Cos this claim is a figment of the OPs thought process, that apparently resulted from a couple of confused guys (he cant/wont say who) on ABC Grandstand in Perth, that was unreported anywhere else at the time.Hard to get a read on this one.
If true that AFL is already essentially tapped out (ie cant raise any further funds via commercial loans), and have already drawn down more than $400M of their existing line of credit (rumoured at $500-$600M), how is it possible the competition survives even with $65M from WAFC?
What does the $65M over 3 years accomplish, if the AFL have 20 - 30% left of a $500-$600M line of credit, how are they possibly going to continue for another year if COVID impacts on next year.
Also why are there rumours that list cuts will only be 4 players if the situation is that dire?
Why is it you can not support any of your claims?Not just TV rights but a part of the revenue share they have. I was just using TV rights as 1 example of a contracted amount. Other things like sponsorship etc change a fair bit and is the changed amount....
In W.A and S.A clubs it doesnt just all go to the clubs. Part goes to WAFC/SANFL . Been like that since the competition began
Did you think the WAFC agreed to be part of the AFL and then said "Nah we dont want any money"?
Well that may well be the silver lining to this 'dark cloud'.If it was me I’d like to see the AFL executive’s salaries and the entire AFL financials before I leant them any money.
I don’t trust the people running the competition at all.
Why is it you can not support any of your claims?
Are you aware of the different business models that support footy across Aus?
Bullshit. The journos and commentators are writng what Gil asks them to writeCos this claim is a figment of the OPs thought process, that apparently resulted from a couple of confused guys (he cant/wont say who) on ABC Grandstand in Perth, that was unreported anywhere else at the time.
It sure hasnt got a hearing in Melbourne & there are heaps of journos/commentators here looking for a rumour.
We are going to get lots of ill informed commentary before the Financials start to be released.
They do not know the answer themselves yet. They do know it was more then anticipated when they borrowed the 500 mill. When they borrowed that they didnt take into account them paying hotel fees galore to play in QLD infront of 300 people for example.I'm still struggling to understand the amount lost so far this season. I thought they said 400 million in lost revenue not over 400 mil in loses.
This scrutiny is in place courtesy of the NAB/ANZ line of credit & I understand on Nov 1 a line will be drawn for all clubs that have required AFL assistance (whatever that means).Well that may well be the silver lining to this 'dark cloud'.
When you borrow that much money the lending covenants, audits and scrutiny follows. You start missing KPI's set by the lender then they start installing their own people in the organisation to police expenditure and question decisions / budgets.
Look to journos like John Stensholt to write it. He's not AFL accredittedThey do not know the answer themselves yet. They do know it was more then anticipated when they borrowed the 500 mill. When they borrowed that they didnt take into account them paying hotel fees galore to play in QLD infront of 300 people for example.
The real thing we should all be struggling to understand is why no one in the press is trying to ask these questions to the guy with the answers.... Because they want the juicy story and all
Yes, lets look for 1 person to do all the AFL press work.Look to journos like John Stensholt to write it. He's not AFL accreditted
My goodness! So you want our members to pay more?Come on Tige, just put your membership rates up to the same level as the Eagles - the Tiges are still kings of the 3 game memberships arent they.
Why dont you get those pseudo members who send their subs to the AFL to pay the money to the club - those blood sucking leeches of the AFL Members Club bleed the Melbourne clubs dry & get treated as up market members, DO SOMETHING you Easty Tiger ... maybe a membership badge with a leech not a Tiger !!
I understand your malaise here in greater Melbourne, but my point is not time specific. These AFL members/leeches have been using their nominated Melbourne clubs, in cahoots with the AFL since day # 1,& your club pays, so its a bit rich to expect WA club members to be paying 'a pauper tax' to subsidise the leeches.My goodness! So you want our members to pay more?
Most of our supporters are based in Victoria, which is in a lockdown at the moment.
Pretty heartless to even suggest such a thing Mr Inekwality.
Haha for some reason I read this with Yorkshire accent.Hand over the dosh you arrogant WA lanky pillocks.
Us poor little struggletown melbourne clubs are doing it tough, while you lot want to flaunt your wealth and rub it in our faces.
You just don't want the working class battlers to have a fair go.
Don't be so greedy. Share the wealth.
And how will afl pay this back if next year has same issues due to coronavirus?So new info
1. Was wrong about the 500 mill being max credit. Max credit is more. AFLs line of credit will be upped to 600 mill very shortly. Already done as the option was already on the table, just waiting announcement. The line of credit is against the net value of Marvel stadium which is 600 something million
2. This has played out over the last fortnight . The initial 500 milll was expected to last 3 years. Its now appearing likely to last 18 months based on 2019/2020 financial reports. The WAFC will not be the only party to be asked for and to give the AFL more money also. The AFL arnt asking for 65 mill to tide them over. They are searching for a few hundred million and WAFC is just 1 of the many being asked to chip in
And what would the WAFC and Eagles seize if it wasn't paid back?It will be paid back over 15 years via improved revenue sharing.
With the line of credit from the banks theyd just seize Marvel Stadium if the AFL cant pay it back
Id imagine Nisbett is aware this is a horrific financial investment and it is why he was raging hard over the last week on Perth radio (raging hard for him anyway).And what would the WAFC and Eagles seize if it wasn't paid back?
I'd suggest the banks have every bit of security they can get rights over. It's called a fixed and floating charge over all assets.
So a unsecured loan is made with WAFC and the Eagles, revenues don't bounce back and the comp is insolvent. Goes into receivership and the banks always get paid first, then employee entitlements and then unsecured loans last.
That is why this isn't simple.