Analysis Stadium deals - what, how, when - why we need a new one and the SA footy paradigm shift happening

[RussellEbertHandball]

That is interesting, I wonder if you have been able to find anything written on that because I looked briefly but didn't see anything mentioned in the Victorian media about finals tickets and distribution differences based on state.

Look at the WAFC report and you will see that the rent paid by WCE and Freo is substantially different $400k, in 2013 so I reckon its because of 1 final Freo played at Subi.

 

[GranFormaggi]

Why is it diabolical? It was a licence granted in perpetuity if the licence conditions were met. You have to be compensated if you give up those rights that are in the licence.

Look at Lang Hancock - he negotiated a deal with Rio Tinto for royalties in perpetuity for his iron ore deposits he discovered in the late 1950's early 1960's in the Pilbara. Rio signed an in perpetuity agreement, so if they want to get rid of this agreement they have to compensate Gina with a massive lump sum.

Same thing happened with the St Lious Spirits of the old ABA when some of the teams merged from that comp with the NBA. The NBA didn't want St Louis, so to get the deal over the line the 4 ABA teams signed over 1/7th of their TV revenue to the owners of St Lious and almost 40 years later they have no team but they are getting a royalty cheque from the 4 teams every year. The NBA have tried to buy this annual royalty stream out with a lump sum but the old owners have said no, its not big enough. I started a thread about it on the BDC board last year -

Greatest sports deal ever

Once again, its why I say I blame Bruce Weber for why we are in the situation we are today. Harsh I know, but failing to get the deal done has given the SANFL monopoly control over us since 1997 and even before that for a few years to a certain degree.

No no, I meant it was diabolical for the PAFC. Did Lang find someone else to pay for the deal through a sub-license (a PAFC for example)......that would have been very SANFL of him.

My point was, SANFL negotiate a licence granted in perpetuity and get compensated for giving up the rights, but they never actually paid for it. The PAFC paid for it. Now you'll rightly argue that we got the right to participate in the AFL comp, the AFL distributions, proceeds from Waverly etc, but having the SANFL involved has only ever hindered our bottom line. The need to support a state league that has failed to reform appropriately will have that effect, albeit the effects are exacerbated by the number and depths of the snouts in the trough.

I agree that failing to get the deal done has been haunting us, I'd say, since 1990, but I also allocate some of the blame to the AFL.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

No no, I meant it was diabolical for the PAFC. Did Lang find someone else to pay for the deal through a sub-license (a PAFC for example)......that would have been very SANFL of him.

My point was, SANFL negotiate a licence granted in perpetuity and get compensated for giving up the rights, but they never actually paid for it. The PAFC paid for it. Now you'll rightly argue that we got the right to participate in the AFL comp, the AFL distributions, proceeds from Waverly etc, but having the SANFL involved has only ever hindered our bottom line. The need to support a state league that has failed to reform appropriately will have that effect, albeit the effects are exacerbated by the number and depths of the snouts in the trough.

I agree that failing to get the deal done has been haunting us, I'd say, since 1990, but I also allocate some of the blame to the AFL.

No argument from me on the points you have made but that's the way the cookie crumbled in 1990 and yes its been somewhat diabolical for us - not completely because we are in - unlike Norwood who dropped the chalice in 1990.

 

[GranFormaggi]

No argument from me on the points you have made but that's the way the cookie crumbled in 1990 and yes its been somewhat diabolical for us - not completely because we are in - unlike Norwood who dropped the chalice in 1990.

Yes, and you sometimes take the good with the bad. We got in, we continue to get the opportunity to change things for ourselves at the main dance.

My brother-in-law bless him, Norwood man as he is can't hide his jealousy.

 

[FPPF]

Are you serious? You can't see it or you don't want to. Remember Power Can't be Given it Must be Taken. The SANFL didn't give away any real rights to stadium income from catering. That was the deal for them to accept a move to AO, they kept access to revenue streams they got at Footy Park.

Why do you think they would have have given that up??

The SANFL paid for the licence $4mil over 6 year to the AFL and the clubs paid $400k over 10 to the SANFL for the sub licence.

The SANFL got the licence to give them an income stream as their competition would be reduced. The clubs paid a sub licence fee to get access to AFL distributions and an interest in Waverley Park.

We are paying the licence fee for the next 15 years to get the SANFL off our back.

Yes I'm being serious.

Why are we still paying these assholes?
Just to get them off our backs? WTF?
Surely there is another way to get them off our backs without handing over millions of dollars to the bastards.

