up to 6 games in Western Suburbs - Sydney

[bornadog]

According to a small snipet in the Sunday Age, the dogs are looking at playing up to 6 non-home games in Western Sydney from 2010. They quote Rose saying that the club is reviewing its secondary market Strategy. " We are looking at a whole host of options to further entrench our long term future. Our overwhelming focus and committment is the Western suburbs of Melbourne"

Apparently the plan is based on Collingwoods schedule of away matches at the MCG and the brand on the word "West"


This may mean seeing the dogs play less games in Melbourne as we are already playing around 5 to 6 interstate games per year, so I don't know how that would impact the away games in WA, SA and QLD.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Stupid idea, I'd be enraged.

Membership will drop and there's no doubt about that; take one look at The Kangaroos and anyone can identify the several problems of playing less games in Melbourne than you already are.

I might go into detail a little later, but in short I sincerely hope the club stays right away from this idea. The short term benefits read that we make a profit from playing a few games up in Sydney; the long term consequences are deadly though.

Besides, we made a profit last year - why wouldn't the club look on expanding the efforts and seek to play more games in Melbourne, with a better TD deal? Before our demise in the last six weeks, we were pulling impressive crowds. If we were able to find a better TD deal, or even a better deal elsewhere - I don't understand why we'd entertain the idea of playing up to six games in Sydney and risking our future.

There'll be a riot down at WO if this ends up happening and rightfully so.

It's very frustrating reading this crap.

[hujsh]

According to a small snipet in the Sunday Age, the dogs are looking at playing up to 6 non-home games in Western Sydney from 2010. They quote Rose saying that the club is reviewing its secondary market Strategy. " We are looking at a whole host of options to further entrench our long term future. Our overwhelming focus and committment is the Western suburbs of Melbourne"

Apparently the plan is based on Collingwoods schedule of away matches at the MCG and the brand on the word "West"


This may mean seeing the dogs play less games in Melbourne as we are already playing around 5 to 6 interstate games per year, so I don't know how that would impact the away games in WA, SA and QLD.

Would that mean we are trying the same thing as Collingwood suggested they do with the Gold Coast so we never travel again?

[Mantis]

Stupid idea, I'd be enraged.

Membership will drop and there's no doubt about that; take one look at The Kangaroos and anyone can identify the several problems of playing less games in Melbourne than you already are.

There'll be a riot down at WO if this ends up happening and rightfully so.

It's very frustrating reading this crap.

Why??

I would presume the bulk of memberships sold would be 11 game memberships which are used for 'Home' games only. Why wouldn't this type of member continue to buy this membership?


Besides, we made a profit last year - why wouldn't the club look on expanding the efforts and seek to play more games in Melbourne, with a better TD deal? Before our demise in the last six weeks, we were pulling impressive crowds. If we were able to find a better TD deal, or even a better deal elsewhere - I don't understand why we'd entertain the idea of playing up to six games in Sydney and risking our future.

We made a profit on the back of the payment we receive from the AFL as a part of the competitive fund. This payment will not be around forever and we need to make arrangemnts to stand on our own 2 feet sooner rather than later. I understand the reasons why we receive this payment, those being our stadium deal and the lack of 'blockbuster type' games, but the management of the club must look at every possible way in which we can increase our revenue streams.

[The Coon Dog]

This payment will not be around forever and we need to make arrangemnts to stand on our own 2 feet sooner rather than later.

Not too sure if anyone has considered pokies? :D

[GVGjr]

Why??

I would presume the bulk of memberships sold would be 11 game memberships which are used for 'Home' games only. Why wouldn't this type of member continue to buy this membership?



The majority of people I know take 17 game memberships and don't want more games away from Victoria. Selling one is acceptable, selling a lot more than that is not.
For years we have been told that selling home games to the interstate market is a short term option and to hear now that they are exploring an even bigger commitment even if it supposed to be away games is not on.

This will impact memberships because people will see this as a push to move the Western Bulldogs to Western Sydney and no amount of spin will change that perception.

I know I am sick of this whole 2nd market strategy of exploring the Sunshine Coast, Darwin and now Sydney. We keep spinning these markets as the future of the club but never make it stick.
I hope we give Darwin the chance to succeed

[The Coon Dog]

If they are proposing 4 AWAY games in West Sydney, how do they do it?

Which teams are going to want (or be forced) to play a HOME game in West Sydney so that another team can be the AWAY team?

Sydney -YES.

Adelaide, Post Adelaide, West Coast, Fremantle & Brisbane - NO.

Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon, Geelong, Hawthorn, Richmond, St.Kilda - NO.

Melbourne & North Melbourne - ?

