Dockers Record Profit Again

[Frank J Moose]

We're operating in the same market as West Coast...they're our yard stick. They haven't released for 2015 yet; but 2014 was over 4m. After giving the around the $6m to WAFC. That there is a powerhouse (I'm afraid)

And what will they spend it on? With the spending cap on football departments there is little you can do.

We move into our new premises in 2017. The Eagles don't even have full approval for Lathlain Park yet or the funding approved.

 

[scon]

Despite the obscenely large footballing and marketing advantages they were gifted by the big end of town before we were permitted to form.
The days of them being our yard stick are barely a memory.

 

[DannyTheDoorman]

Sack Bond...
No KPP's...
Fans adore mediocrity...
Pencil necked sycophants....
Pavlich is a cooked Croat....
Dawson is a shell back not a full back...
Lyon can never win a Premiership cos he doesn't understand the game....
Club has the laziest skipper in the AFL...
Club has no culture and the Steves destroyed its heritage...
Hill is a spineless jellyback...
Danyle has sold compromising photos of RTB to Suban,De Boer and Dawson...
It began when they didn't recruit Lloyd and McCleod....
McManus was talentless White Gum Valley trash...
The list of embarassment is infinite...


Ah sollee wong fwed.......

Great Work mate.

 

[Kram]

Sack Bond...
No KPP's...
Fans adore mediocrity...
Pencil necked sycophants....
Pavlich is a cooked Croat....
Dawson is a shell back not a full back...
Lyon can never win a Premiership cos he doesn't understand the game....
Club has the laziest skipper in the AFL...
Club has no culture and the Steves destroyed its heritage...
Hill is a spineless jellyback...
Danyle has sold compromising photos of RTB to Suban,De Boer and Dawson...
It began when they didn't recruit Lloyd and McCleod....
McManus was talentless White Gum Valley trash...
The list of embarassment is infinite...


Ah sollee wong fwed.......

We deserve it.

 

[AstonSouffle]

Best is yet to come as well

 

[hotchips81]

And what will they spend it on? With the spending cap on football departments there is little you can do.

We move into our new premises in 2017. The Eagles don't even have full approval for Lathlain Park yet or the funding approved.

Clubs can go over the cap; it's just that they will pay a tax for doing so. It's not like the salary cap where there is shame or non monetary penalties in doing so. Over time, clubs will weigh up whether the competitive advantage from a certain spend is worth the tax, and in certain circumstances spend right ahead.

In any case, capital developments (ie lathlain and Cockburn) are outside of the footy soft caps, hence clubs can spend what they want on this. Last I read west coast had received federal funding and AFL funding, state funding was around the corner...and from last years accounts they have over $50m in the there own bank account. I think that they might be okay.

 

[Tazmania]

Grat to make a profit and all that and I belive the Eagles profit is better than our due to them having a better legal arrangement regarding retention of profit rather than giving it to the parent body....but the question I have is what the hell do these clubs actually need profit for?

If they pay the players, coaches and staff well, maintain or invest in facilities (which we're currently doing) and give to grassroots footy then what is a profit actually to achieve? We don't have shareholders to give it out to?

Surely the Dockers and Eagles are meant to be non-profit organisations...does this mean we're actually being overcharged for the things we buy from them?

 

[HowieD]

Grat to make a profit and all that and I belive the Eagles profit is better than our due to them having a better legal arrangement regarding retention of profit rather than giving it to the parent body....but the question I have is what the hell do these clubs actually need profit for?

If they pay the players, coaches and staff well, maintain or invest in facilities (which we're currently doing) and give to grassroots footy then what is a profit actually to achieve? We don't have shareholders to give it out to?

Surely the Dockers and Eagles are meant to be non-profit organisations...does this mean we're actually being overcharged for the things we buy from them?

Profits are great. The profit the club has made this year will be utilised for things in years to come. Whether that is state of the art equipment for the new training facility, an extra scout or two, or investment in facilities down at Peel, this year's profits will allow Fremantle to build a war chest to target specific future requirements which will give us an edge on our competitors. Doing this consistently means that these edges are not cyclical in nature, and are continuously ongoing and able to be achieved. Sustainability is the word. Sustainable success and improvement.

 

[salim malik]

We're operating in the same market as West Coast...they're our yard stick. They haven't released for 2015 yet; but 2014 was over 4m. After giving the around the $6m to WAFC. That there is a powerhouse (I'm afraid)

So great for WA Football,2 powerhouse clubs. West Coast have had a few years start .

