2019 Financials

Ghost of Punt Road

Club Legend
Aug 11, 2004
1,385
407
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
Just read that the state gov do not want to help us with the 65mil redevelopment but they can give shitloads for other clubs facilities. gee i wonder if that would have anything to do with winning 2 flags in 3 years :drunk:

GAGF you campaigners we will pay for it ourselves and youse cant step foot in it

Don't worry. In a few years the state government will be coming to the Tigers asking for funding.

That is the goal.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Bojangles17

Hall of Famer
May 17, 2004
30,865
32,419
AFL Club
Richmond
It doesn't work like that for an AFL club.

There's many elements that go into the mix and impact any correlation between revenue and profit.

For example, football costs are relatively fixed through salary and soft caps. And you must spend the salary cap. So you must earn a sizeable revenue number just to break even on a football basis.

And I haven't mentioned membership and match returns. Membership margin depends on many things including yield.

Then there's strategic aims and the funding of same to add to the mix.

Our emphasis on Community through KGI and BHF, which have an activity or program based funding and cost model.

Aligned leisure requires volume to generate profit and cover fixed costs.

And we're a not for profit entity.

So there's no direct relationship between revenue and profit. Many elements go into baking the cake, Jason Castagna style!

So to monitor all this, we have incredibly capable and experienced staff backed by great systems and governance oversight to pull the right levers in the best interests of the Club and the members.

Haere Ra
KT I’d like to feedback that if we re struggling for extra funding for Punt rd re development , we scale back , there’s much that could be done with say a 30min project . Park the 60mn option as stage II .
 

theflea

Brownlow Medallist
Feb 16, 2010
24,355
27,683
AFL Club
Richmond
It doesn't work like that for an AFL club.

There's many elements that go into the mix and impact any correlation between revenue and profit.

For example, football costs are relatively fixed through salary and soft caps. And you must spend the salary cap. So you must earn a sizeable revenue number just to break even on a football basis.

And I haven't mentioned membership and match returns. Membership margin depends on many things including yield.

Then there's strategic aims and the funding of same to add to the mix.

Our emphasis on Community through KGI and BHF, which have an activity or program based funding and cost model.

Aligned leisure requires volume to generate profit and cover fixed costs.

And we're a not for profit entity.

So there's no direct relationship between revenue and profit. Many elements go into baking the cake, Jason Castagna style!

So to monitor all this, we have incredibly capable and experienced staff backed by great systems and governance oversight to pull the right levers in the best interests of the Club and the members.

Haere Ra
Thanks mate for your reply. I guess just a basic idea of allied leisure returns just not possible? My point being is if we can generate $1m return then that is not bad at all.

On CPH1920 using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

YeOldTiger

Club Legend
Jul 22, 2016
1,300
4,055
AFL Club
Richmond
How much do we make from gaming? It’s slid in with hospitality but on paper looks to be $500k.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Would be a good time now to exit from pokies. Not needed and socially damaging against all the other good community work the club does. Do we really need grandma's pension money ? Give it a rest.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Phar Ace

Premium Platinum
Feb 9, 2017
3,399
7,417
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Brisbane Bullets, Firebirds
It doesn't work like that for an AFL club.

There's many elements that go into the mix and impact any correlation between revenue and profit.

For example, football costs are relatively fixed through salary and soft caps. And you must spend the salary cap. So you must earn a sizeable revenue number just to break even on a football basis.

And I haven't mentioned membership and match returns. Membership margin depends on many things including yield.

Then there's strategic aims and the funding of same to add to the mix.

Our emphasis on Community through KGI and BHF, which have an activity or program based funding and cost model.

Aligned leisure requires volume to generate profit and cover fixed costs.

And we're a not for profit entity.

So there's no direct relationship between revenue and profit. Many elements go into baking the cake, Jason Castagna style!

So to monitor all this, we have incredibly capable and experienced staff backed by great systems and governance oversight to pull the right levers in the best interests of the Club and the members.

Haere Ra
Hey KT, thanks for the continuing responses.

You said "Aligned leisure requires volume to generate profit and cover fixed costs". I assuming from this and what can be gleaned from the limited notes in the accounts that we have large Lease Costs, which I'm guessing is what what you mean in your comments of the fixed costs needed to be covered. Given these costs are, as you say, fixed, do you have any idea how the revenues have tracked in the three years (they appear to be trending up but that could be more a result of additional facilities coming on board more that organic growth), but I also know how these recreation businesses can be hit by recessions, and, how unyeilding municipalities can be in regarding the facilities they own and lease out (Leisure Centres, Aquatic Centres and Sports Centres). Are there any publically available reports on this from the Club? While the Club is not for profit, and I take your comments well on that, it doesn't and shouldn't mean Aligned is run the same way.

