AFLPA

[deedee]

Retired, not renewed, the consequences are the same - go and find a new career. Players who do have long careers get well financially rewarded, but often carry the scars and injuries they sustain with them for life.

David's mistake is seeing the AFL as a typical industry - it's not. It's entertainment - so more like A-List movie stars getting a % of the gross take. I certainly don't begrudge the players getting a bigger share of the pie - it's them we go to watch week after week isn't it?

Anyway, like I say - they are entitled to whatever they can negotiate - good luck to 'em.

Whatever they can realistically negotiate.

Plenty of de-listed players making good money in state and country leagues, as far as life long injuries, most of my ex military mates have plenty, seen plenty of concreters that can't stand straight either, most of every salary cap increase goes into the pocket of the few superstars already earning the most, so they will get no simpathy from me in these or any further negotiations.

 

[AngryAnt]

Plenty of de-listed players making good money in state and country leagues, as far as life long injuries, most of my ex military mates have plenty, seen plenty of concreters that can't stand straight either, most of every salary cap increase goes into the pocket of the few superstars already earning the most, so they will get no simpathy from me in these or any further negotiations.

Dude, they don't need your sympathy, they'll get whatever they can negotiate.\

I do find the whole discussion bizarre - you seem happy that the Gil McLachlan's of the AFL get even richer along with everyone else associated with the industry, as long as it's not the players. It's OK for the fancy big-end of town to get richer, just as long as the players don't, because workers in other industries are exploited.

Strange POV.

 

[deedee]

Dude, they don't need your sympathy, they'll get whatever they can negotiate.\

I do find the whole discussion bizarre - you seem happy that the Gil McLachlan's of the AFL get even richer along with everyone else associated with the industry, as long as it's not the players. It's OK for the fancy big-end of town to get richer, just as long as the players don't, because workers in other industries are exploited.

Strange POV.

No not a strange POV at all, never said a thing about the Gil McLachlan's of the AFL, anyone straight out of high school that is able to earn 60k+ a year is already on a good deal, an industry with an average wage of $300k a year, is also really good.

What I am saying is I know who is really paying the wages, and it is the supporters, the more they get the more we pay, be it threw gate prices, or the price of watching on TV, even free to air has a cost, the more the broadcasting right the more e3xpencive advertising is, and it is not company's that foot the bill for advertising it is consumers.

As far as AFL head office is concerned I believe it is over crowded and over paid, but thanks for telling me what my opinion is, even thou you are incorrect.

 

[AngryAnt]

No not a strange POV at all, never said a thing about the Gil McLachlan's of the AFL, anyone straight out of high school that is able to earn 60k+ a year is already on a good deal, an industry with an average wage of $300k a year, is also really good.

What I am saying is I know who is really paying the wages, and it is the supporters, the more they get the more we pay, be it threw gate prices, or the price of watching on TV, even free to air has a cost, the more the broadcasting right the more e3xpencive advertising is, and it is not company's that foot the bill for advertising it is consumers.

As far as AFL head office is concerned I believe it is over crowded and over paid, but thanks for telling me what my opinion is, even thou you are incorrect.

And yet you were concerned about the percentage of the gross the players get, not the gross itself, which is a different topic.

 

[deedee]

And yet you were concerned about the percentage of the gross the players get, not the gross itself, which is a different topic.

No it's not, it is all inflationary. They both feed off each other

 

[AngryAnt]

No it's not, it is all inflationary. They both feed off each other

Actually, it's related to the demand, not the supply side. It's what the TV/cable networks and public are willing to pay for it.

All the players are doing is carving up a bigger slice of the pie, not driving up costs.

 

[deedee]

Actually, it's related to the demand, not the supply side. It's what the TV/cable networks and public are willing to pay for it.

All the players are doing is carving up a bigger slice of the pie, not driving up costs.

Actually it works both ways, they take a bigger slice, the AfL ( or any other company for that matter) will try to make the pie bigger to regain what they @lost@ in the negotiation, and it gets back to it is all inflationary that the supporters end up paying. I don't think the players have much to complain about, any job that has an average of 300k with nothing more than high school education and anything they get above the cost of living increase is undeserved in my opinion. And that is not even taking into account the doors that open up to these young men by just being at an AFL club.

 

[Blind Charlie]

What I am saying is I know who is really paying the wages, and it is the supporters, the more they get the more we pay, be it threw gate prices, or the price of watching on TV, even free to air has a cost, the more the broadcasting right the more e3xpencive advertising is, and it is not company's that foot the bill for advertising it is consumers.

Everything you mention would/will happen regardless of the players CBA, the 6 year deal is done.
The pie has been made & the players just want a fair slice of it.
Its the size of the pie that effects the customers NOT the size of the slice!

 

[deedee]

Everything you mention would/will happen regardless of the players CBA, the 6 year deal is done.
The pie has been made & the players just want a fair slice of it.
Its the size of the pie that effects the customers NOT the size of the slice!

