AFL Clubs 2011 Annual Reports

Remove this Banner Ad

Prince Imperial

Club Legend
Apr 9, 2003
1,327
882
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Included in operating revenue according to their financials (p17 if anyone cares to have a look).

Which is actually a little depressing if you're a Dogs fan, because not only is it included in an operating profit figure that barely broke even, debt actually went up in 2011. Any donations towards paying off debt in 2011 didn't actually pay off debt, it simply paid for 2011 expenses.

How much did they raise?
About 800k after expenses I recall hearing. The reason why the club's debt increased was because of an additional $1.5m borrowed to purchase and refurbish a RSL club on the Peninsula. However this appears to be "good" debt because it's linked to an asset and the club's level of profit in 2011 improved substantially in hospitality.

The "bad" debt is with Westpac and that declined from $5m to $4.25m broadly in line with the fund raising.

As for our operating result it needs to be borne in mind that there is 845k of depreciation related to the $31m WO redevelopment (easily the largest for any club so far). As this redevelopment wasn't funded by any debt it's really a book result but it makes making a profit really difficult. If we break even this year (including this depreciation) and reduce the debt by another $845k I'll be delighted.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The_Wookie

Queenslander
Jul 2, 2010
33,201
30,914
Launceston
AFL Club
Carlton
Norths position is pretty bad, but so is the Bulldogs. However both clubs position is made much worse than it appears by AFL scheduling, lack of tv exposure and excessive ground rental payments.

last year for example the bulldogs played 6 of 7 possible interstate sides, 4 of them at docklands, leaving them just 4 matches against Victorian club opposition which is where the bigger gates generally come in. North werent much better.
 

catters05

Premiership Player
Feb 16, 2005
4,586
1,658
QLD
AFL Club
Geelong
Norths position is pretty bad, but so is the Bulldogs. However both clubs position is made much worse than it appears by AFL scheduling, lack of tv exposure and excessive ground rental payments.

last year for example the bulldogs played 6 of 7 possible interstate sides, 4 of them at docklands, leaving them just 4 matches against Victorian club opposition which is where the bigger gates generally come in. North werent much better.
How much is the rent per game at Docklands?
 

The_Wookie

Queenslander
Jul 2, 2010
33,201
30,914
Launceston
AFL Club
Carlton
from todays advertiser

THE SANFL has recorded a record operating loss of $3.88 million in 2011, more than double the previous year's shortfall.

The loss has mainly been attributed to again underwriting the debt-ridden Port Adelaide Football Club and the cost of chasing a deal at Adelaide Oval, where football will return in 2014
Biggest part though for AFL concerns

The SANFL has now committed to provide the Port Adelaide Football Club with a total of $14.75m in grants since 2007 which has had a significant negative impact on both earnings and the net asset position of the SANFL.
This is on top of AFL ASD funding since that time.

ref: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...ecord-sanfl-loss/story-fn525un5-1226304421836
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 14, 2011
25,235
9,045
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Renault F1
How much is the rent per game at Docklands?
A week later & no one has said anything - is it unknown?

'Excessive' is another claim, but rarely does anyone say just not enough people want to see that game/club. Much easier to blame someone else than accept the reality of their own predicament, e.g the dreamers that think AFL ownership of Docklands will make it profitable.
 

The_Wookie

Queenslander
Jul 2, 2010
33,201
30,914
Launceston
AFL Club
Carlton
I dont think its co-ordinated at all. I think the AFL and WAFL/SANFL have their own programmes for the most part. The only co-ordinated efforts coming through Auskick. It wouldnt surprise me if AFL NT/Q/NSW/ACT have a co-ordinated strategy since they are wholly owned entities of the AFL.
 

bontshow

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 21, 2009
16,375
7,243
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Great thread, I must have used it 100 times. Thanks to all contributors.

A week later & no one has said anything - is it unknown?

'Excessive' is another claim, but rarely does anyone say just not enough people want to see that game/club. Much easier to blame someone else than accept the reality of their own predicament, e.g the dreamers that think AFL ownership of Docklands will make it profitable.
They charge a relatively fixed fee, which you need a crowd of around 28,000 to break even on. I think the story goes that Essendon negotiated their own deal which was highly profitable for them with their high attendances, then the AFL inked the same thing on behalf of the other clubs without understanding the fee structure.

