Nicko

[ParraEelsNRL]

The Sydney Swans are the biggest football club in NSW by a considerable margin. Way above the Waratahs or the Bulldogs. They have around 35,000 members alone, the club pulls in nearly $41 million in revenue annually (the entire NRL revenue is around $60m), and they are the most sponsored club in Australian sport.

You wouldn't be posting BS would you?

Come on, if you can post that, we want links and proof.

Or you can just say you pulled it out of your arse.

 

[LebaneseForces]

Didn't they make a loss a couple of years ago? I could and probably am wrong though.

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

Didn't they make a loss a couple of years ago? I could and probably am wrong though.

You would be right, nearly every year we hear and see in newspapers where they have given money to the Swans to keep them afloat.

yet Nicko says their rolling in it.

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

Thanks to Green machine

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/06/03/1054406188893.html

Vics could be next: McGuire
By Caroline Wilson, Stephen Rielly
June 04 2003
Sydney Swans will implement a savage budget cut in a bid to offset their cash crisis, leading Collingwood president Eddie McGuire to warn that Victorian clubs could suffer a similar fate if lessons were not learned from the Swans' plight.
Sydney chairman Richard Colless blamed the impact of the rugby World Cup on the Swans' financial problems, which McGuire said ought to serve as a cautionary experience for the Victorian clubs who will be competing with the Commonwealth Games for corporate support in 2006.
"This should bring us to a review of the entire structure of the game. We are a national competition competing with international sport," McGuire said.
"So if I can stand on my desk now and yell, 'Here comes the Commonwealth Games' perhaps we can begin to factor into our planning and thinking that 10 Victorian teams and, to a lesser extent, the whole competition will be under pressure.
"Let's learn some lessons out of this."

• The $500,000 the AFL had planned to spend promoting the Swan's three Telstra Stadium matches this year will dry up after Saturday's Sydney-Essendon game.
• Marketing consultant and former Swans chief executive Kelvin Templeton could lose his job in the budget cut.
• Many clubs have agreed in principle to give the Swans money.
• Star forward Michael O'Loughlin was within days of signing a new contract with the club tying him to it until the end of 2007.
• A "non-AFL-aligned" Australian businessman has promised to donate $250,000 to the Swans.
• Colin Seery, the latest casualty in the Sydney administrative shake-up, was no longer working as the club's chief executive.
• Colless denied the Swans' financial woes were linked to an unofficial settlement with former Bulldogs' coach Terry Wallace, who was rumoured to have been approached by the Swans to coach this season.
• Colless did not rule out offering Geelong chief executive Brian Cook a position as the club's new chief executive.
• In some circles, it was questioned whether the effect of the World Cup had been blown out of proportion.
• Sydney's football chief Andrew Ireland is understood to have reassured skipper Stuart Maxfield that no player payments would be jeopardised.
Colless claimed on Monday that the Swans were as much as $4.5 million below budget this year and will need $1.5 million of AFL assistance to survive.
McGuire said it was imperative that the competition not only help the Swans but prepare for the inevitable transfer of corporate money from football to the Commonwealth Games. "We fully support the Sydney Swans in this instance and our commitment to the national competition is absolute," he said.
McGuire was joined by clubs rich and poor in offering broad agreement to an injection of funds into Sydney on the condition that the club satisfied AFL requirements for help such as the Western Bulldogs and Kangaroos have received.
Essendon chairman Graeme McMahon said that the prospect of a competition without Sydney could not be countenanced.
"I cannot see how we can have a national competition if the largest city in the country is not represented in that competition," he said.
Kangaroos chairman Allen Aylett was similarly supportive. "We'll all be under some sort of pressure at some stage, that's the way it is," said Aylett, whose Roos received seven-figure help from the league last year.
"There is a process in place to deal with these situations now and it should be handled through that process but it is also true that if this competition is to remain the best sporting competition in the country, Sydney must be a part of it."
Templeton, who resigned from the club just before the Swans announced last year's million-dollar loss, had been retained by the AFL as a marketing consultant overseeing the infiltration into Sydney's west via the Homebush games.
Now he appears likely to be a victim of a massive budget cut.
Colless blamed the club's critical downturn in corporate sponsorship and hospitality revenue on the rugby World Cup.
He said the club's marketing revenue had slumped by $6 million in the past four or five years and estimated the drop in sponsorship in 2003 was between $1.5 million and $2 million.
"This year there is one fundamental reason and I don't use this as an excuse, it's a fact of life, we are basically going head-to-head with rugby union, the World Cup," Colless said.
"The two core areas of revenue we are competing for is sponsorship and corporate hospitality and the truth is we are being belted, absolutely belted."
Others, though, have questioned the role of the rugby World Cup.
"It's the largest event in the world this year, but what impact it has had on the Swans is not something I'd like to opine on," Australian Rugby Union chief John O'Neill said. "I couldn't say whether we have contributed to the Swans' problems and if we have, it has been completely inadvertent. It's a matter that's subject to market forces."
Essendon's McMahon was similarly sceptical.
"I would have difficulty in believing that there's any more pressure on Sydney from regular sporting events (in other years). Why did Sydney do alright in the Olympics year, for God's sake?" McMahon said.
The Swans are not the only Sydney-based football team suffering. All nine Sydney-based NRL clubs recorded losses in 2002, with Brisbane and Auckland the only teams in profit.
"Rugby league has the dominant position with nine clubs," NRL chief David Gallop said. "That makes it a tough market for our clubs and other sports attempting to establish themselves in Sydney.
"Melbourne is a tough market for rugby league and Sydney is a tough market for the Swans. The Swans have done a good job of establishing themselves."
Templeton conceded the Telstra Stadium budget - last year the club spent close to $800,000 promoting those games - would be massively reduced but said: "The only figure ever mentioned with Telstra Stadium games is the cost. The benefits in profit, crowds and sponsorship are never mentioned."
He added the the round-one crowd for the Sydney-Carlton game still exceeded any other Swans' home game this season and added the coming Bombers' clash should draw an attendance of up to 45,000.
Now, though, a relative pittance will be spent on the round-22 Swans-Collingwood Kokoda clash.
- with SMH

........................................................................................................

