ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
Moderator: GH Moderators
ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
ACT Sports Minister Yvette Berry says she wants to formalise the community work the Canberra Raiders do as part of future contracts to play in the nation's capital. It's not because they aren't doing enough, it's more to recognise all the work they do do.
"We're looking for some... changes particularly around the community's involvement and what they're getting out of the funding that the ACT government's providing. It's their money after all.
Read more: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... /?cs=14239
ACT Sports Minister Yvette Berry says she wants to formalise the community work the Canberra Raiders do as part of future contracts to play in the nation's capital. It's not because they aren't doing enough, it's more to recognise all the work they do do.
"We're looking for some... changes particularly around the community's involvement and what they're getting out of the funding that the ACT government's providing. It's their money after all.
Read more: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... /?cs=14239
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
Considering the Raiders do more for the well-being of the Canberra community than the ACT Government, then this is probably a good thing.
ACT government tackles budget deficits like Darius Boyd tackles second rowers.
ACT government tackles budget deficits like Darius Boyd tackles second rowers.
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
Or Shannon Boyd empties tanks
- yurithe1
- David Furner
- Posts: 3587
- Joined: March 16, 2008, 10:27 am
- Favourite Player: Jordan Rapana
- Location: Canberra
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
"The Raiders and Brumbies are constantly visiting schools and helping out in the Canberra community, but Berry wanted more people to know about it."
Curious that she doesn't mention the GWS Giants. Personally, I can't recall any stories about them doing anything in the ACT community. Perhaps what she really means is that the Government wants to get more out of the FIFO side rather than our two indigenous teams.
Curious that she doesn't mention the GWS Giants. Personally, I can't recall any stories about them doing anything in the ACT community. Perhaps what she really means is that the Government wants to get more out of the FIFO side rather than our two indigenous teams.
Some people talk about the weather. Others do something about it.
MEMBER NO.: 4500 (before they changed the numbering system).
MEMBER NO.: 4500 (before they changed the numbering system).
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
They do school visits when they come down, but I'm hearing there's a bit of a spat going on between the parties in negotiations of their new deal
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
-
- David Furner
- Posts: 3764
- Joined: January 6, 2005, 9:42 pm
- Favourite Player: Hudson Young
- Location: Here
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
I wonder if our moving a game to Wagga has anything to do with this.
Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is just the train that's about to hit you.
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 12475
- Joined: April 1, 2008, 5:19 pm
- Favourite Player: Dane Tilse
- Location: Sydney
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
How much funding do we get from the ACT government?
Apart from a nice big whack of the money needed to build the new hq ( which is also helping reginional sport) do we actually get much money?
We pay to play on GIO stadium, we pay to have the cops and ambos at the match
We pay rent for our current hq
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Apart from a nice big whack of the money needed to build the new hq ( which is also helping reginional sport) do we actually get much money?
We pay to play on GIO stadium, we pay to have the cops and ambos at the match
We pay rent for our current hq
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Vaccinated
-
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 51208
- Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
- Favourite Player: Hodgo
- Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 12475
- Joined: April 1, 2008, 5:19 pm
- Favourite Player: Dane Tilse
- Location: Sydney
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
My question was how much money do we actually get.
My point is how can they put requirements on how much community work we do ( and we do plenty) if they aren't really giving us much
You ok with that?
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
My point is how can they put requirements on how much community work we do ( and we do plenty) if they aren't really giving us much
You ok with that?
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Vaccinated
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
I thought most of the money for the centre of excellence came from the NSW government. But I know the ACT government does give the club money, not sure of amount but it's nowhere close to the GWS deal.cat wrote:My question was how much money do we actually get.
My point is how can they put requirements on how much community work we do ( and we do plenty) if they aren't really giving us much
You ok with that?
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
Shoving it in your face since 2017
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 12475
- Joined: April 1, 2008, 5:19 pm
- Favourite Player: Dane Tilse
- Location: Sydney
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
Thank yougergreg wrote:I thought most of the money for the centre of excellence came from the NSW government. But I know the ACT government does give the club money, not sure of amount but it's nowhere close to the GWS deal.cat wrote:My question was how much money do we actually get.
My point is how can they put requirements on how much community work we do ( and we do plenty) if they aren't really giving us much
You ok with that?
