Mike "C-Bomb" Fitzpatrick

[The_Reaper]

I have a hypothetical for you:

Say you're a decent Victorian player with a young family looking to get into the housing market.

Sydney come to you and offer you $400k/yr to move away from home for 3 seasons plus the standard $40k COLA.

Geelong also approach you and offer you $410k/yr for 3 seasons.

The median house price in Geelong is $450k. The price of the same sized house in a similar proximity in Sydney is $1.1 million. Assuming an interest rate of 5%, on which offer will you be financially better off at the end of your contract?

Don't worry, Im not expecting an answer anytime soon.

So since the housing price isn't identical in Sydney, Melbourne, Perth, Geelong and Adelaide why is it that only the Sydney teams got a different salary cap?

And if you're on a footballers wage buying a house in Sydney is a financial advantage compared to Geelong because the value of houses in Sydney is increasing faster and you don't have to pay capital gains tax on the family home

 

[telsor]

I have a hypothetical for you:

Say you're a decent Victorian player with a young family looking to get into the housing market.

Sydney come to you and offer you $400k/yr to move away from home for 3 seasons plus the standard $40k COLA.

Geelong also approach you and offer you $410k/yr for 3 seasons.

The median house price in Geelong is $450k. The price of the same sized house in a similar proximity in Sydney is $1.1 million. Assuming an interest rate of 5%, on which offer will you be financially better off at the end of your contract?

Don't worry, Im not expecting an answer anytime soon.

OK, one for you.

That equivilent house costs
$1M in Perth
$800K-1M in Melb (depending on club)
$600K in Adelaide & Brisbane

Now explain to me why is Sydney the only one that gets a cost of living adjustment?

 

[Starburns_]

A 'flog'? Sounds like Fitzpatrick's response was entirely warranted.

I have a hypothetical for you:

Say you're a decent Victorian player with a young family looking to get into the housing market.

Sydney come to you and offer you $400k/yr to move away from home for 3 seasons plus the standard $40k COLA.

Geelong also approach you and offer you $410k/yr for 3 seasons.

The median house price in Geelong is $450k. The price of the same sized house in a similar proximity in Sydney is $1.1 million. Assuming an interest rate of 5%, on which offer will you be financially better off at the end of your contract?

Don't worry, Im not expecting an answer anytime soon.

Yeah, it's better financially, but the trade-off is you have to live in Geelong.

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

I have a hypothetical for you:

Say you're a decent Victorian player with a young family looking to get into the housing market.

Sydney come to you and offer you $400k/yr to move away from home for 3 seasons plus the standard $40k COLA.

Geelong also approach you and offer you $410k/yr for 3 seasons.

The median house price in Geelong is $450k. The price of the same sized house in a similar proximity in Sydney is $1.1 million. Assuming an interest rate of 5%, on which offer will you be financially better off at the end of your contract?

Don't worry, Im not expecting an answer anytime soon.

Why is it that only the Swans need cola?

No A league side needs cola nor does any big bash side.

It was an AFL sanctioned bouns in order for sydney to get galactico style signings and to create a bigger market presence.

 

[kneecapper]

OK, one for you.

That equivilent house costs
$1M in Perth
$800K-1M in Melb (depending on club)
$600K in Adelaide & Brisbane

Now explain to me why is Sydney the only one that gets a cost of living adjustment?

The median house price in Perth is $530k. It's $600k in Melbourne. The comparison just doesn't stack up.

Forget equity, in Sydney on an above average AFL player's salary COLA is absorbed on interest repayments alone.

 

[NewMelbournian]

I didn't like COLA but I think the trade ban is bizarre considering Sydney didn't break any rules.

 

[kneecapper]

Yeah, it's better financially, but the trade-off is you have to live in Geelong.

Good point, well made.

 

[The_Reaper]

The median house price in Perth is $530k. It's $600k in Melbourne. The comparison just doesn't stack up.

Forget equity, in Sydney on an above average AFL player's salary COLA is absorbed on interest repayments alone.

So over the three year contract the value of the blokes house has gone up over $100,000?

And he doesn't need to pay tax on that

 

[Docker Alyssa]

I trust what Colless says about as far as I can throw him.

Can't trust anyone out of Sydney anymore. Bunch of hysteria and hard to believe stories.

Still so reeling over the COLA and draft penalties.

Sydney, so oppressed by the AFL.

 

[kneecapper]

So over the three year contract the value of the blokes house has gone up over $100,000?

And he doesn't need to pay tax on that

I don't understand your point. You'd only get back what you'd paid off on the loan, plus any rise in property value long term would be absorbed by your much higher interest repayments.

