Beyond a joke

[Crow54]

The Victorian/interstate club rivalry has gone too far. In the Sunday Mail this morning is a report that the Kangeroos Director has called for the AFL to cut end-of-year dividends to the Crows and Power, to help struggling Victorian Clubs.

GET REAL. This is just about the last straw. Just because Vic clubs can't manage their finances, after being propped up by the licence fees paid by non-Vic clubs, why should they be given any help by Clubs who can actually run properly.

Words fail me......

But I'm sure you Victorian supporters will have heaps to say on this issue!!!!!

 

[Seth]

No Crow I think most would agree except maybe North supporters. Teams play in this comp for success anf expect to be financially rewarded by the competition organisers if they win or where they finish up. Same as playing in a local comp I guess. It mystifies me why that a sucessful club like norff are in this position, they should have better sponsors and memberships. Perhaps it has something to do with their administration.
Normal didvidends should not be stopped to interstate clubs. Only susbsidising, if this occurs which I don't know.

 

[WCE2000]

I think temporarily, if the AFL give more of a benefit to sturggling cluibs, it will in the long-run help the interstate clubs.

I don't mean entirely cutting of the benefits, but say cutting them in half for a couple of years.

A clause in the TV rights deal, is that there must be 8 games a week for the full 500 million dollars to be payed out.

If North fold, it means there will only by 7 games a week, and the 500 million dollars is cut by some percantage.

So, if North fold, it would end up going against every other club. So maybe for a couple of seasons, just to give them a few more benefits would help the other stronger AFL clubs.

 

[ptw]

yes WCE2000 but surely you would do that by making all other clubs contribute the same....not continuing to give Essendon a full dividend and giving Port nothing !!!!

First I had heard of it, I would be amazed if it actually happened.

ptw

 

[choppy]

Originally posted by Seth
No Crow I think most would agree except maybe North supporters. Teams play in this comp for success anf expect to be financially rewarded by the competition organisers if they win or where they finish up. Same as playing in a local comp I guess. It mystifies me why that a sucessful club like norff are in this position, they should have better sponsors and memberships. Perhaps it has something to do with their administration.
Normal didvidends should not be stopped to interstate clubs. Only susbsidising, if this occurs which I don't know.

Don't worry about North, there are plenty of other Victorian clubs, take the time to have a look at the Bulldogs and Melbournes membership figures and have a look at the crowds Geelong are drawing. It will be interesting to see the financial results of some of these teams come the end of the year.

North has a new administration and they are focusing in the area where they have performed poorly and that is in corportate support. The new Vice presidents club has raised nearly 1 million dollars and there are a number of high flyers who are working behind the scenes to rectify Norths temporary problems.

 

[choppy]

Originally posted by Crow54
The Victorian/interstate club rivalry has gone too far. In the Sunday Mail this morning is a report that the Kangeroos Director has called for the AFL to cut end-of-year dividends to the Crows and Power, to help struggling Victorian Clubs.

GET REAL. This is just about the last straw. Just because Vic clubs can't manage their finances, after being propped up by the licence fees paid by non-Vic clubs, why should they be given any help by Clubs who can actually run properly.

Words fail me......

But I'm sure you Victorian supporters will have heaps to say on this issue!!!!!

What were the straws before the that?

They would be that it is okay for your club to be propped by government funds (ie taxpayers money ie Victorians money) to build your new grandstands and leave your dividend money to be spent on new gym equipment and the like.

And dont give me this crap about the Crows paying licence fees which in hindsight were totally insignificant to what they would be now worth which was payed for by the commision not the crows.

And you never had exclusive zoning in those early years did you and you couldn't claim listed players from Victorian clubs. Oh weve forgotton about that propping up. Now we have established ourselves we want a level playing field but not back then. Only when we are successful we must not have any propping up.

 

[Drakey]

Maybe the problem with North is the fact that they have people like Mark Dawson on the board.

Try running your club a little bit better Mr Dawson. If you can't compete, get out.

''You say to them: 'Why do you need a dividend, boys? You are lucky that you can operate in this franchise. You should be paying us money to operate in the franchise.' It's time to say to the two clubs in Adelaide: 'Sorry, but you don't get the same dividend.'

Both clubs already paid $4 mil for the privelidge. Both clubs put 80% (thats right 80%) of their earnings back into the SANFL for development of grass roots footy. What does North put back into footy?

