The Western Bulldogs could reap about $750,000 if they play home games in Geelong

[Greystache]

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2013/03/19/1226600/993049-cooney.jpg

GEELONG is inviting the Western Bulldogs to play home games at Simonds Stadium next year with the lure of a $750,000 cheque for crowds of just over 20,000.

As the idea of a third boutique stadium again gained momentum yesterday, the Cats revealed they had made overtures to the AFL about rivals using their redeveloped stadium.

The Cats are not only prepared to sacrifice up to 20 per cent of their profit to rivals as part of equalisation measures, they say there is no need for a boutique ground.

Rather than writing a cheque to Etihad Stadium management for crowds in the low 20,000s, the Bulldogs could make a cash windfall from playing in Geelong.

Geelong chief executive Brian Cook said the offer was on the table for the Bulldogs and other clubs.

Talk of a boutique stadium invariably raises its head when the AFL is bargaining with its existing stadiums, but Cook said his door was also open to other clubs.

"We have had a couple of discussions with the AFL on the continual redevelopment of our stadium, and we are completing stage three now," he told the Herald Sun.

"We have spoken to the AFL on several occasions about the Doggies coming down in particular and playing other AFL clubs.

"We are very willing for that to happen. They would make very good money. Our capacity crowd was 22,000 last year and we made about $750,000 profit per game.

"Even if the Dogs only averaged half as much as that, the worst-case scenario is they get 10,000 people and they still make more than at Etihad Stadium."

Etihad Stadium is contracted to host 46 games until 2014, and at least 40 matches a year from 2015 to 2025, when the AFL takes ownership of the ground.

The AFL said yesterday that while the boutique stadium option had been discussed among clubs again recently, it did not make sense to inject $150 million into Punt Rd or Visy Park when the league would inherit its own stadium for $1.

In 2011, North Melbourne made just $97,540 from 11 home-games at Docklands before guaranteed top-ups of $100,000 per game, with seven losses on games with crowds of less than 28,000.

Geelong has warned the fabric of the competition was threatened if the gap continued to grow between the haves and have-nots.

Link (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/afl/the-western-bulldogs-could-reap-about-750000-if-they-play-home-games-in-geelong/story-e6frexx0-1226600992429)

[Greystache]

This idea has been put up before and the AFL knocked it back because they would only allow games to be taken away from Etihad stadium if it was to an expansion market. I wonder if their position on that is changing at all.

[Ozza]

If it meant a significant revenue difference to us - as a supporter, I would be more than happy to head to Geelong for 2 home games per season (eg. versus Port/Freo/GWS or GC) assuming that reserved seating was reciprocated.

[Eastdog]

We should also play one home game against a big Vic club each year at the MCG.

[SlimPickens]

Like this move, could see a 7/4 set up with 7 at Etihad. Would love one of those games to be a home game at kadinia park against the cats.

[bornadog]

The only real solution is for the AFL to buy Eithad. The current owners want $250 million, which the AFL says is too much. All this discussion on boutique stadiums, Geelong games are tactics to try and get the price down. I think the AFL will work out a deal and buy the stadium.

[LostDoggy]

"Even if the Dogs only averaged half as much as that, the worst-case scenario is they get 10,000 people and they still make more than at Etihad Stadium."

God this is depressing.

[craigsahibee]

Mooroolbark to Geelong! Hmmm, how many travellers would I need for that journey?

Do the V-Line trains down to Geelong have a Bar?

[bornadog]

Mooroolbark to Geelong! Hmmm, how many travellers would I need for that journey?

Do the V-Line trains down to Geelong have a Bar?

Prefer that than say Darwin and Canberra.

[Greystache]

Like this move, could see a 7/4 set up with 7 at Etihad. Would love one of those games to be a home game at kadinia park against the cats.

I'm not so keen on that. Kardinia Park only holds 22,000 and there'd be quite a lot of people locked out. That game is probably one of the few we can draw a good crowd and make money out of Etihad from. I'd be more inclined to just play 4 interstate teams there, sure we'll probably only get 15,000 there which isn't a great look, but at least we'd make money.

[SlimPickens]

I'm not so keen on that. Kardinia Park only holds 22,000 and there'd be quite a lot of people locked out. That game is probably one of the few we can draw a good crowd and make money out of Etihad from. I'd be more inclined to just play 4 interstate teams there, sure we'll probably only get 15,000 there which isn't a great look, but at least we'd make money.

