ancillary benefits including participation increases, exposure, media coverage etc.
Puffery on a Balance Sheet imho. Not saying everyone would agree.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
ancillary benefits including participation increases, exposure, media coverage etc.
Have the Eagles handled their membership financial issues differently to other clubs?
'A remarkable Club record of 101,275 members, placing us number one in the competition, illustrating the outstanding support that our club has, particularly given that there was no certainty of games being played during the season.'
Why would that be?
90-95% of members for all clubs would have been paid up, either in full or several of their monthly instalments paid by 28th February. We had full house at the Women's World at the MCG on 8th March 2020 and the Grand Prix was the next weekend and that was shut down on the Thursday. So the WCE had done their marketing hard yards long before the 8th of March.Have the Eagles handled their membership financial issues differently to other clubs?
'A remarkable Club record of 101,275 members, placing us number one in the competition, illustrating the outstanding support that our club has, particularly given that there was no certainty of games being played during the season.'
Why would that be?
90-95% of members for all clubs would have been paid up, either in full or several of their monthly instalments paid by 28th February. We had full house at the Women's World at the MCG on 8th March 2020 and the Grand Prix was the next weekend and that was shut down on the Thursday. So the WCE had done their marketing hard yards long before the 8th of March.
My understanding was that the 18 clubs and AFL had meetings and worked out a consistent approach to what credits/refunds will be given to Members. I got an email from Port on 20st May re the pledge system and on the 25th May saying the season would resume on 13th June for the showdown.
There were 3 basic pledges
1. pledge 100% against their 2020 membership
2. pledge a minimum amount ie buy a club membership (with no game access) and received the balance as a cash refund or a 2021 membership credit, or pledge 50% or 75% and the balance is a cash refund or 2021 membership credit. Club said it was flexible about combinations above the minimum pledge.
3. receive a full refund less a small admin fee of $40 for the club having to put together the membership packages sent out to members in prior months.
96% of Port member's pledged 100% according to the CEO's email to members after the audited membership numbers were released by the AFL in early September.
If most clubs' had 90%+ of members pledge 100% and the majority was for 2020 and not 2021 membership fees, then the accounts of most clubs wont have a large unearned revenue liability, or a huge abnormal amount compared to the previous years, given all clubs seem to have some memberships renewed before 31st October in a normal year, and i doubt any club launched their 2021 membership packages before 1st November given the 2020 season ended on 24th October.
Looks like the WCE had 90%+ of their members pledge 100%, but the majority asked for a 2021 credit rather than cash refund, and took option 2 above.
My post related to why they've changed the method they use to define a member. Interesting timing ...They've got a huge unearned income liability - memberships paid in advance. So 2020 members that paid, say, $500 that will get a credit of that much in 2021 will result in zero recognised as income in the 2020 year with a $500 liability. But their cash balance will of course reflect the extra $500 (that's why their cash has increased by so much as RussellEbertHandball noted) and it will get recognised as income in 2021. IMO it's the correct accounting treatment.
Most other clubs either haven't done this or haven't got many members that will get 2021 credits for their 2020 membership fees.
There's a good chance that has happened, but there are a dozen clubs or so that needed substantial assistance from the AFL to get thru 2020, and they pushed harder with members in their messaging, to help the club out and make a 100% or 50%+ pledge of their 2020 memberships to the club.It's hard to believe only West Coast members had so many go for the 2021 credit compare to most other clubs.
I suspect the accountants at most clubs simply decided to classify 2021 credits as 2020 income as it's non refundable. In which case the true loss for the year will be reflected (at least in part) in 2021.
There's a good chance that has happened, but there are a dozen clubs or so that needed substantial assistance from the AFL to get thru 2020, and they pushed harder with members in their messaging, to help the club out and make a 100% or 50%+ pledge of their 2020 memberships to the club.
I suspect WCE members knew that the club started the 2020 footy year with $20mil in the bank and $35mil in short term financial assets that are readily converted to cash, and most would have thought, well I will leave my membership cash with the club, but they have plenty of money to get thru this year, in May and June when they were given the pledge options, they also probably thought I'm not going to be able to watch a game in the flesh this year, so I'm going to ask for a credit off next year's membership fee. Maybe 2 or 3 other clubs' members could think like that and not worry about their club falling over.
Clubs announced their refund/credit policy in late May, there was still a lot of uncertainty if fans would have been allowed to get into games back in May and June. I don't know when different clubs' members had to make a choice by, but Port's default policy was that if you didn't contact them by 30 June, it was a 100% pledge. I'm sure if some on rang up on the 10th July and wanted a different pledge or refund they would have accommodated them, but they had a default deadline.I guess it's possible. But you're talking about 2/3rds of West Coast membership dollars getting deferred - and basically zero and most other clubs, assuming they're accounting for it in the same way.