Dawson said his views on the state of the game had been formed over a long time and were not based upon the Roos' current financial woes. (yeh we all believe that 1).

I remember the old days listening to patronising crap from clubs like North, Melbourne, hawthorn etc, talking about being in the "big League". Seems like the League is a bit too big for some of these guys now.

 

[Groucho]

As a North supporter I do agree with Mark Dawson but what he's saying won't happen so I won't put my arguments here,but he also said something else which makes sense and would also solve problems for the struggling clubs ie The whole salary cap amount should be paid as the yearly dividend. The rich clubs could still get richer but at least the poorer clubs could get by.

 

[Macca19]

Originally posted by Crow54
The Victorian/interstate club rivalry has gone too far. In the Sunday Mail this morning is a report that the Kangeroos Director has called for the AFL to cut end-of-year dividends to the Crows and Power, to help struggling Victorian Clubs.

GET REAL. This is just about the last straw. Just because Vic clubs can't manage their finances, after being propped up by the licence fees paid by non-Vic clubs, why should they be given any help by Clubs who can actually run properly.

Words fail me......

But I'm sure you Victorian supporters will have heaps to say on this issue!!!!!

The bloke is a dickhead for a start. I feel embarrased that he was once associated with the magpies.

i think the best quote out of the lot is "Its time to say to the two clubs in adelaide - sorry but you dont get the same dividend"

What is this guy on. Just because his club doesnt know how to attract any supporters...that means that the Crows and power who have put in plenty of hard work to make a profit, have to give it to North bloody Melbourne. GET STUFFED

 

[choppy]

Re: Re: Beyond a joke

Originally posted by Macca19

Just because his club doesnt know how to attract any supporters...that means that the Crows and power who have put in plenty of hard work to make a profit, have to give it to North bloody Melbourne. GET STUFFED

Just who is attracting people to games? Perhaps the average attendance to home and away games to the end of round 7 will tell us.

Essendon 55641
Collingwood 55224
Richmond 49577
Carlton 37517
Melbourne 34432
Kangaroos 32523
Adelaide 31654
Bulldogs 31613
Hawthorn 31486
West Coast 30246
Sydney 29695
Port 29305
StKilda 28786
Geelong 27245
Fremantle 26774
Brisbane 24180

And what would this hard work be? You would have to be totally incompetent not to make a profit in Adelaide. With the way the draw and draft is structured there is a gauranteed profit without doing squat.

 

[Crows.ok]

Re: Re: Re: Beyond a joke

Originally posted by choppy


Just who is attracting people to games? Perhaps the average attendance to home and away games to the end of round 7 will tell us.

Essendon 55641
Collingwood 55224
Richmond 49577
Carlton 37517
Melbourne 34432
Kangaroos 32523
Adelaide 31654
Bulldogs 31613
Hawthorn 31486
West Coast 30246
Sydney 29695
Port 29305
StKilda 28786
Geelong 27245
Fremantle 26774
Brisbane 24180

And what would this hard work be? You would have to be totally incompetent not to make a profit in Adelaide. With the way the draw and draft is structured there is a gauranteed profit without doing squat.

Two basic, obvious mistakes here choppy.

First you talk about "attracting people to games" then you give "the average attendance to home and away games". Now it should be obvious to even you that whenever Adelaide or Port play, the majority crowd is nearly always "attracted" to the game by only one club. When these clubs play at home, the majority of the crowd is attracted by the SA club. When playing away, most of the crowd is for the opposition.

This is not the case at all Essendon, Collingwood, Richmond et al. Nearly half of the attendees at most of their games are in fact "attracted" by opposition fans!

Given that, at none of our home games are there virtually any opposition supporters, and home games are where all our revenue is generated, yes these SA clubs have to do all the work.

They don't get a free boost from opposition fans at home games like the Kangaroos do.

Your second mistake is nearly as obvious as your first- if there is such an easy ride to be had in Adelaide, why don't you come over here and play?

You have had an invite to do so from SACA.

You could even do a Kangaroos home game at Footy Park and reap in a home gate from 40,000 Crows fans or 30,000 Port fans. Why the hell not?

Far better option than just trying to steal money from Crows & Power.

 

[Macca19]

Re: Re: Beyond a joke

Originally posted by choppy


What were the straws before the that?

