Analysis AFC finances - Rich Club, Poor Club?

[Eagleboy2011]

Fagan has done a great job considering our AFL and SANFL mandated exoenses and absence of licensed facility snd pokies.

Not to mentiom BLK shortpaying us.


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Haven't the Crows actually posted a statutory $1.3m loss.

Payments of $4.3 million to the SANFL, the AFL and the South Australian Government, depreciation of their West Lakes headquarters to the tune of $1.347 million, a game development grant of $1.1 million and close to a quarter of a million dollar hit due to the collapse of apparel partner BLK led to the loss.

 

[footy4ever]

Fagan has done a great job considering our AFL and SANFL mandated exoenses and absence of licensed facility snd pokies.

Not to mentiom BLK shortpaying us.


Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Now see, I've only cared about money when I didn't have any, and so have never cared about accounting.

I still can't work out if the situation is good or bad. There's so much ridicule (from salty Port flogs) about this outcome, that I'm thinking it's probably a pretty reasonable outcome, but how do we (those of us who know little about accounting) know good from bad when there are so many conflicting expert opinions?

 

[Geoffa32]

Haven't the Crows actually posted a statutory $1.3m loss.

Payments of $4.3 million to the SANFL, the AFL and the South Australian Government, depreciation of their West Lakes headquarters to the tune of $1.347 million, a game development grant of $1.1 million and close to a quarter of a million dollar hit due to the collapse of apparel partner BLK led to the loss.

Edited OP to show that.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Deaneus!]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-03-02/crows-post-13m-loss-despite-operating-profit

have requested a copy of the financials. Cash Profit of $1.46M, revenue of $48.3M - that's $3.8M up on last year or thereabouts, which is a great result.

 

[Geoffa32]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-03-02/crows-post-13m-loss-despite-operating-profit

have requested a copy of the financials. Cash Profit of $1.46M, revenue of $48.3M - that's $3.8M up on last year or thereabouts, which is a great result.

Positive indicators for a Not for Profit organisation. Especially one that operates in a heavily taxed environment.

We pay about $1.5m in "taxes" to the AFL, SANFL and SA Government.










Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[hey shorty]

The only word in the article most Port fans understand is 'loss'

 

[spenze]

The only word in the article most Port fans understand is 'loss'

Plus Kochie won't be happy that we end up in the red, no invite to China for us then.

 

[skoobydoo]

Plus Kochie won't be happy that we end up in the red, no invite to China for us then.

Black?

 

[hey shorty]

Black?

I'm thinking he means any association with red will anger the bald man.

 

[PrideOf]

Now see, I've only cared about money when I didn't have any, and so have never cared about accounting.

I still can't work out if the situation is good or bad. There's so much ridicule (from salty Port flogs) about this outcome, that I'm thinking it's probably a pretty reasonable outcome, but how do we (those of us who know little about accounting) know good from bad when there are so many conflicting expert opinions?

The key question that cuts through the AFL accounting: did we get handouts from the AFL to stay alive or did we hand over cash so other clubs could retain the right to play against us?

 

[1970crow]

The article reckons we contributed $2.69m to the SANFL for our stand alone team. Surely that's not right. That equates to about $2,700 per person for 40 people to travel 25 times. If we're going to spend that much I hope we end up in the VFL and we can fly opponents over and have home double headers.

 

[hey shorty]

The article reckons we contributed $2.69m to the SANFL for our stand alone team. Surely that's not right. That equates to about $2,700 per person for 40 people to travel 25 times. If we're going to spend that much I hope we end up in the VFL and we can fly opponents over and have home double headers.

Seems a huge amount really.

 

[Cleric]

The increase in revenue is good. I posted a couple of years ago that the club should get around 10% increase in revenue per year for the next few years. This isnt anything crazy, as any decent CEO expects 10% growth. Well at least the corporations I worked for demanded it. Double diget growth was a must. A few people here that was a crazy expectation on Fages, but it wasnt.

Im not sure why we depreciated our HQ as I thought we had done that already. Maybe there is something happening with our venue that I dont know about.

