Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Tue Jun 24, 2025 5:37 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 1:41 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:47 pm
Posts: 580
Crikey and North were complaining that they get $1 per ticket.

When does the Dome contract expire? 2015?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 1:48 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:47 pm
Posts: 580
Jarusa wrote:
nck wrote:
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,25429827-19742,00.html

Quote:
CARLTON says it is determined to again play several home games at Visy Park, after another paltry gate return from Etihad Stadium. The Blues have been told they will receive just $17,000 from their Round 2 game against the Brisbane Lions, despite a crowd of 42,496.

It works out to 40c a ticket sold, an embarrassing figure the club says reinforces its stadium deal is the worst of all clubs at the Docklands venue.


Quote:
The AFL did a study on how much clubs make per head, and we were on the bottom of that ladder.

"The Bulldogs and North Melbourne were making more than us."


It is not 40 cents per ticket sold, it is 40 cents averaged against all at the ground. Not everyone has to buy a ticket.

Many there would have been paid up members.

Let's have a look at what has happened over the last few years.

Our membership has skyrocketed.

That is great for bottom line revenue.

But it might not be great for ground receipts.

If the proportion of members attending games now is greater than it was a few years ago our gate receipts are going to suffer at all venues, especially smaller venues.

It would be great to know the numbers, but this is more than likely what is happening.

It's all posturing to get better deals at MCG and Docklands.


So take away Blues members and the return increases? Forgive me Im a maths donkey


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 1:56 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 11:39 am
Posts: 30269
Location: riding shotgun on Agros Karma Train
Deano did you expect the AFL to have mercy on us because of our financial position at the time?

_________________
Between our dreams and actions lies this world


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 1:59 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am
Posts: 23123
anfield, Yes.

Carlton said it was 40c per ticket, which is a blatant lie.

$17,000 over 42,500 people is 40 cents per person.

42,500 did not buy tickets.

Let's say it was about 25,000 member who attended. That leaves 17,000 people who paid to go via ticket (even less if you take out medallion club etc, but lets keep it simple).

So about $1 per ticket.

Is it the worst deal at Etihad.

The simple answer is no one know unless we have the exact numbers for members and tickets for each game for each team.

The fact that Carlton have lied about the numbers tells me it is not the worst deal. Otherwise they would have given the full details of how many members attended.

It is a catch 22, Carlton want the extra memberships to boost revenue. But when you have over 40,000 members it is going to make getting money from gate receipts more difficult, especially for small stadiums like Etihad.

If we build up to 50,000 members next year the gate receipts problem will get even worse.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 2:16 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 6:31 pm
Posts: 24457
Location: Heartbroken
kingkerna wrote:
Deano did you expect the AFL to have mercy on us because of our financial position at the time?


No.

_________________
Richard Pratt - A Carlton legend.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 2:49 pm 
Offline
Herald Sun columnist
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 12:26 pm
Posts: 10018
Location: Visy Park
Deano Supremo wrote:
Jesus Christ, that'd go down well.

That'd be the biggest PR disaster of all time.


Agreed, which is why my statement was tongue in cheek because the situation is farcical.

_________________
“It is a state of mind, a system of belief, a way of seeing the world, a deep faith that, because you are Carlton, you belong to something great.” - Mike Fitzpatrick articulating what Out of the Blue means.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 2:53 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls

Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:03 pm
Posts: 3510
Location: East Brunwick
Greg Swan was on radio SEN this morning and was discussing this matter. Here are a few things he said.........

A return of $17,000 for Carlton when a crowd of 44,000 turned up imagine how much a team like the kangas lose when they play interstate sides.

The AFL will have to build a 'no frills' stadium or redevelop Princes Park as the MCG and Etihad Stadium have both made it clear that they do not want to host games like Kangas, Melbourne and Bulldogs vs Gold Coast and West Sydney. No matter the crowd size or attendance both stadiums will not make money with games like this.

The problem with the Etihad is that other than gate receipts clubs have no other opportunity to make money ie corporate boxes, pouring rights, and advertising. Its all controlled by Etihad and they reap the rewards

Geelong make about $650,000 a home game at Skilled Stadium because they get to negotiate there own pouring rights, the selling of advertising and corporate boxes.