There is no valid reason to make a loss when 25,000 people show up to watch you play.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Rob

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 8, 2000
28,710
15,115
South of the river
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Peel Thunder
There is no valid reason to make a loss when 25,000 people show up to watch you play.
There is when those 25,000 are members and you don't include any of your membership revenue as match day income.

Rest assured, when taking into account all income earned from a game, no club even comes close to making a loss on a crowd of 25,000. Despite the bargain basement prices charged in Victoria. Think about it - even assuming no reserved seating revenue or corporates as well as assuming everyone is a basic GA member, 25,000 people bring in at least $400,000 in revenue. It's probably closer to a million bucks when you add on corporate boxes and the like. The cost of operating Docklands is nowhere near that.
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 14, 2011
25,235
9,045
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Renault F1
There is when those 25,000 are members and you don't include any of your membership revenue as match day income.

Rest assured, when taking into account all income earned from a game, no club even comes close to making a loss on a crowd of 25,000. Despite the bargain basement prices charged in Victoria. Think about it - even assuming no reserved seating revenue or corporates as well as assuming everyone is a basic GA member, 25,000 people bring in at least $400,000 in revenue. It's probably closer to a million bucks when you add on corporate boxes and the like. The cost of operating Docklands is nowhere near that.
Care to put some flesh on this claim?

Is Docklands able to operate at a profit?

How many games/events are you budgetting your claim on?
 

Rob

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 8, 2000
28,710
15,115
South of the river
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Peel Thunder
Care to put some flesh on this claim?
Have a look at any Docklands tenant club annual report. If there was a $5m or so charge from the stadium it would stand out like dogs balls.

But in any case, if any club wasn't making big money on matchday then they'd be as dead as a doornail. Despite the massive numbers thrown around for TV rights, most clubs earn a lot more from matchday than they get from the AFL for TV rights. The latter doesn't even cover a club's TPP, let alone all the other expenses involved in running a football club.

Is Docklands able to operate at a profit?

How many games/events are you budgetting your claim on?
No idea about whether the stadium runs at a profit. I was referring to cost to the AFL club, not cost to the stadium operator.
 

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
60,584
85,421
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
Care to put some flesh on this claim?

Is Docklands able to operate at a profit?

How many games/events are you budgetting your claim on?
Docklands' owners make an operating profit but they are making massive capital losses each year.

This is a cut and paste I wrote in March 2009 when I started a big thread about the different stadium deals around Oz. The deals done at Docklands and MCG in September 2009 improved things somewhat.


http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threa...the-sa-footy-paradigm-shift-happening.554729/

DOCKLANDS
Docklands cost $430mil to build. The AFL stuck in $30 mil after ex AFL commissioner and current ACCC Chairman Graeme Samuel engineered a brilliant financial package for the AFL. The deal was struck in late 1999 and the monies had to be paid in late 2000.

It is a BOOT project, build, own, operate then transfer. A lot of money was lost by the owners and operators in the first few years. It started making a profit in 2005, then in January 2006 Ch 7 bought everybody else out and on 21 June 2006 it sold the stadium to a James Fielding Funds Management for $330mil. The infrastructure fund / superfund has to run it and maintain it until 2025 and then hand it over to the AFL for $1. If the superfund invested $330mil at 6% compound interest and paid no tax, which is a possibility for superfunds given their investment mix and franking credits earned, they would turn that amount into $998mil by 2025. So they have to make decent cash profits of about $30mil per year and then invest those cash profits at 6% compound or more to be ahead at the end of 2025. A tough ask!! But the original owners of the Docklands and Ch 7 lost $70mil of capital value plus it is estimated close to $200mil of pre tax operating losses in 6 years up to June 2006. The AFL didn’t lose it’s $30mil. It has basically paid for the land.

Seven and James Fielding secure agreement on Telstra Dome

Who pays for this? Mainly footy supporters as they are the biggest users of the ground. That's why breakeven crowd is around 30,000 at TD compared to 15,000 at Waverley Park. That's why the Western Bulldogs and North can't make any money out of the TD and St Kilda couldn't until they got their crowds up over 35,000.

I have read on the main board that Docklands break even is 15,000 and they rip the clubs off. That’s rubbish as the break even for a BOOT project is what they could have done if they stuck the money in a bank account. They have to hand the stadium back for $1. They can’t make a capital gain or sell it like the AFL did with Waverley Park for $100mil. It's a depreciating asset.

