Greg Swann laughs at 'Catch up' footy.

[Ghost Dog]

CARLTON chief executive Greg Swann has slammed the idea of "pokies tax"' proposed by the Western Bulldogs.


The plan, as outlined in the Herald Sun yesterday, would see large gains from pokie machines split between all AFL clubs.

Carlton owns 360 gaming machines which made more than $4.5 million in revenue across five venues last year and as such would be one of the hardest hit under such a scheme.

But Swann said the tax "won't be happening'' and said the Dogs were missing the point in the ongoing equalisation debate.

"The issue is the stadium deals, that's the difference,'' Swann said. "The big interstate clubs don't have pokies and their reaping a fortune out of their stadium deals.

"And unless that's addressed then all this other stuff is just a redirection of money from Victorian clubs to other Victorian clubs when it should be an issue that's addressed the competition.''

Conversely, Swann backed plans raised in the Herald Sun this week that would see ticket prices raised for blockbuster games and potentially even lowered for lower-drawing matches.

In submission to the AFL the Western Bulldogs said it believes in "a system in which club poker machine profits over a certain proportion of gross club revenue were contributed to a common pool for equitable distribution''.

"(It) would be a preferable model for a `luxury tax' and might have the additional benefit of reducing the incentive of clubs to increase their own dependence.''

But Swann disagreed, saying it would be unfair to strip such revenue away from clubs who have gone out and sourced such an income.

"We've worked hard for our gaming interests,'' he said.

"We've invested a lot of money and we're carrying a lot of debt, so we don't think that's a viable option.

"There's all sorts of legalities from the casino and gaming point of view, the legislators, so it's not feasible.

"The issue of equalisation is more about the funding that's made within the game, this from our point of view is a separate thing.''

Swann said his club would be happy to entertain a hike on ticket prices for marquee games throughout the season.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/carlton-chief-greg-swann-slams-pokies-tax-proposed-by-western-bulldogs/story-e6frf9jf-1226584179445

[Ghost Dog]

The luxury tax will never happen. Personally, am quite happy for us to be forced into exploring revenue streams. Pokies add SFA to the local community.

Let's sponsor some speed cameras on the westgate or somethin'....

[chef]

Fair enough.

I'm sure if the roles were reversed we would be up in arms.

I'm of the view we(and all clubs) shouldn't have pokies as they are a disease on the community.

[SonofScray]

Anything that promotes alternative revenue streams and less reliance on gaming revenue is fine with me. I thought the majority of the paper we put to the AFL was well balanced and offered a strong alternative view to current policy, in the absence of emotive and divisive language such as the 'luxury tax.'

A cap on football dept spend would be something I'd be in favour of. If we can establish an even means by which the Clubs can operate on field, it would remove lot of financial burden to simply compete and promote some creativity IMO. All that extra revenue the Clubs are making, or not, can be used to generate value for members and grass roots support. I think this is the cornerstone of any extra equalisation measures the League should look at.

Benchmarking the smaller club growth is a very sound idea. The Clubs which are at the centre of the current revenue generation scheme for the AFL (your Big 4s etc) are approaching critical mass. Collingwood do not need another 50k members, from a really basic view, the current stadium infrastructure just couldn't handle it. Create an equal draw, or look at opportunities to promote growth from the bottom end so that Footscray's growth isn't restricted by policy in favour of another 2 clubs reaching critical mass like Collingwood.

[Remi Moses]

The crux of the issue is stadium deals and fixturing
The idea of a tax on blockbuster games is fair due to teams continually getting maximum exposure and therefore able to generate extra revenue.
The stadium deals are nothing short of criminal to be honest.
Personally reckon the blockbuster tax keeps all parties reasonably happy.

[LostDoggy]

The crux of the issue is stadium deals and fixturing
The idea of a tax on blockbuster games is fair due to teams continually getting maximum exposure and therefore able to generate extra revenue.
The stadium deals are nothing short of criminal to be honest.
Personally reckon the blockbuster tax keeps all parties reasonably happy.

Although the blockbuster tax is easiest to implement and an improvement on the status quo, I have a fear that it will reinforce the bulldogs as a smaller club for generations to come. Bulldogs will no longer have a leg to stand on when we argue against poor fixturing as there will be always be the counter argument that the blockbuster games are helping us survive. Furthermore a greater proportion of marketing and media attention will then be thrust upon these games at the expense of others. This will perpetuate as we will struggle to gain a traction with new members.

Instead I think the afl should consider again ownership options at etihad - a subsidised ground rent to tenant clubs will mean more cash for football spending and craziness of having to play in growth areas. Also allowing us to play in Geelong at the least will avoid in the short term having to play in Canberra and Darwin.

