Adelaide Oval Review

[marty36]

It still generated $9.75 million though, which on last years numbers would be 5th in the league.

The SANFL wants more people through the gates. They make huge money off the catering. The more people through the gate, the more over priced hot dogs and beer sold. All goes to the SANFL.

Comparing to different years but adding on income but no expenses, would like to see any business in Australia try and make head or tail of that!

 

[Papa G]

Ive tried to compare the 2014 figures whilst Adelaide and power are at AO to freo but cant locate any numbers, flick us the link so I can compare would you?

I don't have the 2014 figures, I've said on numerous occasions I am comparing them to the 2013 figures.

 

[marty36]

I don't have the 2014 figures, I've said on numerous occasions I am comparing them to the 2013 figures.

Oh so you have added on the predicted revenue for 2014 as you actually dont know it, wihout any expenses, whilst at AO against adding it onto to figures from whilst at AAMI and comparing the two years financials without actually knowing the 2014 expenses and taking a punt on the revenue. Now that it has been made so clear I see where I might be misunderstanding you

 

[MRB37]

John Olsen on 5AA now crying poor for the SANFL.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Can't afford that ivory back-scratcher he wanted

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

John Olsen on 5AA now crying poor for the SANFL.

Can't afford his privatised electricity bill

Perhaps put some solar panels on at aami...

 

[RodnyDangrfield]

Thought Rowies pandering was appalling tonight, asked a question about how much money they need each year for development and Olsen went on about how many kids get drafted each year totally avoiding the question and Rowe replied with 'Exactly...Well done'. Dead set had me tearing my hair out.

 

[Mattrox]

No question about now they have cut back on staff, doesn't that mean the SMA revenue is after expenses where as AAMI was before. ......

 

[FR0GGY]

No question about now they have cut back on staff, doesn't that mean the SMA revenue is after expenses where as AAMI was before. ......

Dont know the figures, but a lot of the sanfl staff work for the sma now.

 

[Mattrox]

Dont know the figures, but a lot of the sanfl staff work for the sma now.

Yep. I heard this too.

 

[Rusty Crow]

Yep. I heard this too.

Seen myself that there has been a crossover from Weslo, Redcoats and Encore.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

I cited three clubs, you chose my West Coast example, but whilst we are on it, why would I want to be like any other club than the best, to follow North melbourne or Western Bulldogs model is dumb they have been handed out $$ by teh AFL for years. Adelaide are charging what West Coast do, if they want more revenue follow the leader! Its their decision they dont have to, and have chosen not to for reasons they feel

Geez you're and absolute hypocrite.

You previously said that you would rather see the SANFL get the $$$ from AO more so that the AFC because.........lets see if you have the backbone to tell us what you posted earlier in this thread specifically about the highlighted bit Marty!!!

 

[marty36]

Geez you're and absolute hypocrite.

You previously said that you would rather see the SANFL get the $$$ from AO more so that the AFC because.........lets see if you have the backbone to tell us what you posted earlier in this thread specifically about the highlighted bit Marty!!!

What are you on about

Ive said all along I want grass roots footy in SANFL control, if the SANFL wasnt granted being the shared lease holder of AO, they wouldnt receive enough income to service SA footy over years and years to come. Then the VFL would have to take over this role of being the governing body of SA footy. The SANFL would continue to opearte their own competition as they have a reasonable asset backing to run their comp and their comp alone. If you would like SA grass roots footy to be run by them, then fine get legislation changed and kick them out of AO!

 

[Big Gazoongas]

How can you want the AFC to fail or SANFL to collapse. I want every SANFL club to remain in the SANFL competition and the competition still to be here in 20 years time, as you mentioned before is there enough money to go around? You said it was simple calciulations on what $$ are left.

If faced with this choice I dont want the SANFL to collapse but would be willing to bet the AFL would bail out the AFC if there were financials issue.

So based on the above "yes" there is your answer!

