Dome Deals?

[saintbrat]

interesting that after some years of little knowledge about what the club's deals with the Dome are snippetts are finally filtering out

Blues eye share of coast gold-

The Blues recently drew 38,675 to their round eight game against the Brisbane Lions, but it is understood to have received only modest returns from that game — a fraction of what anchor tenant Essendon and Collingwood would receive for the same turnout. ( I hadn't realised the Magpies were 'original tenants')

The Magpies, who play only two home games at Telstra Dome this season, are believed to be guaranteed $200,000 a home game at the Dome, regardless of the crowd..... Essendon has the best arrangement of all clubs at the Dome, with a clause in its contract stipulating that no club can receive a better deal.

Carlton would seek to play a Gold Coast game against a club such as Fremantle or Port Adelaide, an opponent that would draw a smaller crowd at Telstra Dome.

Assuming the AFL paid the Blues the same $400,000 for a Carrara game that it has given North Melbourne, the return could be more than 10 times what Carlton would receive for the same match at its primary home ground.

St Kilda has put its hand up for multiple games on the Gold Coast from next year, as the AFL seeks to find clubs to fill the breach in 2009 and 2010 after North Melbourne's decision not to relocate.

The Roos were to play three games at Carrara in 2009, but the AFL released it from that deal once the club chose to remain in Melbourne.

The Saints are considered likely to be granted at least one game at Carrara, its case strengthened by a healthy turn-out of their supporters in last weekend's game against North. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

Carlton's returns from Telstra Dome games have been a sore point for the Blues administration, which believes the club should receive a higher return. Telstra Dome, run by Carlton's former president Ian Collins, notes that the Blues received an upfront payment of about $2.5 million when it agreed to play a majority of its home games at the Dome.

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/b ... 52455.html


Note: for the record- from MY memory of media at the time
Saints original deal- needed to get crowds around or over 30,000+ to then get profit- lost on many games in early years
second deal- reduced the crowd number but guarenteed income ( which sort of backfired as we then got larger crowds and over past few years averaged over 30,000)
don't have any idea of what current deal entails and a new on e being discussed presently.

[Mr Magic]

IIRC part of our original deal to move to teh DOme was a payment of $500,000pa? for 3-4 years as 'compensation' from moving from Waverley.

That money was supposed to offset any discrepancies in our original TD deal.

[Dan Warna]

again harking back to a conversation I was fortunate enough to have with david friend a few years ago.

the MCG DIDN"T WANT US.

we had no choice but to go to the dome and we got a shoddy deal where we basically had to have 30,000k to break even on gate, BUT the deal was supposedly better for us wrt signage till the AFL brought out its 'protected sponsor' plan which saw a few saints sponsors drop off as they weren't allowed signage which clashed with AFL sponsors.

when the first contract came up, the saints signed a 'safe' contract which meant we wouldn't lose money at TD any more (some games were costing st kilda tens of thousands of dollars to open up TD ><)

----
this is a few years ago now and here are my thoughts.

this however also coincided with the rise of st kilda and big increases in gate taking which we didn't benifit from as much as we would have in the previous contract.

I think RB/BW did what the thought best for st kilda with the information at hand.

TD has the upper hand in all negotiations as there is no effective 3rd stadium in Victoria. In all negotiations TD has the last say because it is a monopolistic trader. We can't just go to the MCG because they are full kthxbai

Its a terrible position that the AFL has put the vic clubs in.

IMO victoria can and should support 2 or even 3 40k plus stadiums to back up the MCG.

its ridiculous that ian collins can bend us over like this.

its a frikken joke.

TD is a fantastic venue, but it is inneficient, poorly run and a monopolistic trader.

and no I still don't the MCG will take us, because they are full.

[Solar]

totally agree dan,

the thing that sticks with me is that the AFL allowed their second stadium to sign a deal with essendon promising not to offer another club a better deal. That is crazy!

The fact that carlton was paid 2.5 million to move their shows how corrupt Collins was.

If the AFL was fair they would make sure they sign off on any deal before they go through. They created the 2 stadium situation which allows TD offer anything they want to the likes of stkilda, kangas and dogs.

[saintspremiers]

Don't forget who willl OUTRIGHT OWN TD in about 17 years time (25 years after it was completed!).

The AFL!

So they want to maximise their income into the place so that it's a massive ca$h cow in 2025.

No doubt by then Docklands property values will be very high as it will be fully developed and part of the City, so they'll tender out the whole stadium, sell it for half a billion for redevelopment as retail or residential property, and build another stadium.

[bobmurray]

I dont think the break even crowd figure was as high as 30,000 ,i think it was more like 28,000 which we weren't getting at the beginning of the dome deal......

There weren't many aisle attendants then either and you could sit almost anywhere you wanted,i used to sit in a different spot for each quarter,all on level 1.

We weren't that good when the dome deal was done and all the fair weather supporters had dropped off,ready to jump back on when things improved,as they surely did....The MCG at that time would have looked empty if we had've been one of it's tenant clubs,that might have factored into them not wanting us....

[Animal Enclosure]

I spent a bit of time with the original stadium operators & I know that the figures that clubs like St.Kilda were shown as 'break even numbers' were based on the staffing levels at Waverley (three blokes and a disabled greyhound named Kevin). Colonial/Telstra has that many doorways/aisles/back of house areas that needed staffing that the costs blew out enormously. Clubs were ropable, especially when our crowds were down. Luckily for St.Kilda the initial deal was underwritten by the AFL & we didn't lose the money we would have during 2000-2002.

It is a rort that the AFL calls itself the event operator & then passes on the cost of hiring the venue to a competing club (especially with all of the inequities of the draw).

