Which is why I think just saying “we’re a development league” when talking about our strategic vision is insulting. We depend on that money for a financially viable league and we can’t, and shouldn’t, rely on intermittent income from outgoing transfers exceeding incoming transfers to fund it.
The APL should be held to account for what happened, especially if the contract was able to be shorted on our end for lack of viewership but didn’t have any clauses to do with delivering a quality product. Because this shit matters, as much as I personally will be watching it and glad about.
I don’t think there is any league in the world that would realistically get a majority of it’s ongoing revenue from selling it’s talent. Are there any examples where that’s actually a thing? Some clubs do exceedingly well finding, developing, and selling talent and that may be an important stream of revenue but I doubt it would be the majority of their revenue consistently - let alone an entire league surviving that way.
I think it’s generally used as a euphemism of feeder or selling league. We are certainly that. It is very rare that we pay any kind of transfer fees to bring players into the league.
I would guess that the Dutch, Portuguese and maybe Belgian leagues operate that way. I also suspect that Brazil and Argentina do, but I’m less sure about how large the TV deals are in those countries.
It doesn’t even come close to being a majority. Keeping in mind some of that transfer profit is just money moving between Dutch clubs too.
Those numbers are also with (from what I understand) a really bad broadcast deal. Their new domestic broadcast rights deal is worth 150m Euro per season whereas the old one was under 80 million per season.
Yeah fair enough, makes a lot of sense. For what it’s worth, I think you’re right, I’m just curious if there are any that fulfil that majority transfer income side of things.
In reality, it’s more likely to be a club by club thing, with some of the big Portuguese clubs for example being much more reliant on transfer income.
It’s certainly far from irrelevant in terms of income to those clubs. It’s just that it’s so volatile that I don’t think any league or even club can be run long term with the idea that transfers will provide an essential source of revenue.
To me it’s 'We must say something, but don’t do anything personal to connect with individual groups, or we isolate those who don’t agree. Make it general, tell them about the business decisions, How our business model is doing well, how football in general reflects on us doing well. Throw in a few ‘stars’ names. Tell them we have plans for the future. Make sure you hold that…ball…in a photo and smile. "
But that’s my reaction, maybe they really mean everything in this press release and prove me wrong.
In terms of television audiences, our Isuzu UTE A-League Men free-to-air audiences are up 9% compared to last season, and in the Liberty A-League Women, we’ve seen 120% growth on 10 Play, with every game live and free.
So the elephant in the room there is that presumably the mens matches on Paramount must be down. Otherwise it would have been mentioned.
Just my thought pattern but (Not that it’s happening) IF the A-league collapsed and the Aus FA was remaining in running a national league, what would be the outcome of the clubs in the current A-league?
I know i would continue to support SFC from youth to seniors in both womens and mens.
The clubs in the A-League are clubs, no matter how they started. Time always matters.
Some might fold, the newer ones, but the building blocks are there and so are some fans.