The cost to play in the SANFL is a joke and whoever signed us up to that, considering that Port dont pay a cent, should get his head read.

 

[Geoffa32]

The only word in the article most Port fans understand is 'loss'

Our club and theirs operate under different business models. To compare the two clubs financial results is chalk and cheese.





Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Niximus]

The cost to play in the SANFL is a joke and whoever signed us up to that, considering that Port dont pay a cent, should get his head read.

Fun Fact - the saying used to be "get your head red" but Kochie had it changed.

 

[Geoffa32]

The article reckons we contributed $2.69m to the SANFL for our stand alone team. Surely that's not right. That equates to about $2,700 per person for 40 people to travel 25 times. If we're going to spend that much I hope we end up in the VFL and we can fly opponents over and have home double headers.

Is that actual cash we pay or the amount our team generates for the other 9 clubs by virtue of hosting the games we play. This is revenue they would not recieve if we were not in the competition.

We do pay $400k to the SANFL for our team.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[MarcusP2]

Is that actual cash we pay or the amount our team generates for the other 9 clubs by virtue of hosting the games we play. This is revenue they would not recieve if we were not in the competition.

We do pay $400k to the SANFL for our team.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Can't be the actual cash we pay because Chapman said we would be $3m up from $1.5 without the payments to the State Government and the SANFL. However - it does say we contributed $4.3m to those two + the AFL (presume the $910,000 is the equalisation payment, what a joke.)

 

[FantasticShirt]

Did port pay similar amount to sanfl?

 

[Geoffa32]

Did port pay similar amount to sanfl?

They pay $0.00

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[MarcusP2]

They pay $0.00

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

And get actual home games they keep revenue from I think?

 

[1970crow]

The increase in revenue is good. I posted a couple of years ago that the club should get around 10% increase in revenue per year for the next few years. This isnt anything crazy, as any decent CEO expects 10% growth. Well at least the corporations I worked for demanded it. Double diget growth was a must. A few people here that was a crazy expectation on Fages, but it wasnt.

Im not sure why we depreciated our HQ as I thought we had done that already. Maybe there is something happening with our venue that I dont know about.

The cost to play in the SANFL is a joke and whoever signed us up to that, considering that Port dont pay a cent, should get his head read.

From memory, Kane McGoodwin will confirm/deny, the accelerated depreciation excuse of Triggy a few years ago was a complete furphy. The p&l showed consistent depreciation and the loss was mostly due to decreased sponsorship income despite them all "signing on in droves".

 

[chiwigi]

They pay $0.00

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Because as you well know, we gave up our interest in West Lakes and the $400k per year we were entitled to as a SANFL club, which is exactly what you had to then chip in. Funny how our -400k matches your -$400k.

 

[1970crow]

Is that actual cash we pay or the amount our team generates for the other 9 clubs by virtue of hosting the games we play. This is revenue they would not recieve if we were not in the competition.

We do pay $400k to the SANFL for our team.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

If it's in our financial reports, then it's cash.

 

[Geoffa32]

Because as you well know, we gave up our interest in West Lakes and the $400k per year we were entitled to as a SANFL club, which is exactly what you had to then chip in. Funny how our -400k matches your -$400k.

You still dont pay it.

How can you give up something you never had?

As a Port Magpies member I got told for years by Tealsters the club I was a member of was formed in 1997 and not the real PAFC.

When you took over that club the SANFL waived the fee because you guys cant afford it. You still cant. At that time the SANFL were still giving you "grants" to remain solvent.







Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[chiwigi]

You still dont pay it.

How can you give up something you never had?

As a Port Magpies member I got told for years by Tealsters the club I was a member of was formed in 1997 and not the real PAFC.





Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Sorry you are right, what has happened is the SANFL love Port so much they decided to give us a huge leg up in the Reserves thing at a cost to the Crows. I should have seen it all along, the $400k the Crows pay being identical to the $400k Port gave up was merely a co-incidence and One Club didn't happen years before the SANFL reserves either.