West Coast Eagles have a fantastic deal with Subiaco. They pay the WA commission a rental fee and everything else they negotiate and sell. Subiaco has 108 corporate boxes, imagine each box is sold for $2,000 at a minimum + gate intakes, pouring rights and advertising.

If the AFL take control and redeveloped Princes Park into a boutique stadium clubs will be able sell and organise there own deals and plenty of money from corporate boxes, advertising and pouring rights.

Swan said the AFL has commissioned a feasibility study and have appointed a group who within a months time will to go in and assess how much work is needed and the financial cost to transform princess park into a viable stadium. Currently the stadiums capacity has been reduced to 25,000, he said all the seats would have to be replaced with new ones, facility upgrades like corporate boxes, toilets, broadcasting etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 3:27 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:47 pm
Posts: 580
Melvey wrote:
Greg Swan was on radio SEN this morning and was discussing this matter. Here are a few things he said.........

A return of $17,000 for Carlton when a crowd of 44,000 turned up imagine how much a team like the kangas lose when they play interstate sides.

The AFL will have to build a 'no frills' stadium or redevelop Princes Park as the MCG and Etihad Stadium have both made it clear that they do not want to host games like Kangas, Melbourne and Bulldogs vs Gold Coast and West Sydney. No matter the crowd size or attendance both stadiums will not make money with games like this.

The problem with the Etihad is that other than gate receipts clubs have no other opportunity to make money ie corporate boxes, pouring rights, and advertising. Its all controlled by Etihad and they reap the rewards

Geelong make about $650,000 a home game at Skilled Stadium because they get to negotiate there own pouring rights, the selling of advertising and corporate boxes.

West Coast Eagles have a fantastic deal with Subiaco. They pay the WA commission a rental fee and everything else they negotiate and sell. Subiaco has 108 corporate boxes, imagine each box is sold for $2,000 at a minimum + gate intakes, pouring rights and advertising.

If the AFL take control and redeveloped Princes Park into a boutique stadium clubs will be able sell and organise there own deals and plenty of money from corporate boxes, advertising and pouring rights.

Swan said the AFL has commissioned a feasibility study and have appointed a group who within a months time will to go in and assess how much work is needed and the financial cost to transform princess park into a viable stadium. Currently the stadiums capacity has been reduced to 25,000, he said all the seats would have to be replaced with new ones, facility upgrades like corporate boxes, toilets, broadcasting etc.


What about the Essenscum? Dont they have the best deasl at Etihyad?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 3:30 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls

Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:03 pm
Posts: 3510
Location: East Brunwick
anfield wrote:
Melvey wrote:
Greg Swan was on radio SEN this morning and was discussing this matter. Here are a few things he said.........

A return of $17,000 for Carlton when a crowd of 44,000 turned up imagine how much a team like the kangas lose when they play interstate sides.

The AFL will have to build a 'no frills' stadium or redevelop Princes Park as the MCG and Etihad Stadium have both made it clear that they do not want to host games like Kangas, Melbourne and Bulldogs vs Gold Coast and West Sydney. No matter the crowd size or attendance both stadiums will not make money with games like this.

The problem with the Etihad is that other than gate receipts clubs have no other opportunity to make money ie corporate boxes, pouring rights, and advertising. Its all controlled by Etihad and they reap the rewards

Geelong make about $650,000 a home game at Skilled Stadium because they get to negotiate there own pouring rights, the selling of advertising and corporate boxes.

West Coast Eagles have a fantastic deal with Subiaco. They pay the WA commission a rental fee and everything else they negotiate and sell. Subiaco has 108 corporate boxes, imagine each box is sold for $2,000 at a minimum + gate intakes, pouring rights and advertising.

If the AFL take control and redeveloped Princes Park into a boutique stadium clubs will be able sell and organise there own deals and plenty of money from corporate boxes, advertising and pouring rights.

Swan said the AFL has commissioned a feasibility study and have appointed a group who within a months time will to go in and assess how much work is needed and the financial cost to transform princess park into a viable stadium. Currently the stadiums capacity has been reduced to 25,000, he said all the seats would have to be replaced with new ones, facility upgrades like corporate boxes, toilets, broadcasting etc.


