TuesdayswithTerry said:
On of the dumbest syllogisms going around - maybe that's why some people believe it
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Richmond in Tassie?
- Thread starter Ian4
- Start date
On of the dumbest syllogisms going around - maybe that's why some people believe it
Tiges in Tassie with zoning base.Brisbane clearly see Tassie as a drafting goldmine-they have six on their senior list
More members.Helps pay the bills.
Tiges v Hawks annual Tassie cup.Will continue the Hobart/Launceston rivalry.More rabid supporters.
Sponsorships? Tiger Airways,Tassie Tiger Coterie,bloody hell there is the Historical town of Richmond,just out of Hobart!
Coming in from Geelong,it would be quicker to fly the 45 min flight than go over the West Gate!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Let's do it.
More members.Helps pay the bills.
Tiges v Hawks annual Tassie cup.Will continue the Hobart/Launceston rivalry.More rabid supporters.
Sponsorships? Tiger Airways,Tassie Tiger Coterie,bloody hell there is the Historical town of Richmond,just out of Hobart!
Coming in from Geelong,it would be quicker to fly the 45 min flight than go over the West Gate!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Let's do it.
Pretty straight forward response to this. The MCG is our home ground, not Etihad. We make less money at Etihad and our lowest drawing games are always played there, which means games from there are the best candidates to move to Tasmania to provide a better financial return.Ian4 said:this argument annoys me more than most. so you're happy to move home games from etihad to interstate, not not MCG games? :
I'm with Ian here. We are attractive to Tassie because we are the Tigers. Let them get their own team. I quite like mine at Punt Rd.
ZeroGame said:
so the MCG is our home ground is it? but hold on a sec... you wanna play home games in tassie. you can't have it both ways.
oh and forget the money argument - that argument is dead. 11 home games in melbourne this year will result in $1.1 million in extra revenue due to the new stadium deals. people keep overlooking this point. benny gale even made mention of it in the hobart mercury article.
TuesdayswithTerry said:
I see it more like this:
We are in debt by 4 million
Play games in tassie = less debt.
Erase debt start making profit
Profit = more money to spend on development
better development = more completive on field
more completive on field = more wins
more wins = finals
Suddenly we can start competting against the top clubs once we wipe out our clinton casey debt.
if it helps us out money wise all for it but what does that mean for members we lose out on going to home games?? my 17 game membership with the 11 home game reserve seat will be compremised what compensation will us members get?????
I understand that, however I've also put a condition that we play all our remaining home games at the MCG and have all away games against MCG tennants (and other big clubs like Essendon) at the MCG. The result would be more total games at the MCG and a couple of away games at Tassie that we get $400k+ per game to play at.Ian4 said:
I'd be happy for us to sell games to tassie if we make millions that will
help make te club powerful. On field success is something we don't have, that in an equal
playing field will make you a lot better financially, but in the meantime, this is move we need to make for the lack of finals that we participate in.
help make te club powerful. On field success is something we don't have, that in an equal
playing field will make you a lot better financially, but in the meantime, this is move we need to make for the lack of finals that we participate in.
I don't mind the Hobart prospect but something tells me this is going to be remote at best...why...coz the MCG and Etihad would have not gone to such lengths to concede significant % of their revenue back to the Melbourne clubs without a little commitment back in return. This commitment I would think, but hey Im only speculating..would mean a minimum number of games at ea venue per season
ZeroGame said:
In a nutshell.
And let me add to point (2), preferably against WA or Qld sides, so they have to travel further!!!
Tiger74 said:
not going thru this with again you T74. been there done that. but 6 weeks til the world cup ;D
Tigion said:
no, the 17 game membership will revert to 15 games. we will lose our reserved seat at 2 home games.