In a fair & equitable AFL fantasy land, the AFL would cover the costs & the home team would receive the profit from their home games. This would at least stop clubs from losing money from 'hosting' a game of football. Especially as the AFL can influence heavily the attendance at various games (competing clubs, time of season, day of week, etc).

[Mooksy]

Jeez I'd love to call the G home onm game days. I hate the Dome. Souless.

[ausfatcat]

I spent a bit of time with the original stadium operators & I know that the figures that clubs like St.Kilda were shown as 'break even numbers' were based on the staffing levels at Waverley (three blokes and a disabled greyhound named Kevin). Colonial/Telstra has that many doorways/aisles/back of house areas that needed staffing that the costs blew out enormously. Clubs were ropable, especially when our crowds were down. Luckily for St.Kilda the initial deal was underwritten by the AFL & we didn't lose the money we would have during 2000-2002.

It is a rort that the AFL calls itself the event operator & then passes on the cost of hiring the venue to a competing club (especially with all of the inequities of the draw).

In a fair & equitable AFL fantasy land, the AFL would cover the costs & the home team would receive the profit from their home games. This would at least stop clubs from losing money from 'hosting' a game of football. Especially as the AFL can influence heavily the attendance at various games (competing clubs, time of season, day of week, etc).

Still gripes me the Dome was meant to be more cost efficient than Waverly supposed to bring in more dollars than Waverly. What a crock of BS, but yet they give a deal to Essendon which could possibly see the Dome actually lose money when they play there.


BTW I love the Dome it's the best stadium to watch footy in and anything 25,000 and above is better then 50,000 or less at the MCG for atmosphere.

[ozrulestrace]

I'm interested in your comments Animal Enclosure in relation to the staffing levels at Telstra Dome which quite frankly are appalling both in numbers and quality of customer service.
Sitting in Level 1 Aisle 38, up until this year, the aisle attendants nicked off half way through the last quarter, which leaves us unprotected from the idiots who stand behind us hurling abuse or even worse, decide they'd like to sit down in the reserved seat area (even though they haven't paid $400 like we have) and it's difficult to get anyone to try and remove the interlopers.
For the past few games, the aisle attendants have left at the 15 minute mark of the third quarter (Bulldogs game) and for the Freo game, they left at half time!
In my emails to Kylie Simmons prior to her departure, one of issues I tried to raise was that if the club is incurring the cost of the aisle attendants and security then the club is being ripped off as no-one seems to be sticking around for the required time. Maybe the club is trying to cut costs by telling the aisle attendants to leave early, but it doesn't help me and my fellow seat holders, for come the day, a tight finish, drunken feral supporters, upset seat holders and there will be yet again, a stoush between supporters and the security will be no-where to be seen and some-one will be seriously hurt.

[Dan Warna]

I hate the TD for whats its done in some aspects but its a great and safe place to take young kids.

imagine changing nappies of your little ones at waverley?

one thing TD got right was facilities, it is a fantastic upgrade on waverley, just innefficient.

[Animal Enclosure]

I'm interested in your comments Animal Enclosure in relation to the staffing levels at Telstra Dome which quite frankly are appalling both in numbers and quality of customer service.
Sitting in Level 1 Aisle 38, up until this year, the aisle attendants nicked off half way through the last quarter, which leaves us unprotected from the idiots who stand behind us hurling abuse or even worse, decide they'd like to sit down in the reserved seat area (even though they haven't paid $400 like we have) and it's difficult to get anyone to try and remove the interlopers.
For the past few games, the aisle attendants have left at the 15 minute mark of the third quarter (Bulldogs game) and for the Freo game, they left at half time!
In my emails to Kylie Simmons prior to her departure, one of issues I tried to raise was that if the club is incurring the cost of the aisle attendants and security then the club is being ripped off as no-one seems to be sticking around for the required time. Maybe the club is trying to cut costs by telling the aisle attendants to leave early, but it doesn't help me and my fellow seat holders, for come the day, a tight finish, drunken feral supporters, upset seat holders and there will be yet again, a stoush between supporters and the security will be no-where to be seen and some-one will be seriously hurt.

That is a cost cutting measure but I have an inkling that it was potentially done so that the stadium would have reduced staff costs, while still charging the full cost of having those staff around. The Area Team Leaders, team leaders and a skeleton staff of attendants stay on until stumps & there is supposedly a security force that should be taking care of drunken fools.

I really feel for the customer service staff there as they are treated like sh1t, conditions have deteriorated hugely since the ground's inception (directly linked to a change in the HR department about 3 years ago). Most of the original staff who ran the show exceptionally well have left after being sick of the rubbish they are fed by management.

I love watching footy at the dome but I think my club suffers greatly from having to play their home games there (financially & injury wise).

It will be a much better place when Collins retires (I could tell you some ripper stories about that 'bloke').

[ozrulestrace]

By implication that in some ways suggest the club is getting seirously ripped off in terms of the costs of overheads, security etc and I wonder if this will re raised as an issue when the next deal is done between StK FC and Melbourne Stadium Limited or will it be an ongoing issue that everyone chooses to ignore.
Who checks the fine print in these contracts and who challenges MSL re their rorting of the system?
I like Telstra Dome in many aspects, but the security around the aisles in Level 1 is crap and the scary thing it's becoming a weekly issue.
Whenever we play Hawthorn, Western Bulldogs, Collingwood and Essendon there is always trouble and there's even less chance of seeking assistance from the Dome staff. I guarantee those who sit on Level 2 with the Mediallion Club get better protection than we ever will.
I'm sure there are stories to be told about Ian Collins. Hated him when he played for Carlton and even more so in his "mini-me "role to Andrew Demetriou.