 

[Bardo State]

I have a hypothetical for you:

Say you're a decent Victorian player with a young family looking to get into the housing market.

Sydney come to you and offer you $400k/yr to move away from home for 3 seasons plus the standard $40k COLA.

Geelong also approach you and offer you $410k/yr for 3 seasons.

The median house price in Geelong is $450k. The price of the same sized house in a similar proximity in Sydney is $1.1 million. Assuming an interest rate of 5%, on which offer will you be financially better off at the end of your contract?

Don't worry, Im not expecting an answer anytime soon.

When all is said and done financially, you probably want to be the guy that owns the $1M house in Sydney.

 

[Hawkas1988]

The funny thing is this says a lot more about Colless than it does Fitzgerald

 

[The_Reaper]

I don't understand your point. You'd only get back what you'd paid off on the loan, plus any rise in property value long term would be absorbed by your much higher interest repayments.

Nope. Because you've got a property that is worth far more.

Median house price in Sydney has gone up by more than $250,000 over the past few years.

So that house is worth half a million more than it was when you bought it.

 

[kneecapper]

When all is said and done financially, you probably want to be the guy that owns the $1M house in Sydney.

Do people understand how loans work? In my scenario in Sydney you are paying $55,000 in interest per year compared with $22,500 in Geelong. Interest is dead money, it doesn't even touch the principal.

 

[Procrastinator35]

I didn't like COLA but I think the trade ban is bizarre considering Sydney didn't break any rules.

Simple really....Cola gives them close to a $mill salary-cap advantage (How else do you think they could afford Buddy?)....They were offered the proviso of removing it from all contracts from here on in & thereby being allowed to trade again thereafter....However, if they renege on the Cola, then their way over the sarary-cap, when stripped of IT'S Cola component....Hence the ban/limitation.

They abused the system & now they are paying the price....It aint rocket-science; It's as simple as that.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

The funny thing is this says a lot more about Colless than it does Fitzgerald

totally agree. anyone who goes leaking what was discussed privately is just a self-righteous douchebag of the highest order. must be something in the water down at sydney...

 

[master bate]

The median house price in Perth is $530k. It's $600k in Melbourne. The comparison just doesn't stack up.

Forget equity, in Sydney on an above average AFL player's salary COLA is absorbed on interest repayments alone.

1. Don't turn this in to another COLA thread. These arguments have been had over and over again

but:

2. If you are then the house price argument isn't a good one. There's no reason for a young and often single footballer to buy a median priced house. An apartment might be wiser. But also any established player who's consistently making 300k a year can afford the mortgage payments and will have a more expensive property to show for it.

There's better arguments to be had with the cost of renting, food and drink, entertainment etc. But in my mind these things are all worth it to live in Sydney as a young AFL player. If you told me I had to leave Melbourne and my choice was Sydney or any other city with an AFL club I'd choose Sydney. It's got beaches, a good climate, pubs/bars/clubs, it's a world class city full of opportunity.

Anyway, back to point 1, COLA has been replaced by a sensible rent allowance to allow young players to not be disadvantaged.

 

[bresker]

I have a hypothetical for you:

Say you're a decent Victorian player with a young family looking to get into the housing market.

Sydney come to you and offer you $400k/yr to move away from home for 3 seasons plus the standard $40k COLA.

Geelong also approach you and offer you $410k/yr for 3 seasons.

The median house price in Geelong is $450k. The price of the same sized house in a similar proximity in Sydney is $1.1 million. Assuming an interest rate of 5%, on which offer will you be financially better off at the end of your contract?

Don't worry, Im not expecting an answer anytime soon.

If the bank agreed to sell me a house in Sydney, and the my house price increased in price from 1.1 million to 1.3 million over the terms of the contract, I could make $200,000 just from selling my house.

Then I got move to Geelong on free agency, get my 400k p/a contract, and have a cool $200,000k as a deposit on my house.

Many hypotheticals at work here.

 

[Bardo State]

Do people understand how loans work? In my scenario in Sydney you are paying $55,000 in interest per year compared with $22,500 in Geelong. Interest is dead money, it doesn't even touch the principal.

You might have an argument if you were talking about rent for a low wage player. The interest might be 'dead money' but owning a house in Sydney has its advantages. Capital gains, could keep the property as an investment, rent income for the rest of your life potentially. Also pretty assured demand. Easier to sell in Sydney than Geelong.

If you're talking rent/food prices, that's a separate discussion. Home ownership opens up plenty of opportunities and is more complex than accounting for 'dead' interest payments.

