Lawyers by their nature are not gamblers and despite a few rash comments, Football Federation Australia CEO David Gallop doesn’t come across as a man who would be first in line if the organisation installed a roulette table in their headquarters.
But even the most sober of lawyers would have to act if they were given $346m from a TV network and told to place a bet that will affect the future of the whole sport. One spin, and doing nothing is not an option. The stakes couldn’t be higher
Last time the FFA were faced with a similar decision, they bet on red and black and won big. But as several teams gear up for expansion, there is no obvious safe and each potential franchise comes with its own risks.
Gallop and the FFA are still as oblique as ever on the criteria for any new franchise, beyond viability of size and fan-base, as they weigh up the odds.
Most keen are Geelong, South Melbourne and Tasmania, as reflected by the bookies’ pricing. None are certainties, though.
Pundits will point to the success of Melbourne Victory’s sojourn to Western Victoria, but it would be wrong to assume an impressive crowd size of over 14,000 at Simonds Stadium means Geelong is ready to host a franchise.
The Victory’s game was played at the height of holiday season and before any conclusions can be made as to the viability of a franchise, you first have to separate what numbers are existing Victory supporters or day-trippers and which numbers are Geelong natives.
Satisfy the FFA with those numbers and the odds start tumbling. Geelong is a serious contender but that doesn’t necessarily translate into support from the governing body, as Canberra, who are still licking their wounds from their failed franchise bid in 2012, will attest.
Or indeed South Melbourne.
The child of the old Hellas club is one of the most well-known names from the old NSL days and was beaten to a licence by Melbourne Heart, and were later rebuffed in their attempts to buy the Heart.
South Melbourne has long coveted an A-League licence. Like the Western Sydney Wanders, and unlike Melbourne City, they have a clearly defined fan-base and a sense of community within the city. On paper, they are one of the strongest candidates.
And yet, the FFA has been lukewarm in the past and may be reluctant to entertain a third Melbourne team so soon. The city could sustain a third franchise, but there is a real chance this could dilute support for the existing clubs. Melbourne City especially are still slowly developing their supporter base and there’s only so long a Cahill bounce can last for – most probably until his legs give way.
Politically, the FFA may also feel they need to expand into a territory that isn’t currently served by an A-League team, such as the Gold Coast.
Or, indeed, Tasmania.
There is no doubt the local government would love a Tasmanian franchise and while any club would be competing against the Hobart Hurricanes for bums on seats, the island fills the definition of an untapped market and would relish being a David against the Goliaths of Sydney and Melbourne.
But passion alone won’t impress the FFA and a stadium remains one of Tasmania’s biggest issues, as does the rivalry between Hobart and Launceston. Base the club solely in one area and you risk alienating half your market.
On the opposite side, if the FFA want to properly tap into a heritage name and an existing fan-base, perhaps they’ll decide to listen to the pundits who have long championed Wollongong’s case for expansion. The Wolves were one of the biggest names from the NSL and the area has the support base in the Shire without the risk of syphoning off existing support from Sydney FC and the Wanderers.
But the FFA hasn’t exactly shown itself to be overly sentimental or nostalgic when it comes to selecting franchises and purely going by attendances and the demands of TV networks, they may view Geelong or South Melbourne as a sure fire winner.
Again, much depends on how lucky the FFA is feeling in the crapshoot.
Then there’s another gamble of aiming for a second Queensland team, either in or out of Brisbane. The risks here are more apparent. Bring in the Brisbane Strikers and you risk destabilising the Roar at a point in time when the owners have a rocky relationship with their supporters.
And while there is a thriving football scene in Queensland, memories of Gold Coast Unity and the Fury probably still keep some at the FFA awake at night. Will those bad dreams mean they stay away from the Sunshine State?
While sports administrators aren’t a breed that attract much in the way of sympathy, it’s hard not to feel a little for Gallop and his team.
Whichever way they bet, the minute the next franchise is announced, there will inevitably be a long line of pundits and fans queuing up to tell the authorities why they’re wrong.
Time will tell if this set of gamblers hit upon a hot streak by creating the next Western Sydney Wanderers or loses all momentum by giving us another New Zealand Knights.
j binnie
Guest
Nemesis -Thanks again for the reply,My suspicious mind led me the other way ,that being ,as part of being granted a licence, you, (the franchisee) were told where you had to play bearing in mind conditions within stadia around Australia.some seated.some not, some with good surfaces ,some not, some with "legal" floodlights,some not, you get the picture????. Re Sth Melbourne '. It would be interesting to know what their 40 year lease terms are, for if you can break even on 1000 attendees,their "rental" can't amount to much when one considers the other costs involved in running an HAL team.,after all 13 games at $30 a head only comes to $170,000 per annum. There are players in the HAL presently earning double that amount. So the question is raised, what are the rental costs for their leased stadium, not to mention the upkeep and maintenance of the same. I am assuming those costs are not involved in the lease terms???? Cheers jb,
Nemesis
Guest
jb 1) why do HAL teams play in stadia that are far too big? A: I've no idea. It's one of the big mysteries to me. Victory, who are the biggest supporter base in the Aleague now, started life playing at Olympic Park. Once they found the demand was there, they moved to a bigger venue. That's the way businesses normally evolve. They build a factory, or rent office space, to satisfy the forecast demand. Then, if they grow, they upsize. 2) The State Govt of Victoria owns the Lakeside Stadium but Sth Melb have a long term (40 years I think) lease to operate the stadium. I don't think owning the bricks & mortar is important for football clubs. Just like owning bricks & mortar isn't important for most businesses. If clubs can operate the stadium it provides a new revenue boost (catering) & eliminates many costs that stadiums add on.