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
If that's the case I question how much say they should have in expecting us to do even more community work
The nsw/qld governments have all paid money for different stadiums and training facilities but don't seem to try and control the club
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Vaccinated
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
For 2019 the Raiders receive $2.257 million (performance fee and payroll tax waiver), less the $150,000 penalty for breaking the agreement and playing a game in Wagga (which the Wagga Council is paying). If we played 12 home games, as per the contract, that's about $190,000 per game.cat wrote: ↑April 17, 2019, 2:29 pm How much funding do we get from the ACT government?
Apart from a nice big whack of the money needed to build the new hq ( which is also helping reginional sport) do we actually get much money?
We pay to play on GIO stadium, we pay to have the cops and ambos at the match
We pay rent for our current hq
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
The Raiders then must hire the stadium... which covers all the costs of opening the gates (staff etc). When the Raiders say they make a loss on some games, they're saying the ticket sales don't cover the cost of hiring. There's a break even crowd figure (as I recall it is something like 7 or 8,000). But the Raiders are also getting paid 190,000 a game to play in Canberra as well.
https://www.procurement.act.gov.au/__da ... eement.pdf
I understand union and AFL receive around the same amount as the Raiders. The issue that rightly concerns the Raiders is that the per game incentive is therefore more for union and much, much more for AFL.
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 12475
- Joined: April 1, 2008, 5:19 pm
- Favourite Player: Dane Tilse
- Location: Sydney
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
Ok , so when you remove the cost of hiring the stadium we don't get much?
Im just curious considering they seem to want " us to do more"
And the afl don't do as much community work in Canberra and don't pay to hire manuka?
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Im just curious considering they seem to want " us to do more"
And the afl don't do as much community work in Canberra and don't pay to hire manuka?
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Vaccinated
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
The Raiders have received about $16 million in performance fees over the life of the 10 year agreement, plus $5 million in payroll tax exemptions - just for agreeing to play out of Canberra Stadium.
So that's not to be sneezed at and it is taxpayer's dollars being handed out...
I think all three codes should receive the same per game incentive, however. More games, more dollars. The government claims that AFL get more, because Manuka Oval doesn't have the same corporate box sale opportunities that Canberra Stadium has. But that doesn't really explain why the Brumbies get more per game. And I think it is ridiculous to pay a fortune to get a(n AFL) team to play here, when they don't base themselves here.
The hiring agreement should be on commercial terms... and its up to the sports to sell tickets to cover the costs of opening the gates in my view.
The Raiders seem to be concerned that they don't have a way of finding cost savings, or getting better deals on suppliers of the services to open the gates - that is, the Stadium manages all the service supplier deals, and the hiring cost is the hiring cost. That seems entirely reasonable.
So that's not to be sneezed at and it is taxpayer's dollars being handed out...
I think all three codes should receive the same per game incentive, however. More games, more dollars. The government claims that AFL get more, because Manuka Oval doesn't have the same corporate box sale opportunities that Canberra Stadium has. But that doesn't really explain why the Brumbies get more per game. And I think it is ridiculous to pay a fortune to get a(n AFL) team to play here, when they don't base themselves here.
The hiring agreement should be on commercial terms... and its up to the sports to sell tickets to cover the costs of opening the gates in my view.
The Raiders seem to be concerned that they don't have a way of finding cost savings, or getting better deals on suppliers of the services to open the gates - that is, the Stadium manages all the service supplier deals, and the hiring cost is the hiring cost. That seems entirely reasonable.
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 12475
- Joined: April 1, 2008, 5:19 pm
- Favourite Player: Dane Tilse
- Location: Sydney
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
Thanks for that GE , clearer now
Should be some interesting talks between the parties before signing the next agreement
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Should be some interesting talks between the parties before signing the next agreement
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Vaccinated
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
This is the AFL Giants agreement:
https://www.procurement.act.gov.au/__da ... eement.pdf
They pay $20,000 rental fee to the ACT (indexed by 2.5 per cent) per match, plus cover all the match day costs (that is, they pay for all the event day staff, including police, ambulance, traffic management etc etc). So it is not correct to say they don't pay for hire of Manuka Oval. Not sure if that is a commercial rate or not.
