Would you accept Richmond playing a home game interstate for a better MCG deal?

[one-eyed]

Would you accept Richmond playing a home game interstate for a better MCG deal? Because that's what all Vic clubs are considering to twist the arms of the MCC and Docklands.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/73600/default.aspx

VICTORIAN AFL clubs have proposed each moving one home game interstate as they step up their campaign for better deals at the MCG and Docklands.

Western Bulldogs president David Smorgon said that idea was raised as the chiefs of all AFL clubs met on Monday to discuss ways to raise the stakes in their negotiations with the two Victorian stadiums.

Smorgon said the Victorian clubs fared the worst in the competition out of gate receipts, making 30 per cent of what fans paid for tickets compared to 75 per cent for the West Australian clubs.

He said at a meeting with MCG management and the Victorian government on Friday that the parties were nowhere near reaching a satisfactory agreement.

It had caused the clubs to weigh up more drastic options.

[mightytiges]

Not sure how this will work. Do they mean they take a cut in membership revenue (10 games instead of 11) to make a point or if there's a make up game for members then won't these make-up games still need to be played at the 'G or Docklands?  .

The Clubs are right especially in Richmond's case as we have provided large crowds for the MCG for over 40 years yet have been taken for granted by the MCC as far as revenue. The problem is the contracts with both stadia have the AFL and clubs by the short and curlies  . Docklands will eventually end up in the AFL's hands but not for another 16 years or so while the main reason why Waverley was built in the first place was because of the way the MCC treated the VFL at the time. History repeats  .

[Ramps]

A home game vs Freo or WCE could be transferred to WA ... and instead of getting 20-25000 people, youd get 45000 West Australians paying at the gate to see Ben Cousins.

[Infamy]

A home game vs Freo or WCE could be transferred to WA ... and instead of getting 20-25000 people, youd get 45000 West Australians paying at the gate to see Ben Cousins.

Plus we love playing there as it suits our game.

Make it so!!!

[WilliamPowell]

Aren't we technically doing that this season by selling a "home" game to the Gold Coast

[WA Tiger]

Yes I would except it over here...

[mightytiges]

Aren't we technically doing that this season by selling a "home" game to the Gold Coast

Docklands loses out from our GC deal as that "home" game would've been our 3rd docklands home game. However the MCC will gain as all RFC members with 11 game memberships will turn up to a make-up away game they wouldn't have attended under normal circumstances and buy food etc at the MCG .

[one-eyed]

from today's Australian...

Under a new arrangement brokered by the AFL and specifically for the nine Victorian clubs who play home games at the MCG, clubs are seeking an additional $200,000 a home game in match returns from the venue.

The only Victorian club which does not host a game at the MCG this season is St Kilda.

But for the financially struggling Melbourne, which has 10 home games at the MCG in 2009, a new deal could benefit it this year by as much as $2million in additional revenue, which would almost ensure the immediate future of the embattled Demons.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25231916-5012432,00.html

[Darth Tiger]

Yes I would except it over here...

I also reluctantly accept.   

[Ramps]

Aren't we technically doing that this season by selling a "home" game to the Gold Coast

Yes we are but we may as well fleece 45000 West Australians if we can as well

[1965]

For the long term good of the club - Absolutely.

[one-eyed]

Tigers wade into stadium stoush
Nick Sheridan | March 27, 2009

RICHMOND president Gary March joined the fray in the AFL's stoush with Melbourne's stadium operators yesterday, urging the MCG to revise their deal with tenant clubs.

March's comments come on the back of a sustained campaign by the league and all of its clubs to force a new deal for the tenants of the MCG, Etihad Stadium and AAMI Stadium in Adelaide.

Several clubs, including Richmond, receive relatively low gate receipts at their home stadium compared with other tenants.

The presidents of all 16 clubs met with the AFL commission last week and reached a unanimous decision to campaign on the issue of stadium deals.

March compared the Tigers' situation with that of the West Australian clubs.

"If this game was played in Western Australia, the gate receipts going back to the competing clubs would be between 70 to 80 per cent," he said in his president's address before last night's season opener between the Tigers and Carlton at the MCG. "We're not asking for 70 or 80 per cent. We understand that the MCG has debt, but we're asking for a fair go.

"We're also asking that they recognise that this stadium is here on the back of AFL football. For a hundred years we are the code that has continually brought people through the gates.

"We continue to provide this ground with the opportunity for all other codes to come to this great colosseum, so they need to recognise that they need to compensate clubs fairly, and we've been united in our path, all clubs and the AFL, ensuring that we get a fair deal playing at the MCG."

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/tigers-wade-into-stadium-stoush/2009/03/26/1237657072644.html