaw had headed west. Life in a shared house these days would be interesting to say the least. The millenials are heading home now that the pubs and avocado cafes have been closed or so I've heard ?

So will the brothers comeback fitter than the lone players. Assuming they are bunkered down together. Brayshaws, McDonalds Wagners etc

No problems Andy Will be interesting to see what the advertising bot sends my way ?

Definitely worth discussion. I think form should play a lot bigger part in total remuneration. To some extent it already does through contract renewal but there is certainly room for more incentives due to form. Injury is a lot tougher. Long term injuries are probably tougher again. If they are still paid 75% of the cap that would be a fair outcome. In fact I think it a little too fair.I would set it closer to 66%. Perhaps need to ask should a club still be required to pay almost 100% of the cap when it finishes 16th or thereabouts. Leigh Matthews was big on this at Brisbane a few years back saying why should they pay the same to a bunch of mediocre players when they had no marquee player at the time. Also underscores the need for the bulk of players to have a clear path to work after football. Finally it's important that the clubs aren't allowed to game the system and use the formula to poach the high paid players (a la Sydney with their COLA) while the bulk of the team take the minimum.

Go to Bomber Blitz and you can read the email from Essendon to its members if you wish

It was a Herald Sun article reporting that Essendon had put out a statement to the affect that members who pay for their membership by instalments must continue to pay those instalments.

not a good move.... this story and related ones has a way to go. The AFL and the clubs are businesses and people pay accordingly. If they want donations that is up to the membership. This is why they are desperate to get in some form of season

very strange that they have not been classed as an essential service but then again getting very hard to find a gin and tonic here as well ?

Where I am presently they make a large percentage of the world's surgical gloves and condoms.We are now in day 7 of a four week lockdown and I just read an article that the local condom maker who makes one in five of the world's condoms has ceased production due to the lockdown. They predict a worldwide shortage if they don't start up production.