They get incentives of $1.55 million per year (as I read it), indexed for just four games. Ten year deal totalling $23 million.
https://www.procurement.act.gov.au/__da ... eement.pdf
They pay $20,000 rental fee to the ACT (indexed by 2.5 per cent) per match, plus cover all the match day costs (that is, they pay for all the event day staff, including police, ambulance, traffic management etc etc). So it is not correct to say they don't pay for hire of Manuka Oval. Not sure if that is a commercial rate or not.
They get incentives of $1.55 million per year (as I read it), indexed for just four games. Ten year deal totalling $23 million.
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 13407
- Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
- Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
- Location: Canberra :(
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
The government has an obligation to ensure the money is delivering the best possible benefit to the community as a whole and the best way to do that is to put terms and conditions into the agreement.
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
But $1.6 million a year for a few Western Sydney club games a year is of no benefit to Canberra in comparison to the Raiders who live and breath their life and their money in Canberra.Green eyed Mick wrote:The government has an obligation to ensure the money is delivering the best possible benefit to the community as a whole and the best way to do that is to put terms and conditions into the agreement.
Andrew Barr did a dodgy deal with the AFL without taking it through the usual processes. Most expensive government paid sports deal in Australia.
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
The incentive escalates... so it was widely reported at the time the deal was done that the 10 year deal was worth $23 million. That means they get $2.3 million on average per year for four games. That is well over $500,000 per game. The Raiders receive less than $200,000 in the final year of the deal per game.BJ wrote: ↑April 17, 2019, 8:33 pmBut $1.6 million a year for a few Western Sydney club games a year is of no benefit to Canberra in comparison to the Raiders who live and breath their life and their money in Canberra.Green eyed Mick wrote:The government has an obligation to ensure the money is delivering the best possible benefit to the community as a whole and the best way to do that is to put terms and conditions into the agreement.
Andrew Barr did a dodgy deal with the AFL without taking it through the usual processes. Most expensive government paid sports deal in Australia.
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 12475
- Joined: April 1, 2008, 5:19 pm
- Favourite Player: Dane Tilse
- Location: Sydney
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
And thats 200,000 minus the cost of the stadium hire....greeneyed wrote:The incentive escalates... so it was widely reported at the time the deal was done that the 10 year deal was worth $23 million. That means they get $2.3 million on average per year for four games. That is well over $500,000 per game. The Raiders receive less than $200,000 in the final year of the deal per game.BJ wrote: ↑April 17, 2019, 8:33 pmBut $1.6 million a year for a few Western Sydney club games a year is of no benefit to Canberra in comparison to the Raiders who live and breath their life and their money in Canberra.Green eyed Mick wrote:The government has an obligation to ensure the money is delivering the best possible benefit to the community as a whole and the best way to do that is to put terms and conditions into the agreement.
Andrew Barr did a dodgy deal with the AFL without taking it through the usual processes. Most expensive government paid sports deal in Australia.
I get the raiders being a bit cranky if they don't get a say in the running of the day but have to pay for it. Maybe there are cheaper security options? Or maybe we want less bars open and more food trucks rather then the cost of running stadium food outlets...
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Vaccinated
-
- David Furner
- Posts: 3764
- Joined: January 6, 2005, 9:42 pm
- Favourite Player: Hudson Young
- Location: Here
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
I mean, in a town like Canberra where there is such a huge non-local born population, it does make sense to incentivise an AFL club to bring some games to town. The city will likely never get its own team and there is clearly a portion of the population who enjoy the sport.
The amount to which they are incentivised is the issue.
The amount to which they are incentivised is the issue.
Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is just the train that's about to hit you.
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
It is the same deal for the AFL in that regard. The main difference is in the incentive payment. But it is perfectly reasonable that the Raiders should get more control over the costs of opening the gates under the next deal.cat wrote: ↑April 17, 2019, 11:11 pmAnd thats 200,000 minus the cost of the stadium hire....greeneyed wrote:The incentive escalates... so it was widely reported at the time the deal was done that the 10 year deal was worth $23 million. That means they get $2.3 million on average per year for four games. That is well over $500,000 per game. The Raiders receive less than $200,000 in the final year of the deal per game.BJ wrote: ↑April 17, 2019, 8:33 pmBut $1.6 million a year for a few Western Sydney club games a year is of no benefit to Canberra in comparison to the Raiders who live and breath their life and their money in Canberra.Green eyed Mick wrote:The government has an obligation to ensure the money is delivering the best possible benefit to the community as a whole and the best way to do that is to put terms and conditions into the agreement.
