AFL Clubs 2012 Annual Reports

[The_Wookie]

Barkly...

My constant whinge is the failure of the AFL to demand standards of the reporting that allow the most basic of interpretation of the Financials presented.
Particularly in terms of the list management: no of contracts to expire in each future year, ball park contract values attached to the number of contracts.
Profit/loss on football operations.
A standard approach to presenting the value of non football income.
A comparison of membership to get away from the reliance on numbers (no idea on how a standard reporting criteria could apply).

I'd like to see an ability to compare directly sponsorship income, yes wrinkles would be interesting ..

#7 handballing at Port might set me stright on the level of disclosure required by the various ownership structures - I might even pony up for the Indian Pacific financials, but I fear a 6 pack might be better value.

Love the input of all, well done to The Wookie.

Ill probably pony up for the Indian Pacific ones as well as others that arent publicly downloadable this year. My blog gets quite a few hits about it,so the interest is there.

 

[The_Wookie]

St Kilda information added to the OP
http://www.saints.com.au/Portals/0/images_saints/stkfc_annual_report_2012.pdf

Have now added in Operating profit/loss as category since all are reporting it.

 

[The_Wookie]

Geelong information now added to the OP
Geelong Football Club 2012 Annual Report

 

[The_Wookie]

As of this minute awaiting formal annual reports from:

• Adelaide
• Brisbane*
• Collingwood
• Fremantle
• Melbourne
• North Melbourne*
• Port Adelaide*
• Sydney
• West Coast

* have supplied a statement to media

I dont know what the status of GWS and Gold Coast is for annual reporting.

 

[Old Spice]

Here is an example of why the AFL should adopt a reporting standard:

Football Department Spend

• Carlton - $20,349,646
• Essendon - $19,200,704
• Richmond - $3,915,909 (specifically cited)
• Hawthorn - $2,378,471 (Specifically cited)

Absolutely.

 

[Barkly St End]

I dont know what the status of GWS and Gold Coast is for annual reporting.

I don't remember seeing too much detail on Gold Coast last year except some mention that it turned a profit in its first year.

 

[syl]

Thanks Wook!!! Needed this, that other thread is a joke...

 

[Cmarsh]

I don't remember seeing too much detail on Gold Coast last year except some mention that it turned a profit in its first year.

Really?
So what was all that talk re it would have to be supported by the AFL forever and a day then?

 

[theflea]

Absolutely.

does this mean the tigers and hawks dont include the tpp?

 

[FredLeDeux]

The majority of AFL clubs are company's limited by gurantee ( ie a nominal gurantee amount by members ie $0.10 to $20) and because they have more than 50 members (members and shareholders usually have the same meaning) they are public companies, not proprietary ltd companies and they are not listed on a stock exchange because they have no shares to list.

I did the exercise several years ago when there was the usual BS about the two Port's and looked up the structure of all clubs on the ASIC website search function. Essendon was the first club to go from an incorporated association ie Inc after its name to Ltd, in the 1950's. Most Vic clubs convereted in the 1970's and 1980's from Inc to Ltd as the clubs started borrowing more and the banks wanted the directors to be subject to directors duties and securities remedies under the old state Companies Code which became the Corporations Law on 1/1/91 and then the Corporations Act in 2001.

Just as a matter of personal interest, do you know how the Victorian clubs incorporated as associations prior to the passing of the Associations Incorporation Act in 1981?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Just as a matter of personal interest, do you know how the Victorian clubs incorporated as associations prior to the passing of the Associations Incorporation Act in 1981?

There would have been a prior dated act. The current SA act is dated 1985 and I think the prior act was dated in the 1930's. 1938 rings a bell. so the same situation would have happened in Victoria.

A bit like the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 and the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997. Before 1997 you looked up section X of the 1936 act now you have to look up section Y of the 1997 act. Although the slack bastards haven't transferred everything from the 1936 act to the 1997 act and you still have to use both as there is still about a 1/4 of the old act that is still law. one day they might actually merge the two and clean up a lot of the crap.

 

[The_Wookie]

does this mean the tigers and hawks dont include the tpp?

I believe so.

 

[The_Wookie]

Thanks Wook!!! Needed this, that other thread is a joke...

Main board threads are for cheerleaders and trolls, here we are a little more serious about the nitty gritty bits ... lol

 

[The_Wookie]

OP now includes Brisbane
Brisbane Football Club 2012 Annual Report

 

[The_Wookie]

All reports released so far can be now downloaded in one easy pack from here.

 

[FredLeDeux]

There would have been a prior dated act. The current SA act is dated 1985 and I think the prior act was dated in the 1930's. 1938 rings a bell. so the same situation would have happened in Victoria.

A bit like the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 and the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997. Before 1997 you looked up section X of the 1936 act now you have to look up section Y of the 1997 act. Although the slack bastards haven't transferred everything from the 1936 act to the 1997 act and you still have to use both as there is still about a 1/4 of the old act that is still law. one day they might actually merge the two and clean up a lot of the crap.