They would be that it is okay for your club to be propped by government funds (ie taxpayers money ie Victorians money) to build your new grandstands and leave your dividend money to be spent on new gym equipment and the like.

And dont give me this crap about the Crows paying licence fees which in hindsight were totally insignificant to what they would be now worth which was payed for by the commision not the crows.

And you never had exclusive zoning in those early years did you and you couldn't claim listed players from Victorian clubs. Oh weve forgotton about that propping up. Now we have established ourselves we want a level playing field but not back then. Only when we are successful we must not have any propping up.

You are an absolute ********ing idiot. If your club is so financially and corpratly inept that it struggles to break even and attract new members and sponsers then STIFF ********!!!!!! GET OUT OF THE BLOODY LEAGUE.

You have just shown you no very little about what your talking about. For a start Port is STILL PAYING OFF THE LICENCE FEE. This affects port so much that it ended up not making a profit last year.
If anyone should 'prop' you up, it should be the AFL. Not only did the AFL clubs make it so Port would almost certainly be an instant failure with there concessions...you are now asking us to give you our bloody profits.

Get your facts straight before you make a tool of yourself (which is too late anyway)...The funds for Ports big gym and training facilities came from our major sponsor...not from victorias government funds or whatever crap you sprouted.

Learn your facts.

 

[Macca19]

For once we agree!!!

Originally posted by Crows.ok


Two basic, obvious mistakes here choppy.

First you talk about "attracting people to games" then you give "the average attendance to home and away games". Now it should be obvious to even you that whenever Adelaide or Port play, the majority crowd is nearly always "attracted" to the game by only one club. When these clubs play at home, the majority of the crowd is attracted by the SA club. When playing away, most of the crowd is for the opposition.

This is not the case at all Essendon, Collingwood, Richmond et al. Nearly half of the attendees at most of their games are in fact "attracted" by opposition fans!

Given that, at none of our home games are there virtually any opposition supporters, and home games are where all our revenue is generated, yes these SA clubs have to do all the work.

They don't get a free boost from opposition fans at home games like the Kangaroos do.

Your second mistake is nearly as obvious as your first- if there is such an easy ride to be had in Adelaide, why don't you come over here and play?

You have had an invite to do so from SACA.

You could even do a Kangaroos home game at Footy Park and reap in a home gate from 40,000 Crows fans or 30,000 Port fans. Why the hell not?

Far better option than just trying to steal money from Crows & Power.

EXACTLY!!! I would of thought personally it would be easier for melbourne clubs to make a profit thru gate sales. The fact that the MCG holds up to 95000 people and that there are plenty of 'blockbuster' games over in melbourne. Meanwhile the SA clubs have one...the showdown. Footy Park only holds 44,000 at the moment.

 

[Same Old's]

Re: For once we agree!!!

Originally posted by Macca19


EXACTLY!!! I would of thought personally it would be easier for melbourne clubs to make a profit thru gate sales. The fact that the MCG holds up to 95000 people and that there are plenty of 'blockbuster' games over in melbourne. Meanwhile the SA clubs have one...the showdown. Footy Park only holds 44,000 at the moment.

Just because some Victorian clubs play at the MCG doesn't mean it's "easier" for them to make a profit. It's rarely filled, unlike Football park.

It's always "easier" to make money at a stadium that might have less capacity but is filled most weeks.

 

[1AD]

Re: Re: Re: Beyond a joke

Originally posted by choppy


Just who is attracting people to games? Perhaps the average attendance to home and away games to the end of round 7 will tell us.

Essendon 55641
Collingwood 55224
Richmond 49577
Carlton 37517
Melbourne 34432
Kangaroos 32523
Adelaide 31654
Bulldogs 31613
Hawthorn 31486
West Coast 30246
Sydney 29695
Port 29305
StKilda 28786
Geelong 27245
Fremantle 26774
Brisbane 24180

And what would this hard work be? You would have to be totally incompetent not to make a profit in Adelaide. With the way the draw and draft is structured there is a gauranteed profit without doing squat.

Is that why North are looking anywhere but Melbourne to play? So they can do squat. Why penalise clubs that make a profit . Taker the last ten years , you would have to be incompetant to be in all those PF's and 2 premierships and not make a profit. If you can't do it when you are succesfull how the hell are you going to do it when you are struggling.?