Andrew Barr did a dodgy deal with the AFL without taking it through the usual processes. Most expensive government paid sports deal in Australia.
I get the raiders being a bit cranky if they don't get a say in the running of the day but have to pay for it. Maybe there are cheaper security options? Or maybe we want less bars open and more food trucks rather then the cost of running stadium food outlets...
Sent from my SM-G950F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
The incentives being paid to the AFL are absolutely outrageous in comparison to other sports, particularly when you consider AFL is a minority sport in the ACT.Timbo wrote: ↑April 17, 2019, 11:14 pm I mean, in a town like Canberra where there is such a huge non-local born population, it does make sense to incentivise an AFL club to bring some games to town. The city will likely never get its own team and there is clearly a portion of the population who enjoy the sport.
The amount to which they are incentivised is the issue.
-
- David Furner
- Posts: 3764
- Joined: January 6, 2005, 9:42 pm
- Favourite Player: Hudson Young
- Location: Here
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
That's what I was saying?greeneyed wrote: ↑April 17, 2019, 11:19 pmThe incentives being paid to the AFL are absolutely outrageous in comparison to other sports, particularly when you consider AFL is a minority sport in the ACT.Timbo wrote: ↑April 17, 2019, 11:14 pm I mean, in a town like Canberra where there is such a huge non-local born population, it does make sense to incentivise an AFL club to bring some games to town. The city will likely never get its own team and there is clearly a portion of the population who enjoy the sport.
The amount to which they are incentivised is the issue.
Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is just the train that's about to hit you.
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
The AFL gains just as much out of playing in Canberra as the ACT government does. I've never understood why we throw money at them in this arrangement, whether it is GWS or North Melbourne.
Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
Shoving it in your face since 2017
-
- David Furner
- Posts: 3764
- Joined: January 6, 2005, 9:42 pm
- Favourite Player: Hudson Young
- Location: Here
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
I think it's a matter of finding a reasonable balance. There should be an incentive to bring games to Canberra, but the fact that it's bigger than the incentive offered to the two full-time Canberra football teams is ludicrous.
For the sake of comparison - does anyone know what the deal the ACT Government made with the Sydney Thunder is worth? I've done a quick google, all I can find is that a deal was made and not the value of it.
For the sake of comparison - does anyone know what the deal the ACT Government made with the Sydney Thunder is worth? I've done a quick google, all I can find is that a deal was made and not the value of it.
Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is just the train that's about to hit you.
-
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 51208
- Joined: June 25, 2012, 9:53 am
- Favourite Player: Hodgo
- Location: Rockhampton, Central Queensland
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
I don't really understand this conversation... why WOULDN'T the incentive to bring an out of town, other code team to Canberra be more than the teams that already play out of your town every second week?
Makes perfect sense to me.
Makes perfect sense to me.
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
I’ll give you a why WOULDN’T.... Because you need to support your sporting base not your fly in fly out codes.The Rickman wrote:I don't really understand this conversation... why WOULDN'T the incentive to bring an out of town, other code team to Canberra be more than the teams that already play out of your town every second week?
Makes perfect sense to me.
I can understand paying a bit more for one off big events such as bringing sporting world cups or Olympic events to Canberra. But not for public money funding of fixed ten year deals at such an exorbitant rate compared to what other state governments pay for AFL games.
- Northern Raider
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 32584
- Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
- Favourite Player: Dean Lance
- Location: Greener pastures
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
Thats a fair point. There is lesser need to incentivise teams to play here that are already here. Hence bigger offerings for outside teams. Same way Wagga city council are paying more for the Raiders to play one game there than they do for the Wagga Kangaroos.The Rickman wrote: ↑April 18, 2019, 10:54 am I don't really understand this conversation... why WOULDN'T the incentive to bring an out of town, other code team to Canberra be more than the teams that already play out of your town every second week?
Makes perfect sense to me.
