Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About Flytox

  • Rank
    Club Captain

Profile Information

  • Gender

Supported Teams

  • AL Team
  • Other Teams

Recent Profile Visitors

542 profile views
  1. 1. It has to be spent on capital works to get the money for asset recycling from the Feds. 2. When the stadium build is considered as a 30 year investment with limited recurrent cost to Government its not excessive. 3. If you build 4 new hospitals at the same cost they cost about $1.5b pa to operate. Where does that $1.5b annually come from? There are plenty of ways to look at it but I'm just pointing out that using the windfall for other purposes brings with it other costs. Also, the time will come when the stadiums have to be replaced anyway. When is the best time to do it? When you have windfall revenue or when the expenditure means deferral of "essential" projects?
  2. This image gives a better appreciation of the rake of the upper tier. https://imgur.com/iovaTuM
  3. A-League TV Ratings.

    Round 10 this season:- average STV rating 69k which is 0.4k higher than last season. This is now 2 of the last 3 rounds that this season has been slightly higher than last season. In between the 2 "successes", however, was the poor ratings when we were up against the Ashes and averaged 49k against 69k last season. Guess whats likely to happen next weekend.
  4. The money for the stadiums was topped up by $1b from the $2.6b from the sale of the Land Titles Office.
  5. A-League TV Ratings.

    I started a chart just the other day. I can post that on here when I tidy it up.
  6. A-League TV Ratings.

    The season before was when I had a stroke so I only did the first 7.5 rounds. I intend to go through the thread on 442 to fill in the rest of that season so when I have done that I can post details.
  7. A-League TV Ratings.

    I prepared this for another site but I thought it was worth having here too. We are a third of the way through the season so I thought it was worth putting up average STV ratings per club compared to this point last season.Victory Last season 93k, This season 79k, -15.1%Wanderers 93k, 78k, -16.1%City 90k, 74k, -17.7%Sydney 90k, 73k, -18.9%Brisbane 90k, 66k, -26.7%Adelaide 80k, 65k, -18.8%Perth 70k, 56k, -20.0%Mariners 64k, 55k, -14.1%Newcastle 62k, 55k, -11.3%Wellington 59k, 46k, -22.0%
  8. FIFA sees representative democracy a little different to some. In the preamble in the section on Membership of the congress it states that if categories of membership are established then all members of that category should have the same rights and obligations. This would mean all State Feds should have the same vote with no regard to the difference is size. Similarly if the A-League gets x number of votes then the "Championship" should get the same unless professional competitions are put in a different category to semi- professional competitions. I'm not sure that it allows particular members to have more say.
  9. Statement concerning the Football Federation of Australia (FIFA.com) 07 Dec 2017 © AFP The situation of the Football Federation of Australia (FFA) was submitted to the FIFA Member Associations Committee during its meeting on 4 December 2017. The Committee took note that proposals put forward by the FFA regarding the expansion of the FFA Congress failed to reach consensual agreement amongst the stakeholders at the extraordinary meeting convened on 30 November 2017. In addition, the Committee was informed of FFA's intention to immediately establish a Congress review working group involving all relevant stakeholders to agree on the future Congress model. The Committee eventually decided to support the establishment of the Congress review working group by the FFA, provided that FIFA and AFC are fully involved in the process and that a clear roadmap ensuring a timely conclusion with the adoption of a more inclusive and representative membership model is established. To this end, a FIFA/AFC mission will visit Sydney early next year to meet with FFA and the stakeholders (Member federations, A-League clubs, PFA) as well as any other relevant interlocutors, such as the Association of Australian Football Clubs (AAFC), that have been established in the meantime. Based on the feedback received, FFA together with FIFA and AFC will define the terms of reference of the Congress review working group, including its objective, composition, mandate and timeline.
  10. As I understand it the FIFA/AFC representatives will be listening to all the stakeholders and then they will write the brief for the Congress Review Working Group. They will have to thoroughly understand the situation to end up with the right riding instructions. If the FFA is seen to be attempting to commandeer the process then they will know and similarly if the clubs/PFA do another "we won't talk to you unless its on our terms" like they did with the 7 State Feds then they will be seen as not playing ball. At this stage we don't know whether FIFA is only interested in the membership structure or will get involved in the development of an ongoing model for football here. I doubt they will want to get involved in the latter but if the they get into more detailed changes to the constitution they can set a basic direction for subsequent boards to work with.
  11. I think that the FIFA and AFC representatives will tell all parties that a non resolution of the issue won't be tolerated and as they will be involved in the process they will know which parties aren't playing ball and tell them to get out of the way.
  12. Now the clubs and PFA will have to talk to the FFA and the 7 State Feds that disagree with them instead of not wanting the FFA involved and refusing to discuss anything with the 7 State Feds unless it was on their terms. FFA also will be forced to discuss the pros and cons of the issues openly without having predetermined what the outcome should be and trying to enforce it. The laughable thing about the whole debacle is that neither of the two voting proposals go anywhere near what most MA's see as the size and breadth of Congress that satisfies FIFA's representative democracy model. If the final agreement follows these then the FFA, clubs and the State Feds will have learnt that Congress is not about power but facilitating the growth of the game.
  13. Gate takings for the finals series last season was $3.7m. Gate takings for the Socceroos was $4.1m. Gate takings from the FFA Cup $0.4m. The $9.97m from levies on all players paid through the State Feds is just about 10% on its own without taking into account $5.2m from State Governments for hosting rights to Socceroos games. Just those three revenue sources is near 20% and there are a lot more that are purely FFA revenue. 90% is nonsense, di Pietro said 70% recently and that is probably a bit high.
  14. I'm not sure what everyone is complaining about. We had a great win this weekend. Highest crowd of the round. Well done.
  15. Thats an interesting point that has never been spelled out clearly. The clubs have claimed at various times anything between 60% and 80% and $60m and $80m. The most recent I have seen on two occasions was $60m solely A-League generated plus additional shared revenue. I had a look at the annual accounts and review to try and work it out from there. Of the $40m in the smaller categories I concluded that about $30m was FFA revenue which leaves $39m for broadcast rights and $26m for sponsorship to try to split up. With the FFA now not having the broadcast rights to official AFC mens games I'd expect that maybe $5m would be FFA revenue. With sponsorship I would reckon that the split that is the FFA's would be a significantly higher percentage so maybe the figure again is around $5m. So for what it is worth my calculation of the split is $65m A-League and $40m for FFA plus or minus whatever you want to allow. In my opinion quoting in percentages is not the right way to go because the total revenue varies across the 4 years of the WC cycle quite considerably whereas A-League revenue is fairly stable across the broadcast rights cycle.