 

[Macca19]

I have to say the funneist thing about Dawsons comments are "im not saying this because of Norths current financial position"

yeah...we all believe that one

 

[KickItAnywhere34]

I think all you guys are missing the point , Mark Dawson does not want to take other clubs profits. What he wants is the dividend the AFL pays each club at the end of the year to be split up differently. Now if you want to call it Port or Adelaides profit then you're kidding because I thought those two clubs made a big enough profit without the AFL dividend.
The AFL dividend should be treated as an additional bonus at the end of each year not PROFIT, however some clubs unfortunately need it to balance the books.
Perhaps what he is saying is pay 95% of the dividend to say Ess Port West Coast Freo Coll Rich Carlt Brisbane Adelaide
and pay the full dividend plus the extra 5% to Kangaroos Hawth Melb Geelong Sydney St Kilda Bulldogs.
This would mean that if the dividend was $1 million then $950000 would go to the first lot of clubs I mentioned and $1,064000 would go to the second lot.
If you look at those figures it seems fair and is not taking that much from the richer clubs who already get an armchair ride from the way gate receipts are now distributed.
However I doubt it will happen and I wouldnt want it to happen as I think my team should stand on its own terms but I don't think you shoud ridicule the guy because he has come up with something different.
Maybe there can be some sort of formula so over time when each club is struggling financially the dividend can be split differently so no club will die rather than the rich get richer syndrome thats happening now.

 

[Crows.ok]

Originally posted by KickItAnywhere34
I think all you guys are missing the point , Mark Dawson does not want to take other clubs profits.
... deleted text ...
If you look at those figures it seems fair and is not taking that much from the richer clubs who already get an armchair ride from the way gate receipts are now distributed.

This is complete rubbish. Mark Dawson is the one missing the point.

Please give one good reason why Kangaroos should be rescued at anyones expense, and in particular why at the expense of the two Adelaide based clubs.

As it stands now the contribution of the Adelaide clubs is greater than the dividend they get back. They contribute more than their share in terms of merchandise sales, TV audience, etc, etc, and must suffer more expenses in terms of travel. They get a penalty in the draw in terms of the number of interstate trips they must endure. There is no way it is fair as it stands ... regardles of any further penalties imposed just because Kangaroos can't make a fist of it! Get real!

Shared revenue is not derived from gate receipts. Get the facts right before you post.

Some Victorian clubs act like they have a god-given right to be in the national competition. When there are not enough people that follow them to actually support them in that competition, they act like the rest of the world owes them a living. Other people should be penalised for not following Kangaroos enough, or something?

Not only does Mark Dawson look like a complete deadhead on this issue, so too do quite a number of Kangaroos fans who can't seem to grasp the simplest concept - the two Adelaide sides do NOT owe Kangaroos a living!

How much more simple can we make this concept for you?

 

[choppy]

Re: Re: Re: Beyond a joke

Originally posted by Macca19



You are an absolute ********ing idiot. If your club is so financially and corpratly inept that it struggles to break even and attract new members and sponsers then STIFF ********!!!!!! GET OUT OF THE BLOODY LEAGUE.

You have just shown you no very little about what your talking about. For a start Port is STILL PAYING OFF THE LICENCE FEE. This affects port so much that it ended up not making a profit last year.
If anyone should 'prop' you up, it should be the AFL. Not only did the AFL clubs make it so Port would almost certainly be an instant failure with there concessions...you are now asking us to give you our bloody profits.

Get your facts straight before you make a tool of yourself (which is too late anyway)...The funds for Ports big gym and training facilities came from our major sponsor...not from victorias government funds or whatever crap you sprouted.

Learn your facts.

Okay Macca19, perhaps you can explain the following which was in The Age on June 20 2000.
And I quote

"New stand at Football Park

Construction has begun on a new $14.5 million grandstand at Football Park that is set to cut the waiting list for Adelaide Football Club season ticket-holders.

The AFL has provided a $1.5 million grant on the condition that an extra 2000 daily general seating tickets be provided, bringing total general tickets available to 5000. The South Australian Government also has put $7.65million towards the development."

Yes this totally supports your argument that South Australian clubs do not receive any money from the government or the AFL do they.

It would be nice for North to get 1.5 million from the AFL to upgrade Norths ground at Arden St. Oh hang on the money has allready been taken by the South Australian clubs.

