Is The Current AFL Business Model Completely Flawed ??
- Thread starter LordLucifer
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Albert Ross
Premiership Player
There is no incentive to make profits in a not-for-profit industry with no private ownership and no distributions. Clubs should be trying to spend about 99 cents in every dollar they earn.
That makes little sense when a club like WCE who have 40 + miilion in the bank, can because of reserves pay 15 milion towards a new training center.
There is always incentives to save and put money away, one reason is common sense.
Albert Ross
Premiership Player
WCE are not a not-for-profit, they are owned and so have an incentive to generate a dividend for their owners.
Whether you have owners or not a incentive to generate excess funds makes sense for the continued viability of a club, particuarly when down times hit.
Football clubs are renowned to spend every cent they generate year after year, sensible financial management means putting away funds for the future, rainy days or future projects and attempting as much as possible to bullet proof the club.
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,334
Also 10 of our teams are based out of one city, whilst theirs are spread across the whole country.
They also have over 100 cities with more than 200k population, compared to our 11.
When you actually think about, the amount of professional sporting teams in Australia across all codes is quite absurd for a population of ours.
- Jun 30, 2014
- 10,169
- 5,512
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Banned
- #32
can someone explain to me how Essendon is a struggling club!
spending 35 million on a new training & admin facility, playing out of etihad, second highest merchandise sales in the AFL, millions in legal fees & less poke revenue than the pies and hawks! mean while being a basket case on field for the last decade
meanwhile Collingwood & Pies have won premierships & been top 4 teams for the last decade, raped the taxpayer for funding and sponsorship!
Essendon received over 700k in fundraising and donations for the year yet Hawthorn received 820k in donations plus millions in further funding from the AFL.
the op article is a piece of s**t
Essendon is off field a club that has done extremely and is a model club of the Victorian clubs meanwhile the Pies & Hawks have sold home games, receive taxpayer funding & donations & are classed as financial success stories
yeah go figure
yeah go government & AFL funding and pokie revenue
spending 35 million on a new training & admin facility, playing out of etihad, second highest merchandise sales in the AFL, millions in legal fees & less poke revenue than the pies and hawks! mean while being a basket case on field for the last decade
meanwhile Collingwood & Pies have won premierships & been top 4 teams for the last decade, raped the taxpayer for funding and sponsorship!
Essendon received over 700k in fundraising and donations for the year yet Hawthorn received 820k in donations plus millions in further funding from the AFL.
the op article is a piece of s**t
Essendon is off field a club that has done extremely and is a model club of the Victorian clubs meanwhile the Pies & Hawks have sold home games, receive taxpayer funding & donations & are classed as financial success stories
yeah go figure
yeah go government & AFL funding and pokie revenue
- Sep 27, 2014
- 34,227
- 28,859
- AFL Club
- Essendon
NFL teams don't spend money they don't have with a "the NFL will pick up the tab" attitude. That's a difference.
They're all in large cities by themselves (handful of exceptions) with a sport more popular than ours too.
They're all in large cities by themselves (handful of exceptions) with a sport more popular than ours too.
Owned by WA footy just as the Pies are owned by their members - grasping at straws Mr Ross? Why does ownership define profit? One group choses to accumulate cash to establish a facility whereas another grows a chain of pokie palaces (for profit by a not-for-profit?).
So what is the difference Mr Ross: pokies, grog palaces, funding to junior footy?
Not for profit Mr Ross, you are confused. Keep it black & white !!
The AFL really need to introduce football department caps, even a cap that is currently at what Collingwood spends simply in preparation for the next TV rights deal as history has shown that clubs have increased their football department spending after every TV rights deal and can anyone honestly say that having a football department that is so much bigger than they were even 10 years ago is better for the game. Cap it now and then the next TV rights deal clubs might be able to make a profit more easily.
Albert Ross
Premiership Player
If West Coast and Freo don't make money, the WAFL and WA junior football goes broke. The owners of those clubs ensure that the club's spending is kept in check so that 'their' money doesn't get spent.
The 10 Victorian clubs do not distribute profits and their club members receive no tangible benefit from the clubs being profitable. There is no barrier to those clubs spending all their revenue on anything from pokie venues to training camps to new facilities.
The contrast that has been discussed is the NFL. Those private owners want costs kept down and have been prepared to lockout the players to achieve it (as recently as 2011).