New development will have the stadium holding around 34K. If its suggested we could make 750k for such a game,, then I'd jump at it. There is no chance regardless of the size of the crowd we would make that sort of money at etihad.

34k is plenty of space for our membership numbers unfortunately!

[LostDoggy]

New development will have the stadium holding around 34K. If its suggested we could make 750k for such a game,, then I'd jump at it. There is no chance regardless of the size of the crowd we would make that sort of money at etihad.

34k is plenty of space for our membership numbers unfortunately!

That's $750k for a crowd of 22,000. I doubt the club could get that many people to a Kardinia Park game the isn't vs Geelong. You'd be looking around the 8,000 - 13,000 crowd mark playing games down there.

[bornadog]

That's $750k for a crowd of 22,000. I doubt the club could get that many people to a Kardinia Park game the isn't vs Geelong. You'd be looking around the 8,000 - 13,000 crowd mark playing games down there.

With Live games on TV now, and the thought of travelling an hour down the road (longer for others), and seeing the team get beaten, we may not get that sort of crowd.

[Greystache]

New development will have the stadium holding around 34K. If its suggested we could make 750k for such a game,, then I'd jump at it. There is no chance regardless of the size of the crowd we would make that sort of money at etihad.

34k is plenty of space for our membership numbers unfortunately!

Right, I'm with you now.

I agree with the increased capacity it would be a huge windfall, we're probably talking $1 million for that game. The downside is it almost certainly spells a loss for the team however.

[Greystache]

With Live games on TV now, and the thought of travelling an hour down the road (longer for others), and seeing the team get beaten, we may not get that sort of crowd.

I think in reality the Geelong crowd would go a long way toward filling it for us. The negative is it will be like an away game for us.

[Maddog37]

$400,000.00 profit for a crowd of say 12,000 would be mountains better than 18,000 at Etihad for nil return.

[Remi Moses]

I'd jump at it personally ( read the fine print though)
Wonder if any inducements for Cat members will happen?
Have to have a form of transportation to Geelong .
Certainly a better option than Darwin, Canberra or NZ.

[Remi Moses]

Gotta say one Edward McGuire had some interesting thoughts.
Reckons Norf still won flags with no money, so it can be done.
One would say the game has gone to another stratosphere since then Eddie!!
I wonder if he really "Wants" an equalised comp.

[Hotdog60]

Gotta say one Edward McGuire had some interesting thoughts.
Reckons Norf still won flags with no money, so it can be done.
One would say the game has gone to another stratosphere since then Eddie!!
I wonder if he really "Wants" an equalised comp.

I'm sure Eddie likes sitting on his perch right were he is. Perish the thought of the Wobbles being on equal levels with the rest of the crowd.

[westdog54]

With Live games on TV now, and the thought of travelling an hour down the road (longer for others), and seeing the team get beaten, we may not get that sort of crowd.

I wonder if V/Line might be inclined to do a deal with us so that Members get free train fares From Southern Cross?

Of course its all Academic if the AFL forces us to play at Etihad.

[Mantis]

With Live games on TV now, and the thought of travelling an hour down the road (longer for others), and seeing the team get beaten, we may not get that sort of crowd.

What proportion of our members would live in the west?

Pretty easy trip for them.

[LostDoggy]

I'd be happy to travel from the eastern suburbs to Geelong for a couple of home games per season. As long as they weren't Sunday twilight games, makes the trip home a very late one.

[LostDoggy]

That's $750k for a crowd of 22,000. I doubt the club could get that many people to a Kardinia Park game the isn't vs Geelong. You'd be looking around the 8,000 - 13,000 crowd mark playing games down there.

Half of $750k >>> writing a cheque.

[Ghost Dog]

I live in Geelong so it sounds like a fine idea to me!

[OLD SCRAGGer]

I could live with this ONLY if games down there are against GWS, SUNS Power & Freo, rest of Home games MUST be at Etihad...JMHO

[gohardorgohome]

Much rather play games at Geelong than Canberra and Darwin..... I really enjoyed watching the footy there a few years ago......Pity that we can't use Princes Park or Whitten Oval... Good suburban footy atmosphere.