No, there was no statutory predecessor in Victoria to the 1981 Act, and it wasn't possible here to incorporate associations.
I strongly suspect that prior to 1981 the clubs without "Limited" in their names were in fact either unincorporated associations, or companies limited by guarantee which had obtained permission to dispense with the use of the "Limited" (this was possible for not for profit companies).

 

[The_Wookie]

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/7415/newsid/152007/default.aspx

MELBOURNE Football Club reported on Monday an operating profit of $77,618 (FY11: $135,976) for the year ending 31 October 2012, with a statutory profit for the year of $19,486.

Provides little in the way of useful data, and Ill be waiting for a couple of days until the annual report is released before I update the OP. I also expect Collingwoods any day now. Not sure whats holding up Norths unless they are waiting for the AGM.

 

[Kwality]

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/7415/newsid/152007/default.aspx

MELBOURNE Football Club reported on Monday an operating profit of $77,618 (FY11: $135,976) for the year ending 31 October 2012, with a statutory profit for the year of $19,486.

Provides little in the way of useful data, and Ill be waiting for a couple of days until the annual report is released before I update the OP. I also expect Collingwoods any day now. Not sure whats holding up Norths unless they are waiting for the AGM.

A statutory profit eh, is that the real profit before abnormals - the uniformity of the results in the press releases is stagggering, both dollars & terminology.

 

[The_Wookie]

statutory profit:

The profit that the company is required to report by law - this will include exceptional items etc, which the company might prefer to exclude from its own headline figures.

operating profit:

Operating profit is the profit that the company makes from what it does, before taking into account interest, tax and dividends. Operating profit is also sometimes known as EBIT (earnings before interest and tax) or PBIT (profit before interest and tax) or operating income.

ref: http://www.financetalking.com/pages/glossary.php

 

[Slattery_20]

Not sure whats holding up Norths unless they are waiting for the AGM.

Might have something to do with the uncertainty over the CEO position & the process/search still going on down there.

 

[The_Wookie]

Updated OP to include Pies results from The Age: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/78m-jackpot-20121204-2atcf.html

As of this minute awaiting formal annual reports from:

• Adelaide
• Collingwood*
• Fremantle
• Melbourne*
• North Melbourne*
• Port Adelaide*
• Sydney
• West Coast

* have supplied a statement to media and are incorporated in the OP.

Will be adding Cash on hand and Bank Debt to the OP tonight.

 

[The_Wookie]

in addition, im working on a post that will compare 5 year growth across all victorian clubs, adelaide, port and brisbane. It may not be possible to do the WA clubs and Sydney without outlaying money. And Ive only got 4 years of Adelaide data.

 

[Kwality]

See the Pies treated the TV rights money as an extraordinary item, one off revenue, begs the question why this approach is not applied consistently.

 

[The_Wookie]

Doing the 5 year comparisons at the moment, cant finish it without this years results, but along the way ive tried to separate the club data from the WAFC data in their reports, that should be doable by pulling the WAFC income and expense (which is separately listed) from the consolidated results. At least we'll get a revenue idea from it. Fun notes:

The combined finances of Freo and West Coast have not topped 80 million between them, on average putting them somewhere around Carltons level of funding, while still making a joint profit of around over 2-3 million. Adelaides revenue figures actually make the Bulldogs look good, cosnsistently 30 million or below - and not paying the SANFL 1/5th of what the WA clubs are to the WAFC. Ports revenue figures are actually better - but still nowhere near the top 5 or 6 melbourne clubs. Something is really off in Adelaide.

• Adelaide, a supposed powerhouse, have less revenue than almost every other AFL club including Port
• Port Adelaide managed to lose money on Matchday revenue three years out of the last five
• Ports royalty feees are about the same as what a victorian AFL club would pay to run a VFL club (about 350k)
• Adelaide and Port both have sub 1,000,000 merchandise sales 4 out of the last 5 years - and i havent got the 2012 results yet.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Doing the 5 year comparisons at the moment, cant finish it without this years results, but along the way ive tried to separate the club data from the WAFC data in their reports, that should be doable by pulling the WAFC income and expense (which is separately listed) from the consolidated results. At least we'll get a revenue idea from it. Fun notes:

The combined finances of Freo and West Coast have not topped 80 million between them, on average putting them somewhere around Carltons level of funding, while still making a joint profit of around over 2-3 million. Adelaides revenue figures actually make the Bulldogs look good, cosnsistently 30 million or below - and not paying the SANFL 1/5th of what the WA clubs are to the WAFC. Ports revenue figures are actually better - but still nowhere near the top 5 or 6 melbourne clubs. Something is really off in Adelaide.

• Adelaide, a supposed powerhouse, have less revenue than almost every other AFL club including Port
• Port Adelaide managed to lose money on Matchday revenue three years out of the last five
• Ports royalty feees are about the same as what a victorian AFL club would pay to run a VFL club (about 350k)
• Adelaide and Port both have sub 1,000,000 merchandise sales 4 out of the last 5 years - and i havent got the 2012 results yet.

something very off there - I would have lost my house if you asked to be bet that Adelaide has a lower revenue than Port. Is this something to do with the whole Magpies separate entity issue that recently resolved?