The balance is still needed to support the local teams otherwise you end up with no local sport.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
- yurithe1
- David Furner
- Posts: 3587
- Joined: March 16, 2008, 10:27 am
- Favourite Player: Jordan Rapana
- Location: Canberra
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
That's not really comparing apples with apples. Raiders and GWS Giants are national sporting teams. Wagga Kangaroos are a low-level park football side. I don't think many people would travel from far beyond surrounding areas to watch the 'Roos play. You can bet that the $150K Wagga Council paid the Raiders was far less than the flood of money that would have come into the town in terms of payment for accommodation, food, petrol, etc.Northern Raider wrote: ↑April 18, 2019, 11:17 amThats a fair point. There is lesser need to incentivise teams to play here that are already here. Hence bigger offerings for outside teams. Same way Wagga city council are paying more for the Raiders to play one game there than they do for the Wagga Kangaroos.The Rickman wrote: ↑April 18, 2019, 10:54 am I don't really understand this conversation... why WOULDN'T the incentive to bring an out of town, other code team to Canberra be more than the teams that already play out of your town every second week?
Makes perfect sense to me.
The balance is still needed to support the local teams otherwise you end up with no local sport.
The out of town cash injection that these national teams bring into Canberra is something that hasn't been factored into the conversation. That said, I recall seeing a two coach-loads of people from Wagga parked outside the stadium for a Brumbies game last year. I wonder how many people travel from Sydney or Melbourne to support their side when the Giants are playing here. (I don't care for Aussie Rules, so I've never attended an AFL match).
We need the Barr Government to release a Treasury estimate of much this Giants deal is worth to the ACT.
Some people talk about the weather. Others do something about it.
MEMBER NO.: 4500 (before they changed the numbering system).
MEMBER NO.: 4500 (before they changed the numbering system).
- Northern Raider
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 32584
- Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
- Favourite Player: Dean Lance
- Location: Greener pastures
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
You're right its not apples with apples. I was using that as an example closer to home. Better comparison maybe is teams like Souths and Manly taking games to Perth. Of course there will always be conjecture about the value of it and ROI.yurithe1 wrote: ↑April 18, 2019, 1:09 pmThat's not really comparing apples with apples. Raiders and GWS Giants are national sporting teams. Wagga Kangaroos are a low-level park football side. I don't think many people would travel from far beyond surrounding areas to watch the 'Roos play. You can bet that the $150K Wagga Council paid the Raiders was far less than the flood of money that would have come into the town in terms of payment for accommodation, food, petrol, etc.Northern Raider wrote: ↑April 18, 2019, 11:17 amThats a fair point. There is lesser need to incentivise teams to play here that are already here. Hence bigger offerings for outside teams. Same way Wagga city council are paying more for the Raiders to play one game there than they do for the Wagga Kangaroos.The Rickman wrote: ↑April 18, 2019, 10:54 am I don't really understand this conversation... why WOULDN'T the incentive to bring an out of town, other code team to Canberra be more than the teams that already play out of your town every second week?
Makes perfect sense to me.
The balance is still needed to support the local teams otherwise you end up with no local sport.
The out of town cash injection that these national teams bring into Canberra is something that hasn't been factored into the conversation. That said, I recall seeing a two coach-loads of people from Wagga parked outside the stadium for a Brumbies game last year. I wonder how many people travel from Sydney or Melbourne to support their side when the Giants are playing here. (I don't care for Aussie Rules, so I've never attended an AFL match).
We need the Barr Government to release a Treasury estimate of much this Giants deal is worth to the ACT.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
To be honest, the incentives for events provided by State and Territory governments are probably a complete waste of taxpayers' money. They shift economic activity from one location to another but they create a deadweight loss on the economy (because it has an efficiency cost - that is, it subsidises location of an economic activity and consumption of the output in a place where it wouldn't have otherwise taken place, and would most efficiently happen elsewhere).
In the case of the AFL Giants games, the best thing for the Australian economy would be to let the AFL decide where to stage the games, without any subsidies. That might mean (most likely) they stage all of them in western Sydney. But there is also the possibility that they stage some in Canberra regardless of the incentive (government subsidy) because they want a presence in Canberra and to promote their sport in Canberra. We will never know if the AFL would do the latter now, because the government has intervened with a subsidy (financed by taxes which are no longer in the pockets of the tax payers). That's the very unfortunate part of this... AFL games might well have been played in Canberra without Canberra taxpayers spending a cent.
