Roast Dear Customers (The I’ve lost my faith in KT thread)

Start the clean out?

  • Sack him

    Votes: 6 18.2%
  • SACK HIM!!!

    Votes: 14 42.4%
  • Jack Watts is more Port Adelaide than you

    Votes: 26 78.8%

  • Total voters
    33

Remove this Banner Ad

That Norwood jumper has no right to be there!

Agreed it's total BS, but I can recall when we traded for Nathan Lonie in Oct of one year and a pic of him wearing his hawks jumper was left on the club's official player list on its own website for more than 5 months, and was only changed about 2 weeks before the start of the next season. :thumbsdown:

It was amateur hour, and as much as we like to take the p*ss out of the wobblers there is no way their ceo would be shown with eg a carlton or richmond jumper on his desk, or any player in an oppo guernsy on their website pics, regardless of where they got him from.
 
There's also been a lot of 'talk' around that we are hemorrhaging money hand over fist with a very poor fiscal outlook

Is there any truth to these rumours ?

Realistically not a lot has changed from last year
Membership is down a little but still OK
China game by all accounts broke even / made a small profit
OAK still major and a good mix of minor sponsors
Crowd figures are OK

What's changed if anything ?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

There's also been a lot of 'talk' around that we are hemorrhaging money hand over fist with a very poor fiscal outlook

Is there any truth to these rumours ?

Realistically not a lot has changed from last year
Membership is down a little but still OK
China game by all accounts broke even / made a small profit
OAK still major and a good mix of minor sponsors
Crowd figures are OK

What's changed if anything ?

I've bought much less merch this year (in fact, just stuff for the grandchildren). I know that's but a drop in the bucket, but if thousands of members are doing the same, it makes a difference. And I can't imagine a casual fan finding much in this season's performances to make a beeline to Queen St for a new 2019 guernsey. Which you can't even buy, but let's not go there.
 
Fair call

So likely just a ruse to hold back any meaningful change

Seems about right
Club is struggling on the $'s.... now is not the time for change
Club is holding it's own in difficult times.... now is not the time for change
Club is going well.... now is not the time for change

Sooo when is it time for change?

Certainly not now, we need stable leadership.
 
I've bought much less merch this year (in fact, just stuff for the grandchildren). I know that's but a drop in the bucket, but if thousands of members are doing the same, it makes a difference. And I can't imagine a casual fan finding much in this season's performances to make a beeline to Queen St for a new 2019 guernsey. Which you can't even buy, but let's not go there.
As I posted a few weeks back on why we can't afford to keep Hinkley ^ was part of my argument.
The 5k down in membership and let's be very conservative @ roughly $500 a member lost equals $2.5m.
Ken is on what 800k/yr? so it seems like simple arithmetic to a simpleton like me. Dump the car hunt I tells ya it makes cents
 
Last edited:
As I posted a few weeks back on why we can't afford to keep Hinkley ^ was part of my argument.
The 5k down in membership and let's be very conservative @ roughly $500 a member lost equals $2.5m.
Ken is on what 800k/yr? so it seems like simple arithmetic to a simpleton like me. Dump the car hunt I tells ya it makes cents
If we pay him out we don’t have the money to pay a new good coach.
 
Rumors of fearsome debt are supposed to make people conservative and accepting of mediocre but stable governance

Yep. It's all part of the massaging of supporters expectations downwards.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

In Google Images, that Keith Thomas photograph is connected to this Advertiser article from 2013.

It doesn't make his recent dismissal of the Prison Bar guernsey any better, of course.


Ok, my mistake.

It was re-used earlier this year in an article about the Prison Bar guernsey.

Still, the point holds.
 
As I posted a few weeks back on why we can't afford to keep Hinkley ^ was part of my argument.
The 5k down in membership and let's be very conservative @ roughly $500 a member lost equals $2.5m.
Ken is on what 800k/yr? so it seems like simple arithmetic to a simpleton like me. Dump the car hunt I tells ya it makes cents
$500 is a bit high for the average membership. Also, you need to look at profit/membership, no revenue. i.e. how much is the club keeping as a profit for each membership. If that was, as an example, $100/membership, a loss of 5,000 memberships translates into $500k profit lost.
 
Yep. It's all part of the massaging of supporters expectations downwards.
Same tactic used to justify conservative policies.
So annoying that it keeps working.
 
We just have to wait. Because Richmond.

Well, they can't exactly use the 'Bomber Thompson was almost sacked and look what happened when they had faith' line anymore.
So yeah, its Richmond now.
 
Check out the placement of the Norwood guernsey in this photo, for a story on the importance of the PBs to the PAFC, taken in his office as the CEO of PAFC.

View attachment 701020


Unfarkenforgivable.

Kudos to the commemorative Vintage Port with Tim Evans' head on it.
 
$500 is a bit high for the average membership. Also, you need to look at profit/membership, no revenue. i.e. how much is the club keeping as a profit for each membership. If that was, as an example, $100/membership, a loss of 5,000 memberships translates into $500k profit lost.

It’s also not just the missing payment of the flat membership. It’s the loss of the premiership fund contributions, matchday spend at AO (inc. impulsive merchandise purchases) and increasing consequences of general disconnect.

ie, I’ve been to the club once in the past 2 years.

In the dark days of 2011/12, let alone the upswing/promise of 2013-2015, I was there all the time.
 
$500 is a bit high for the average membership. Also, you need to look at profit/membership, no revenue. i.e. how much is the club keeping as a profit for each membership. If that was, as an example, $100/membership, a loss of 5,000 memberships translates into $500k profit lost.
Yep I think that is closer to the mark, although it is the first time I have seen 5000 members- the data seems to indicate 3000 members.
I'd also weight higher than $100 and put it somwhere between $100-$300 maximum.
I have no reason other than gut feel for that range.
3000 x $100 = $300000
3000 x $300 = $900000
Let's take the midpoint: $600000
Similar answer, different method.
 
$500 is a bit high for the average membership. Also, you need to look at profit/membership, no revenue. i.e. how much is the club keeping as a profit for each membership. If that was, as an example, $100/membership, a loss of 5,000 memberships translates into $500k profit lost.
Yep its way to high. At the AGM Koch has shown a graph where we get about $11m revenue from membership. But we are too scared to publish the figure and get publicly bench marked.

From the 8,000 AO Football members 2,250 we count in our audited figures, and 5,750 the crows get to count in theirs, we only get $50 for full members and less for concessions and juniors.

We have about 6,000 junior members where we would get $50 or less ie non access kids and the Auskickers counted last year for the first time.

So the remaining 45,000 members would produce about $10.2m of that $11m.
 
The failure to get a 2nd joint major sponsor over the last few years should be the end of KT.

Enough of this making the community proud crap.

The first order of business of a footy club is to win games. We have completely lost sight of that.

He and Koch will never admit that they made a mistake in reappointing Hinkley.

The rumours about the financial position are true. No matter what type of creative accounting the club comes up with will mask the facts that the club is in strife.
 
Back
Top