Monoethnic Social Club
Club Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 2,816
I think I remember it on old 442 .... it really is remarkable how much they can get away with.....
Canberra fc
- Thread starter Ange's high line
- Start date
NicCarBel
First Team Contender
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 588
Off the top of my head - and this is assuming that all current bids for teams go ahead (APL Canberra United Men's, and BBL Canberra team) - 'Manuka Oval' sports (AFL and BBL) receive $5.85m annually for 8
Can tell you now that 'GIO Stadium' sports will be receiving far, far less than that - from memory the APL commitment from the ACT Gov is around $1.3million a year (including the current commitment to the A-League women's side), for what would be 12-13 pieces of content on the men's side (since I conveniently left that out of the above - not sure how it would incorporate for the WBBL, but for AFLW, that included 2 regular season games - and unsure if that's part of the $28.5m/10year GWS deal)
NicCarBel
First Team Contender
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 588
Here it is
Ok, so let's break this down to include womens sport, because for Canberra United, and the Canberra Raiders, part of that funding is specifically for the women's teams.
- MANUKA OVAL SPORTS - $390,000 p/c
- AFL - $2.85m per year for 5 pieces of content = $570,000 p/c
- BBL - $3m per year for, let's be generous and assume all women's games at Manuka Oval as well, 10 pieces of content = $300,000 p/c
- GIO STADIUM SPORTS - $102,040 p/c
- I will edit this post when I can find the full breakdown again, but I only have the combined amount of $5million (although can confirm the A-League portion of that is $1.45m per year - $250,000 of that being for the ALW)
- A-League - $1.45m per year for 23 pieces of content = $63,043 p/c
- NRL - 16 pieces of content
- Super Rugby - 10 pieces of content
Monoethnic Social Club
Club Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 2,816
Im assuming the "Content" descriptor is a new addition? lolHere it is
Ok, so let's break this down to include womens sport, because for Canberra United, and the Canberra Raiders, part of that funding is specifically for the women's teams.
- MANUKA OVAL SPORTS - $390,000 p/c
- AFL - $2.85m per year for 5 pieces of content = $570,000 p/c
- BBL - $3m per year for, let's be generous and assume all women's games at Manuka Oval as well, 10 pieces of content = $300,000 p/c
- GIO STADIUM SPORTS - $102,040 p/c
- I will edit this post when I can find the full breakdown again, but I only have the combined amount of $5million (although can confirm the A-League portion of that is $1.45m per year - $250,000 of that being for the ALW)
- A-League - $1.45m per year for 23 pieces of content = $63,043 p/c
- NRL - 16 pieces of content
- Super Rugby - 10 pieces of content
NicCarBel
First Team Contender
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 588
The real numbers behind the ACT's World Cup bid revealed after Barr's 'offer'
Officials are at odds over Canberra's 2027 Rugby World Cup fate.
The real numbers behind the ACT's World Cup bid revealed after Barr's 'offer'
By Caden Helmers
Updated January 31 2025 - 9:37am, first published 5:30am
The ACT government pitched a $500,000 per-game bid to have rugby union World Cup matches in Canberra, far less than the multimillion-dollar "package" Chief Minister Andrew Barr said had been rejected.
The capital will be sidelined from another major international event after World Cup organisers revealed the host cities for the 2027 tournament on Thursday.
Barr said the government presented a four-game offer for tier-c games that "amounted to around $2.5 million for each match" and would rise as high as $12 million in total pending ticket sales.
However, the "offer" Barr touted wasn't a promise of government funding. Instead, it was potential revenue from hospitality and ticket sales to the public.
The Canberra Times can reveal the actual cash pledge from the government was just $2 million in total for all four games - a $1.6 million payment to the World Cup and another $400,000 to be spent on a fan zone and free public transport.
And while Barr said the decision to bypass Canberra was "all about money", the most powerful man World Rugby - chairman Brett Robinson - said the ageing facilities at Canberra Stadium also counted against the capital.