I realise you are not the spokesperson for it and would understand completely if you wanted to leave it at that, nor am I digging for anything in particular, other than a better understanding of the opportunities and threats this investment offers to RFC.
 

Ned_Flanders

Premium Platinum
Aug 22, 2009
48,966
91,465
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76'ers
Hey KT, thanks for the continuing responses.

You said "Aligned leisure requires volume to generate profit and cover fixed costs". I assuming from this and what can be gleaned from the limited notes in the accounts that we have large Lease Costs, which I'm guessing is what what you mean in your comments of the fixed costs needed to be covered. Given these costs are, as you say, fixed, do you have any idea how the revenues have tracked in the three years (they appear to be trending up but that could be more a result of additional facilities coming on board more that organic growth), but I also know how these recreation businesses can be hit by recessions, and, how unyeilding municipalities can be in regarding the facilities they own and lease out (Leisure Centres, Aquatic Centres and Sports Centres). Are there any publically available reports on this from the Club? While the Club is not for profit, and I take your comments well on that, it doesn't and shouldn't mean Aligned is run the same way.

I realise you are not the spokesperson for it and would understand completely if you wanted to leave it at that, nor am I digging for anything in particular, other than a better understanding of the opportunities and threats this investment offers to RFC.
the club doesn't report AL separately (its under "health, fitness, and community groups), but the following is in the annual report. While there is a lot of red, the important thing to remember is that (1) as KiwiTiger mentioned we were in the rollout phase initially where economies of scale worked against us, and (2) this includes the clubs community activities, which have grown significantly over this period too (and are not an income stream).

2015
Revenue: $53,921
Expenses: $933,794
Profit: -$879,873 (-1632% margin)

2016
Revenue: $2,473,589
Expenses: $2,917,060
Profit: -$443,471 (-18% margin)

2017
Revenue: $8,639,721
Expenses: $9,622,630
Profit: -$982,909 (-11% margin)

2018
Revenue: $14,237,718
Expenses: $14,160,181
Profit: $77,537 (1% margin)

2019
Revenue: $24,847,040
Expenses: $24,208,745
Profit: $638,295 (3% margin)

As a comparison this is gaming:
2015
Revenue: $6,984,755
Expenses: $6,122,552
Profit: $862,203 (12% margin)

2016
Revenue: $7,217,846
Expenses: $6,241,029
Profit: $976,807 (14% margin)

2017
Revenue: $7,180,170
Expenses: $6,238,110
Profit: $942,060 (13% margin)

2018
Revenue: $7,670,839
Expenses: $6,899,647
Profit: $771,192 (10% margin)

2019
Revenue: $6,977,432
Expenses: $6,417,932
Profit: $559,500 (8% margin)

So what does all this tell you? AL is only now even able to replace the profits we make from gaming (and only on a soft year for gaming), but it is growing at a rate where soon this will be a viable prospect.
 
Last edited:

DeLaCon

Debutant
Nov 15, 2019
52
206
AFL Club
Richmond
Unfortunately gaming has to stay because it generates substantial income for the club. Also other major competitors like Essendon and Hawthorn are running bigger gaming operations putting us at a financial disadvantage already without us forfeiting the current gaming revenue. Aligned seems to be improving but I reckon we are years away from exiting gaming. Indeed some could argue that we should buy a pub with machines in Richmond where supporters go after games to celebrate wins.
 

JAKLAUGHING

πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Nov 20, 2008
25,028
44,252
AFL Club
Richmond
Unfortunately gaming has to stay because it generates substantial income for the club. Also other major competitors like Essendon and Hawthorn are running bigger gaming operations putting us at a financial disadvantage already without us forfeiting the current gaming revenue. Aligned seems to be improving but I reckon we are years away from exiting gaming. Indeed some could argue that we should buy a pub with machines in Richmond where supporters go after games to celebrate wins.
+1...
 

Meteoric Rise

All Australian
Feb 4, 2008
738
2,521
AFL Club
Richmond
Unfortunately gaming has to stay because it generates substantial income for the club. Also other major competitors like Essendon and Hawthorn are running bigger gaming operations putting us at a financial disadvantage already without us forfeiting the current gaming revenue. Aligned seems to be improving but I reckon we are years away from exiting gaming. Indeed some could argue that we should buy a pub with machines in Richmond where supporters go after games to celebrate wins.
Just straight out get rid of it at the earliest point. Selling yourself as a non gaming revenue club surely makes you more attractive to sponsors - and supporters. But as we know, it is just the correct thing to do by the community.