I think that's just not overly likely. Especially given West Coast actually offered some members the ability to attend games. In the end we'll find out either because there's a switched on journo prepared to ask questions or when next year's financials come out and income from memberships is significantly down at other clubs.
This horrendous disease has no limits. It doesn't discriminate. It treats everybody and everything the sameCOVID cost AFL and NRL hundreds of millions, financial accounts reveal (theaustralian.com.au)
AFL Stadia subsidiary, which owns Marvel Stadium in Melbourne’s Docklands, posted an $18m loss for the year, and the AFL’s results included $33m it received from the Federal Government’s JobKeeper program and there was also $14m from the Victorian government for a future Marvel Stadium redevelopment. It also spent about $60m on measures such as the Queensland hubs for the competition in the second half of the year.
So looks like there probably isn't much consistency across these 7 clubs above and what WCE have done, = 8 of the 12 clubs who have publicly released their annual reports. Might look at the other 4 clubs later in the week.
No worries. Was only going to do 3 but after I did the first 3 I wasnt satisfied that told us much, so all this arvo would do another one then go do something else then come back and do another one then do something else etc.Mighty effort REH, thanks. A thumbs up was too understated.
Interesting take on motor mouth V'Landys trying to hide the loss of TV income by Roy Masters in the SMH today.
NRL’s neck-to-knee financials can’t conceal broadcast revenue hit
By Roy Masters
March 2, 2021 — 8.50am
It was American economist Aaron Levenstein who compared statistics to a bikini, saying, “what they reveal is suggestive but what they conceal is vital.”
Based on the recently published NRL financial accounts, ARLC chair Peter V’landys is dressing the code in a top-to-ankle swimsuit.
For the first time since 2012, the accounts for the financial year ended October 31, 2020, do not reveal income from broadcasting.
Instead, total revenue is shown as $417.273 million, rather than divided into broadcast and non-broadcast revenue, as it was in 2019.
Broadcast revenue from Nine Entertainment, Fox Sports and Telstra represents the greatest source of income to the governing body, suggesting that V’landys clearly wants to shield it from public view.
Perhaps he doesn’t want to reveal the extent to which the code took a hit from broadcasters as a result of the COVID-19 disrupted season, compared to the AFL.
However, it is possible to tease out the NRL 2020 broadcasting income by examining the cost of non-broadcast revenue.
The margin for non-broadcast revenue is historically around 50 per cent. In 2020, the costs of earning (accountants call this COGS – Cost of Goods Sold), the non-broadcast revenue, was $65.445 million, listed in the financials as “Event, Game and Sponsorship”.
This is the amount of money spent on putting on the show. To establish the non-broadcast revenue number, you simply multiply the COGS of $65.445 million by two, meaning the non-broadcast revenue was around $130.89 million.
Subtracting $130.89 million from the published total revenue of $417.273 million, reveals broadcast revenue to be $286.383 million, or $274.865 million if JobKeeper is excluded.
Pre COVID-19 broadcast revenue for 2020 was estimated to be $330 million, meaning the NRL gave broadcasters an approximate $50 million to $60 million discount.
The exact figure will be known when the NRL is obliged to lodge its accounts with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission in approximately 30 days time.
The AFL’s financial report showed its broadcast revenue dropped by $45 million from $397 million received in 2019, compared to the NRL’s discount of $50 million to $60 million on 2019 broadcast income of $324.6 million.
In other words, the NRL took a bigger hit on lesser income.
This is understandable, given reports Nine’s Hugh Marks threatened to further disrupt the resumption of the already shortened NRL season with legal action, unless he reached a satisfactory discount.
However, V’landys also gave Nine further discounts of $27.5 million for each of the 2021 and 2022 seasons, according to information forwarded to the Australian Stock Exchange.
More significantly, what will be the position if Nine, having been awarded generous discounts, doesn’t renew its free-to-air rights with the NRL when they expire at the end of the 2022 season?
We don’t know how much of the $50 million to $60 million discount was split between Nine and Fox Sports but V’landys was able to renegotiate Fox Sports deal past 2022 to 2027. V’landys describes the terms of the five-year extension as “commercial-in-confidence” but it was good news for the Murdoch owned company who, in the words of one Fox executive, “can’t get enough of rugby league.”
If Fox Sports took a small slice of the $50 million to $60 million in order for the NRL to be sufficiently cashed up to fund its clubs in 2020 – in exchange for a longer deal – it also demonstrates what a great short term outcome Nine received.
The AFL gained extensions with both its broadcasters, Seven and Foxtel, delivering $946 million over 2023-24, or an average of $473 million per year.
Considering the NRL was scheduled to receive approximately $340 million in 2021, now reduced by at least $27.5 million as a result of Nine’s discount, the gap with AFL seems likely to grow.
Why?Its about financials but Ill put it on the other thread you like!Can this be moved to a more appropriate thread?
Why?Its about financials but Ill put it on the other thread you like!