[bornadog]

Much rather play games at Geelong than Canberra and Darwin..... I really enjoyed watching the footy there a few years ago......Pity that we can't use Princes Park or Whitten Oval... Good suburban footy atmosphere.

I hate cheats Park.

[jeemak]

I hate cheats Park.

I don't really like the way we were treated by Carlton FC when we were a co-tenant, or the attitude they take to the rest of the competition in a general sense, but I really rate Princess Park as the second best ground I've watched football at, behind Etihad.

The MCG is fantastic if you have amazing seats however.

I've not been to AAMI Park yet, though I've heard that the way it's been designed makes a game with minimal crowd have a huge impact on the viewing experience due to the atmosphere the accoustics of the place create, complemented by how close you are to the pitch.

I'd love to see a 20-25K capacity ground built on the inner western side of the city designed with these characteristics.

[Ghost Dog]

If the AFL is going to look into buying Etihad, it needs to have a serious think about the impact of rising waters. An Article in The Age in 2012 predicted the whole of the Docklands area could be seriously impacted by floods in the near future

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_BjA9HB5RzRc/TS163KHQxcI/AAAAAAAAF1c/8_02FAUjKRY/s400/Yarra3rdFeb2005.jpg

[ledge]

That's $750k for a crowd of 22,000. I doubt the club could get that many people to a Kardinia Park game the isn't vs Geelong. You'd be looking around the 8,000 - 13,000 crowd mark playing games down there.

Don't underestimate Geelong supporters, half of them would have us as their second side, i tend to think it would be well Over 22000 every game.
Add to that how many dogs supporters live around Geelong and outer areas.

[Eastdog]

What proportion of our members would live in the west?

Pretty easy trip for them.

I live in the eastern suburbs myself but that would be interesting to know how many members live in the traditional heartland. Do you reckon we have an even spread of members around the city?

[LostDoggy]

What proportion of our members would live in the west?

Pretty easy trip for them.

Is it though?

I'd say a very high percentage of fans love the convenience of the tram/train network of inner Melbourne delivering them to the door step of Etihad stadium.
Couple that with the thought of going to an indoor arena in the middle of a cold Vic winter and the Docklans set up is quite attractive to the average punter. That's not even mentioning the blow in crowd that are visiting Melb CBD.
Take these away, add a 50 - 60min drive and a (let's hope this isn't the case) poor performing Bulldogs and I can't see much over 10k showing up. Especially if it coincides with the Cats playing in Melbourne.
I know we still are better off financially running with 10,000 spectators down there, but drawing crowds like that would be very depressing.

[Ghost Dog]

Is it though?

I'd say a very high percentage of fans love the convenience of the tram/train network of inner Melbourne delivering them to the door step of Etihad stadium.
Couple that with the thought of going to an indoor arena in the middle of a cold Vic winter and the Docklans set up is quite attractive to the average punter. That's not even mentioning the blow in crowd that are visiting Melb CBD.
Take these away, add a 50 - 60min drive and a (let's hope this isn't the case) poor performing Bulldogs and I can't see much over 10k showing up. Especially if it coincides with the Cats playing in Melbourne.
I know we still are better off financially running with 10,000 spectators down there, but drawing crowds like that would be very depressing.

Should we worry about that? Long term it won't kill us. Do it for a few years, pocket the cash and be done with it. We've played in Darwin and Canberra to much smaller crowds.

[ratsmac]

The only real solution is for the AFL to buy Eithad. The current owners want $250 million, which the AFL says is too much. All this discussion on boutique stadiums, Geelong games are tactics to try and get the price down. I think the AFL will work out a deal and buy the stadium.

$250 million, the bulldogs should buy it at that price. We would pay it off in no time :D

[1eyedog]

I'm not so keen on that. Kardinia Park only holds 22,000 and there'd be quite a lot of people locked out. That game is probably one of the few we can draw a good crowd and make money out of Etihad from. I'd be more inclined to just play 4 interstate teams there, sure we'll probably only get 15,000 there which isn't a great look, but at least we'd make money.

I think you're underestimating the footy hungry footy fan down there.I grew up in Geelong and they are hungry for footy. I reckon a lot of local Geelong supporters would get alongt to enjoy a good afternoon of AFL footy.

[jeemak]

Is it though?