A good deal should be had at etihad and afl should use it's balance sheet to attract cheap finance on it's terms as equity investor

[Remi Moses]

Although the blockbuster tax is easiest to implement and an improvement on the status quo, I have a fear that it will reinforce the bulldogs as a smaller club for generations to come. Bulldogs will no longer have a leg to stand on when we argue against poor fixturing as there will be always be the counter argument that the blockbuster games are helping us survive. Furthermore a greater proportion of marketing and media attention will then be thrust upon these games at the expense of others. This will perpetuate as we will struggle to gain a traction with new members.

Instead I think the afl should consider again ownership options at etihad - a subsidised ground rent to tenant clubs will mean more cash for football spending and craziness of having to play in growth areas. Also allowing us to play in Geelong at the least will avoid in the short term having to play in Canberra and Darwin.

A good deal should be had at etihad and afl should use it's balance sheet to attract cheap finance on it's terms as equity investor

I think the AFL should just buy the bloody stadium!
Don't mind the Geelong idea, but I'd like a decent deal and not look like a pack of desperadoes

[Eastdog]

What's the deal with Etihad and the AFL I hear till 2025. I agree Remi we do need a far better deal at Etihad and for us to make revenue from that. I've said this a few times before but maybe we could play a few home games at the MCG against the bigger clubs. We could alternate kind of between Etihad and the MCG and this would benefit Bulldog MCC members as well.

[LostDoggy]

What's the deal with Etihad and the AFL I hear till 2025. I agree Remi we do need a far better deal at Etihad and for us to make revenue from that. I've said this a few times before but maybe we could play a few home games at the MCG against the bigger clubs. We could alternate kind of between Etihad and the MCG and this would benefit Bulldog MCC members as well.

As I understand, Etihad will revert to afl ownership in 2025 or thereabouts.

The issue is that a private consortium owns the stadium until then. The owner has 'guaranteed' income from the afl (i.e. from tenant club home games) and then to make a decent return on investment must supplement income with advertising, concerts, etc.. The afl would need to agree a deal with the equity owners (with consent from debt providers) to purchase the stadium - this would form a negotiation of value of their investment (over the next 12 years). Not sure what the current owners' intentions or desire to do a deal is but this could represent a good deal for the afl if conditions are satisfactory.

What would also be playing on the afl's mind is that if it were to buy the stadium it would need to take over management of upkeep of the stadium and also for booking concerts and managing sponsorship arrangements - all of which it may prefer another party to have to worry about.

Overall, I would think that this form of investment (purchasing the stadium) would certainly be great for the game, especially given some of the other dubious investments made in the sport.

[F'scary]

How about we just hit our safe Labor members for some bread when they are in government? Otherwise, no number 1 ticket and all the free publicity that goes with it. Christ, we got $20m from bloody Howard and he is a NSW Liberal rugby league supporter.

[Dazza]

How about we spend within our means and stop overspending trying to catch the richer clubs.

[bornadog]

How about we just hit our safe Labor members for some bread when they are in government? Otherwise, no number 1 ticket and all the free publicity that goes with it. Christ, we got $20m from bloody Howard and he is a NSW Liberal rugby league supporter.

This is a joke right??:confused:

[F'scary]

How about we just hit our safe Labor members for some bread when they are in government? Otherwise, no number 1 ticket and all the free publicity that goes with it. Christ, we got $20m from bloody Howard and he is a NSW Liberal rugby league supporter.


This is a joke right??:confused:

We do all the right things, like promoting harmony, health & positive attitudes in the neglected, underprivileged, etc, etc, western suburbs. That was the rationale behind the $20m. We're still doing those things.

[Remi Moses]

How about we just hit our safe Labor members for some bread when they are in government? Otherwise, no number 1 ticket and all the free publicity that goes with it. Christ, we got $20m from bloody Howard and he is a NSW Liberal rugby league supporter.

State LABOR donated money, as did the labor councils.

[Ghost Dog]

We do all the right things, like promoting harmony, health & positive attitudes in the neglected, underprivileged, etc, etc, western suburbs. That was the rationale behind the $20m. We're still doing those things.

That's the problem in part. We are not a charity. Have to be a super-well oiled business if we are to really become the counterbalance for the teams on the other side of the city. The creation of the 'catch up footy ' paper is, if nothing else, an effort to get us on track. Well done Peter.

[bornadog]

That's the problem in part. We are not a charity. Have to be a super-well oiled business if we are to really become the counterbalance for the teams on the other side of the city. The creation of the 'catch up footy ' paper is, if nothing else, an effort to get us on track. Well done Peter.

Exactly GD.

We got the $20 million previously as part of building a community centre, but on going handouts from governments is clearly not going to work. Peter and the club have given the AFL some food for thought. Perhaps the Pokie tax won't work but having a reverse cap on the footy department spend, ie each club must spend a minimum amount is a great idea and will make all teams more competitive.

[LostDoggy]

We need to get some good propaganda going on this. Get these posters up all over AFL House…


http://www.simplicitywebdesign.com.au/misc/afl-play-fair.jpg

Yeah, I probably have better things to do with my time, but what can ya do?

