Resource 2014 Annual Reports - ALl clubs now complete (in OP)

[telsor]

Let me tell you strait: it's a case of money for nothing...

Well, St Kilda is pretty wary about getting chicks for free these days....

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Why Financials need to be interpreted & why the footy media buy the PR spin lock, stock & barrel.

They are innumerate, that's why they buy it lock stock and barrel.

#PH408

 

[Prince Imperial]

Going forward the Ryan Griffin deal, the Tom Boyd deal will the subject of close scrutiny.

Maybe, but the AFL recognizes these days that clubs are required to spend at least 95% of their cap and that 100% should be available to all clubs to spend if equalization means anything. It's the total football spend that they will be concerned about (not just one player's salary) and for years the Dogs and Roos have consistently been the lowest spenders across their whole football departments.

 

[The_Wookie]

Collingwoods Annual Report is now available, details now in the OP
http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/sta...romos/141128_CFCAnnualFinancialReport2014.PDF

 

[The_Wookie]

http://www.geelongcats.com.au/news/2014-11-29/cats-announce-first-operating-loss-in-15-years

The Geelong Football Club has announced a loss of $251,207 for the 2014 financial year. This is the club's first operating loss in 15 years.

The club's net asset position is $10.9 million.

Major factors in the financial outcome include:
· A drop in average home attendance (including home games at MCG and Etihad Stadium) from 36,649 in 2013 to 33,915 in 2014.
· A decrease in profit from the club’s overall commercial area of $1.1 million to $20.8 million.
· A marginal increase in football department spend from $21.4 million in 2013 to $21.6 million in 2014. While spending increased the rise was below the AFL average.
. Depreciation and amortisation totalling $2.2 million
· A reduction in turnover from $55 million to $51.4 million in 2014. This was in large part caused by non-recurring one off revenue items totalling $3.0 million in 2013 in the form of distribution from the Geelong Cats sports foundation upon its wind up and super screen instillation revenue.

"This is a disappointing outcome,” Geelong CEO Brian Cook said.

That Annual Report will evidently be on the clubs website later today.

 

[telsor]

http://www.geelongcats.com.au/news/2014-11-29/cats-announce-first-operating-loss-in-15-years



That Annual Report will evidently be on the clubs website later today.

Got to say, after 14 years profits and being at the top of the league for much of that time, $10.9M in net assets seems low.

 

[The_Wookie]

Got to say, after 14 years profits and being at the top of the league for much of that time, $10.9M in net assets seems low.

Wont know until the annual report comes out, but they'd be carrying some debt from the Kardinia Park work I imagine

 

[The_Wookie]

Geelongs Annual Report
http://www.geelongcats.com.au/stati...os/2014 GFC Financial Statements - Signed.pdf

Adding to Op

 

[The_Wookie]

http://www.nmfc.com.au/news/2014-12-04/north-records-profit

North Melbourne is delighted to announce an operating profit of $423,074 for the 2014 financial year.

Dilena said one of the key factors was North’s membership record of more than 40,000. The club was also able to reduce its debt by a further $700,000 while increasing its investment in the football department.

"We have reduced our once crippling debt to just $2.05M. This was made possible through significant fundraising efforts and generous member donations.

"This current Board vowed to wipe out our debt when it took over in 2008 and we are very close to making good on that promise."

 

[The_Wookie]

Melbourne Football Club
http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2014-12-05/melbourne-makes-financial-profit

MELBOURNE Football Club has reported a statutory profit of $285k for the year ending 31 October 2014. The Club’s operating result for the year was a profit of $161k.

This result represents a turnaround of $1.9m from the operating result of 2013. The turnaround has been achieved through increased revenue and tight cost control.

Club revenue grew by $2.3m during the year. Key drivers of this growth include the increase in our membership tally to almost 36,000 members, a 28% increase in home game attendances and a full suite of Club sponsors. In addition, administration costs were reduced by $494k, whilst our corporate, membership and fundraising expenses remained constant despite the $2.3m increasing to revenue.