I'd say a very high percentage of fans love the convenience of the tram/train network of inner Melbourne delivering them to the door step of Etihad stadium.
Couple that with the thought of going to an indoor arena in the middle of a cold Vic winter and the Docklans set up is quite attractive to the average punter. That's not even mentioning the blow in crowd that are visiting Melb CBD.
Take these away, add a 50 - 60min drive and a (let's hope this isn't the case) poor performing Bulldogs and I can't see much over 10k showing up. Especially if it coincides with the Cats playing in Melbourne.
I know we still are better off financially running with 10,000 spectators down there, but drawing crowds like that would be very depressing.

I think you make some excellent points.

Etihad is an exceptional ground to watch football at, even though I think the ground is too short and narrow for modern AFL football (with the way the game's played these days, more room on the flanks is needed to reduce congestion IMO).

You've nailed the indoor aspect, as well as the driving aspect.

We need as many people as possible attending our games, and having 10,000 people showing up isn't acceptable. That's why it's so important for the AFL to buy Etihad and improve the returns for its tenants.

The fact we are subsidising the paying off of the stadium for naught return is sickenning.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

I live in the eastern suburbs myself but that would be interesting to know how many members live in the traditional heartland. Do you reckon we have an even spread of members around the city?

As another who lives in the outer Eastern Suburbs, I would have little enthusiasm for moving home games to Geelong. Mantis is right in saying that to have the Southern Cross station on the doorstep of Etihad is a huge attraction. The figures Geelong are throwing about is based on their ability to attract 30,000 to their home games. We would be lucky to attract half of that number at Kardinia Park. We were given an initial bad deal to play at Etihad. Hopefully Peter Gordon's new equalization scheme will gather momentum to ensue our future is secure at Etihad.

[F'scary]

If the AFL is going to look into buying Etihad, it needs to have a serious think about the impact of rising waters. An Article in The Age in 2012 predicted the whole of the Docklands area could be seriously impacted by floods in the near future

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_BjA9HB5RzRc/TS163KHQxcI/AAAAAAAAF1c/8_02FAUjKRY/s400/Yarra3rdFeb2005.jpg

GD, you surprise me. I did not think you were a believer in catastrophic anthropogenic global warming.

[mighty_west]

I now live in Brisbane but lived in Mornington for 6 years, I would have had no issues doing the road trip to the cattery, as it was mentioned in this thread as long as it was out of the likes of GWS, Port, Suns or Freo,

[F'scary]

If the finances stack up like the $750k profit and there is 34,000 capacity, I think it would be good to play all home games at Geelong. The Etihad deal is a dud and reduces us to pauper status, which I can't stand.

[Remi Moses]

If the AFL is going to look into buying Etihad, it needs to have a serious think about the impact of rising waters. An Article in The Age in 2012 predicted the whole of the Docklands area could be seriously impacted by floods in the near future

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_BjA9HB5RzRc/TS163KHQxcI/AAAAAAAAF1c/8_02FAUjKRY/s400/Yarra3rdFeb2005.jpg

Gee GD I thought you'd subscribe to our expert on all things climate Professor Andrew Bolt.
What on earth would scientists know?

[F'scary]

Gee GD I thought you'd subscribe to our expert on all things climate Professor Andrew Bolt.
What on earth would scientists know?

Yes, what would activist scientists know?

[Mofra]

Yes, what would 97% of scientists know?
Fixed for you

[F'scary]

Fixed for you

Thank you for reprogramming me: 97% of activist scientists.

[The Adelaide Connection]

I don't really like the way we were treated by Carlton FC when we were a co-tenant, or the attitude they take to the rest of the competition in a general sense, but I really rate Princess Park as the second best ground I've watched football at, behind Etihad.

The MCG is fantastic if you have amazing seats however.

I've not been to AAMI Park yet, though I've heard that the way it's been designed makes a game with minimal crowd have a huge impact on the viewing experience due to the atmosphere the accoustics of the place create, complemented by how close you are to the pitch.

I'd love to see a 20-25K capacity ground built on the inner western side of the city designed with these characteristics.

Demetriou flagged the possibility of spending some coin on Punt Road or Princess Park rather than paying overs for taking Etihad early. What sort of coin would it take to get each up to scratch and, if it were to happen, which would be the better option?

[Greystache]

Demetriou flagged the possibility of spending some coin on Punt Road or Princess Park rather than paying overs for taking Etihad early. What sort of coin would it take to get each up to scratch and, if it were to happen, which would be the better option?