What about the Essenscum? Dont they have the best deasl at Etihyad?


They do and its written in there contract that no other team can negotiate a better deal. They signed a 25 year deal or something along the lines like that as they were the first tenants.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 3:37 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:04 pm
Posts: 48548
Location: Prison Island
from memory if you buy a carlton top from the shop at the dome then Essendon* get some money from that

_________________
*(grow - fun - gah) :fight:

Yeah but whatabout your whataboutism.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 3:48 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls

Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:03 pm
Posts: 3510
Location: East Brunwick
I think we have outgrown Princes Park. Im not sure what our exact home game average attendance against interstate sides are but i would have to say it would be around 32k to 35k

I honestly believe that playing home games at PP would discourage many supporters when we need to grow.

Games against the Lions, Eagles and Swans are usually played at night. If they are moved to Princes Park they would be played in the afternoon and most likely on foxtel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 3:49 pm 
Offline
Wayne Johnston
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 8128
grrofunger wrote:
from memory if you buy a carlton top from the shop at the dome then Essendon* get some money from that


That's farcical if true. Surely not..

_________________
There's so much I could say...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 3:54 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:38 pm
Posts: 7640
Agree with comment about revisionism here

This is no ones fault bar the AFL

They wouldnt let us stay at PP -THEY wouldnt let us have all our home games at the MCG THEY MADE US HAVE HALF OUR GAMES AT THE DOME

The Club was in no position financially to argue and the AFL said even if we tried to have the "G" AS OUR HOME GROUND THEY WOULD SCHEDULE GAMES AT Telstra Dome and if we wanted to stay at PP they would schedule the games at Telstra Dome

Who do you think ultimately signs off on these stadium deals - the AFL -they didnt ensure there was protection in the agreements between the stadium and the club and we had no real bargaining power


You will recall that this was about the same time where the AFL instead of giving us a grant like the dogs and norf advanced us an interest bearing loan to "help" us survive - if they had of sought repayment at that time we were dead so they had us cold

Dont you recall also that the club sought to do a deal with the MCG to play its home games there and as part of that deal the MCG would relinquish the position of requiring one of the preliminary finals to be played there -the AFL BLOCKED THIS DEAL -2 OR so years later it agreed to this position when a similar deal was reached by the MCG and the Bloody Carringbush


Dont slag off about Collo before you know the true facts and in my eyes Collo is as much a saviour of the footy club as was Richard Pratt

The Club would have gone under if not for Collo stepping up to the Presidency and secondly refusing to throw in the towel when it got tough when others wanted to throw the keys to the AFL AND say it was all over :banghead:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 3:55 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:04 pm
Posts: 48548
Location: Prison Island
budzy wrote:
grrofunger wrote:
from memory if you buy a carlton top from the shop at the dome then Essendon* get some money from that


That's farcical if true. Surely not..


I cant find the article , it was a few years back - Part of the leasing deal was that profits from the shop (i dont even know if this shop still exists at the dome) go to Essendon*, so no matter what is bought in the shop , they get a cut. so yeah a portion of profit from a carlton top would go to them.

I remember when i was in melbourne a few years back seeing the shop and the window plastered with Essendon* gear thinking it was a bit unfair that they got all that exposure and then i saw the article about the leasing arrangements etc - and it made sense.

maybe its not the case, not sure

_________________
*(grow - fun - gah) :fight:

Yeah but whatabout your whataboutism.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 4:00 pm 
Offline
Herald Sun columnist
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 12:26 pm
Posts: 10018
Location: Visy Park
The merchandise shop, which the Scum reap all the benefits does still exist, which is why the club is always at pains to state at which gate to buy CFC merchandise from at ES.

_________________
“It is a state of mind, a system of belief, a way of seeing the world, a deep faith that, because you are Carlton, you belong to something great.” - Mike Fitzpatrick articulating what Out of the Blue means.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 4:01 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:47 am
Posts: 18288
Location: talkingcarlton.com
budzy wrote:
grrofunger wrote:
from memory if you buy a carlton top from the shop at the dome then Essendon* get some money from that


That's farcical if true. Surely not..