* them and their s**t third tier competition.

Are you able to give us a rough overall figure of how much money has come out of Port Adelaide into the SANFL coffers since our entry to the AFL?
Probably a bit of a tough ask..

 

[El_Scorcho]

Crows supporters have been mobilised for ages against Trigg, and it doesn't do them any good. The Adelaide Football Club will be useless in this fight.

They aren't though really.

I mean we hated the SANFL for a decade and we had ridiculous SANFL decrees designed purely to destroy us put on us at every turn.

Yet things only really started to change when Tim Ginever and George Fiacchi got the ball really rolling on OneClub. They had vision and drive and got people marching under the same banner.

Thousands of individuals angry about the same thing will achieve precisely nothing. Take those individuals and give them a banner to fight under and a leader to unite them, and they can start a revolution. As usual it might be Port Adelaide people fighting in the boardrooms, but we can't win the fight on the streets here without Crows supporter backing. Ricciuto on board means that instead of 300,000 Port Adelaide upstarts trying to ruin SA realfooty™ once again, we'll have 1,000,000 football supporters united as one against the SANFL. The boys club can't compete with that.

Divided they'll always conquer us. If we unite we can take back football power in this state.

 

[Smithy7]

Keith Thomas has stated that the figures released by the media are wrong and he thinks that Port will be 4 million dollars better off with Adelaide Oval, but will still post a loss this year.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Keith Thomas has stated that the figures released by the media are wrong and he thinks that Port will be 4 million dollars better off with Adelaide Oval, but will still post a loss this year.

$4mil is the membership + corporate + advertising and averaging low 30k Uplift. the debate is what we get for the extra for that extra 15-18k we are getting.

KT put Rowe in his place when Rowe said the $35k figure was wrong and KT said no that was the first figure the club was given. More work was done on it but the final figure still hasnt been calculated. Bloody slack almost 10 weeks since showdown.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Yes I'm being serious.

Why are we still paying these assholes?
Just to get them off our backs? WTF?
Surely there is another way to get them off our backs without handing over millions of dollars to the bastards.

**** them and their s**t third tier competition.

Are you able to give us a rough overall figure of how much money has come out of Port Adelaide into the SANFL coffers since our entry to the AFL?
Probably a bit of a tough ask..

How long is a piece of string? But its tens of millions.

 

[tribey]

Once again, its why I say I blame Bruce Weber for why we are in the situation we are today. Harsh I know, but failing to get the deal done has given the SANFL monopoly control over us since 1997 and even before that for a few years to a certain degree.

Look, we made a sow's ear of it on the strategic front but there was no way we were getting into the AFL - automatically relegating the SANFL to instant insignificance - without Basheer and Whicker extracting a massive pound of flesh on an ongoing basis.

They held all the cards what with AAMI Stadium still being relatively modern by Australian standards and Adelaide Oval being an underdeveloped shanty in comparison. Where else were we going to fit the 35000+ punters required to permit us to be viable on a national level at a time when stadium rationalisation was all the rage in Victoria?

I don't see how 'Weber doing things differently' results in:

#1) Port getting into the AFL any earlier

#2) The SANFL not demanding a controlling stake in our licence OR charging us Etihadesque rent for the privilege

 

[PowerfanMat]

How long is a piece of string? But its tens of millions.

A few yrs ago Wicker was trying to sell home games to Melb for 750k.

Do the maths, 750 x 11 = $8.25m and there is still PLENTY for the SANFL - based on what, a 20k crowd??

We r gonna make $4m with +40k average.

The SACA got an incredible deal, The SANFL isnt going to sign off on the AO without an even more amazing deal........port and the crows are paying for these 2 amazing,incredible,fantastic,mind blowing deals.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

The WAFC didnt own the West Coasts licence for the first 5 or 6 years. If things had been differently we would have stood a better chance to be free of the SANFL - no guarantees - but our odds would have been a s**t load better.

 

[Tibbs]

Keith Thomas has stated that the figures released by the media are wrong and he thinks that Port will be 4 million dollars better off with Adelaide Oval, but will still post a loss this year.

No ... he said they were correct, just more work is still to be done to get a definitive figure ... IE: The SMA are scurrying around in a panic to produce a better return for PORT to avoid the media/AFL scrutiny. I liked the way he refused to be pushed by Rowe to defend the SMA, and refused to bag the media reports ... He just kept towing the middle line! Very well done!

