I'll put this here as I expect it to be deleted from the other questions thread. I look forward to your answers uk

Ok, I know I said I would stay away, but I found out some interesting info today that I thought I would ask about (however I doubt I'll get an answer)
Is it true that the reason the afc believe that the sanfl clubs will be better off with your proposal because the sanfl will be able to expect more income from sponsorships due to the commercial free to air tv deal?
I was told today that the entry of an afc reserves side will guarantee the tv deal, and that then the clubs can "charge" more for sponsorships thereby negating any loss of members/match day attendees.
If that is the case, do you view a successful entry of your club into the sanfl as one that attracts fans to the games, and helps increase the attendees, and popularity of the competition, or will it still be viewed as a success if the sanfl clubs make money but don't attract crowds?
Is that why you believe that the clubs will still make money even if no one goes to the games? Sponsors will pick up the shortfall despite no one watching live? If so, why the big deal over your own clubs failing crowds? Why the move to Adelaide oval? Why the big deal over the "poor" stadium deal?
If it is true, I now understand why you don't care if the proposal lowers crowds, to you it is all about dollars, and with your back door deal of guaranteeing the free to air deal, it supposedly gives the clubs more sponsorship money, without costing you a cent. Who cares about the competition when everyone is making money, who cares about the fans when the clubs have cash.
To me the competition is about more than money. **** your crows, **** your afl, I follow the sanfl not because it is the biggest league, but because I love it. I don't love corporations, I don't love money. I really hope this proposal doesn't go ahead and you have to play in the ammos as a laughing stock of the country. Once again I'm out.