Wallabies great Matt Giteau was stunned by the decision to snub Canberra, saying: "How can Canberra not get one game for RWC 2027? This can't be accurate surely."
Barr's spin on the figures created confusion. When all of that was stripped back, the government estimated a $2 million outlay would generate $9 million in economic activity for the city.
Businesses won't see any of that now after World Cup organisers formally rejected the proposal in writing to Barr this week.
"Given only the lowest tier games between qualifying nations were available, we put forward a realistic multimillion offer to Rugby Australia, that was financially responsible," Barr said.
"This included providing a rent-free, commercially clean match venue, marketing support, support for the provision of a rugby village fan zone, integrated ticketing and free public transport.
"Based on 75 per cent capacity attendance at each match (including ticket sale revenue and hospitality), the ACT government offer amounted to around $2.5 million for each match ($10m for four games)."
Brett Robinson and Andrew Barr are at odds over Canberra's World Cup fate. Pictures by Keegan Carroll
A stoush over costs, Canberra's stadium facilites and World Cup opportunities has been brewing since 2022, when rugby officials raised concerns about the city's involvement in the tournament.
The fact Robinson - the newly-elected World Rugby chairman and the ACT Brumbies' foundation captain - pointed to the facilities as a reason for Canberra's absence is a major blow to a stadium saga that has dragged on for 16 years.
Barr dismissed concerns about Canberra Stadium, saying World Rugby's decision was "all about money". Robinson, who played his first game at the venue in 1996, told a different story.
It's understood World Rugby officials had raised concerns about the stadium's lights, corporate facilities and even the wireless internet.
"At the end of the day, the facilities, the scale of the stadium we require and the economics of it just couldn't stack up with the local organising committee CEO and chair," Robinson said.
"We've just agreed that that's unfortunately not going to be an outcome. But as I've said, there are many other ways that Canberra will contribute to this great tournament.
"While it was disappointing we couldn't make the economics of it work for Canberra, there are other ways we connect through players, the administration and even how we might activate or locate different teams for their preparation.
"It's only an hour or two up the highway to [Sydney] for the Canberrans. I'm sure they will be disappointed about that, but ultimately as the Brumbies always have, they've contributed to our country's on-field and off-field performance in many ways."
The drama has been brewing for the past three years after it was revealed the government was struggling to compete with bigger state governments in the battle for major sporting content.
All prospective bidders were asked to submit their financial contribution and the expected revenue opportunities for World Cup organisers via ticket sales and game-day hospitality.
Canberra cannot compete with the revenue opportunities at the biggest stadiums - at Homebush, the MCG or Perth - but it is comparible with similar sized venues at Newcastle, Townsville and Melbourne's rectangular stadium.
Townsville and Newcastle will host four games each, while Melbourne will host nine matches but it's unclear how those will be split between the MCG, Docklands and the rectangular venue.
Those three cities are backed by governments with deeper pockets than the ACT government and accordingly presented bids worth more than the $500,000 put up by the Barr's team and with the ability to generate greater profits via crowds.
But Canberra is one of only four Super Rugby locations and has been home to Australia's most successful franchise - the Brumbies. That wasn't enough to convince World Rugby into make some concessions and Canberra was overlooked.
Barr has drawn a line in the sand, refusing to pay what he deems "exorbitant" amounts to host minnow nations in tournament play.
He says the money is better spent on hosting the Socceroos, Matildas, Wallabies, Kangaroos or other national teams, dismissing the impact of World Cup fever like the Matildas mania that swept over Australia in 2023.
It also overlooks the fact that an average crowd of 20,482 watched Italy, Wales, Tonga and Canada play rugby World Cup matches in Canberra in 2003.
Admittedly, rugby union was in the midst of a golden era 22 years ago, and the sport was thriving compared to the dwindling crowds and interest over the past decade.
The failure to strike a deal stunned Wallabies and Brumbies great Matt Giteau.