Perhaps we could approach the Victorian government for 7.5 million. Oh hang on the South Australian Government has allready taken that via the Commonwealth Grants Scheme.

Which facts do you want me to learn? You are the absolute tool.

 

[Macca19]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Beyond a joke

Originally posted by choppy



Okay Macca19, perhaps you can explain the following which was in The Age on June 20 2000.
And I quote

"New stand at Football Park

Construction has begun on a new $14.5 million grandstand at Football Park that is set to cut the waiting list for Adelaide Football Club season ticket-holders.

The AFL has provided a $1.5 million grant on the condition that an extra 2000 daily general seating tickets be provided, bringing total general tickets available to 5000. The South Australian Government also has put $7.65million towards the development."

Yes this totally supports your argument that South Australian clubs do not receive any money from the government or the AFL do they.

It would be nice for North to get 1.5 million from the AFL to upgrade Norths ground at Arden St. Oh hang on the money has allready been taken by the South Australian clubs.

Perhaps we could approach the Victorian government for 7.5 million. Oh hang on the South Australian Government has allready taken that via the Commonwealth Grants Scheme.

Which facts do you want me to learn? You are the absolute tool.

ok...a few things

- what does the new football park stand (basically for use of the crows only) have to do with Port Adelaide??
- Port built its gym and facilities on money given to them by the major sponser

You say "it would be nice for North to get money but SA has already taken it"
North still get dividends...and im sorry but i dont see what North Melbourne has to do with the SA government.
What does SAs goverments Commonwealth games scheme have to do with the victorian governemnt??

I dont see the link

 

[choppy]

Re: Re: Re: Beyond a joke

Originally posted by Macca19



You have just shown you no very little about what your talking about. For a start Port is STILL PAYING OFF THE LICENCE FEE. This affects port so much that it ended up not making a profit last year.
If anyone should 'prop' you up, it should be the AFL. Not only did the AFL clubs make it so Port would almost certainly be an instant failure with there concessions...you are now asking us to give you our bloody profits.

Get your facts straight before you make a tool of yourself (which is too late anyway
Learn your facts.

So Port are paying of the licence fee. Sorry, after reading the article in The Adelaide Advertisor on June 23 1998 I got the wrong impression.

And I quote

PORT Adelaide will have the first $1m of its $4 million AFL licence fee paid by the SANFL.

The nine league clubs last night picked up the Power's tab, as they did for the Crows in 1991.These off-field bonuses will open the door for Port to build modern training and administration facilities at Alberton for the 2000 season.

The club will also have a $500,000 grant from the AFL ~ money gleaned from Channel Seven's bid for television rights from 2002

I bet that $500,000 grant from the AFL came in handy. Oh I am mistaken you payed for those palatial gyms by yourself.

Gee, I must get my facts straight.

 

[choppy]

Re: Re: Re: Beyond a joke

Originally posted by Macca19

If anyone should 'prop' you up, it should be the AFL. Not only did the AFL clubs make it so Port would almost certainly be an instant failure with there concessions...you are now asking us to give you our bloody profits.

Get your facts straight before you make a tool of yourself

Learn your facts.

Yes, the AFL has a proud history of propping clubs up, Fitzroy springs to mind. But Port is not being propped up are they.

This article from The Adelaide Advertiser on 23 Novermber last year is obviously completely wrong.


PORT Adelaide has had its financial burden eased with the AFL giving the Power an extra three years to pay off its $4m licence fee.

In a deal brokered between the AFL and SANFL, the Power will now be required to pay the remaining $1.6m of its licence fee over the next five years rather than the $800,000 it was due to pay in each of the next two years.

"It will allow us to enhance our profitability over the next couple of years."

The refinancing of Port's licence will improve the club's financial situation by more than $400,000 in 2001 and 2002.

Tell Macca, How do you make those profits. By not paying your licence fees?

I wonder who the tool is? What are the facts Macca? Enlighten me. Please.

 

[choppy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Beyond a joke

Originally posted by Macca19


ok...a few things

- what does the new football park stand (basically for use of the crows only) have to do with Port Adelaide??
- Port built its gym and facilities on money given to them by the major sponser

You say "it would be nice for North to get money but SA has already taken it"
North still get dividends...and im sorry but i dont see what North Melbourne has to do with the SA government.
What does SAs goverments Commonwealth games scheme have to do with the victorian governemnt??