ZeroGame said:
lets not forget that these games in tassie will be home games. if we were the away team, by all means, but these will be our HOME games.
think about it this way... if you have a 17 game membership, that will be reduced to 15 right? does that mean these members will get a reduction in membership cost?
what about members who have a reserved seat at home games? remember that we'll only get to sit in our reserved seat for 9 games instead of 11. even if we do get 2 reciprical games, we still will not gain admittance to our reserved seat area for those games. so will we get a reduction in membership cost?
if we do get a membership price reduction, how much would that cut into the $400-$500k profit from these games? do the maths - even if you take $10 off per membership for $35,000-40,000 members, then a large chunk of the Hobart money is already gone.
and if we don't get a membership price reduction... well quite frankly the club will be ripping us off. and the last thing the club would wanna do is make its traditional supporters unhappy.
some people have suggested this is win/win. imo its lose/lose
Below is a story from Hobart's Mercury newspaper today. So it appears that the Tasmanian Government aren't prepared to give other clubs what Hawthorn is getting to play in Launceston.
THE Tasmanian Government will not financially support an AFL club to play home matches in Hobart.
Richmond is looking at playing home games at Bellerive Oval, but with no State Government support the task of luring a team to Hobart, while not impossible, makes it considerably harder.
Premier David Bartlett said yesterday Hawthorn, which gets $3.4 million of Government money a year to play four home games in Launceston, would be the only Government-backed side in Tasmania.
"The Government won't be entering into any arrangements of sponsorship or underwriting of games at Bellerive so therefore any clubs who made arrangements with AFL Tasmania and the TCA [Cricket Tasmania] to play games there would effectively be doing so without Government involvement," he said.
"Having said that, I wouldn't actively stand in the way of it either."
Hawthorn's five-year contract expires at the end of 2012 but, significantly, is due for renegotiation this year.
Cricket Tasmania is keen to see its boutique Bellerive stadium host AFL games, and has sent stadium economic figures to Richmond chief executive Brendon Gale just last week.
While no Government financial support would be a massive blow, an AFL club may look at the Hobart option by the lure of a "clean" stadium and large, untapped football-mad population starved of local AFL content or attempt to attract support from a private entity.
The architect of the Hawks-Tasmania contract, former premier Paul Lennon, has been pushing for more AFL games in Hobart and said Richmond was the logical fit.
"I think it is a very good idea," Mr Lennon said yesterday.
"I think it is time that AFL football was played live in Hobart. I think the Richmond Tigers would be a very good fit given they have had a long-time association with Tasmania.
"Some of Richmond's greatest players have come from Tasmania, Royce Hart and Paul Sproule amongst them."
what is this?
Share this article
THE Tasmanian Government will not financially support an AFL club to play home matches in Hobart.
Richmond is looking at playing home games at Bellerive Oval, but with no State Government support the task of luring a team to Hobart, while not impossible, makes it considerably harder.
Premier David Bartlett said yesterday Hawthorn, which gets $3.4 million of Government money a year to play four home games in Launceston, would be the only Government-backed side in Tasmania.
"The Government won't be entering into any arrangements of sponsorship or underwriting of games at Bellerive so therefore any clubs who made arrangements with AFL Tasmania and the TCA [Cricket Tasmania] to play games there would effectively be doing so without Government involvement," he said.
"Having said that, I wouldn't actively stand in the way of it either."
Hawthorn's five-year contract expires at the end of 2012 but, significantly, is due for renegotiation this year.
Cricket Tasmania is keen to see its boutique Bellerive stadium host AFL games, and has sent stadium economic figures to Richmond chief executive Brendon Gale just last week.
While no Government financial support would be a massive blow, an AFL club may look at the Hobart option by the lure of a "clean" stadium and large, untapped football-mad population starved of local AFL content or attempt to attract support from a private entity.
The architect of the Hawks-Tasmania contract, former premier Paul Lennon, has been pushing for more AFL games in Hobart and said Richmond was the logical fit.
"I think it is a very good idea," Mr Lennon said yesterday.
"I think it is time that AFL football was played live in Hobart. I think the Richmond Tigers would be a very good fit given they have had a long-time association with Tasmania.
"Some of Richmond's greatest players have come from Tasmania, Royce Hart and Paul Sproule amongst them."
what is this?
Share this article
It give the Tassie govt some negotiating power though. $3.4 mill a year is a lot.
P.S. Was Paul Sproule one of our 'greatest' players?
P.S. Was Paul Sproule one of our 'greatest' players?