South Africa won the World Cup in 2023. Picture AP
"How can Canberra not get one game for RWC 2027? This can't be accurate surely," Giteau wrote on social media.
"Growth of the game down here is as crucial as it is around the country. Most successful Super Rugby team and we get [donuts] down this way."
But if Barr and World Rugby bosses can agree on one thing, it's this: the numbers don't add up.
Critics naturally turn to a heavy investment in AFL games, with Barr forced to defend a 10-year, $28.5 million investment to have the GWS Giants play three games per season at Manuka Oval.
Barr pointed to investment in the Brumbies, Raiders, Canberra United and the Canberra Capitals as a counter-argument, reiterating his is the only government in Australia to financially back national-league teams and that they would cease to exist with the support.
Barr is adamant the rugby World Cup offer was realistic and financially responsible, claiming tournament organisers were more interested in markets with a bigger population.
Rugby Australia has indicated it is keen to work with the ACT government to strike a deal for Rugby Championship, or one-off Tests.
"It's a World Rugby tournament, run by the World Rugby local organising committee," Rugby Australia chief executive Phil Waugh said.
"Those decisions are with World Rugby. Clearly, the governments put forward their level of interest, and clearly, commercial terms are a big part of that. We've had great support around the country from state governments."
Barr bit back at the idea he is a "stooge" for the AFL who cares little for investing in other sports when he said the ACT government's World Cup bid was worth $2.5 million per game.
The $10 million figure is what World Rugby stood to gain if 75 per cent of tickets were sold for four matches at Canberra Stadium.
Had half of Canberra Stadium's seats been sold during four World Cup games in Canberra, Barr figured World Rugby stood to make $8 million. That number jumps to $10 million with three-quarters of the stadium filled, and $12 million from four sell-outs.
NicCarBel
First Team Contender
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 588
Should the feds pitch in to save Canberra from future 'embarrassment'?
The ACT government failed to secure World Cup games for Canberra.
www.canberratimes.com.au
Should the feds pitch in to save Canberra from future 'embarrassment'?
The ACT government failed to secure World Cup games for Canberra.
Should the feds pitch in to save Canberra from future 'embarrassment'?
By Caden Helmers
Updated January 31 2025 - 2:02pm, first published 11:17am
The "embarrassment" of seeing Canberra discarded by the Rugby World Cup has sparked a call for federal government investment to ensure the capital isn't left behind in the race to secure marquee events.
Independent MLA Tom Emerson has challenged the federal government to match its own rhetoric about fostering the importance of Canberra as the national capital by coming to the aid of the ACT government to secure major events and infrastructure.
It comes after Canberra was overlooked as a host city for the 2027 Rugby World Cup, with Independent ACT Senator David Pocock saying Chief Minister Andrew Barr's "astonishing" explanation of his failure to secure games for Canberra sounds like "creative accounting designed to mislead".
The ACT government pitched a $500,000 per-game bid to have rugby union World Cup matches in Canberra, with Barr's claim of a $10 million package revealed to be potential revenue from hospitality and ticket sales to the public - not guaranteed government funding.
Barr is adamant the offer put to tournament organisers was realistic, but there is a fear Canberra could be blown out of the water by rival state governments in the race for other marquee sporting events.
Emerson says the federal government needs to match its own Canberra rhetoric with action, citing the recommendations of an inquiry into fostering and promoting the significance of Australia's national capital.
Among the recommendations was "the Commonwealth government work with the ACT government to upgrade Canberra's stadium infrastructure to: provide the necessary infrastructure to support national and international sporting events", while a function of the National Capital Authority is "to foster an awareness of Canberra as the national capital".
David Pocock, Stephen Larkham and Tom Emerson have weighed in on the World Cup saga. Pictures by Keegan Carroll, Elesa Kurtz
"The challenge we've got is we're a smaller jurisdiction with a smaller budget, so we're missing out on a lot of key events for financial reasons. My view is the federal government should be investing in the ACT and Canberra as the national capital," Emerson said.
