Current Club Debts?

[Ad76]

I've been looking for some info for a while on AFL clubs current debt levels but havent been able to find a definitive list anywhere.

The most recent references that i found put Melbourne on about 1.2 Million and Port on about 3.5

I havent seen a recent figure for Calrton, North or the Bullies. Info on those and any other clubs that are carrying debt would be appreciated.

Cheers,
Ad

 

[Reveler]

wait till the end of the year and most should release annual statements.

 

[Zvim]

Financial year ends 31 October, so current year is unknown.

Last year our total liabilities were $6.2m down from $8m the year before and total assets were $7.5m up from $3.2m the year before.

Of that debt only $3.25m was interest bearing and that was reduced from $4.34m the year before.

 

[Ad76]

Financial year ends 31 October, so current year is unknown.

Last year our total liabilities were $6.2m down from $8m the year before and total assets were $7.5m up from $3.2m the year before.

Of that debt only $3.25m was interest bearing and that was reduced from $4.34m the year before.

Thanks mate, last years figure works fine - just looking for rough figures.

Any other clubs figures from last year also greatly appreciated.

 

[pricefixer]

Carlton still hasn't played the AFL back the $1.5M interest free loan they begged for a few years back. Swan has said their club can't pay it, yet somehow they are able to afford the money for Judd to pay a salary that puts them over a salary cap - except for some devious accounting.

 

[Goobernutty]

Two years ago Melbourne had a debt of $5 million, then Jim Stynes introduced Debt Demolition Month, we raised $3 million last year & $800,000 this year, so $1.2 million sounds correct.

 

[Dez!]

Two years ago Melbourne had a debt of $5 million, then Jim Stynes introduced Debt Demolition Month, we raised $3 million last year & $800,000 this year, so $1.2 million sounds correct.

To knock off $3.8 million of a $5 million debt in 2 years is excellent, hopefully we can get debt free by the end of next season.

 

[mediumsizered]

Carlton still hasn't played the AFL back the $1.5M interest free loan they begged for a few years back. Swan has said their club can't pay it, yet somehow they are able to afford the money for Judd to pay a salary that puts them over a salary cap - except for some devious accounting.

The interest free loan is now an interest bearing loan. Once the deadline for repayment was reached the club advised it would not be able to repay the loan & it was therefore converted to an interest bearing loan.

Your comment about the club being able to pay Judd but not repay the loan, equally applies to all clubs who are carrying some debt, as they are all paying approx $7m in player payments rather than paying off debts. The reality is that all clubs must pay a minimum TPP under the AFL rules, so even if a club wanted to focus on paying off their debt (I'm not sure that would be smart business), they still have to pay x-amount of dollars under the TPP rules.

As for the salary cap implications of Judd's salary, that has been signed off by the AFL. If you have any issues with Judd's salary & the salary cap, take it up with the AFL.

 

[A Living God]

Interest Bearing debts from 2008 annual reports
Collingwood - $13.1m
Carlton - $5.2m
Port Adelaide - $5m
North Melbourne - $3.25m
Brisbane - $1.2m
Hawthorn - $500k
Essendon - $0

 

[DanA]

Interest Bearing debts from 2008 annual reports
Collingwood - $13.1m
Carlton - $5.2m
Port Adelaide - $5m
North Melbourne - $3.25m
Brisbane - $1.2m
Hawthorn - $500k
Essendon - $0

Collingwood had the whole pub thing though which was an anomoly and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be so high anymore.

 

[Zvim]

Collingwood had the whole pub thing though which was an anomoly and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be so high anymore.

I thought they bought the pubs because they were cashed up.

 

[Plogs]

The interest free loan is now an interest bearing loan. Once the deadline for repayment was reached the club advised it would not be able to repay the loan & it was therefore converted to an interest bearing loan.

As for the salary cap implications of Judd's salary, that has been signed off by the AFL. If you have any issues with Judd's salary & the salary cap, take it up with the AFL.

Of course the AFL will sanction this. Why on earth would they block one of the "poster" players ?

 

[Zvim]

Would be interesting to see how much of the TPP Cap Carlton pay. From memory I thought North were restricted and not allowed to pay the full cap while in debt to the AFL. Is that the case for Carlton?

We don't owe the AFL anything.

You are confused about the old CBF rules which only existed for 2 or 3 years, back when the Doggies and Demons were the first to go on the CBF. That doesn't exist anymore and what is given now in the SDF is more for compensation for stadium deal inequities.

It is not much of a compensation, we generated $10m or so in revenue at TD, the average stadium return is 75%, we got effectively nothing so in effect we paid $7.5m off of an AFL debt and received $1.4m in compensation. Great deal.

 

[DanA]

I thought they bought the pubs because they were cashed up.

Eg:
Guy A borrows 1 m for a 2 m dollar house
Guy B borrows 500k for a 1m dollar house

Guess who's richer?