In doing so, you are putting the clubs gleaning the bigger gaming profits at an ethical disadvantage that will create pressure for them eventually.
 

Infamy

πŸ―πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†πŸ†
Oct 1, 2004
10,735
13,359
AFL Club
Richmond
Just straight out get rid of it at the earliest point. Selling yourself as a non gaming revenue club surely makes you more attractive to sponsors - and supporters. But as we know, it is just the correct thing to do by the community.

In doing so, you are putting the clubs gleaning the bigger gaming profits at an ethical disadvantage that will create pressure for them eventually.
I assume that we'd make a pretty handy profit selling the licenses as well, you'd think that would cover some of the future profits we'd expect while we replace it with alternate revenue as well.
 

Bojangles17

Hall of Famer
May 17, 2004
30,865
32,419
AFL Club
Richmond
Unfortunately gaming has to stay because it generates substantial income for the club. Also other major competitors like Essendon and Hawthorn are running bigger gaming operations putting us at a financial disadvantage already without us forfeiting the current gaming revenue. Aligned seems to be improving but I reckon we are years away from exiting gaming. Indeed some could argue that we should buy a pub with machines in Richmond where supporters go after games to celebrate wins.
Already have MRC , you’d expect that social amenities may be increased with the PRo development
 

DeLaCon

Debutant
Nov 15, 2019
52
206
AFL Club
Richmond
Just straight out get rid of it at the earliest point. Selling yourself as a non gaming revenue club surely makes you more attractive to sponsors - and supporters. But as we know, it is just the correct thing to do by the community.

In doing so, you are putting the clubs gleaning the bigger gaming profits at an ethical disadvantage that will create pressure for them eventually.
Getting more sponsors if you ditch gaming hadnt been proven. Not by Nort or anyone else. As for whats best for the community people should take individual responsibility for their actions. 95% of the community gamble responsibly 5% dont. Why should the majority miss out because a small minority dont know when to stop. By selling our licence it doesnt make a difference to the total number of machines. A new operator would just be taking the profits that would have gone to the RFC which would then invest those funds into things like our community programs. The business people would just take the money and stick it in their pockets.
 

Ned_Flanders

Premium Platinum
Aug 22, 2009
48,966
91,465
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
76'ers
Getting more sponsors if you ditch gaming hadnt been proven. Not by Nort or anyone else. As for whats best for the community people should take individual responsibility for their actions. 95% of the community gamble responsibly 5% dont. Why should the majority miss out because a small minority dont know when to stop. By selling our licence it doesnt make a difference to the total number of machines. A new operator would just be taking the profits that would have gone to the RFC which would then invest those funds into things like our community programs. The business people would just take the money and stick it in their pockets.
It's not sponsors, it's govt and councils
 

Phar Ace

Premium Platinum
Feb 9, 2017
3,399
7,417
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Brisbane Bullets, Firebirds
Getting more sponsors if you ditch gaming hadnt been proven. Not by Nort or anyone else. As for whats best for the community people should take individual responsibility for their actions. 95% of the community gamble responsibly 5% dont. Why should the majority miss out because a small minority dont know when to stop. By selling our licence it doesnt make a difference to the total number of machines. A new operator would just be taking the profits that would have gone to the RFC which would then invest those funds into things like our community programs. The business people would just take the money and stick it in their pockets.
I'm with Meteoric Rise on this:

Gaming Machines
All states and territories in Australia have Electronic Gaming Machines (also known as gaming machines, EGMs, poker machines or 'pokies') available at licensed venues (with the exception of Western Australia which allows EGMs only at the casino and the ACT where Casino Canberra is not licensed to provide EGMs)

According to the World Count of Gaming Machines 2016, Australia has the sixth highest number of gambling machines in the world. Australia is estimated to have 197,122 electronic gaming machines (EGMs), which is 2.50% of the world's legally installed machines.

Around 600,000 Australians (4 per cent of the adult population) play on the 'pokies' at least weekly. While survey results vary, around 15 per cent of these regular players (95 000) are 'problem gamblers'. And their share of total spending on machines is estimated to range around 40 per cent.

The problems experienced by gamblers are as much a consequence of the technology of the games, their accessibility and the nature and conduct of venues, as they are a consequence of the traits of the gamblers themselves.


Apparently, more money is spent of gaming machines than all other forms of gambling combined, and yet 40% of that is by 'problem gamblers'. I'd rather Richmond were part of the solution rather than part of the problem, whether or not that means someone else becomes part of the problem - that is the ultimate of taking responsibility. But for contracts and income dependency by governments and business generally, this could be largely wiped out with enough responsibility being taken.
 

Top Bottom