"Frankly, it's a bit of an embarrassment the national capital is not going to host any games during a World Cup, which is the second time in quick succession that it's happened. Canberra is one of the least-known capital cities in the world, and there will be plenty of people coming to the World Cup, who leave it not knowing Canberra is the capital.
"My disappointment is the federal government is not stepping up and actually investing in Canberra, especially given some of the signals we've had from the Prime Minister about how much he cares about Canberra, how it's important to live at The Lodge, that needs to be backed up with funding for these sorts of events.
"When you've got similarly sized cities like Newcastle getting games, the NSW government is playing a role in that. A lot of the other states have other revenue streams we don't have in the ACT."
Canberra is home to Australia's most successful Super Rugby side and the ACT Brumbies' inaugural captain, Brett Robinson, is the World Rugby chairman. Even so, Robinson declared Canberra hasn't "got the stadium to be competitive" in the bid to secure marquee fixtures.
"The Chief Minister claimed that Rugby World Cup rejected a $10 million package but it seems, in fact, it was $500,000 a game ... It seems like creative accounting designed to mislead, which I think raises some pretty serious questions," Senator Pocock told ABC radio on Friday morning.
"To their credit, at least they put a bid in. My understanding is that they didn't even put a bid in for the women's football World Cup game. They didn't think it was value for money."
Asked if he thought the ACT government was "trying to hide some of the facts from us", Pocock said: "I don't know, I'm sure things will come out in time."
Pocock added Canberra had "some of the highest community sports participation rates in the country, and we are consistently missing out on actually having world-class events and having millions of people actually watching sport that's happening in Canberra. It's no surprise we're the least-known capital city."
ACT and Wallabies great Matt Giteau was left dumfounded by failure to strike a deal to bring games to Canberra, with Brumbies women's coach Andy Friend telling The Roar it is "a real slap in the face".
Canberra is home to Australia's best Super Rugby side. Picture by Keegan Carroll
Brumbies coach Stephen Larkham was one of rugby's biggest stars during a Wallabies golden era, and the decision has left him disappointed for the Canberra fanbase.
Rugby crowds in Canberra have dipped since the golden era of 2003, when four World Cup games featuring Italy, Tonga, Wales and Canada drew an average crowd of 20,482 across four fixtures at Canberra Stadium.
"From our perspective, we've got a lot of really passionate supporters. Disappointing for them, not to have that ability to watch a game here in Canberra," Larkham said.
"It's probably something I can't really speculate on more than that except to say disappointing from our perspective. In the rugby community within Australia, and proudly representing this region, we would have loved to have had a game to showcase the game at the top level. We can't do anything about that right now.
"The only thing we can do is make sure we're putting really good performances out there for the local fans who love coming to support us."
NicCarBel
First Team Contender
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 588
This is the bit that's really grinding my gears, because:
A) CBR gov didn't put any interest in the Women's World Cup bid
B) Between the Matildas and Socceroos since COVID restrictions ended, there has only been one Matildas friendly against NZ, and a LEBANON HOME GAME against the Socceroos put together at the last minute.
NicCarBel
First Team Contender
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 588
Not when:
A) you put it up against what Barr has said above
B) the fact that there was no interest from the ACT government in supporting the Women's World Cup.
C) The Socceroos game was a Lebanon home game that was only possible because AFC wouldn't allow Lebanon to host, so in effect.. isn't really Canberra trying to invest in hosting the Socceroos.
I’m not disagreeing with you or the sentiment of the article and agree that the AFL gets way too much money from the government and this should be highlighted and fixed or at least evened up somehow countrywide. There’s a definite football-bias at all levels of government in Australia which unfortunately comes down to too many old white men (of which I am also one, but I’m a football lover).
NicCarBel
First Team Contender
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 588
Yes, I think this is my main point.