 

[A Living God]

Eg:
Guy A borrows 1 m for a 2 m dollar house
Guy B borrows 500k for a 1m dollar house

Guess who's richer?

Obviously Guy A

 

[Rioli magic]

We don't owe the AFL anything.

You are confused about the old CBF rules which only existed for 2 or 3 years, back when the Doggies and Demons were the first to go on the CBF. That doesn't exist anymore and what is given now in the SDF is more for compensation for stadium deal inequities.

It is not much of a compensation, we generated $10m or so in revenue at TD, the average stadium return is 75%, we got effectively nothing so in effect we paid $7.5m off of an AFL debt and received $1.4m in compensation. Great deal.

Thanks yeah that's a great deal! Ridiculous. And you can't sell a game to Subi because of the "intergrity" of the "fixture". I was thinking of a few years ago I didn't mean you currently owe the AFL, obviously the CBF rules I had in mind.

 

[markr]

Thanks mate, last years figure works fine - just looking for rough figures.

Any other clubs figures from last year also greatly appreciated.

The annual report for each club should be on their website somewhere. Hawthorn's is here: http://www.hawthornfc.com.au/annual report/tabid/4842/default.aspx for example.

 

[mediumsizered]

Of course the AFL will sanction this. Why on earth would they block one of the "poster" players ?

So you would have us believe the AFL would actually allow our club to breach TPP rules in the name of having Judd paid x-amount of dollars? You are talking about the same AFL who fined our club just under $1m for breaching TPP rules. Surely the AFL could have said no & forced Carlton to pull out of the Judd deal & allow him to go to one of the other 3 clubs (including yours) that were in the running for him.

Don't kid yourself that the AFL would do our club any favours.

 

[Zvim]

Eg:
Guy A borrows 1 m for a 2 m dollar house
Guy B borrows 500k for a 1m dollar house

Guess who's richer?

They aren't buying housing, they are purchasing income generating assets with commercial business loans.

They are probably looking at 8-9% for a business loan, you also have inflation on average around 3%. You need to be earning a significant return just to be better off than just leaving your money in the bank, combined in capital growth and annual profit.

The problem was, Collingwood wasn't getting that kind of return, not in terms of annual return and definitely not in capital growth, which is why it got to the point it had.

There would have been a significantly lower amount required if they didn't have business loan in addition to pay off. Assuming you are paying 15% of your loan amount per annum (on a loan of $1m) and are looking at 8% interest rate then over the 10 year term you would have forked out close to $500k in interest alone. That puts significant pressure on profitability especially when you factor after 10 years inflation on $1m is equivalent to $1.3m, it is quite easy to have your effective profit margin vanish unless the growth/return is significant when you are borrowing for that investment.

 

[re cat]

Geelong paying for a new grandstand.

 

[DanA]

They aren't buying housing, they are purchasing income generating assets with commercial business loans.

They are probably looking at 8-9% for a business loan, you also have inflation on average around 3%. You need to be earning a significant return just to be better off than just leaving your money in the bank, combined in capital growth and annual profit.

The problem was, Collingwood wasn't getting that kind of return, not in terms of annual return and definitely not in capital growth, which is why it got to the point it had.

There would have been a significantly lower amount required if they didn't have business loan in addition to pay off. Assuming you are paying 15% of your loan amount per annum (on a loan of $1m) and are looking at 8% interest rate then over the 10 year term you would have forked out close to $500k in interest alone. That puts significant pressure on profitability especially when you factor after 10 years inflation on $1m is equivalent to $1.3m, it is quite easy to have your effective profit margin vanish unless the growth/return is significant when you are borrowing for that investment.

So many assumptions in your post that it's rediculously irrelevant. All i'm pointing out is Collingwood may be carry more debt but the figure is irrelevant in isolation. Particularly so when we know they had a number of highly leveraged assets (the pubs) that have since been sold.

 

[AlecDuncan]

Geelong paying for a new grandstand.

Dogs, Carlton, North and maybe even Richmond & St.Kilda are also building new facilities at their respective grounds - so that would cloud figures for most of the Melbourne clubs.

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

Obviously Guy A

Not if Guy A borrowed 1 mil to buy a 2 mil house that he then sold for 800k a few years later ...

 

[SirJimi05]

From memory Essendon has $0 in debts and approx $10,000,000 in cash reserves.

All of the renovations to our clubs and facilites were done using our own cash.

We don't own many pubs though.

 

[blue judd]

So many assumptions in your post that it's rediculously irrelevant. All i'm pointing out is Collingwood may be carry more debt but the figure is irrelevant in isolation. Particularly so when we know they had a number of highly leveraged assets (the pubs) that have since been sold.

Do a bit of research and i think you wil find they have not sold all of those bad debts..