Analysis Stadium deals - what, how, when - why we need a new one and the SA footy paradigm shift happening
- Thread starter RussellEbertHandball
- Start date
- Tagged users None
TeeKray
Moderator
Port Adelaide - Allir Allir Player Sponsor 2021
Port Adelaide - Kane Farrell Player Sponsor 2021
Port Adelaide Forum Tipping Champion
Bring Back the Bars
Port Adelaide - Connor Rozee Player Sponsor 2020
Port Adelaide - Zak Butters 2019 Player Sponsor
Port Adelaide - Jack Watts Player Sponsor 2018
Port Adelaide - Riley Bonner Player Sponsor 2016
- Moderator
- #7,502
#scurrilous
Must admit I like the word scurrilous.
Is this Inquiry still going? Hope the wind hasn't gone out of this issue. Would like to see that fat twat Andrews get his comeuppance.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
- Thread starter
- #7,504
Yeah its still going as they have to write a report at the end of it. No idea when they will finish taking public submissions, but they dont have a date they have to produce a report by, like the Royal Commission for banking had a 1st February deadline.
PepeSilvia
Norm Smith Medallist
"Only last week, we met with the PAFC and was assured once again that the Game Day Village was not a priority for the club for 2019."
They can't even proofread their press releases properly.
we had the courtesy to tell them to not bother lawyering up as we weren't even going to try and get it running - and they even use this against us. campaigners
Janus
Advocatus Diaboli
- Sep 9, 2007
- 23,349
- 57,116
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Dallas Cowboys, Chicago Bulls
So what they are saying is they took over the running of the GDV after opposing the liquor licence application of Tennis SA, and put in $100k thinking that PAFC would continue to promote it as a club run endeavour.
The fact that we’ve had to tell the campaigners twice that we don’t want anything to do with their s**t and won’t be encouraging our fans to attend it if they attempt to run it without us goes to show how desperate they are. Must have earned the SMA/SANFL some good money last year.
powermacs
Premiership Player
- Jan 16, 2009
- 4,934
- 9,566
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Port Magpies, Bulls & Cricket Aus
Well they’ve just taken over running jr footy in SA. They were smart about it too. When clubs didn’t want to follow what they have planned they said clubs could form their own league but the SANFL would pull all insurance for those clubs making it unviable option.
If Port gets on it's feet then it should start funding 'grassroots' footy in it's old zones, bypassing the AFL / SANFL. Give an example to the AFL on a smaller scale of what AFL SA should be. Get more justification out there as to why the SANFL shouldn't have anything to do with the AFL clubs (including and especially being half of the SMA).
To paraphrase.
Port did a great job with the GDV.
We got jealous and so took control of the GDV offering a s**t sandwich in return to the PAFC and their members.
This year we offered Port a double s**t sandwich (twice) and they refused (ungrateful bastards).
What more could we do?
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,643
- 98,888
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
Divesting junior football development in South Australia from the SANFL is an important step in getting South Australian football back to a position of strength IMO.
We need our own TAC cup type setup where teams are completely unrelated to existing teams. If you want to make it as fair as possible, set it up along Federal electorate lines so you know the population base for each club is pretty close to even.
Obviously this is along the same lines of Port and Adelaide getting seats on the SMA board. The SANFL is a group of minor league football clubs and should not wield the power they do over South Australian football.
Port and the Crows shouldn't need to try to scrap for positions on the SMA board, because the SMA board should already be doing everything in it's power to make the Crows and Port affluent and successful, because successful AFL teams are the number 1 thing that will get kids playing footy, which is how we grow the game in this state.
We need our own TAC cup type setup where teams are completely unrelated to existing teams. If you want to make it as fair as possible, set it up along Federal electorate lines so you know the population base for each club is pretty close to even.
Obviously this is along the same lines of Port and Adelaide getting seats on the SMA board. The SANFL is a group of minor league football clubs and should not wield the power they do over South Australian football.