Mister Football
Roar Guru
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/football/ffa-hints-it-may-delay-release-of-aleague-expansion-blueprint/news-story/debc63b87dce9cfff5fae73f9c0e3a66 FFA hints it may delay release of A-League expansion blueprint FOOTBALL Federation Australia has given the strongest hint yet that they may delay the release of the highly-anticipated A-League expansion blueprint. FFA has issued a statement, claiming they’ll “have more to say in coming weeks”, adding new clubs were doomed to fail if not commercially viable.
j binnie
Guest
Nemesis - Thank you for the reply. As you correctly point out,there are many factors other than attendances to be considered when examining how an HAL franchise is run, but without going into detail can you explain why all of our HAL teams appear to be playing in stadia that are far too big for their support bases.Is there a hidden agenda there that we are not told about?. Also on that vein. I note you say South Melbourne "operate" their own stadium, it is that word "operate" that worries me, and make me ask,do they "own" their own stadium or is it leased from a municipal society?. If you could clarify those 2 questions it would help readers follow your logic, especially when you introduce as back up, European Leagues, where many of the clubs actually do own their own stadiums lock,stock and barrel... Cheers jb.
Nemesis
Guest
Let me guess. You're not very good at Cryptic Crossword Puzzles?
Beny Iniesta
Guest
Are you talking of the NFL? The best example of Crash & Carry I can think of with 16 game seasons. Judging by the worldwide hype about the SuperBowl I think they go alright mate - the biggest Football League in the World no less!!
Nemesis
Guest
Sth Melb didn't say they're aiming for 1k crowds. They said that, because they own the management rights to their home stadium, they can break even on matchdays with 1k crowds. If you think crowds are the determining factor when deciding if a comp is Mickey Mouse, you've got a pretty poor understanding of football leagues in Europe. Of the Top 20 football leagues in Europe 15 of the 20 have clubs that pull crowds less than 5k, including: France, Portugal, Belgium, Holland, Sweden, Austria, Turkey, Greece, etc. Only Australians get titillated by big crowds. It's probably because many Australians don't understand sport; they're more interested in taking selfies at the sport.
tully101
Roar Guru
i dont think we would see a 2k+ fixture in the AFLW if they had to pay a decent price tbh
MarkfromCroydon
Roar Pro
Perry, I think you may be right. I may be intellectually challenged. I mean, here I am, as football fan, constantly coming to articles about football on the football tab and making comments on those articles from the perspective of a football fan. I didn't realise I was so dumb. I see you're trying to enlighten me, and I think I understand now. As a football fan, I should really focus all my time and energy on reading and writing about other sports that I don't really follow that much, and don't have that great an interest in. Is that the lesson you're trying to teach me sensei?
pacman
Guest
I doubt South Melbourne will gain admittance to the A League based on break even attendances of 1,000. They would need to assure FFA of far higher attendances, so what is the capacity of their stadium? I doubt if a 1,000 attendance would amuse Foxtel either. The A-League would descend to Mickey Mouse status in a heart beat.
Perry Bridge
Guest
Don't you love how people deal with unfriendly facts in their different ways, Midfielder - your response is actually the foolish looking one - no rebuttal, how can it be 'old and out of date' when talking about the most recent weekend just gone?? Pauly - classic head in the sand, and admitted as such!! (love it!!) MarkfromCroydon - where to start, where to end? I'm confused - in that he is speaking of the 'Aussie sports consumer' and then solely referring to the AFL. I keep hearing that the AFL is only consumed in Victoria and the other couple of states that people in NSW and QLD keep forgetting weren't sold to the Portuguese. I do suspect that MarkfromCroydon struggles to count on more than one hand which is why low level binary scoring games like soccer suit him perfectly.
