Official Club Stuff 2025 Financial Results - Operating profit $1.677m and DEBT FREE!

[malcheski]

St Kilda were allowed to sack coaches months after extending them and splash the cash left and right on players, and they’re a perennial beggar permanently in hock.

Compared to revenue, assets and future earnings, the lingering spectre of our debt has always been vastly overblown, and a ready crutch for a stale, football-illiterate board terrified of making long-needed change.

What is the board going to adopt as their persona now that the debt is clear?

Sure as shit won't be about on field performance. That's a goal that has too many metrics to hold people accountable to.

Maybe we see the re-emergence of the Port Adelaide Halfway House for First Nations People and Domestic Abuse Victims (PAHHFNPDAV for short)?

 

[Steve Dore]

What is the board going to adopt as their persona now that the debt is clear?

.....

Now that the debt has been cleared the board can turn their full attention to making the community proud.

 

[Doctor Feel]

What is the board going to adopt as their persona now that the debt is clear?

Sure as shit won't be about on field performance. That's a goal that has too many metrics to hold people accountable to.

Maybe we see the re-emergence of the Port Adelaide Halfway House for First Nations People and Domestic Abuse Victims (PAHHFNPDAV for short)?

BACK TO THE CARBON NEUTRALITY CHESTNUT!

 

[dav3]

It’s not really an option, but I’d rather be $50 million in debt with two extra premierships because we invested correctly.

Or even because we went hard as **** towards a premiership.

I'm sure that's a cool reality if you think spending caps don't exist

 

[Doctor Feel]

I'm sure that's a cool reality if you think spending caps don't exist

Lol, they literally don't. There is just a tax.

 

[Powerade 08]

Sort em out davo

 

[Steve Dore]

I'm sure that's a cool reality if you think spending caps don't exist

It's called a "soft cap" for a reason.

 

[StueyDaDew]

Surely there’s enough pennies in the bank now to tell the SANFL to GAGF & PAM join the VFL.

 

[chiwigi]

I’m glad you think that way. Let’s have an offline convo soon. I’ve got some ideas.

Interested!

 

[PatientMental]

Lol, they literally don't. There is just a tax.

Of like 75% - 100% up to $500k over the cap then 200% for anything above that.

Real butthole spreading effort.

 

[yepits2020]

Yes, revenue has gone backwards, on an inflation-adjusted basis. This tells me that our expenditure has been reduced to achieve a financial surplus and pay off that debt. It showed in the quality of our coaching panel and other support staff.

Hopefully, we can focus on growth now, especially on resourcing a winning playing and coaching team.

Our operating profit went down to $1.677m from $3.257m in 2024. This indicates our expenditure did not reduce.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

Making 1.67million and getting rid of Hinkley in the same year - has to be the best season since 2004.

 

[Steve Dore]

Making 1.67million and getting rid of Hinkley in the same year - has to be the best season since 2004.

$400K of expenses that should have been booked in 2025 has been deferred to 2026 though.

 

[EskimoPAFC]

$400K of expenses that should have been booked in 2025 has been deferred to 2026 though.

Agree, but the extra expenses shouldn't have ever existed if we'd just sacked him pre-covid as we should have coming off 5 straight seasons without a finals win and his role in the co-captaincy debacle; probably the club's biggest ever AFL disgrace.

 

[Byrons Firen]

Our operating profit went down to $1.677m from $3.257m in 2024. This indicates our expenditure did not reduce.

I think we're all a little in the dark 'til REH gives us the good oil

 

[Tibbs]

I think we're all a little in the dark 'til REH gives us the good oil

Indeed ... There is No profit, until REH says there is.

 

[Grave Danger]

I think we're all a little in the dark 'til REH gives us the good oil

He went to the budget lock-up, but Kochead has kept him there.

 

[tribey]

St Kilda were allowed to sack coaches months after extending them and splash the cash left and right on players, and they’re a perennial beggar permanently in hock.

Compared to revenue, assets and future earnings, the lingering spectre of our debt has always been vastly overblown, and a ready crutch for a stale, football-illiterate board terrified of making long-needed change.

Speak of the, uh, devil…

 

[El_Scorcho]

View attachment 2495197

Speak of the, uh, devil…

Yep, bang on.

We were repeatedly told (even from people with inside info like Chewy) that we couldn't sack Hinkley because of our financial situation, but there are at least half a dozen clubs who are far worse off than us financially that had no issue sacking multiple coaches during the Hinkley era.

Of course we never had an issue extending Hinkley after he step over the lowest bars imaginable.

 

[Grave Danger]

View attachment 2495197

Speak of the, uh, devil…

Saints declared an operating profit of $2.781 million for 2025 here's how:

St Kilda’s revenue from the AFL​

Football first, debt second: The Saints said they wanted to get off ‘welfare’ but accepted extra AFL cash

While it was known that the Saints have received additional millions of dollars from the AFL, financial statements give a frank accounting assessment of the club’s reliance on the league to remain solvent as a company and meet the club’s debts.

www.theage.com.au

 

[Burningleviathan]

I mean St Kilda should prioritise football over the balance sheet.
We saw what austerity did to us under the SANFL and Nth Melb is probably following suit in order to clear its debts.
Play good football and get the crowds to your games and then look at where you can tighten things up.
Losing NWM because they cheaped out and continuing to hover down the bottom while being broke is absolutely worse case scenario.

 

[Duck Farmer]

$400K of expenses that should have been booked in 2025 has been deferred to 2026 though.

While not in the P&L it should still appear as a liability on the balance sheet.

 

[Steve Dore]

While not in the P&L it should still appear as a liability on the balance sheet.

Would it though? Just because we are going to pay Hinkley a $400k salary for next season doesn't necessarily mean it has to be included in this year's accounts as a liability. We know we are going to have to pay Carr a salary next season but that wouldn't be included as a liability. I'm not an accountant but just because you know you have an expense next year shouldn't mean it is a liability this year.

 

[FishingRick04]

I think we're all a little in the dark 'til REH gives us the good oil

Shove it into chatGPT and get an analysis going

 

[Duck Farmer]

Would it though? Just because we are going to pay Hinkley a $400k salary for next season doesn't necessarily mean it has to be included in this year's accounts as a liability. We know we are going to have to pay Carr a salary next season but that wouldn't be included as a liability. I'm not an accountant but just because you know you have an expense next year shouldn't mean it is a liability this year.

IANAA either but because it's a debt owed to Hinkley that's already been incurred I'm pretty sure it needs to be recorded as a liability in the balance sheet.