Not sure if it is actually true or not, but it has been bandied about ever since the deals were done that the Bombers would receive a percentage of every sale for any club at the Dome merchandise stalls.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 4:02 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:47 pm
Posts: 580
Melvey wrote:
anfield wrote:
Melvey wrote:
Greg Swan was on radio SEN this morning and was discussing this matter. Here are a few things he said.........

A return of $17,000 for Carlton when a crowd of 44,000 turned up imagine how much a team like the kangas lose when they play interstate sides.

The AFL will have to build a 'no frills' stadium or redevelop Princes Park as the MCG and Etihad Stadium have both made it clear that they do not want to host games like Kangas, Melbourne and Bulldogs vs Gold Coast and West Sydney. No matter the crowd size or attendance both stadiums will not make money with games like this.

The problem with the Etihad is that other than gate receipts clubs have no other opportunity to make money ie corporate boxes, pouring rights, and advertising. Its all controlled by Etihad and they reap the rewards

Geelong make about $650,000 a home game at Skilled Stadium because they get to negotiate there own pouring rights, the selling of advertising and corporate boxes.

West Coast Eagles have a fantastic deal with Subiaco. They pay the WA commission a rental fee and everything else they negotiate and sell. Subiaco has 108 corporate boxes, imagine each box is sold for $2,000 at a minimum + gate intakes, pouring rights and advertising.

If the AFL take control and redeveloped Princes Park into a boutique stadium clubs will be able sell and organise there own deals and plenty of money from corporate boxes, advertising and pouring rights.

Swan said the AFL has commissioned a feasibility study and have appointed a group who within a months time will to go in and assess how much work is needed and the financial cost to transform princess park into a viable stadium. Currently the stadiums capacity has been reduced to 25,000, he said all the seats would have to be replaced with new ones, facility upgrades like corporate boxes, toilets, broadcasting etc.


What about the Essenscum? Dont they have the best deasl at Etihyad?


They do and its written in there contract that no other team can negotiate a better deal. They signed a 25 year deal or something along the lines like that as they were the first tenants.


Maybe not a better deal but what about the same deal?

We did get upfront money too from the Dome. I dont know what happened to it but it was part of the deal. We were so desperate then and we all smart with hindsight now that we are back on our feet so taking that money was a short term fix but given the circumstances a short term fix was needed?

Its easy to be hard on Collins but he stepped up when the no one else wanted and got rid of Smorgy.

The agreement expires about the time we will be at our peak. I cant see us getting screwed again or ever getting into the position were we can be screwed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 4:03 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2005 9:00 am
Posts: 23123
grrofunger wrote:
budzy wrote:
grrofunger wrote:
from memory if you buy a carlton top from the shop at the dome then Essendon* get some money from that


That's farcical if true. Surely not..


I cant find the article , it was a few years back - Part of the leasing deal was that profits from the shop (i dont even know if this shop still exists at the dome) go to Essendon*, so no matter what is bought in the shop , they get a cut. so yeah a portion of profit from a carlton top would go to them.

I remember when i was in melbourne a few years back seeing the shop and the window plastered with Essendon* gear thinking it was a bit unfair that they got all that exposure and then i saw the article about the leasing arrangements etc - and it made sense.

maybe its not the case, not sure


This has been covered a few times on TC over the years.

Basically there are some Essendon* controlled shops in the stadium that sell AFL merchandise.

There is usually one stand within the stadium each game that sells just Carlton gear and the money from them goes to Carlton. Trouble is, you have to know which one it is.

But yes, it is true that it is possible to buy a Carlton guernsey at Docklands on matchday and the money goes to Essendon*.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 4:07 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:38 pm
Posts: 7640
Further to my earlier rant as part of this exercise you had Fitzpatrick from the AFL sitting at the Carlton board meetings as an observer - so the decision to go to the Dome have the AFL fingerprints all over it :mad:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 05, 2009 4:18 pm 
Offline
Herald Sun columnist
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 12:26 pm
Posts: 10018
Location: Visy Park
frank, with the AFL being keen to move us to the Dome at the time, wouldn't Collo of also benefitted from that too as CEO?

_________________
“It is a state of mind, a system of belief, a way of seeing the world, a deep faith that, because you are Carlton, you belong to something great.” - Mike Fitzpatrick articulating what Out of the Blue means.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Maxwell Smart and 22 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group