[Ghost Dog]

!!!!! That's friggin AWESOME!!! Did you bust that out in illustrator?

[LostDoggy]

!!!!! That's friggin AWESOME!!! Did you bust that out in illustrator?

Yep. Been wanting to use the font for a while too.

[hujsh]

That propaganda got me right in my inner socialist. Well done.

[jeemak]

That propaganda got me right in my inner socialist. Well done.

Hahaha, I was thinking the same thing! :D

Somebody find me a square to rally within!

[F'scary]

Yes, that was a good poster. The worker goes to the pokies venue and all AFL clubs share equally in the spoils.

I liked things better when all the players had proper jobs and they weren't elite fitness athletes.

[F'scary]

The fair draw point on the poster is a good one. What happens at the moment is the AFL starts with Collingwood's games, then moves on to the new franchises, then Sydney, then...we are probably consideration 18 and by that time all the good slots and home games in Melbourne have gone.

[KT31]

Yeah, I probably have better things to do with my time, but what can ya do?

Great poster BAS, need to get some tips from you.
What program did you use ?

Chant : The Doggie's united will never be divided. ;)

[LostDoggy]

Great poster BAS, need to get some tips from you.
What program did you use ?

Chant : The Doggie's united will never be divided. ;)

Adobe Illustrator.

I do web design for a living. :)

Let's start a movement — Fans Eschewing Dishonesty, Unfairness and Partiality. FED UP!

[hujsh]

We are the Bulldogtariat and we will no longer be exploited by the AFL bourgeois and their oppressive capitalist dogma. We must revolt and tear down the superstructures of AFL society to that we can rebuild from a base of fairness that places the game of football above all else.


http://www.simplicitywebdesign.com.au/misc/afl-play-fair.jpg

[SonofScray]

We are the Bulldogtariat and we will no longer be exploited by the AFL bourgeois and their oppressive capitalist dogma. We must revolt and tear down the superstructures of AFL society to that we can rebuild from a base of fairness that places the game of football above all else.



Ha! Contro Il AFL Moderno.

[Remi Moses]

Perhaps we could poach a player get to him work at Gordon legal and pay him 200 grand to do nothing . Then after numerous and rightly so rumblings we could stick that money in "Injury payments" . Get stuffed Carlton

[Doc26]

Exactly GD.

We got the $20 million previously as part of building a community centre, but on going handouts from governments is clearly not going to work. Peter and the club have given the AFL some food for thought. Perhaps the Pokie tax won't work but having a reverse cap on the footy department spend, ie each club must spend a minimum amount is a great idea and will make all teams more competitive.

The gaming revenue redistribution recommendation put forward by the Club in my opinion was poorly considered. In itself it is inconsistent with other arguments put forward by the Club regarding supporting all Clubs right to promote innovation through its sales and marketing channels, football or non football related.

I should add that on social grounds I'm not an advocate of driving any form income growth through gaming channels and have applauded North Melbourne's more recent stance on this. Giving up valuable advertising space regularly, as they have done, to promote a not for profit in place of one of its corporate sponsors must have been a difficult decision and itself quite innovative and I hope will bring them rewards. I would further endorse the AFL being more active in its Corporate Social Responsibility as it pertains to its ever growing reliance on gaming revenue and the subsequent effect this has on society.

Anyway with that said it is an income stream which the league has turned a blind eye to and even endorsed with its own strategies in this space. It is unfortunate that it has become an income stream that the larger Clubs themselves are now heavily reliant upon and as such will now fight to the death to keep from the clutches of any debate on equalisation. My fear is that this point will risk hijacking our stronger arguments on the topic of equalisation.

For me the gaming redistribution recommendation put forward by our Club is unrelated to the unequal playing field debate we find ourselves in. The equalisation argument should be centred squarely on living with a fixture geared towards maximising total league revenue and secondly the obligation Clubs like ours finds ourselves in with being a league tenant at Etihad with a cost structure that would appear to prohibit acceptable returns given the scenario of an unfavourable fixture in support of the league's maximum return agenda.

Supporting this argument Ii felt our Club put its case well in its recent submission paper.

[w3design]

We are the Bulldogtariat and we will no longer be exploited by the AFL bourgeois and their oppressive capitalist dogma. We must revolt and tear down the superstructures of AFL society to that we can rebuild from a base of fairness that places the game of football above all else.


http://www.simplicitywebdesign.com.au/misc/afl-play-fair.jpg

Simply loved this post !!!

Absolutely brilliant.

Well done.:):):):)

[hujsh]

Simply loved this post !!!

Absolutely brilliant.

Well done.:):):):)

Thanks:D

Inspired by what Marxism I've read at uni and The Red Dawn episode of Sealab 2021 which does not have any appropriate clips online to link to.