NicCarBel
First Team Contender
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 588
I'm going to reply rather than edit, as I don't want to lose the post:Here it is
Ok, so let's break this down to include womens sport, because for Canberra United, and the Canberra Raiders, part of that funding is specifically for the women's teams.
- MANUKA OVAL SPORTS - $390,000 p/c
- AFL - $2.85m per year for 5 pieces of content = $570,000 p/c
- BBL - $3m per year for, let's be generous and assume all women's games at Manuka Oval as well, 10 pieces of content = $300,000 p/c
- GIO STADIUM SPORTS - $102,040 p/c
- I will edit this post when I can find the full breakdown again, but I only have the combined amount of $5million (although can confirm the A-League portion of that is $1.45m per year - $250,000 of that being for the ALW)
- A-League - $1.45m per year for 23 pieces of content = $63,043 p/c
- NRL - 16 pieces of content
- Super Rugby - 10 pieces of content
- MANUKA OVAL SPORTS - (INCLUDING PROPOSED CANBERRA BBL SIDE)
- $390,000 p/c
- AFL - $2.85m per year for 5 pieces of content = $570,000 p/c
- BBL - $3m per year for, let's be generous and assume all women's games at Manuka Oval as well, 10 pieces of content = $300,000 p/c
- GIO STADIUM SPORTS - (INCLUDING PROPOSED A-LEAGUE MENS SIDE)
- $118,980 p/c
- A-League - $1.45m per year for 23 pieces of content = $63,043 p/c
- NRL - $2.6m per year for 16 pieces of content = $162,500 p/c
- Super Rugby - $1.78m per year 10 pieces of content = $178,000 p/c
- MANUKA OVAL SPORTS - AS CURRENT
- $570,000 p/c
- AFL - $2.85m per year for 5 pieces of content = $570,000 p/c
- BBL - unknown for 2 pieces of content per year
- GIO STADIUM SPORTS - AS CURRENT
- $125,135 p/c
- A-League - $250,000 per year for 11 pieces of content = $27,727 p/c
- NRL - $2.6m per year for 16 pieces of content = $162,500 p/c
- Super Rugby - $1.78m per year 10 pieces of content = $178,000 p/c
WhatAmIWatching
Impact Sub
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2024
- Replies
- 191
And I will go against the grain here and say that I oppose any government expenditure on sporting facilities for professional sports. And yes, I do take advantage of what is provided but I rather they spend the money on community facilities. Want an upgrade to a sporting venue? Raise private capital. Am I filthy about the AFL expansion to Tasmania costing the taxpayer over $750M? You bet I am.
nm.apia21
Youth Prospect
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2024
- Replies
- 41
i am fine with the investment in Manuka as it means they'll probably get a sheffield shield/big bash/afl team but the fact that they're neglecting their existing teams and further neglecting the growing sport of basketball is what really rubs me the wrong way
NicCarBel
First Team Contender
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 588
Yes that’s the way I feel (at least about the cricket side of things). I really do not think AFL is going to give Canberra a full time team.
If they do, Andrew Barr/ACT Gov better give them the exact same funding as the Canberra Raiders as the maximum.
The neglecting of completely local teams, for the benefit of trying to pull Sydney and Melbourne tourist money in (which is hilarious, considering the snub of the Women’s World Cup in 2023, and the upcoming Rugby World Cup - 2 of the most watched events in the world) is what really grinds me.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 2,602
Shame the bundesliga style model didn't work out
Frankly Speaking
Reserve Player
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2024
- Replies
- 84
I don't think Canberra will happen. A Gold Coast team would be hands down a better investment.
Ange's high line
Benchwarmer
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2024
- Replies
- 103
- Thread Author
- #79
Can Conroy raise the titanic? A Canberra team to rise out of the ashes...oh that's a Phoenix..
MoorePark
Reserve Player
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2024
- Replies
- 85
Makes flying & hotels actually worth it.
You could do Berlin away (1 week) cheaper with Scoot in October and November than Surfers last year.