I dont see the link

I thought Port played there home games at Football Park. So they don't use the corporate facilities at this ground to raise funds for the club?

Yes we do get dividends but it is less because the AFL is putting money into South Australia.

Commonwealth Grants Macca, not Commonwealth Games. I cant be bothered explaining the devolution of tax payers money from Victoria to the rest of Australia.


You originally said that North should recieve nothing and to piss of if we couldn't stand on our own. My argument is, and I believe it is still valid, that if every other club and that is just not Port receive some sort of concession some where along the line, then why does everyone jump up and down when there is a single mention that North should recieve a single concession.

Apart from some funds last year that were provided by the AFL to market some home games in Sydney and this was all spent on advertising, we did not make any profit from this, North has received nothing, no grants, no special draft concessions, nothing.

Well bugger it, if every other club gets something why not North?

 

[Crows.ok]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Beyond a joke

Originally posted by choppy


I thought Port played there home games at Football Park. So they don't use the corporate facilities at this ground to raise funds for the club?

Yes we do get dividends but it is less because the AFL is putting money into South Australia.

Commonwealth Grants Macca, not Commonwealth Games. I cant be bothered explaining the devolution of tax payers money from Victoria to the rest of Australia.


You originally said that North should recieve nothing and to piss of if we couldn't stand on our own. My argument is, and I believe it is still valid, that if every other club and that is just not Port receive some sort of concession some where along the line, then why does everyone jump up and down when there is a single mention that North should recieve a single concession.

Apart from some funds last year that were provided by the AFL to market some home games in Sydney and this was all spent on advertising, we did not make any profit from this, North has received nothing, no grants, no special draft concessions, nothing.

Well bugger it, if every other club gets something why not North?

In answer to your question, here is how Kangaroos have had a share of a heap of funding, and Power and Crows in comparison have had chickenfeed:

Choppy extracted this news report from somewhere:

"New stand at Football Park

Construction has begun on a new $14.5 million grandstand at Football Park that is set to cut the waiting list for Adelaide Football Club season ticket-holders.

The AFL has provided a $1.5 million grant on the condition that an extra 2000 daily general seating tickets be provided, bringing total general tickets available to 5000. The South Australian Government also has put $7.65million towards the development."

And then choppy made this comment:

Yes this totally supports your argument that South Australian clubs do not receive any money from the government or the AFL do they.

Actually, the money to upgrade Football Park is provided to the owners of Football Park, which is the SANFL.

First observation: SANFL is not "South Australian clubs".

Second observation: AFL has put what, $30 million? into Colonial. The AFL have built, used and discarded Waverly in the time Footy Park has been around. I'd hate to think how much the Victorian Government over the years has put into the MCG (Kangaroos home ground).

But whatever the actual figures these two bodies have put into stadium facilities in Victoria, the amount AFL & govt bodies (read SA govt for Vic govt) has put into stadium facilities in SA pales into insignificance. $1.5m plus $7.65m = $9.15m is an absolutely paltry sum in comparison.

The SANFL on their own have entirely funded the rest of Footy Park.

So choppy shove your parochial bias up your arse, and get Mark Dawson to beg or steal your money from somewhere else. Or alternatively, you still haven't told us why Kangaroos shouldn't come and play some home games in SA to earn their way out of trouble.

 

[Macca19]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Beyond a joke

Originally posted by choppy


So Port are paying of the licence fee. Sorry, after reading the article in The Adelaide Advertisor on June 23 1998 I got the wrong impression.

And I quote

PORT Adelaide will have the first $1m of its $4 million AFL licence fee paid by the SANFL.

The nine league clubs last night picked up the Power's tab, as they did for the Crows in 1991.These off-field bonuses will open the door for Port to build modern training and administration facilities at Alberton for the 2000 season.

The club will also have a $500,000 grant from the AFL ~ money gleaned from Channel Seven's bid for television rights from 2002

I bet that $500,000 grant from the AFL came in handy. Oh I am mistaken you payed for those palatial gyms by yourself.

Gee, I must get my facts straight.

yeah you must. Ports gym was built with the moeny given by Allan Scott...the big wig at Scotts Transport...hence the name of the gym is called the Allan Scott Gymnasium