 

[salim malik]

Clubs can go over the cap; it's just that they will pay a tax for doing so. It's not like the salary cap where there is shame or non monetary penalties in doing so. Over time, clubs will weigh up whether the competitive advantage from a certain spend is worth the tax, and in certain circumstances spend right ahead.

In any case, capital developments (ie lathlain and Cockburn) are outside of the footy soft caps, hence clubs can spend what they want on this. Last I read west coast had received federal funding and AFL funding, state funding was around the corner...and from last years accounts they have over $50m in the there own bank account. I think that they might be okay.

Wouldn't this be better on West Coasts board. This thread is about Fremantle. That 50 mill WC have will be gobbled up by their Lathlain project .They have not received any funds .It will be a go it alone project.

 

[hotchips81]

Wouldn't this be better on West Coasts board. This thread is about Fremantle. That 50 mill WC have will be gobbled up by their Lathlain project .They have not received any funds .It will be a go it alone project.

Just doing a comparison before we get too carried away with own performance. Bringing a bit of balance to the discussion if that's allowed on the board?
The Steve's still have a long way to go. But, have certainly put us on the right path.
You're also not correct RE funds.

 

[scon]

Fremantle Dockers 'hungry years' are over


Must've missed the bit where people were getting 'too carried away' which makes it difficult to follow the claim to be 'bringing a bit of balance' with the peculiar innuendo that this may not be permitted.
Hardly a meaningful comparison given the utterly contrasting conditions under which each club was established.
I have also met several ex Eagles supporters who despise the blind focus on corporate avarice championed by those up the road,some of whom now support Freo and and others who truly hope that Chickyyyy drops a truck load of manure on the cynically corrupt governance so deeply embedded in 'the yard stick' and moral compass for football in WA.
Our on and off field transformation is a success story whether compared with others or not.
As has been said this is not really the thread's topic so I'll leave it at that.

 

[salim malik]

Just doing a comparison before we get too carried away with own performance. Bringing a bit of balance to the discussion if that's allowed on the board?
The Steve's still have a long way to go. But, have certainly put us on the right path.
You're also not correct RE funds.

Please pass on info where WC are receiving Govt funds. It was reported that because Lathlain was not community based they would get nothing. Have not read where this has changed. Please explain why the Steves have a long way to go.

 

[Frank J Moose]

The eagles are getting some federal funds given the number of times Steve Irons has appeared in the local paper at Lathlain Park in photo opportunities. (usually with an Eagle or two) The lack of community facilties has meant the state funds required for the development are not forthcoming.

 

[hotchips81]

Please pass on info where WC are receiving Govt funds. It was reported that because Lathlain was not community based they would get nothing. Have not read where this has changed. Please explain why the Steves have a long way to go.

http://m.westcoasteagles.com.au/news/2015-08-22/lathlain-boost

Federal above.

State funding being worked through in view of the community aspect you refer too and which has been reported. But it would be naive to think they won't get support.

Afl already chipped in (as they did for us)

The Steve's got Ross; so they will forever get a tick in my book. But off the field, we've still got big commercial strides to make in my opinion.

 

[salim malik]

http://m.westcoasteagles.com.au/news/2015-08-22/lathlain-boost

Federal above.

State funding being worked through in view of the community aspect you refer too and which has been reported. But it would be naive to think they won't get support.

Afl already chipped in (as they did for us)

The Steve's got Ross; so they will forever get a tick in my book. But off the field, we've still got big commercial strides to make in my opinion. i didn't say the right ppl wernt in place to help us take those strides.

Are not Freo one of the AFL leaders in sponsorship? Surely that is giant strides from the past stuff ups.

 

[theGav56]

Bank account balances get built over time and accrue from ongoing successful management. Personally I don't think we need to compare the size of our bank account to anyone else. What we need/have is ongoing successful management.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

Getting excited about our present results without considering historical performance is nonsense. The fact is that the Steves came together in 2008 and perpetrated a poorly implemented re-branding exercise that alienated our supporter base and saw us take a hit to our membership that we didn't recover from until 2013. If they had handled that period of our history a lot better then we would be in a far greater position than we are now.

 

[Clems Knee]

Getting excited about our present results without considering historical performance is nonsense. The fact is that the Steves came together in 2008 and perpetrated a poorly implemented re-branding exercise that alienated our supporter base and saw us take a hit to our membership that we didn't recover from until 2013. If they had handled that period of our history a lot better then we would be in a far greater position than we are now.

Fact? I don't think so.