I don't really know how it can happen at Princess Park these days. Carlton's training facility pretty much extends all the way onto the ground on one side. Spectators wouldn't be able to sit on that side at all, it's really only a training venue now other than games that only need to seat a couple of thousand at one end.

[bornadog]

I don't really know how it can happen at Princess Park these days. Carlton's training facility pretty much extends all the way onto the ground on one side. Spectators wouldn't be able to sit on that side at all, it's really only a training venue now other than games that only need to seat a couple of thousand at one end.

Same with Punt Rd

[Mofra]

Thank you for reprogramming me: 97% of activist scientists.
Hilarious :D

(God I hope that's a parady)

[F'scary]

Hilarious :D

(God I hope that's a parady)

Why?

[Greystache]

Let's move on, I'm sure both sides of politics are certain they're right.

[The Adelaide Connection]

I don't really know how it can happen at Princess Park these days. Carlton's training facility pretty much extends all the way onto the ground on one side. Spectators wouldn't be able to sit on that side at all, it's really only a training venue now other than games that only need to seat a couple of thousand at one end.

I wonder why Demetriou would suggest it if it is so unsuitable? Do you think he is looking for leverage to get a better deal?

I am pretty sure there used to be some leverage that was custom built for that reason. Then they decided to tear it down and give it to the Hawks. Hard to bargain when you throw your chips away.

[Greystache]

I wonder why Demetriou would suggest it if it is so unsuitable? Do you think he is looking for leverage to get a better deal.

I'm sure that's the case, I can't see Stadiums Management blinking however.

[hujsh]

Hilarious :D

(God I hope that's a parady)

It can't always be a Steven Colbert type character Mofra.

[jeemak]

I'm sure that's the case, I can't see Stadiums Management blinking however.

Irrespective of the wishes I have for a boutique stadium in my post above, I'm under no illusion that it will happen.

The AFL and Stadium Management are doing a dance right now, kind of like what we see at the beginning of trade week (Lake case aside Sedat :D) where everybody puffs out their chest and states their best, but most unrealisitic outcome with idle threats thrown in the mix.

If the AFL wants to help out the tenant clubs through buying Docklands earlier than the deal's expiry date it will. It's up to all clubs in the name of equalisation to lobby for that to happen though, as it's the most likely means to which equalisation can be achieved without the larger clubs having to give up as much of their own revenues as they otherwise might.

Lobbying for a boutique stadium is part of the process, though an inconsequential diversion. Let's get it over with and concentrate on the actual prize.

[Greystache]

Irrespective of the wishes I have for a boutique stadium in my post above, I'm under no illusion that it will happen.

The AFL and Stadium Management are doing a dance right now, kind of like what we see at the beginning of trade week (Lake case aside Sedat :D) where everybody puffs out their chest and states their best, but most unrealisitic outcome with idle threats thrown in the mix.

If the AFL wants to help out the tenant clubs through buying Docklands earlier than the deal's expiry date it will. It's up to all clubs in the name of equalisation to lobby for that to happen though, as it's the most likely means to which equalisation can be achieved without the larger clubs having to give up as much of their own revenues as they otherwise might.

Lobbying for a boutique stadium is part of the process, though an inconsequential diversion. Let's get it over with and concentrate on the actual prize.

The most rediculous apsect of the whole argument from Stadiums Limited is that they're negotiating hard to protect the superannuation funds of 3-4 million Australian workers, so they can retire comfortably.

They're demanding circa $250,000,000 for the last 12 years of their contract, which is close to the actual retail price. Yet divide $250,000,000 by 3-4 million fund holders and we're talking about about approx $71 per person. Do they seriously expect us to believe they give a shit about super customers getting $71 as opposed to $50 from the sale? It's all grandstanding to try to secure the management team as big a bonus from the deal as possible.

They lost more than $50 per customer per day for the years 2008-2011 without batting an eyelid.

[jeemak]

Good point.

The only mitigating aspect I can think of is corporate governance determining minimum requirements for the sale of assets, that form part of a broader bunching of assets, whereby special consideration to sell can't be given to individual cases unless a particularly volatile climate would affect the future value of the asset in question.

There's no real compeition for Docklands that will risk a high return from its sale in the future. Stadium Management kind of holds the cards from this perspective, Docklands is money for jam as far as they're concerned.