What is the incentive/inducement that could be offered for a team to transfer a HOME game there, bearing in mind there would have to be a sizeable incentive/inducement for a team to play 4 AWAY games there.

[Sockeye Salmon]

The idea is to play away games v the interstate sides in West Sydney and never have to travel west of Geelong ever again.

The AFL will never agree to it.

[GVGjr]

The idea is to play away games v the interstate sides in West Sydney and never have to travel west of Geelong ever again.

The AFL will never agree to it.

Thats why there will need to be a compromise either for a couple of home games or an eventual relocation

[The Bulldogs Bite]

The majority of people I know take 17 game memberships and don't want more games away from Victoria. Selling one is acceptable, selling a lot more than that is not.
For years we have been told that selling home games to the interstate market is a short term option and to hear now that they are exploring an even bigger commitment even if it supposed to be away games is not on.

This will impact memberships because people will see this as a push to move the Western Bulldogs to Western Sydney and no amount of spin will change that perception.

I know I am sick of this whole 2nd market strategy of exploring the Sunshine Coast, Darwin and now Sydney. We keep spinning these markets as the future of the club but never make it stick.
I hope we give Darwin the chance to succeed

Agree wholeheartedly with this. The arrangement we have at the moment is more than enough. In fact, I'd like to see us play Sydney at the TD within the next couple of years - and that was promised by the club. These new rumours seem to suggest otherwise.

When does it stop? It grows from one point to another until you're in a position that confronted The Kangaroos. If we play games in Western Sydney I have no doubt Membership will drop; less games in Melbourne & the fact that relocation is being explored is a huge turn off, particularly to young fans growing up in the community.

Darwin is a viable option for now; it's working. What the club should be trying to do is fix up a far better TD deal. I read somewhere last year that we averaged higher crowds than Essendon. That along with good footy over the last three seasons (aside from the last six weeks of '07 obviously) should have us demanding a lucrative deal. If not - fine. Play our HG's somewhere else. MCG, Skilled - I don't care - but playing in Sydney is unacceptable.

[BulldogBelle]

The majority of people I know take 17 game memberships and don't want more games away from Victoria. Selling one is acceptable, selling a lot more than that is not.

Same here, I always purchase a 17 game membership and just about everyone that I know that goes to the footy does the same.

I wonder if these comments regarding additional games were made before this Western Sydney & Qld proposed team were mentioned the other day by Fitzpatrick?

Here is an article that was put up on the NT news "The Sunday Territorian" clearly indicates that we are seeking other avenues...

-------
Dogs here to stay (http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2008/02/14/3350_ntsport.html)
Feb 14th, 2008

WESTERN Bulldogs president David Smorgon last night said that any talk of his club ending its playing tenure in Darwin in 2009 was premature.

A move to western Sydney for a four-game playing tenure from 2010 or a similar stay on the Gold Coast by the Bulldogs have been mentioned as possibilities.

Ironically, tomorrow night's NAB Cup opponent, North Melbourne, knocked back a multi-million dollar relocation move to the Gold Coast just prior to Christmas.

Smorgon (pictured) said his club was focused solely on playing premiership matches in Darwin for the next two years (2008 and '09).

"Nothing else has been talked about or even discussed informally,'' he said.

"There has been lots of speculation, but I can tell you we're here for the NAB Cup game this week and the premiership game against Port Adelaide in June.

"The same thing applies to 2009, and where we go from there we'll have to sit down and talk about.''

Smorgon conceded that the crowd numbers at last year's Bulldogs-Fremantle premiership game at Darwin's TIO Stadium (11,400) had been disappointing.

"We'd like to get the crowd up by a few thousand, there's no doubt about that,'' he said.

"The crowd numbers we've been getting up there have been a little disappointing.

"But it's something we'll be talking to the NT Government about and the support they're giving us to play matches in Darwin.''

Smorgon said playing "home'' games interstate would remain on his club's agenda, despite the obvious temptation to play all of them in Melbourne in front of their sponsors and fans.

[Prince Imperial]

Our Canberra deal expires this year and Darwin the next. I don't think many people would show up to watch us play at Homebush unless we were playing the Swans. it would be a flop just like the roos in the late 90s and I don't think the AFL would go down that path. Though I don't like it, I accept the club has to play 2 home games interstate - we need the revenue and to demonstrate to the League that they should continue to support us through the ASF.

I would support us playing an extra match interstate and I reckon the Gold Coast would be the better option for 2009 and 2010 until a club is established there; there's no "Western" connection and no perception that we are going to relocate (something that really harmed North).

[The Coon Dog]

If we have to play 2 interstate games then back to back Darwin games for me.

[Sockeye Salmon]

If we have to play 2 interstate games then back to back Darwin games for me.

That's what the club wanted to do but the AFL wouldn't agree to it