 

[El_Scorcho]

I've listened to that KT interview with Rowe and McDermott.

KT has basically stated that we budgeted for a $4mil uplift and we're getting that, and he basically played the question with a straight bat just like anyone deeply involved in negotiations should.

We might be getting a $4mil uplift, but i'd imagine we're way, way ahead in terms of where we budgeted for members and crowds.

So does that then mean we're only going to get that uplift when we're top of the league?

What happens in 2020 when we drop back down the ladder and get some mid 20k crowds. Is it going to get to the stage where our existence is in question again?

Is anybody taking any risks with this stadium deal apart from the AFL clubs?

Does the SMA and SANFL continue to make enormous profits whether we're making money or not?

These are the important questions, not whether we're making money now. Ofcourse we're making money now, we're top of the league and packing out our brand new stadium.

What everyone should be worried about is our next trip back down the ladder.

 

[jakey]

Keeping in mind we were given $3,000,000 in grants from 2011-2013 to see us through to the supposed boon that was the Oval.

Wowee! $1,400,000!!

That's what, 10% of the salary cap these days?

Our footy dept spend (bottom quartile of the league mind) is $14m I think. So 10% of that yeah.

I'd love rowey to treat us to a run-through of how in the * we are supposed to find the other 90% + all admin / marketing costs + a wee surplus for those rainy days.

Major sponsorship is, what, another $1.5m p.a? Minors + corporate boxes + membership needs to clear another, what $14m or so?

Seriously Rowey...how much can we up the price of schnittys at the Port Club?

 

[Byrons Firen]

Yes I'm being serious.

Why are we still paying these assholes?
Just to get them off our backs? WTF?
Surely there is another way to get them off our backs without handing over millions of dollars to the bastards.

**** them and their s**t third tier competition.

Are you able to give us a rough overall figure of how much money has come out of Port Adelaide into the SANFL coffers since our entry to the AFL?
Probably a bit of a tough ask..

Probably no-one knows for sure but Rucci said a few weeks ago it was roughly $55m of
which $14m was "lent" back to Port. Anger however justified solves nothing.
A major issue in my view, amongst many, is the confidentiality of the SMA figures.
Ricciuto's article raises points that even if glossed over publically thru corporate spin
will galvanize both clubs and I hope the SA government with/thru the AFL to hold these
people to account.
when this stadium deal was first questioned a few weeks ago Daniels of SMA infamy
alluded to significant drops in costs. Im surprised no-one offered him a pair of rear vision
mirrors coz when you back pedal that fast you can hurt yourself.
Behind closed doors the spin offered to defend the indefensible won't wash

 

[Stewies Power]

I've listened to that KT interview with Rowe and McDermott.

KT has basically stated that we budgeted for a $4mil uplift and we're getting that, and he basically played the question with a straight bat just like anyone deeply involved in negotiations should.

We might be getting a $4mil uplift, but i'd imagine we're way, way ahead in terms of where we budgeted for members and crowds.

So does that then mean we're only going to get that uplift when we're top of the league?

What happens in 2020 when we drop back down the ladder and get some mid 20k crowds. Is it going to get to the stage where our existence is in question again?

Is anybody taking any risks with this stadium deal apart from the AFL clubs?

Does the SMA and SANFL continue to make enormous profits whether we're making money or not?

These are the important questions, not whether we're making money now. Ofcourse we're making money now, we're top of the league and packing out our brand new stadium.

What everyone should be worried about is our next trip back down the ladder.

This is what we should all be deeply concerned about. If we're not making a profit while on top of the ladder and getting record crowds, something is seriously wrong.

 

[Concussion]

North Melbourne make about $600k for each game at Blundstone Arena with 15,000 people.
I understand it's a different deal but it shows how much the game makes even with smallish crowds.
Not taking gate receipts, say every attendee spends $20 at the ground there's $800,000 (with 40k crowd) and say expenses were 60% there would still be $320,000 profit per game which the home team should be sharing..........surely??
Is this too simple

 

[pastmyprimus]

$4mil is the membership + corporate + advertising and averaging low 30k Uplift. the debate is what we get for the extra for that extra 15-18k we are getting.

This is the key point Keith made. We had budgeted for $4m uplift with average crowds in the low 30s. That projection stays the same even with average crowds in the mid 40s. So where is that extra money going - one things for sure - it's not going to Port, at least at this stage. Even rowe had to concede that Port and the Crows were owed an explanation for that.