MarkfromCroydon
Roar Pro
I think the average Aussie sports consumer, either at the ground or watching on t.v likes their sport to be generally softer/gentler in nature and slower with more breaks in play and less on field action than football. As such, we'll always struggle to have the A league football achieve the crowds/ratings of the (mens or womens) AFL. Whereas football has constant flow of play, and tough tackles, Aussie audiences seem to want safer/gentler play (such as allowing 'cuddle' tackles in AFL, or hands being put up to protect yourself), and Aussie audiences don't seem to like the physical toughness of football where a kick might seriously injure a player, maybe even break a leg. Aussie audiences seem to prefer less tension in the play with the action in AFL leading to a raft of goals or misses that also count toward the score. Aussies seem to prefer the stop/start nature of the AFL, with it's 'marks' where the ball stops being live and you can't tackle the player with it. Aussie audiences seem to prefer the use of hands over the greater skill required to use other parts of the body, even seem to enjoy the constant fumbling by those using their hands. In short, football is simply too tough, too action packed, too fast, too skilful and too tension filled to be able to be be the favourite sport of the majority of Aussies who prefer a gentler, slower, less skilful and less tense affair and as such, will always prefer AFL. I think the best course of action for Football fans is to simply accept this and 'work around' the womens AFL. The FFA should try to avoid schedule clashes, ramp up marketing, and maybe give some more free tickets away during the WAFL season.
Nemesis
Guest
jb Your revenue figures look fine to me. But the Match Day Expenses (cost of hiring the venue, security, etc.) are needed. Why? Because we know (at least in Melbourne) that some sporting clubs can get 20k ticketed fans into the stadium but still lose money because the stadium fees they've negotiated are too high. Sth Melb operates its own stadium.
j binnie
Guest
Nemesis - for one who consistently cites company principles and business know how ,this answer is way below your claimed intelligence. The calculations I made were, as I spelled out, "rough", and were simply using crowd attendances as a measuring stick as to the differential in revenue from that source. Were my calculations wrong?,if not,why the comment. It may well be that tickets are too expensive,scheduling of games is poor, but this problem has been growing now for some years, and to date,there is little evidence to suggest the FFA is even aware of the long term prognosis as to what happens when the rich get richer,and the poor get poorer. South Melbourne have told you they can break even with 1000 spectators, Frank Lowy told us 12 years ago that a franchise needed 10,000. We presently have 7 out of 10 teams achieving that figure (that of course is ignoring any increase Lowy's figure would have gained in 12 years), and 3 are still struggling to attain 10,000 . So if you believe South Melbourne, that is your prerogative, but,if factual, it means we can "steam ahead" with unlimited expansion of the HAL ,creation of a second tier competition , and introduce promotion and relegation, with no chance of another GCU, Northern Fury,or Auckland Kingz to "muddy" the waters of our premier football. I think not ,but I could be proved wrong. Cheers jb.
SVB
Guest
Don't worry punter. Wait until the novelty and propaganda wears off, and we will start giving it back really badly. Let MF have is say for now and get his hopes up. It all makes it sweeter later on.
Nemesis
Guest
So, jb Do you suggest the 10 CEOs/owners would prefer to play maybe 4 home matches each year to create the illusion of "big average season crowds"? Maybe have a 10 team league and play only 8 games like BBL or AFLW? Sport is about the contest. If people are not turning up to watch ALeague because ticket pricing is too expensive (I think it is too expensive) then that's something the CEOs/owners need to fix. PS: Appreciate your calculations but, unless we know the match day expenses, the revenue figures are pretty meaningless. We've been told by Sth Melbourne that they only need 1,000 paying customers to break even on match day.
j binnie
Guest
Nemesis- "Who cares about crowds you ask". I can name 10 people in the HAL who would answer that question in a positive manner. I refer of course to the "treasurers" of each of our HAL clubs.They are not allying the size of crowds as to how good the product is, they are simply applying fiscal considerations as to how their club is faring in the day to day running of the club,not to mention thinking about the future and what it may bring. (You have previously given off knowledge of budgeting and other business principles) Here is an interesting "league table" based of average crowds with the generated seasonal income being gained. It is a "rough" analysis but by using an average $30 entry fee it gives a range of how our clubs are "performing" in the revenue stakes. Club -- Average gate after this seasons "home " games --Calculation Victory 24,000 $7,200,000 WSW 19,000 $4,560,000 Sydney fc 18,000 $4,320,000 Roar 15,000 $4,050,000 Melb. City 11,000 $2,970,000 Adelaide 11,000 $2,970,000 Perth 11,000 $2,970,000 Jets 9,000 $2,430,000 CCM 8,000 $2,160,000 Wellington 7,000 $2,100,000 Now the buzz word on everyone's lips is expansion,expansion,expansion but when one looks at the huge discrepancy in the above figures one has to wonder, (1) From where is the expansion going to come? and (2) Where would an incumbent "stand" in the above "league"?. This is one area where the use of "crowds" as a measure can be a very useful "business tool" even to such devout football fans as you. Before you go into detail I did say this is a rough calculation aimed at highlighting the differential between top and bottom. jb
KJ
Roar Rookie
Agree Nemesis Just to point out, Brisbane is currently averaging above 15,000 this season ;)
punter
Guest
Not sure why even bother with this fraud Mid. All you need to let him know; AFL/VFL 140 years old, huge budget, AFLW first year. FFA 11 years old small budget W-League 8 years old. Who cares about women sport?
Nemesis
Guest
Who cares about crowds? Only the ignorant sports viewer measures sport by size of crowds. The educated sports fan measures sport by the contest. If you're bored switch off & watch the women who can't play AFL.