Did they overrule the choice or the spend?
same thing really
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.
Did they overrule the choice or the spend?
What we're investing in training facilities? Member retention? IT and tech infrastructure?AFL has already done that by decreeing 40% reduction to footy cap. I expect the AFLs interest will extend only as far as limiting wasteful expenditure. I bet that we'll enjoy the 2021 season as much as 2019 despite 40% footy dept spend reduction and the screws being tightened on admin spend. If we're running lean and mean, AFL review of our admin spend should cause us no concern whatsoever. Which admin costs would you be concerned they'll try and cut? Noting that footy dept and player costs are already fully controlled by and reported to AFL House. What is it about our admin spend do we need to protect from prying eyes?
SpendDid they overrule the choice or the spend?
What we're investing in training facilities? Member retention? IT and tech infrastructure?
I have no idea really. But I wouldn't want AFL House having to approve every expense that's not bound by the cap. That literally removes every competitive advantage you have being a stronger club.
same thing really
What we're investing in training facilities? Member retention? IT and tech infrastructure?
I have no idea really. But I wouldn't want AFL House having to approve every expense that's not bound by the cap. That literally removes every competitive advantage you have being a stronger club.
Spend
Based on the evidence before us, you'd have to think we're not really making the most of those advantages anyway.
The footy department is just wages of a few dozen staff, isn't it?If it's not being fed into the footy dept how does it help us perform better on the field.
Perhaps. But the AFL demanding that a line of credit is paid back before money is spent on new training facilities would be a lot worse.Based on the evidence before us, you'd have to think we're not really making the most of those advantages anyway.
This is probably the main reason for going the commercial LoC over AFL handout.Perhaps. But the AFL demanding that a line of credit is paid back before money is spent on new training facilities would be a lot worse.
The footy department is just wages of a few dozen staff, isn't it?
I assume there's a bunch of ways to invest in the club outside of footy department - like giving them the best training facility, and recovery equipment, and strength and conditioning gear, and recruiting data. I'm sure there would be a massive list of things that could be done better with more resources.
Perhaps. But the AFL demanding that a line of credit is paid back before money is spent on new training facilities would be a lot worse.
We weren’t terrible but we weren’t poor
We did increase revenues a lot, but we spent it all
Opposite. Port had a preferred candidate. AFL wouldn’t sign off on the spend. Notice that Richardson’s role as “executive general manager” hasn’t been replaced. They are basically the exact same structure but without Keith Thomas.Not really. The selected candidate could have come at a cost within the AFL's approved budget but they vetoed the person despite the $ being ok.
Olsen should have nothing to do with the negotiations for financing. Not that he was with the club when it was actually negotiated.Not really, the covid thing is a couple of years. Moving to new training facilities should take longer than that. But Olsen does seem keen to get into bed with the SANFL at Thebby in a hurry. Not that he impacted on the borrowing decision, that direction was decided months ago. Must have been tight seeing how long it took.
Opposite. Port had a preferred candidate. AFL wouldn’t sign off on the spend. Notice that Richardson’s role as “executive general manager” hasn’t been replaced. They are basically the exact same structure but without Keith Thomas.
Olsen should have nothing to do with the negotiations for financing. Not that he was with the club when it was actually negotiated.
CEO and other staff negotiate, then present to the Board for sign off.
Board should not be involved in the day to day. Including Roo.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Port Power fans. If you think I’m wrong, grow a set of balls and debate me on here so I can correct you. Don’t tag me onto your board, you ******* cowards.
Ask your mate who tagged me onto your board. He seemed aroused.What’s to debate? You haven’t really provided much info.
Enlighten me.
Ask your mate who tagged me onto your board. He seemed aroused.
Again, it’s not hard. Your friend thought to tag me onto your board and have a laugh. He (or you) can tell me what the issue is. Or you can be a chump.So nothing of substance, as usual.
Again, it’s not hard. Your friend thought to tag me onto your board and have a laugh. He (or you) can tell me what the issue is. Or you can be a chump.