Poorly implemented re-branding exercise - opinion.
Alienated our supporter base - false. Alienated some of our supporter base - fact.
Saw us take a hit to our membership - opinion. Might also have something to do with our performance at the time.
If they had handled that period of our history a lot better... - opinion, and untestable. Perhaps the change in branding ultimately recruited more fans. Perhaps not. We can't rewind and do it again.

 

[Reginald Perrin]

Fact? I don't think so.

That's your opinion.

Poorly implemented re-branding exercise - opinion.

Fact. The "engagement" with members was botched as was the supply of new merchandise.

Alienated our supporter base - false. Alienated some of our supporter base - fact.

You're dancing around the issue here. Alienating some of our supporter base is still alienating our supporter base. It resulted in the most significant drop in membership in our history.

Saw us take a hit to our membership - opinion. Might also have something to do with our performance at the time.

Not opinion at all, the figures don't lie. Claiming it had something to do with our performance at the time completely ignores historical evidence that our membership numbers have generally grown in spite of poor performances.

If they had handled that period of our history a lot better... - opinion, and untestable. Perhaps the change in branding ultimately recruited more fans. Perhaps not. We can't rewind and do it again.

No, we can't rewind the damage. More's the pity. It's a pretty easy exercise to chart the numbers and extrapolate the data though. We could easily be 10,000 members stronger by now.

 

[holy diver]

Getting excited about our present results without considering historical performance is nonsense. The fact is that the Steves came together in 2008 and perpetrated a poorly implemented re-branding exercise that alienated our supporter base and saw us take a hit to our membership that we didn't recover from until 2013. If they had handled that period of our history a lot better then we would be in a far greater position than we are now.

Reg, stop obsessing.

Be happy - you'll live longer.

The highlighted section is impossible to prove either way. The famous protest walk from the train station never amounted to shit.

 

[Rob]

Grat to make a profit and all that and I belive the Eagles profit is better than our due to them having a better legal arrangement regarding retention of profit rather than giving it to the parent body....but the question I have is what the hell do these clubs actually need profit for?

If they pay the players, coaches and staff well, maintain or invest in facilities (which we're currently doing) and give to grassroots footy then what is a profit actually to achieve? We don't have shareholders to give it out to?

Surely the Dockers and Eagles are meant to be non-profit organisations...does this mean we're actually being overcharged for the things we buy from them?

Rest assured all of it will go back into the club eventually. The reality is that football is an arms race, and if you can build up a war chest when the going is good, then you can spend it when the going is bad, or alternatively when you need to invest in modern sports technology.

TBH, Reg has a point here. We probably should be putting away a couple of million a year given the number of wins in the last few seasons.

 

[Kram]

Getting excited about our present results without considering historical performance is nonsense. The fact is that the Steves came together in 2008 and perpetrated a poorly implemented re-branding exercise that alienated our supporter base and saw us take a hit to our membership that we didn't recover from until 2013. If they had handled that period of our history a lot better then we would be in a far greater position than we are now.

I know you don't like the Steve's but you can't be serious.

 

[Righteo]

Getting excited about our present results without considering historical performance is nonsense. The fact is that the Steves came together in 2008 and perpetrated a poorly implemented re-branding exercise that alienated our supporter base and saw us take a hit to our membership that we didn't recover from until 2013. If they had handled that period of our history a lot better then we would be in a far greater position than we are now.

From my experience it alienated only a very small but vocal minority, you're attributing too much of our membership drop (which at 1057 isn't exactly the mass exodus you're intimating it was) to re-branding rather than the fact that 2011 was a disaster on field. The money we lost has been recouped tenfold from merchandise sales anyway.

 

[Clems Knee]

I found the membership figures, Reginald Perrin
In 2008, the only indication we had that there may be a rebranding was a survey put out to members. You really think that was responsible for the drop in numbers in 2009? Of course not, that's absurd. We were rebuilding and had little prospect of team success.
The new uniform came about at the end of the 2010 season. Amazingly the alienated supporter base increased by almost 3000 in 2011. So much for your facts. Of course it's more likely that it had something to do with winning a final in 2010.

Year Membership Numbers
2014 48,000*
2013 43,880
2012 42,918
2011 42,762
2010 39,854
2009 39,206
2008 43,366
2007 43,343
2006 35,666
2005 34,178
2004 32,780
2003 25,368
2002 23,775
2001 23,898
2000 24,925
1999 24,896
1998 22,186
1997 19,949
1996 19,622
1995 18,456