T
Train Without a Station
Guest
They were? Outside of 'Telstra Smart Rugby'?
Well $10M+ was put into Shute Shield in that period wasn't it?
They were? Outside of 'Telstra Smart Rugby'?
This is based on the premise that the Waratahs have achieved 100% saturation of the Sydney market, which i think most people on here would agree hasn't been achieved, not even close. In terms of playing resources it is really no change to the current situation in terms of competition for player recruitment, and in terms of corporate support, Sydney is a large enough market that it could and would cater for two teams without negatively impacting on each other.
QH absolutely the Giants are an investment by the AFL.
They are investing not to get current fans, but future fans.
They have resulted in a hit to the Swans. If the Waratahs had taken a 5k hit over the last 5 years they would be broke now.
And there is no indication that any Western Sydney team would have greater support than the Force, based on neither start up in Western Sydney in other codes having greater support than the Force.
So it's potential corporate dollar then. And how well have the Waratahs been going with that? How much major sponsor turnover have they head due to sponsors discontinuing?
As I previously noted, weren't the Waratahs selling 2016 jerseys without a major sponsor because they did not have one tied up when the jerseys were made?
Other codes have shown slight hits at times with other teams being introduced.
If the Waratahs had lost 5000 fans in 2011, how would they have fared in the period 2011-2015? They were already skirting close to the red.
Surely talk of splitting any market would only be feasible for a team that was in a position similar to the Reds 2011-2014. And they showed how quickly it can fall apart.
Over what time frame, how many clubs, and how much does that differ against past funding?
NZRU has 26 provincial unions so $9mil equates to approximately $350k per union that then needs to be spread across their clubs.
If your statement were correct about sufficient corporate support to support 2 teams without negatively impacting etc the Tahs would be a financial powerhouse which it is not with significant financial resources.
In addition, with the abundance of support in Sydney you refer to the ARU would be surely be a beneficiary and be far better placed financially which it is not.
How have the swans mutually benefited? They're averaged attendance dropped by 5k and has now just recovered.
In that time they've made the finals every single year and won a premiership.
In fact in their premiership season in 2012 they were still considerably down on their 2010 peak attendance.
Monopolies on markets rarely achieve maximum saturation or productivity due to inherent lack of efficiency in their own organisations.
Using the Tahs finances as an example of why a second team would not work in the Sydney market ignores the benefits of added competition, in both the A-League and AFL cases the pre-existing Sydney team has mutually benefited from the introduction of another cross-town rival. Not only has it increased AFL and A-League coverage in local reporting but it has also introduced another level of rivalry in the local market which has driven a passionate fanbase.
There are only so many sponsorship opportunities in a sporting team, for a decade HSBC were the principal sponsor. This prevented any other bank from coming on board as a sponsor of the Tahs. This is where increased corporate support lies and why a sporting monopoly will never achieve full market saturation when it comes corporate support.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There is a basic rule of thumb that business use to assess sponsorship - Eyeballs; which is worked out by doubling the bums on seats. The more you have the more sponsorship is worth. The more competitive the market the higher value of the sponsorship.
Exclusivity or control of crossover marketing of sponsorship is not a measure, just a general good business practise.
Based on your argument, noting that Sydney had more available eyeballs than any other place in Australia (where franchise are located), how much is the Tahs sponsorship worth?
Can you supply us with a figure of how far above all the rest of the franchise it is?
Can you also provide how much higher the bums on seats, or the TV audience is?
Well $10M+ was put into Shute Shield in that period wasn't it?
QH, more a comment that money has supposedly gone to grassroots in this time. Clearly it hasn't yielded results, probably because it wasn't directed in the best manner to achieve the best return.
Right now clearly the focus needs to be on what will bring the most fans going forward. That will lead to the funds required for other areas. What funding the other areas clearly hasn't lead to is the funds required to grow the fan base, or the growth in the fan base itself.
2 AFL sides in Sydney means a local game every week too. Much easier to get a share of media if you're playing at home.
The Force (even with Pocock, Sharpe and Gits) never got above 7th position. Amongst other reasons, the main one was that they can't get top talent over there - too far from the centre of rugby in Australia. Talk to anyone involved and they'll tell you that's THE massive problem.
Clearly, making money isn't the strong suit for of ANY Super rugby teams in Australia. So if it's about player dev, the argument is foregone: NSW creates about 50% of the semi/pro level players in Australia and yet there is only one Super team there. The Force could only survive with the the players who came from NSW/QLD.
Those making points about having two AFL teams in Syd or Bris and it not working totally miss the point - would the AFL, NRL or any other sport ever have had just ONE team in their home market (Melb for AFL) but instead dotted basket cases around Australia first?
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING?
We may have fucked ups few years back with this decision, but that's no reason to perpetuate it now