The contention that the Vic Footy business model is flawed because a series of Not For Profit businesses do not register profits is a bit strange.
telsor
Hall of Famer
If Richmond makes $1 profit, it's 'owners' (members) would be a little disappointing, but generally OK with that.
If WCE made $1 profit, it's owners would have a fit.
I would think any football club ( members) would be disappointed if a club that turns over many millions of $ did not attempt to turn a profit and just spent the money because it had it.
Members like to see the club turn a profit, everyone likes to see money in the bank as a form of a backstop against ..... well .... anything really.
The claim that clubs that are not privately owned should just spend every cent is quite silly.
Money in the bank gives a club credibility, stability and able to execute future plans confidently.
- Jan 13, 2001
- 15,892
- 6,917
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Man City
The whole of the AFL model seems to be to maximise attendances and tv ratings. The draw is done in a manner to do this rather than any fair and equitable way. Because of this the AFL has to find ways to offset this with an equalisation formula which means pumping millions into the clubs that get screwed over by the draw.
The tv problem is also massive for the rugby league states where coverage is poor at best and because they get no coverage elsewhere in the country their brand carries less value in marketplace for sponsors. The AFL have positioned themselves in such a way that they are now at the whim of the tv ratings holder and that isn't going to change anytime soon.
The tv problem is also massive for the rugby league states where coverage is poor at best and because they get no coverage elsewhere in the country their brand carries less value in marketplace for sponsors. The AFL have positioned themselves in such a way that they are now at the whim of the tv ratings holder and that isn't going to change anytime soon.
Being screwed over by stadium owners and operators then in turn screwing over pokies addicts should give a clue
I used to blame oakley and co but AD did the same thing with adelaide oval
I used to blame oakley and co but AD did the same thing with adelaide oval
Only North havent invested in pokies, yes/no and, as yet, most Melb clubs cant turn a profit without a leg up from the AFL.
The owner of the WAFC paid $3mil off their debt, i.e the taxpayers of WA. As stadium managers of Subi the WAFC earn income (but you do know that Alby?), a contrast with the Melb club model.
The 10 Victorian clubs are also carrying about $46 million in combined debts, though some of that is related to gaming businesses.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...millions-in-aid-from-afl-20150301-13rqwm.html
Last edited:
Furn2
Norm Smith Medallist
- Sep 27, 2012
- 9,475
- 15,515
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Saying teams can't turn a profit without help from the AFL doesn't really make sense since the AFL doesn't give teams anywhere near their share of the profits of makes from the clubs.
The AFL makes around $450mil a year mostly from tv, finals and sponsors which is about $28mil a club. Clubs don't get even half of that.
I've wondered if a club was going to go under and the AFL was going to let them whether it could sue for an 18th of the AFL revenue.
The AFL makes around $450mil a year mostly from tv, finals and sponsors which is about $28mil a club. Clubs don't get even half of that.
I've wondered if a club was going to go under and the AFL was going to let them whether it could sue for an 18th of the AFL revenue.
If the AFL was to redistribute all it's profit to the clubs they would just spend it as they always have, player wages would just get higher.
The AFL as the self proclaimed keeper of the code owes it to the football community to run and subsidise many football development programs separate from the AFL.
The players get a far less share of overall revenue than other big leagues and comps and IMO it should stay that way.
Revenue is not profit F2.
Collingwood, Essendon, Hawthorn and Richmond were the only ones of 10 Victorian clubs to achieve profits in their own right, as did the West Coast Eagles and Fremantle. Essendon's $720,000 profit, however, was boosted by about $700,000 worth of donations.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...millions-in-aid-from-afl-20150301-13rqwm.html
Why? Make your case.
It's equally as absurd to think we can keep trying to expand the number of teams and sports and not expect a major downturn will see some fall off the perch at some stage.
North did invest in pokies, they just didnt get a return and ditched them and made that a virtue.
Other cluns probably lost dollars on the journey too. Hawthorn did and it was a contributing factor to the 93-93 financial problems
Other cluns probably lost dollars on the journey too. Hawthorn did and it was a contributing factor to the 93-93 financial problems
Not a loaded question fabulon, is there a table of how much players get across team sports? I agree the players get a fair share of AFL revenue.
Similar threads