Melbourne CEO Peter Jackson said: “This is an encouraging result for the Melbourne Football Club, particularly considering the statutory loss of $3.1m in 2013. We have been able to right a ship that was floundering last year and it’s a reflection of the effort and capabilities of all involved. Importantly, this has not been at the expense of our football department expenditure, which grew by $892k during the year.”

 

[harmesy 37]

Melbourne Football Club
http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2014-12-05/melbourne-makes-financial-profit

"Whereas the club received a one-off grant from the AFL in 2013 to restructure the club, funding from the AFL returned to normal levels in 2014. The restructure has allowed us to reduce costs and has clearly contributed to this result in 2014."

One has to laugh with this statement or one would cry.
What is their definition of "normal levels" for 2014?

The AFL is really keen to splash around the cash to North Melbourne and Melbourne amongst others.... 3.85 million here, 2.5 million there, out the money goes...(let's wait and see how much Brisbane gets this year) but you won't see any extra money above "normal levels" directed down the Royal Parade way. Suddenly the money dries up.

 

[telsor]

"Whereas the club received a one-off grant from the AFL in 2013 to restructure the club, funding from the AFL returned to normal levels in 2014. The restructure has allowed us to reduce costs and has clearly contributed to this result in 2014."

One has to laugh with this statement or one would cry.
What is their definition of "normal levels" for 2014?

The AFL is really keen to splash around the cash to North Melbourne and Melbourne amongst others.... 3.85 million here, 2.5 million there, out the money goes...(let's wait and see how much Brisbane gets this year) but you won't see any extra money above "normal levels" directed down the Royal Parade way. Suddenly the money dries up.

2013 AFL annual report: payments to clubs;
Carlton..
Base: 7,196,244
Future fund: 1,000,000
Other: 3,313,913
Total: 11,510,157 (10th Highest)

Clearly hasn't dried up entirely.
BTW. You got more than Brisbane...

 

[The_Wookie]

2013 AFL annual report: payments to clubs;
Carlton..
Base: 7,196,244
Future fund: 1,000,000
Other: 3,313,913
Total: 11,510,157 (10th Highest)

Clearly hasn't dried up entirely.
BTW. You got more than Brisbane...

Please read up on what the "other funding" consists of. Its generally to do with payouts arising from games at Etihad - pourage and signage for the most part.

 

[telsor]

Please read up on what the "other funding" consists of. Its generally to do with payouts arising from games at Etihad - pourage and signage for the most part.

It's all sorts of stuff, but the point was that money flows don't stop before they get to Carlton.

 

[The_Wookie]

It's all sorts of stuff, but the point was that money flows don't stop before they get to Carlton.

But it has nothing to do with Melbourne recieving a one off grant or its future funding and other aid.

BTW you got more than Carlton. In fact you got more than everyone else in the competition - North included - except the Western Bulldogs.

for bonus fun: the last 9 years

 

[telsor]

But it has nothing to do with Melbourne recieving a one off grant or its future funding and other aid.

True, I was speaking in broader terms.
Although if we're comparing to Melbourne AKA bad situations due to AFL penalties, I seem to recall that Carlton did get a big/cheap loan from the AFL around the time of the salary cap fines (although that was in no small part due to the double up of the fines and the stand).

BTW you got more than Carlton. In fact you got more than everyone else in the competition - North included - except the Western Bulldogs.

Absolutely.
Richmond is the poster child for the stated goals of the disequal funding program, we're using it do dig our way out of the crap we were in a few years back and setting things up so we (hopefully) avoid sinking so far again.
That Benny Gale was in the group that set it all up probably doesn't hurt either

 

[harmesy 37]

But it has nothing to do with Melbourne recieving a one off grant or its future funding and other aid.

BTW you got more than Carlton. In fact you got more than everyone else in the competition - North included - except the Western Bulldogs.

for bonus fun: the last 9 years

Good stats there Wookie.