Another important part of the financing of Docklands is the 5,000 members in the Medallion club. The first 5 years if people wanted their own video seat they paid $5,000 joining fee plus $400 per month for 60 months. If you didn't want a video seat you paid $2,500 joining fee plus $350 per month for 60 months.

The second lot of 5 year memberships that go until March 2010, cost $325 per month for 60 months.

For this, each year you get 40+ games at Docklands plus 40+ games at MCG plus finals games tickets in weeks 1 and 2 and rights for PF and GF tickets as well as a 50% discount to cricket at the MCG plus free admission to any other sporting event at the stadium.

Then there are 3,000 Axcess One members that started at $499 per year which is now called Axcess One Premium and costs about $2,800 per year with a $500 joining fee and you have Axcess One memberships which costs $990 per year.


So when a crowd of 30,000 turns up, it is the Dockland Owners who do well out of the footy people rather than the AFL clubs. The clubs don’t get much of the other revenue streams from the Docklands. Essendon were able to get a good deal because they have the numbers and became they were the anchor tenants. However they would do a lot better in terms of membership income and gate takings if they played at the MCG. However the part of the deal that they don’t reveal is how better off their corporate facilities deal is than the other clubs who call the stadium their home.

The clubs at Docklands were sold a pup and they were stupid enough to fall for the deals. Yes the AFL initial deal with 35 games meant that some clubs were forced to play some home games, but the clubs were seduced by a shiny new stadium and didn’t do the hard number crunching.

It's nice to have 2 shiny new stadiums in Melbourne. But someone has to pay for them. That someone is the footy clubs and their fans as they are the biggest users. The AFL signing long term 40 year deals at the MCG and 25 year deals at Docklands have stuffed things up for the Vic clubs.
 

RussellEbertHandball

Flick pass expert
Nov 16, 2004
60,584
85,421
SE Oz
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
The Mighty Blacks
Not sure if this should go here after my post last night or in the MCG and Docklands deals thread but was thinking about this today and went to the corportate structure page of Etihad stadium.

http://www.etihadstadium.com.au/corporate-structure

Looks like James Fielding has off loaded a big chunk of its 100% ownership since I last looked at this 3 years ago.

Etihad Stadium Ownership Chart




If you have any of your super in these funds I'd be moving it another on in the group or somewhere else.

These guys are all going to make capital losses from their investments.
 

Oneiros

Norm Smith Medallist
Jul 6, 2011
6,827
6,194
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Cleveland Browns, San Jose Sharks
You know, I was tooling around, looking at prices for various things and came to the deeply unpleasant realisation that ticket prices, corporate box prices, private suite prices and the like for Fremantle and West Coast have actually pulled into parity with some of the lesser NFL teams.

Somehow this depresses me.
 

Kwality

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 14, 2011
25,235
9,045
Tootgarook
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Renault F1
You know, I was tooling around, looking at prices for various things and came to the deeply unpleasant realisation that ticket prices, corporate box prices, private suite prices and the like for Fremantle and West Coast have actually pulled into parity with some of the lesser NFL teams.

Somehow this depresses me.
Interesting, how do they compare with Sydney Cricket Ground, Melbourne Cricket Ground & Suncorp Stadium?
 

Oneiros

Norm Smith Medallist
Jul 6, 2011
6,827
6,194
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Cleveland Browns, San Jose Sharks
Norths position is pretty bad, but so is the Bulldogs. However both clubs position is made much worse than it appears by AFL scheduling, lack of tv exposure and excessive ground rental payments.

last year for example the bulldogs played 6 of 7 possible interstate sides, 4 of them at docklands, leaving them just 4 matches against Victorian club opposition which is where the bigger gates generally come in. North werent much better.
I'm curious, a substantial part of that Victorian opponent gate increase would be Vic members on 15/16/17 game memberships - how much of the that money does the away club get?

Interesting, how do they compare with Sydney Cricket Ground, Melbourne Cricket Ground & Suncorp Stadium?
I think the MCG corporate suites were $400-$500 per person per game, which puts them on a par with Coprorate Suites for teams such as the Cincinnati Bengals.

It is a bit odd to compare in parts, however, because US clubs tend to us "Club Seating" which they market direct at the public in the seating locations we tend to place open-air Corporate Boxes (which are not advertised anywhere near as openly).

Club Seating and Corporate Box seating is pretty similar in price though ($230-350 range).
 

Top Bottom