[Happy Days]

I don't really know how it can happen at Princess Park these days. Carlton's training facility pretty much extends all the way onto the ground on one side. Spectators wouldn't be able to sit on that side at all, it's really only a training venue now other than games that only need to seat a couple of thousand at one end.

If Vlad wants to renovate Visy Park then maybe this is one time where his "I'm right because I say so and SHUT UP" style of leadership could actually generate something positive

[Greystache]

Good point.

The only mitigating aspect I can think of is corporate governance determining minimum requirements for the sale of assets, that form part of a broader bunching of assets, whereby special consideration to sell can't be given to individual cases unless a particularly volatile climate would affect the future value of the asset in question.

There's no real compeition for Docklands that will risk a high return from its sale in the future. Stadium Management kind of holds the cards from this perspective, Docklands is money for jam as far as they're concerned.

That may be the case, but given Stadiums Limited has been open to negotiation I wouldn't think it would be so.

The competition for Stadiums Limited is effectively time. The stadium can be viewed as a despreciating asset from their perspective. Come 2025 they are contracted to hand it to the AFL for $1, the only benefit they can gain from the asset is what they can derive in the next 12 years. Each year that goes by is one less year they have control over the asset so in essence they lose leverage in negotiations every day. I'm sure they'll put the same argument forward as you just have, but it's a bluff. The AFL want to control it for the sake of the clubs that are tennants, but in reality they are under no real obligation to buy it. They could quite happily drip feed 3 or 4 clubs enough blood to keep them alive and get the stadium for nothing. It's only the constant media attention the tennant clubs draw to how unfair the situation is that causes the AFL any heart burn, and I'm sure if they want to they can live with that pretty confortably. It just sucks for us.

One thing you have to give to Vlad is he is an outstanding negotiator, the AFL hold the leverage and I'm pretty sure everyone in the negotiations would be made well aware of it.

[Greystache]

If Vlad wants to renovate Visy Park then maybe this is one time where his "I'm right because I say so and SHUT UP" style of leadership could actually generate something positive

Personally I don't think for a second he has any interest in renovating Princess Park. I think it's just a tool to keep the media's attention diverted, and a distraction for Stadiums Limited during negotiations.

[jeemak]

That may be the case, but given Stadiums Limited has been open to negotiation I wouldn't think it would be so.

The competition for Stadiums Limited is effectively time. The stadium can be viewed as a despreciating asset from their perspective. Come 2025 they are contracted to hand it to the AFL for $1, the only benefit they can gain from the asset is what they can derive in the next 12 years. Each year that goes by is one less year they have control over the asset so in essence they lose leverage in negotiations every day. I'm sure they'll put the same argument forward as you just have, but it's a bluff. The AFL want to control it for the sake of the clubs that are tennants, but in reality they are under no real obligation to buy it. They could quite happily drip feed 3 or 4 clubs enough blood to keep them alive and get the stadium for nothing. It's only the constant media attention the tennant clubs draw to how unfair the situation is that causes the AFL any heart burn, and I'm sure if they want to they can live with that pretty confortably. It just sucks for us.

One thing you have to give to Vlad is he is an outstanding negotiator, the AFL hold the leverage and I'm pretty sure everyone in the negotiations would be made well aware of it.

Well, knowing your background versus mine this isn't really an arm wrestle I'd expect to walk away from without some third knuckle bruising on my right hand! So I'll leave the finance discussion at that :p.

Beyond that my major concern will be the trouble for our club if this isn't resolved prior to negotiations of the next round of broadcasting rights commencing. We benefitted from the last round (irrespective of our poor stadium deal), though I fear that the networks with the encroaching online and pay TV space will not be prepared to front up with the cash they did most recently. This will have a flow on effect to revenue distribution.

The heartburn you mention will only intensify once revenue is squeezed, and the bigger clubs increase their fight to ensure their slice of the pie does not diminish in any way. The self interest of the bigger clubs is completely understandable, irrespective of the level to which clubs like ours subsidise their riches, and in a climate where broadcasting revenue will potentially dry up we'll be one step closer to being completely screwed.

I'm also not too confident in Vlad being around for a great deal longer. While he's a great negotiator it's becoming very clear that a change in leadership within the administration is iminent. That's why action needs to be taken now to secure Docklands, it will limit the exposure against a poorer return from broadcasting revenue.