Saints and Lions no longer viable

[TroyUgle]

Pretty astounding read on the debt situation, at Brisbane in particular...

"If the AFL was not backing the club, Australian company laws would dictate it be placed in the hands of administrators. That’s because Brisbane’s total debts exceed its assets by $8.2 million."

http://bit.ly/1HthVFs

 

[Prudster]

Is it really that relevant? If clubs didn't have the backing of the AFL (and be forced to compete with bigger clubs via salary cap, etc.), they would likely run a tighter ship and not have so much debt. If you remove the biggest factor in why these clubs operate the way they do, of course it's going to look odd.

 

[Adz]

Brisbane Saints?

 

[Tom Kerrigan]

Oh yay we're apparently "the undisputed business champions of the AFL". And Gold Coast "need a sugar daddy". Well GC you're in luck, we have something you need, you have something we need - O'Meara, Bennell, Swallow, Martin and Matera. Let's make this happen.

 

[Murraj1966]

It would be nice if anyone acknowledged the giant ball and chain that is the Etihad Stadium deal we're subjected to

 

[vonn]

Not trying to troll but why do the Brisbane Lions have as much debt as they do? Did they recently have any large investments in infrastructure or something?

 

[Lensen]

Not trying to troll but why do the Brisbane Lions have as much debt as they do? Did they recently have any large investments in infrastructure or something?

were appallingly run for much of the last decade, combined with being poor on field and the notoriously fickle QLD public, combined with trying to do something about it 5 or so years ago by setting up a social club with pokies that they borrowed to pay for

social club is quite good with tremendous pizzas, thus debt well worth it IMO

 

[Underarm]

It would be nice if anyone acknowledged the giant ball and chain that is the Etihad Stadium deal we're subjected to

Because st Kilda were always rolling in the money before etihad?

 

[Murraj1966]

Because st Kilda were always rolling in the money before etihad?

Don't have to be rolling in money to remain a viable club and you shouldn't act like Richmond haven't been tin rattlers in the past.

 

[vonn]

were appallingly run for much of the last decade, combined with being poor on field and the notoriously fickle QLD public, combined with trying to do something about it 5 or so years ago by setting up a social club with pokies that they borrowed to pay for

social club is quite good with tremendous pizzas, thus debt well worth it IMO

So is it just that the revenue coming in doesn't cover the expenses or have they been spending or subject to poor stadiums deals?

 

[Affidavit]

Saint Brisbane it is.

The two dud sides will complement each other nicely.

 

[RodneyMaynard]

Saint Brisbane it is.

The two dud sides will complement each other nicely.

The last time Brisbane merged with a Vic club they became a three-peat juggernaut.

No thanks.

 

[Affidavit]

The last time Brisbane merged with a Vic club they became a three-peat juggernaut.

No thanks.

Don't think we have to worry about that....

 

[NathanMX]

Saint Brisbane it is.

The two dud sides will complement each other nicely.

So from 1 premiership in over 100 years to 4, including 3 in a row at the start of the century, woo hoo

 

[Affidavit]

Saints fans approve!!

 

[Murraj1966]

Saints fans approve!!

We'll do the merger on the same day you disclose your testing records, saves a car trip you know

 

[JeffDunne]

Given the Saints were a bounce of the ball away from repeating the result of 1966, I found this insight quite funny:

An investigation by The New Daily of the financial accounts of the AFL’s 18 franchises reveals that cashed-up clubs such as Hawthorn and Collingwood are more prone to achieving on-field success than clubs with clapped-out balance sheets such as Brisbane and St Kilda.

The past 10-20 years have shown us that there is no correlation between the financial performance of clubs and on-field success. St Kilda were in finals for a decade with a shitty balance sheet.

There is however a correlation between clubs that make good football decisions and on-field success.

Clubs will survive provided they are worth more to the AFL than they cost. Both St Kilda and Brisbane currently have nothing to worry about other than making sound football decisions.

 

[Belnakor]

The past 10-20 years have shown us that there is no correlation between the financial performance of clubs and on-field success. St Kilda were in finals for a decade with a shitty balance sheet.

There is however a correlation between clubs that make good football decisions and on-field success.

North Melbourne was also tremendously successful, had the best player in the league for basically the entire of the 90s and still struggled financially.

Brisbane the same in the early 00s.

Seems like financial performance doesn't make that much difference.

 

[mellowyellow]

Im sure some will take a perverse liking to clubs and their financial struggles, however this is not good for anyone,but most of all the game.

 

[Upgrayedd]

Tbf brisbane has been ran into the dirt over the past 8 years. People talk of carltons failure but at least they have a strong brand. Brisbanes backers have been Poor at best and corrupt at worst

 

[00Stinger]

Every 5 years there are two teams that are no longer viable, then they start winning and two new teams take their place

 

[Ichabod Noodle]

It would be nice if anyone acknowledged the giant ball and chain that is the Etihad Stadium deal we're subjected to

If it was such a s#itty deal, why did you sign it?

Don't get me wrong. This thread is a waste of time. I'm fully supportive of every team's right to exist going forward and any talk of mergers moving or folding is just stupid.

But I keep hearing about how every team at Etihad had a terrible deal. I'm just genuinely interested in why everyone signed them if they're that bad.

 

[FootyJunkie]

TV right$ will $ave the day

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Saint Brisbane it is.

The two dud sides will complement each other nicely.

As well as having the live lions out prematch, they can throw some hapless Christians to them as a bit of Roman style match day experience!

Sounds great!

 

[JeffDunne]

If it was such a s#itty deal, why did you sign it?

No choice.

The AFL have the final say on such contracts and refused to allow us to negotiate with the G, so it was Docklands or nothing.

Hence the shitty deal.