Freo's profits fly through the roof

[Crippa]

The wheelbarrows full of cash have been counted and it's good to hear we've been been raking it in, with a whopping $400,000 of Freo's $650,000 total profit earned on the back of finals:

• Fremantle's annual turnover will exceed $50 million this year for the first time.
• Although some Victorian clubs recorded greater turnover than Fremantle - Geelong ($56 million), Carlton (57 million), Essendon ($63 million), Hawthorn ($64 million) and Collingwood ($75 million) - "for some clubs gaming revenues are now up to 30 per cent of their total revenues. We are very proud that we don't have any gaming revenues," Rosich said.
• Fremantle are expecting a profit of $650,000. That's $400,000 more than the $250,000 we budgeted for.
• Rosich said the extra profit was due to a boom in the finals series during which the Dockers sold $1 million of merchandise in three weeks.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/20084156/freo-purple-patch-on-and-off-the-field/

 

[BananaOnTheRun]

So the $4.8M that we've dished off to the WAFC, would that ordinarily be profit or is there some kind of tricksy accounting matrix involved?

 

[go_the_dockers]

a record contribution to the WA Football Commission of more than $4.8 million.

If we pay for WA football, who pays for the Vic Football? The AFL or Vic clubs?

 

[estibador]

And it's all thanks to the sexy rebranded merchandise!

But seriously, Ross Lyon's contract is paying for itself already. Pretty impressive effort for a club that doesn't leach off gambling addicts and who pays for the development of draftees for every other club.

 

[estibador]

If we pay for WA football, who pays for the Vic Football? The AFL or Vic clubs?

The AFL, while the Victorian clubs put 100% of their profits back into their clubs.

We're fighting with one hand tied behind our backs.

 

[bkozican]

The AFL, while the Victorian clubs put 100% of their profits back into their clubs.

We're fighting with one hand tied behind our backs.

Great news for the dockers.
It has always been that way here in the west.

 

[theGav56]

I have to say $650k profit on a $50mill business seems to be cutting it fin to me. But it is a footy club not a profit making business.

 

[estibador]

I have to say $650k profit on a $50mill business seems to be cutting it fin to me. But it is a footy club not a profit making business.

Like they say, turnover is a more important indicator for AFL clubs than profit.

As Rosich alludes to, there's a heavy correlation between the money you can spend on drafting/development and finals appearances.

 

[greatgatsby]

I have to say $650k profit on a $50mill business seems to be cutting it fin to me. But it is a footy club not a profit making business.

Exactly. This is more of a not-for-profit industry. Certainly, no sane person would invest in it with their own cash!

 

[Crippa]

So the $4.8M that we've dished off to the WAFC, would that ordinarily be profit or is there some kind of tricksy accounting matrix involved?

If the $4.8 million given to WAFC would ordinarily be profit, it puts into perspective Collingwood's profit figure of $5.2 million which the AFL media have been marvelling at as something unheard of.

 

[BananaOnTheRun]

If the $4.8 million given to WAFC would ordinarily be profit, it puts into perspective Collingwood's profit figure of $5.2 million which the AFL media have been marvelling at as something unheard of.

Yep, to a degree. Their footy department spending would be more than ours. If they're operating on $70M turnover and we're $50M but we've got about the same profits, then they're putting $20M extra into something that we're not.

 

[yakka man]

It gets said every year but it's disgraceful how both WA clubs fund WA footy by themselves only to have the majority of WA footy players join interstate clubs. It's about time the AFL chipped in to WA Footy.

 

[go_the_dockers]

If the $4.8 million given to WAFC would ordinarily be profit, it puts into perspective Collingwood's profit figure of $5.2 million which the AFL media have been marvelling at as something unheard of.

Except Collingwood invest the money in a pub or hotel, while we pay WA.

If we invested the money everyyear our turn over would be closer to 70m.

 

[Dockernut]

Saaaaweeeet!! Love the cashola. I thought about all the merch we must have sold when I gazed down upon a sea of purple in Fed Square. Rain those dollarios!! Whoop!

 

[basashi]

Never support an AFL club with pokies! !

 

[Seppo]

Exactly. This is more of a not-for-profit industry. Certainly, no sane person would invest in it with their own cash!

I do.

I actually invest MONEY and TIME, the rewards are worth it.

 

[Rob]

If the $4.8 million given to WAFC would ordinarily be profit, it puts into perspective Collingwood's profit figure of $5.2 million which the AFL media have been marvelling at as something unheard of.

Just over $3 million of that amount would be rent paid to the WAFC for Subi Oval. The rest would ordinarily be profit.

 

[Bender571]

Yep, to a degree. Their footy department spending would be more than ours. If they're operating on $70M turnover and we're $50M but we've got about the same profits, then they're putting $20M extra into something that we're not.

A fair chunk of that would be pokies. For 2012 their "social club and gaming" revenue was $19.8 million and their "social club/gaming expenses" were $15.3 million.

Using the figure for club revenue above and subtracting the pokies revenue from this article, the revenue ladder looks more like this;

Collingwood; $61.8 million
Hawthorn; $52.7 million
Essendon; $51 million
Freo; $50 million
Geelong; $46.4 million
Carlton; $37.8 million

 

[Admiral Byng]

We should spend the money on a stronger roof.

 

[greatgatsby]

I do.

I actually invest MONEY and TIME, the rewards are worth it.

What are you describing as your money investment - membership fees?

 

[Arcassius]

^ and flights, accomodation, additional events (like the doig)

 

[couldhavebeen]

Except Collingwood invest the money in a pub or hotel, while we pay WA.

If we invested the money everyyear our turn over would be closer to 70m.

Collingwood where a basket case because of the financial disaster buying the hotels was .
They lost millions .

 

[estibador]

^ and flights, accomodation, additional events (like the doig)

...and buying new TVs after you throw your remote through the last one.

 

[fabulousphil]

The reason why football is so strong at community level is because the Dockers and Eagles pay for it, and that was precisely the idea when they were set up and owned by the WAFC

The AFL pays for auskick Australia wide, the WAFC does not, but make grants to clubs, run clinics, fund rep teams, etc etc from Auskick up.

The Dockers will build up a big warchest just as the Eagles have done, but it will take a while longer.

I think the WAFC has done a good job, and football in this state is in a better position because of it.

 

[estibador]

Just over $3 million of that amount would be rent paid to the WAFC for Subi Oval. The rest would ordinarily be profit.

That's not as bad then, I always assumed that $3mill had already come out of the operating costs before the WAFL dividend got paid.

Anyone know how much the Vic clubs pay to rent their stadiums?