In fact, there is probably not much economic sense in paying any of the teams incentives (subsidies). The possible justification is that there is some "public good" in having major sporting events staged in the city - for cultural and social reasons. But that is pretty dubious. The other might be that there is a major government asset already in existence and they want to see it used. However, that's very dubious too. The asset has been built, the cost is sunk, and providing subsidies so that it is used is really throwing good money after bad.
The cost benefit studies that government events bodies do aren't really worth the paper they're written on... because they treat the ACT economy as "closed" along the borders of the ACT. They often ignore the counter case (ie what would happen if the money was left in the hands of the taxpayers). If they were done properly, they'd show that the costs always outweigh the benefits.
Given the ACT and other States are in this business, however - for selfish reasons I don't want to see rugby league miss out. And the least distortionary thing is to equalise the subsidies (so one match in one sport does not attract significantly higher subsidies than others).
In the case of the AFL Giants games, the best thing for the Australian economy would be to let the AFL decide where to stage the games, without any subsidies. That might mean (most likely) they stage all of them in western Sydney. But there is also the possibility that they stage some in Canberra regardless of the incentive (government subsidy) because they want a presence in Canberra and to promote their sport in Canberra. We will never know if the AFL would do the latter now, because the government has intervened with a subsidy (financed by taxes which are no longer in the pockets of the tax payers). That's the very unfortunate part of this... AFL games might well have been played in Canberra without Canberra taxpayers spending a cent.
In fact, there is probably not much economic sense in paying any of the teams incentives (subsidies). The possible justification is that there is some "public good" in having major sporting events staged in the city - for cultural and social reasons. But that is pretty dubious. The other might be that there is a major government asset already in existence and they want to see it used. However, that's very dubious too. The asset has been built, the cost is sunk, and providing subsidies so that it is used is really throwing good money after bad.
The cost benefit studies that government events bodies do aren't really worth the paper they're written on... because they treat the ACT economy as "closed" along the borders of the ACT. They often ignore the counter case (ie what would happen if the money was left in the hands of the taxpayers). If they were done properly, they'd show that the costs always outweigh the benefits.
Given the ACT and other States are in this business, however - for selfish reasons I don't want to see rugby league miss out. And the least distortionary thing is to equalise the subsidies (so one match in one sport does not attract significantly higher subsidies than others).
- Raiders_Pat
- John Ferguson
- Posts: 2083
- Joined: July 24, 2016, 8:11 am
- Favourite Player: Josh Papalii
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
My views on this echo yoursgreeneyed wrote: ↑April 18, 2019, 3:34 pm To be honest, the incentives for events provided by State and Territory governments are probably a complete waste of taxpayers' money. They shift economic activity from one location to another but they create a deadweight loss on the economy (because it has an efficiency cost - that is, it subsidises location of an economic activity and consumption of the output in a place where it wouldn't have otherwise taken place, and would most efficiently happen elsewhere).
In the case of the AFL Giants games, the best thing for the Australian economy would be to let the AFL decide where to stage the games, without any subsidies. That might mean (most likely) they stage all of them in western Sydney. But there is also the possibility that they stage some in Canberra regardless of the incentive (government subsidy) because they want a presence in Canberra and to promote their sport in Canberra. We will never know if the AFL would do the latter now, because the government has intervened with a subsidy (financed by taxes which are no longer in the pockets of the tax payers). That's the very unfortunate part of this... AFL games might well have been played in Canberra without Canberra taxpayers spending a cent.
In fact, there is probably not much economic sense in paying any of the teams incentives (subsidies). The possible justification is that there is some "public good" in having major sporting events staged in the city - for cultural and social reasons. But that is pretty dubious. The other might be that there is a major government asset already in existence and they want to see it used. However, that's very dubious too. The asset has been built, the cost is sunk, and providing subsidies so that it is used is really throwing good money after bad.
The cost benefit studies that government events bodies do aren't really worth the paper they're written on... because they treat the ACT economy as "closed" along the borders of the ACT. They often ignore the counter case (ie what would happen if the money was left in the hands of the taxpayers). If they were done properly, they'd show that the costs always outweigh the benefits.
Given the ACT and other States are in this business, however - for selfish reasons I don't want to see rugby league miss out. And the least distortionary thing is to equalise the subsidies (so one match in one sport does not attract significantly higher subsidies than others).
Re: ACT government looks to formalise community in Canberra Raiders contract
Excellent post Greeneyed.