He keeps complaining about selective leaks to the media, especially the news that Port only received $35,000 for the Showdown. But Keith confirmed that was the first figure provided but it's now being revised - only because of the heat that's been applied by Roo, Caro, Rucci, Dwayne and others.

But rowe's hypocrisy. Complaining about leaks to the media when all the while the SMA is leaking info to him.

 

[tribey]

Hello readers from other clubs looking to gauge the mood of the man on the street vis-a-vis the politics and subterfuge that is Adelaide Oval.

I put to you this photograph:

The man on the left is a legend of Australian Football. 350+ games at the highest level, 2 x Norm Smith Medallist, multiple All-Australian, multiple B&F winner Leigh Matthews Trophy winner and a three time premiership player for the two biggest clubs in the state.

But it's the apparatchik on the right who has his name up in lights dead centre on the sparkling new Eastern Stand - and you couldn't pick him out of a lineup of one.

What would the reaction be if Ross Oakley had his name put on the Great Southern Stand of the MCG, or there was a Wayne Jackson End at Etihad Stadium?

What's that? They wouldn't dream of it?

Welcome to South Australia and the hubris and cronyism of the SANFL.

 

[I Dont Care]

Hello readers from other clubs looking to gauge the mood of the man on the street vis-a-vis the politics and subterfuge that is Adelaide Oval.

I put to you this photograph:

The man on the left is a legend of Australian Football. 350+ games at the highest level, 2 x Norm Smith Medallist, multiple All-Australian, multiple B&F winner Leigh Matthews Trophy winner and a three time premiership player for the two biggest clubs in the state.

But it's the apparatchik on the right who has his name up in lights dead centre on the sparkling new Eastern Stand - and you couldn't pick him out of a lineup of one.

What would the reaction be if Ross Oakley had his name put on the Great Southern Stand of the MCG, or there was a Wayne Jackson End at Etihad Stadium?

What's that? They wouldn't dream of it?

Welcome to South Australia and the hubris and cronyism of the SANFL.

And, can I add that it is akin to naming Malcolm Fraser a member of the ALP Hall of Fame

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Look, we made a sow's ear of it on the strategic front but there was no way we were getting into the AFL - automatically relegating the SANFL to instant insignificance - without Basheer and Whicker extracting a massive pound of flesh on an ongoing basis.

They held all the cards what with AAMI Stadium still being relatively modern by Australian standards and Adelaide Oval being an underdeveloped shanty in comparison. Where else were we going to fit the 35000+ punters required to permit us to be viable on a national level at a time when stadium rationalisation was all the rage in Victoria?

I don't see how 'Weber doing things differently' results in:

#1) Port getting into the AFL any earlier

#2) The SANFL not demanding a controlling stake in our licence OR charging us Etihadesque rent for the privilege

Weber played the hand he had back then about as well as he could have. As it was Port and the Commission lost the club vote by a single club. If Weber had not been so bullish about wearing black and white Collingwood probably would have voted for our entry. It was that close.

Even under REH's ideal alternative reality the AFL clubs would vote on any agreement reached between Port and the AFL Commission. Between Port's announcement and the vote does anyone seriously believe the SANFL, like the street poets in Jungleland, would have stood back and let it all be? They would would have lobbied every AFL club offering them 5 times the money Port were going to pay, reduced entry player concessions, unfettered use of Football Park, the support of the majority of the SA football public (with a nod and a wink to possible civil unrest at Port matches ) and the SANFL team would pay its way on all fronts (travel, accommodation etc) and require no aid from the AFL.

The minute it becomes public knowledge it becomes open warfare. Even without a court case the SANFL would have fought as hard and dirty as possible. So many of those AFL clubs were still living beyond their means and at the creditor's door, which way would they have voted? They would have been attracted to money like iron filings to a magnet.

 

[Rankor]

I didn't listen too closely due to work but I though he said something about a share of food and beverage profits. Did I hear correctly? I hope they are negotiating that.

 

[1954]

And, can I add that it is akin to naming Malcolm Fraser a member of the ALP Hall of Fame

That pic makes McLeod appear to be about 6' 3", ( at first glance I thought it was Greg Phillips ) but he would be no more than about 5' 10 ish, no wonder Max Bash-your-ear was nicknamed the garden gnome.

 

[Andre]

And, can I add that it is akin to naming Malcolm Fraser a member of the ALP Hall of Fame

He's just about an honourary Member of the ALP these days. It'd be more akin to giving Robert Mugabe a Nobel Peace Prize.