Do you remember the above post Marty in answer to this question I posed to you "Are you happy that the SANFL/SMA gain profits to the detriment of the AFC......just a Yes or No answer will suffice."

So you have stated and on record that you are happy for the SANFL to profit at the expense of the AFC.


then you posted this:

I cited three clubs, you chose my West Coast example, but whilst we are on it, why would I want to be like any other club than the best, to follow North melbourne or Western Bulldogs model is dumb they have been handed out $$ by teh AFL for years. Adelaide are charging what West Coast do, if they want more revenue follow the leader! Its their decision they dont have to, and have chosen not to for reasons they feel


So its dumb to follow the Roos or Dogs model because the AFL has been bailing them out for years but then you'd be quite happy for the AFL to bail out the AFC..........because it would be OK in that instance because the SANFL will profit....but at the same time you want the AFC to be the best.....makes perfect sense!!!!!

 

[marty36]

Do you remember the above post Marty in answer to this question I posed to you "Are you happy that the SANFL/SMA gain profits to the detriment of the AFC......just a Yes or No answer will suffice."

So you have stated you are happy for the SANFL to profit at the expense of the AFC.


then you posted this:

I cited three clubs, you chose my West Coast example, but whilst we are on it, why would I want to be like any other club than the best, to follow North melbourne or Western Bulldogs model is dumb they have been handed out $$ by teh AFL for years. Adelaide are charging what West Coast do, if they want more revenue follow the leader! Its their decision they dont have to, and have chosen not to for reasons they feel


So its dumb to follow the Roos or Dogs model because the AFL has been bailing them out for years but then you'd be quite happy for the AFL to bail out the AFC..........because it would be OK in that instance because the SANFL will profit....but at the same time you want the AFC to be the best.....makes perfect sense!!!!!

I want SA Grass Roots footy to survive under the control under our own governing body, not have the VFL run it that's my first priority if you don't give a shit about SA grass Roots that's not my problem

 

[Big Gazoongas]

I want SA Grass Roots footy to survive under the control under our own governing body, not have the VFL run it that's my first priority if you don't give a shit about SA grass Roots that's not my problem

You've been pushing that barrow for ages. Much better informed posters than me like Mattrox and aneale have responded to the financial management of the SANFL and all you have countered time and time again is "supporting SA grass roots footy"

Its a pity you don't hold the SANFL to account about their financial management. Port were in dire straights and needed cash, the SANFL bail them out whilst knowing back then under the arrangement at AAMI that Ports cash flow wasn't going to get any better.
Why the hell did the SANFL bail them out only to continue to bend them over in the previous and current arrangements.

Surely a "good financial manager" would have gone to the AFL and said buy the license back because under the AAMI deal things weren't about to get any better.....surely you don't want to prop up a club that wasn't about to be in a position to pay you back then or now.

But under your beloved SANFL model Marty its OK because the SANFL are good financial managers supporting grass roots footy. Meanwhile the SANFL clubs are bleeding and instead of the SANFL placing some sort of framework for them to live within their means the "good financial managers" that support grass roots footy go in the opposite direction.

And you are a total hypocrite, going around in circles and contradicting previous posts of yours.

 

[Mattrox]

If you cut through the hubris on the Port board and actually read REH's posts with attached financials it becomes clear that the SANFL was using the AFL clubs to generate revenue to run the SANFL at a loss. They borrowed to the hilt as dud clubs.

It becomes apparent that Olsen is not being forthright with how the debt has come to pass.

The money that Port... and Crows received via the AFL loan to the SANFL were grants to the clubs. The SANFL keeping their cash cows afloat through the GFC.

I begs the question, what would have happened if the AO deal was scuttled.

The SANFL would have gone down in a screaming heap of unservicable debt.

The SANFL clubs themselves owe $18m. As I posted before, Olsen mentions this in his MMM interview.

He's looking for sympathy. He's calling on sentimentality with the grass roots footy argument. But the fact is the SANFL lost control of their debt. As Olsen said...."skating on thin ice".