So whilst Carlton was bleeding 2006 and 2007 and trying to get its base back together after nearly closing the doors just a few years earlier - the AFL deemed no extra funding was required.

Meanwhile, at the "happy team" of Hawthorn...they got an extra 250k per year in 2006 and 2007, 2008 and 2009.

Any idea on what grounds Hawthorn got that money? I can remember reading up on it but have forgotten.

Surely the funding of North Melbourne has to stop now. They have achieved their objective. Let it end.

As your stats observe, Richmond has received double what Carlton has. Richmond has more members, similar levels of revenue, yet double the payment from the AFL..how much of this is due to the redevelopment of Punt Oval?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

2013 AFL annual report: payments to clubs;
Carlton..
Base: 7,196,244
Future fund: 1,000,000
Other: 3,313,913
Total: 11,510,157 (10th Highest)

Clearly hasn't dried up entirely.
BTW. You got more than Brisbane...

Every club gets an "other" distribution of $1.2mil. That was the TV monies every club got per year for 5 years for the 2007-11 TV deal as the cash component the AFL got from the TV stations increased by $290mil. In the 2012-16 TV deal the clubs are still getting that $1.2mil/year but the AFL still call it TV bonus monies not base distribution.

 

[Rob]

Other would include AFL membership payments as well, i.e the club support option. The larger Victorian clubs will always get more of that money. Collingwood had over 12k of those in 2013, and they got paid what, $150 or so each? Not a bad little earner. North, Melbourne and the Dogs (along with every non-vic club) had less than 2000.

 

[telsor]

Other would include AFL membership payments as well, i.e the club support option. The larger Victorian clubs will always get more of that money. Collingwood had over 12k of those in 2013, and they got paid what, $150 or so each? Not a bad little earner. North, Melbourne and the Dogs (along with every non-vic club) had less than 2000.

Not sure if it is included, but it'd be MCG based clubs that benefit. (Melbourne is somewhat different due to their ties with the MCC)

 

[Tas]

Good stats there Wookie.

So whilst Carlton was bleeding 2006 and 2007 and trying to get its base back together after nearly closing the doors just a few years earlier - the AFL deemed no extra funding was required.

Meanwhile, at the "happy team" of Hawthorn...they got an extra 250k per year in 2006 and 2007, 2008 and 2009.

Any idea on what grounds Hawthorn got that money? I can remember reading up on it but have forgotten.

Surely the funding of North Melbourne has to stop now. They have achieved their objective. Let it end.

As your stats observe, Richmond has received double what Carlton has. Richmond has more members, similar levels of revenue, yet double the payment from the AFL..how much of this is due to the redevelopment of Punt Oval?

You are in for a rude shock, these payments are going to get even bigger with the equalisation strategy kicking in from 2015.

 

[The_Wookie]

You are in for a rude shock, these payments are going to get even bigger with the equalisation strategy kicking in from 2015.

where that remaining money goes will be interesting indeed.

 

[Tas]

where that remaining money goes will be interesting indeed.

Yeah, I think our future fund payment will decline for the last two years of the existing broadcasting rights agreement, however, not sure what mechanism they are using for revenue sharing, I assume it is just going to be thrown into the other category.

 

[The_Wookie]

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/25703846/freo-race-towards-50-000-members/

Fremantle expect to hand over $5.7 million to the WAFC from the 2014 season, up from about $5 million last year.

West Coast expect their figure to be over $6 million after $6.4 million last year.

The figures are good news for the commission, which has had to restructure in order to balance its books.

The handover from each club will be boosted by $450,000 in payments to be given to WAFL clubs for the alignments with East Perth and Peel.

West Coast are yet to audit 2014 figures but Fremantle, currently mid-audit, expect to make a profit of about $200,000 after the payments to the WAFC.

It will be their 12th profit in a row and the sixth consecutive year the club has exceeded its budget.

 

[marty36]

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/25703846/freo-race-towards-50-000-members/

Is that disbursement after the WAFL receives its stadium return of approximately $15 Million?