 

[DaVillaBlues]

Look, Fitzy probably carried on in a manner unbefitting of someone so high upat City Hall, but really, The AFL invested millions into the GWS venture and pinned their hopes of Buddy joining GWS.

Also no one likes a snitch, especially one who blabs about a private conversation made 18 months ago.

#IStandWithMike #IllRideWithFitzpatrick

 

[headache1]

Well if he's really made a decision like the ruling on COLA out of bitterness/anger, as this article claims, then I think that's a pretty big deal. Regardless of your opinion on COLA, the Commission should make decisions based on logic and sense. Not personal vendettas.

Perhaps handing Franklin a $10m deal the year after recruiting Tippett opened his eyes to just how ridiculous the COLA was, and that it was perhaps being manipulated as a recruiting tool, instead of being fairly dispersed amongst players on the team that actually had some semblance of claim to needing more money?

 

[Satan]

I am shocked to be reading this .

This house cost red hering is more predictible than a Kim K selfie.
New Afl players that get thru the rookie period earn a lot more than the average 21 year old . Good financial advice where the player steps up to 200-300 pa and does not blow it at the Tab or up there nose etc could mean they they can pay off a house within a 2nd 3 year contract . Sure sydney is more expensive to live compared to adelaide but the house a player owns is worth more too.

Back to topic.

Former afl presidents like former politicians should shut up. There moment in the sun is over.

 

[Rhayader]

Seems to me that this story just proves COLA was an AFL-approved salary cap rort (house prices, please) that the Swans used for unintended purposes. The Buddy deal may yet work out for the Swans in coming years, but it does seem the like they bit the hand that feeds a little too hard. And if that didn't tick off the Swans' biggest supporter - yes, the AFL - enough, Colless has really gone and done it now!

As for Fitzpatrick's hysterics, it's understandable in some ways. He supported a scheme clearly designed to advantage the Swans, and was left looking like a bit of a goose in they eyes of the other clubs when they poached two key forwards for ridiculous money, and it screwed up the AFL's sweetheart deal (another rort driven by marketing, not football) to help GWS in the meantime.

Neither party comes out of this saga looking good, but the long-term loser here appears to be the Swans, not City Hall. This just looks like a crude attempt to get Fitpatrick revenge sacked (oh, my wife heard some swearing, boo hoo). The Swans may even win that battle, but what of the war?

And yes I'm a Hawthorn supporter, and yes I was annoyed about Buddy leaving, but I can't say I've missed him much. Good old Blind Freddy could have seen what would happen to COLA once it was done, though. The ruse was no longer sustainable.

 

[nineteen eighty]

Is anyone really surprised he's this big a flog? Keep in mind, this is the guy that has basically ran the AFL for however many years now.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/af...mission-chairman/story-e6frf7jo-1227470080663

I was going to open up with the same line...

Is anyone really surprised?

It's been plainly obvious that the AFL is being vindictive with restricting the Swans at the trade table. Ok remove COLA as they did with Brisbane. But why the restrictions?

Also obvious that the HUN has Fitzpatrick in its sights. Interesting to see how this plays out and whether the HUN gets his man.

Fitzpatrick may have underestimated who he tried to bully. Colless isn't a patsie.

 

[nineteen eighty]

There's a fantastic irony about Colless and the Swans trying to bring down Fitzpatrick and the AFL. Nearly as much as when Hird tried. Using the Goodes issue as well. Spare me.

Goodes has been on the receiving end of wonderful treatment by the AFL for a decade and a half, yet the AFL get hammered when they (rightly in my mind) sat back and let the other 17 clubs and players provide the support and direction that fans would follow. It's bemusing. All of the leagues captains and many players displayed great support to Goodes and the average footy fan stood up and took notice. Why Sydney are so upset that the AFL Commission didn't put out an early statement is beyond me.

Colless admits to COLA being worked favourably for Sydney for over a decade. Then when it's cancelled out (in dubious circumstances I will admit) the Swans cry foul.

It's time that Mike Fitzpatrick took some heat for his leadership of the AFL commission and for his conflict of interest with ANZ stadium but this is just petty airing of dirty laundry.

This isn't a Goodes thing mb. This is personal between Colless and Fitzpatrick. Two alpha males with one of them biding his time till the appropriate moment. Doors opened for Colless and he's kicked them down in his haste to have a crack back at Fitzpatrick. This has nothing to do with Fitzpatrick's delay in responding re: Goodes.

Colless has the added bonus of not only potentially bringing Fitzpatrick down but possibly also having the trade restrictions removed.