Many of the inferences I have drawn are backed up by REH's posts and the information he's provided. Someone better at interpreting financials shoul really read the posts.

Why did he avoid answering Roo's question? Because, perhaps retiring the AFL $10m was not minimising the interest payments? Olsen is glossing over facts to suit him at the time. His latest arguments are starting to bring the Crows grants into the reason for the SANFL debt. Fagan must be getting to him, because in his presser earlier it was the Port debt.....

The SANFL was extracting huge amounts of money from FP and the AFL clubs..... even in a year we posted 12k loss they still extracted their 600k dividend.

 

[marty36]

You've been pushing that barrow for ages. Much better informed posters than me like Mattrox and aneale have responded to the financial management of the SANFL and all you have countered time and time again is "supporting SA grass roots footy"

Its a pity you don't hold the SANFL to account about their financial management. Port were in dire straights and needed cash, the SANFL bail them out whilst knowing back then under the arrangement at AAMI that Ports cash flow wasn't going to get any better.
Why the hell did the SANFL bail them out only to continue to bend them over in the previous and current arrangements.

Surely a "good financial manager" would have gone to the AFL and said buy the license back because under the AAMI deal things weren't about to get any better.....surely you don't want to prop up a club that wasn't about to be in a position to pay you back then or now.

But under your beloved SANFL model Marty its OK because the SANFL are good financial managers supporting grass roots footy. Meanwhile the SANFL clubs are bleeding and instead of the SANFL placing some sort of framework for them to live within their means the "good financial managers" that support grass roots footy go in the opposite direction.

And you are a total hypocrite, going around in circles and contradiction previous posts of yours.

Really what do you propose that the SANFL sell more memberships for their club for their next premiership? The body is actually their to spend and develop so their expenditure should equal their income in most cases if not greater than this income as long as their Debt to Equity stays positive. This income is derived mostly from government and other parties in football as well as assets the SANFL has managed to develop. Please name me some of these Assets that have put together and developed enabling them to receive an income?

 

[aneale]

When a big 4 bank tells you to pack up your accounts and take your money elsewhere you pretty much know you are a financial basket case. Even knowing that the sale of land would net tens of millions, Westpac told the SANFL to **** off. Says a lot.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

This thread should really be renamed:
Adelaide oval - why review when Marty's sanfl & grass roots footy is all that matters.

All other parties are irrelevant to the review & concentrate on lifting their game to the Sanfl's high standards!

Case of killing the golden goose....

 

[Big Gazoongas]

Really what do you propose that the SANFL sell more memberships for their club for their next premiership? The body is actually their to spend and develop so their expenditure should equal their income in most cases if not greater than this income as long as their Debt to Equity stays positive. This income is derived mostly from government and other parties in football as well as assets the SANFL has managed to develop. Please name me some of these Assets that have put together and developed enabling them to receive an income?

Serious question....were you sober when you wrote this?

 

[the_pale_king]

When a big 4 bank tells you to pack up your accounts and take your money elsewhere you pretty much know you are a financial basket case. Even knowing that the sale of land would net tens of millions, Westpac told the SANFL to **** off. Says a lot.

Props to Bendigo Bank for stepping in - they have a community sector arm that works with lots of non-profits and associations, much better fit for them

 

[redandblack]

I'm amazed at the definitive statements on here about the finances of the SANFL and the AFL clubs over the stadium deal, when none of us know the figures.

The big stick in all this is the AFL, not the SANFL.

 

[Rusty Crow]

When a big 4 bank tells you to pack up your accounts and take your money elsewhere you pretty much know you are a financial basket case. Even knowing that the sale of land would net tens of millions, Westpac told the SANFL to **** off. Says a lot.

Crows parted company as well around the same time, may of been because they were not independent of the SANFL.

 

[Papa G]

Crows parted company as well around the same time, may of been because they were not independent of the SANFL.

Interesting due to your own Chairman being a high end employee of Westpac.