Port and the Crows shouldn't need to try to scrap for positions on the SMA board, because the SMA board should already be doing everything in it's power to make the Crows and Port affluent and successful, because successful AFL teams are the number 1 thing that will get kids playing footy, which is how we grow the game in this state.
Doctor Feel
Shitposter In Chief
Quiet for over 24 hours since KT fired his salvo. Hmm.
Almost too quiet......
Crickets.wav
- Aug 21, 2007
- 31,643
- 98,888
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
We need the hotel inquiry to come out looking really bad for the SMA so we can land a killer blow while they're on the ropes.
Port said they only want to comment whilst under the protection of the review.
The SMA have obviously threatened law suits.
Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
36ers confirmed not playing in Titanium next season. Switching to Entertainment Centre. So they're open to moving to improve publicity and yield. One can guess they would prefer a redeveloped Memorial Drive if it was being considered....
Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk
Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk
NTRabbit
Brownlow Medallist
That's kinda been known for a while, albeit leaving Titanium now was unexpected. Grant Kelley started talking to Tennis SA about it years ago, it came up during that brief window where it looked like the AFC might be buying a piece of the 36ers.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
- Thread starter
- #7,519
From page 27 and 27 of the SMA submission to the Select Committee. If the Hotel makes profits, the SACA and SANFL split them, after paying SMA a licence and management fee. Its the same structure as the Roof Climb operations.
Commercial Operations Trust
The Commercial Operations Trust was established on 11 April 2016 for the purpose of managing the
Adelaide Oval RoofClimb under licence from AOSMA.
The licence arrangement to transfer the Adelaide Oval RoofClimb operations to the Commercial
Operations Trust was approved by The Minister for Transport and Infrastructure (The Hon Stephen
Mullighan) via his delegate on 28 July 2016.
The Trustee of the trust is the Commercial Operations Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Commercial
Operations Trust. The beneficiaries of the trust are SACA, SANFL and any association, trust or other organisation that has as its principal object the encouragement of sport and which is not carried on for
the profit or gain of its members.
The trust was established as a special purpose vehicle to quarantine the risks of the Adelaide Oval
RoofClimb away from AOSMA. The RoofClimb was considered a high risk, speculative, non-core
activity of AOSMA, which is required to focus its activities on its principal business of managing the
Adelaide Oval as set out in the Promoter’s Agreement.
The Commercial Operations Trust assumed $2.3m in non-core debt from AOSMA, reducing the
financial risk to the Adelaide Oval. The Commercial Operations Trust has contracted AOSMA to provide management and staffing services and pays licence and management fees (2018: $354,795) which
form an additional revenue stream to AOSMA to offset the costs of the Adelaide Oval.
A similar structure (The Commercial Operations Hotel Trust) with the same beneficiaries will be
established as a special purpose vehicle to be utilised for the operation of the Adelaide Oval Hotel.
AOSMA will be contracted to provide services to this trust that are required in relation to operation
of the Hotel.
Commercial Operations Trust
The Commercial Operations Trust was established on 11 April 2016 for the purpose of managing the
Adelaide Oval RoofClimb under licence from AOSMA.
The licence arrangement to transfer the Adelaide Oval RoofClimb operations to the Commercial
Operations Trust was approved by The Minister for Transport and Infrastructure (The Hon Stephen
Mullighan) via his delegate on 28 July 2016.
The Trustee of the trust is the Commercial Operations Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Commercial
Operations Trust. The beneficiaries of the trust are SACA, SANFL and any association, trust or other organisation that has as its principal object the encouragement of sport and which is not carried on for
the profit or gain of its members.
The trust was established as a special purpose vehicle to quarantine the risks of the Adelaide Oval
RoofClimb away from AOSMA. The RoofClimb was considered a high risk, speculative, non-core
activity of AOSMA, which is required to focus its activities on its principal business of managing the
Adelaide Oval as set out in the Promoter’s Agreement.
The Commercial Operations Trust assumed $2.3m in non-core debt from AOSMA, reducing the
financial risk to the Adelaide Oval. The Commercial Operations Trust has contracted AOSMA to provide management and staffing services and pays licence and management fees (2018: $354,795) which
form an additional revenue stream to AOSMA to offset the costs of the Adelaide Oval.