Ok, if I am running a musical at a thearter and my singing employees want more $$$ so my inputs for the production have gone up which in turn forces me to increase what I charge, be it entry fees, or popcorn prices or whatever the bigger the slices of pie I hand out the bigger I need to make the pie, otherwise I go backwards, and once the singers get more all of my singing coaches will expect more, yet all my other over heads like up keep of my theater, my junior development for the budding 12 year old singers that are out there and my legal fees insurance and so on, So yes every slice that increases in size results in the pie needing to get bigger, and the only way the pie gets bigger is by putting your hand deeper into the pockets of the mug punter.

And as far as a fair slice goes and average salary of over 300k a year for providing 52 hours per year of entertainment is more than fair in my opinion.

And the pie has not been made, the broadcasting deal is part of it but by no means all of it.

 

[Blind Charlie]

52 hours of entertainment is where I bow out on this .
As antman described it, its about the demand so I agree to disagree on the subject.

 

[AngryAnt]

Actually it works both ways, they take a bigger slice, the AfL ( or any other company for that matter) will try to make the pie bigger to regain what they @lost@ in the negotiation, and it gets back to it is all inflationary that the supporters end up paying. I don't think the players have much to complain about, any job that has an average of 300k with nothing more than high school education and anything they get above the cost of living increase is undeserved in my opinion. And that is not even taking into account the doors that open up to these young men by just being at an AFL club.

Nope. It's demand side. If the AFL wants too much money from the networks, they won't pay it. If they put the seat prices/membership prices up too much, supporters won't pay it.

Dude, the players are fighting over their percentage of the pie. Whether you think they "have much to complain about" or not, they'll negotiate the best deal they can. That's business.

 

[Baloo]

With the intrusion into the players lives that is mainstream and social media these days, the players have a right to demand more. They are high profile people who are constantly being watched 24x7.

If the AFL want to give them less, then give the players back their image rights. If the AFL want to use them in promotions, media access or sponsor events, let the managers broker the deal. Then it's up to the players to further maximise their income during their short AFL career.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Greedy AFLPA & players still holding strike action over the head of the coming season...

 

[K3]

Greedy AFLPA & players still holding strike action over the head of the coming season...

When Tennis, Basketball and Soccer players are getting paid 10s of millions of dollars a year, don't know if it is fair to call the players greedy mate.

 

[Baloo]

When Tennis, Basketball and Soccer players are getting paid 10s of millions of dollars a year, don't know if it is fair to call the players greedy mate.

Agree. Too many people drinking the AFL Kool-Aid. Players have a right to maximize their earnings during their short career. But the AFL and clubs should link it to other agreements to even the balance of power. i.e. Clubs can transfer players to other clubs without the players consent. The should make trade time more fun and take the power which is the FA bargaining chip away from just the players.

 

[tigertim]

When Tennis, Basketball and Soccer players are getting paid 10s of millions of dollars a year, don't know if it is fair to call the players greedy mate.

But tennis, basketball and soccer are played on an international basis garnering income far greater than the AFL so I don't think that's a good comparison.

 

[taztiger4]

But tennis, basketball and soccer are played on an international basis garnering income far greater than the AFL so I don't think that's a good comparison.

not too mention the fact most of our AFL clubs are still membership owned not for profit organisations

 

[AngryAnt]

Found this article interesting:

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/footys-explosive-cash-war-explained/news-story/1e61542df899e052cc39ca559b1ac010

According to reports, the AFLPA will argue in the upcoming negotiations that players only receive about 22-23 per cent of total industry revenue.

FOR the first time the players are asking for a fixed percentage of the AFL’s annual revenue. They haven’t publicly shown their hand on the number, but it’s mooted to be around the 25 to 27 per cent mark.

Doesn't seem that greedy to me given they are ones putting their bodies on the line for our entertainment. Where does the rest of the money go?

 

[MB78]

100% agree with the above statements from Taz and Tim

And they are trying to get a % of the revenue when the AFL is about to own Eddiehead stadium. How would that work in any practical way?

I think a 10% pay rise pa for the next 5 years would work best, with the min salary going up this much so that rookies can make a decent living without it going straight to the top tier players. This is well above and beyond CPI and real wage growth and it allows clubs to plan salary caps.

If the players have done the right thing by the game the AFL would be able to afford the increase and they can look for more at the next agreement. If the game can't afford it the players will need to adjust accordingly.

 

[dcstar]

Found this article interesting:

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/footys-explosive-cash-war-explained/news-story/1e61542df899e052cc39ca559b1ac010

Doesn't seem that greedy to me given they are ones putting their bodies on the line for our entertainment. Where does the rest of the money go?

No one forces people to become paid footballers. The AFLPA want a cut of all GROSS income without any consideration for the costs of running the game and this is ridiculous. The players want all the protections of being employees but be paid as if they are co-owners.

If the AFLPA want a fixed slice of all money coming in then the players can start financing ALL the costs of their overheads which are now paid for by the clubs.
The players themselves can pay for all the resources thrown at them to continuously improve them as individuals so they can earn more money in the industry like all other independent contractors have to do in virtually every other work sector in Australia.

You can either be an employee with all the benefits that go with that status or you can be some sort of contractor taking a big cut but responsible for your own costs - you can't be both.