A similar structure (The Commercial Operations Hotel Trust) with the same beneficiaries will be
established as a special purpose vehicle to be utilised for the operation of the Adelaide Oval Hotel.
AOSMA will be contracted to provide services to this trust that are required in relation to operation
of the Hotel.
Janus
Advocatus Diaboli
- Sep 9, 2007
- 23,349
- 57,116
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Dallas Cowboys, Chicago Bulls
Here's the kicker:
The trust was established as a special purpose vehicle to quarantine the risks of the Adelaide Oval
RoofClimb away from AOSMA. The RoofClimb was considered a high risk, speculative, non-core
activity of AOSMA, which is required to focus its activities on its principal business of managing the
Adelaide Oval as set out in the Promoter’s Agreement.
The Commercial Operations Trust assumed $2.3m in non-core debt from AOSMA, reducing the
financial risk to the Adelaide Oval. The Commercial Operations Trust has contracted AOSMA to provide management and staffing services and pays licence and management fees (2018: $354,795) which
form an additional revenue stream to AOSMA to offset the costs of the Adelaide Oval.
AOSMA will be contracted to provide services to this trust that are required in relation to operation
of the Hotel.
Never trust an organisation that is making contracts with itself. It's too ******* easy for the AOSMA to charge a sweetheart rate to their Commercial Operations Hotel Trust for the operation of the hotel, while increasing the operating costs of the oval itself to the AFL clubs. That's why they said that the Commercial Operations Trust was set up to 'quarantine the risk away from AOSMA'.
Ask yourself this - if the AOSMA isn't taking on the risk for the highly speculative RoofClimb....who is? Someone has to assume the debt for it if it is suddenly losing money, particularly since it's taken on $2.3m in non-core debt from the start.
And if the AOSMA isn't taking on the risk for the highly speculative hotel...who is? That's not $2.3m, that's $42m in non-core debt.
It's just incredibly suss to me.
The trust was established as a special purpose vehicle to quarantine the risks of the Adelaide Oval
RoofClimb away from AOSMA. The RoofClimb was considered a high risk, speculative, non-core
activity of AOSMA, which is required to focus its activities on its principal business of managing the
Adelaide Oval as set out in the Promoter’s Agreement.
The Commercial Operations Trust assumed $2.3m in non-core debt from AOSMA, reducing the
financial risk to the Adelaide Oval. The Commercial Operations Trust has contracted AOSMA to provide management and staffing services and pays licence and management fees (2018: $354,795) which
form an additional revenue stream to AOSMA to offset the costs of the Adelaide Oval.
AOSMA will be contracted to provide services to this trust that are required in relation to operation
of the Hotel.
Never trust an organisation that is making contracts with itself. It's too ******* easy for the AOSMA to charge a sweetheart rate to their Commercial Operations Hotel Trust for the operation of the hotel, while increasing the operating costs of the oval itself to the AFL clubs. That's why they said that the Commercial Operations Trust was set up to 'quarantine the risk away from AOSMA'.
Ask yourself this - if the AOSMA isn't taking on the risk for the highly speculative RoofClimb....who is? Someone has to assume the debt for it if it is suddenly losing money, particularly since it's taken on $2.3m in non-core debt from the start.
And if the AOSMA isn't taking on the risk for the highly speculative hotel...who is? That's not $2.3m, that's $42m in non-core debt.
It's just incredibly suss to me.
RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
- Thread starter
- #7,524
The Commercial Operations Trust, like the SACA and SANFL aren't audited by the Auditor General. The Adelaide Oval SMA Ltd is.
So if you have stuff you don't want the public to see, you move them into that entity. It doesn't have to be dodgy, just don't want to reveal to everyone what is going on.
So if you have stuff you don't want the public to see, you move them into that entity. It doesn't have to be dodgy, just don't want to reveal to everyone what is going on.