So in 2003, they looked like being anywhere from 2-6 million in debt, and nicko is saying within 2 seasons they've turned it around and made a profit of 41 million

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

Souths will be the most sponsored team in the Country very soon, I think it was 7 million over 2 or 3 years.

 

[Philhawk]

Souths will be the most sponsored team in the Country very soon, I think it was 7 million over 2 or 3 years.

Rubbish mate. Nick's statement was perhaps wrong, but let's not overdo things. Most AFL clubs will be in the Top 10 wealthiest sporting teams (perhaps excluding the Western Bulldogs, Brisbane, Swans and Kangaroos), but the only few NRL teams who can compete with the huge AFL corporate sponsorship would perhaps be Brisbane and to a lesser extent, the St George-Illawarra Dragons and the Sydney Roosters.

 

[YOTC]

41 million. lol.

 

[1908]

Maybe, but AFL has always operated in a monopoly, it's like winning a race with no competition. League is comparable to them given they operate in a very competitive market and always have, also until the 90's they were basically frozen out of Vic etc.
It is no surprise that AFL should monopilise sponsorship and ratings in markets with no other form of competition, it's a no brainer.

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

Rubbish mate. Nick's statement was perhaps wrong, but let's not overdo things. Most AFL clubs will be in the Top 10 wealthiest sporting teams (perhaps excluding the Western Bulldogs, Brisbane, Swans and Kangaroos), but the only few NRL teams who can compete with the huge AFL corporate sponsorship would perhaps be Brisbane and to a lesser extent, the St George-Illawarra Dragons and the Sydney Roosters.

Mate, there's not too many sports clubs on Earth who run at a profit.

Look at English Soccer and NFL, they spend crazy amounts on players.

You think those teams would have that money to spend on players with no outside help?

That's probably why sports like RL, AFL and some others have salary caps, to stop them from killing themselves.

Yet as we have seen in all sports in Australia, even salary caps don't stop teams dieing.

I think Parramatta Leagues club made around 40 million after tax in 2001, but that was from pokies, not the eels Rugby League Team.

And as for Souths not being able to foot it with the most wealthy in the country, if they where allowed too, don't you think their new owners would open the purse strings?

It sounds like you believe all the negative spin "spun" about Rugby League!

 

[robbieando]

So in 2003, they looked like being anywhere from 2-6 million in debt

Parra, I wouldn't be so fast in using that article because it turned out at the time that most of the information used in that article and even the quotes from Richard Colless turned out to be false, misleading and wrong. In 2003 the Swans in fact made a profit after posting a lost in 2002 (on the back of building work at the SCG the club undertook at its own cost) which was the first financial lost posted by the club since 1995. The club hasn't been in debt since 1996 (when we paid the last of the 1992 loans the AFL gave us, 6 years ahead of time). Since 2003, we posted a profit in 04 and a $100,000 in 05 and expect to again post a larger profit in 06 on the back of increased membership, sponsorship and crowds.

and nicko is saying within 2 seasons they've turned it around and made a profit of 41 million

and by the way nicko said nothing about making a profit of $41 million (because that's impossible), but the club bringing in revenue of $41 million (I'll put it in terms you'll understand - "the amount of money the club earnt"). For all we know the club spends $40.5million each year.

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

Parra, I wouldn't be so fast in using that article because it turned out at the time that most of the information used in that article and even the quotes from Richard Colless turned out to be false, misleading and wrong. In 2003 the Swans in fact made a profit after posting a lost in 2002 (on the back of building work at the SCG the club undertook at its own cost) which was the first financial lost posted by the club since 1995. The club hasn't been in debt since 1996 (when we paid the last of the 1992 loans the AFL gave us, 6 years ahead of time). Since 2003, we posted a profit in 04 and a $100,000 in 05 and expect to again post a larger profit in 06 on the back of increased membership, sponsorship and crowds.



and by the way nicko said nothing about making a profit of $41 million (because that's impossible), but the club bringing in revenue of $41 million (I'll put it in terms you'll understand - "the amount of money the club earnt"). For all we know the club spends $40.5million each year.

I know what he meant Robbie, why didn't he post it the correct way in the first place?

It was just a ploy to make the Swans and Aussie Rules bigger than it actually is in NSW.

Being from NSW, I don't know how he could actually post it.

 

[dr nick]

It's in last years BRW top 1000 magazine. And also keep in mind that financial report was made BEFORE the new TV ratings deal and before Swans back to back grand finals. There are plenty of publicly available sources stating that total AFL club revenue is $420 million per year (http://afl.com.au/cp2/c2/webi/article/240699al.ppt), and I think to pull in only 10% of that figure would be an underestimate, certainly these days. But when you put it into context, and compare the NRL total revenue being just $66 million (and 497th on the BRW list according to wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rugby_League) - it certainly shows what a massive footy club the Sydney Swans are. Easily the biggest club in NSW... that's just not in dispute.

 

[dr nick]

and by the way nicko said nothing about making a profit of $41 million (because that's impossible), but the club bringing in revenue of $41 million (I'll put it in terms you'll understand - "the amount of money the club earnt"). For all we know the club spends $40.5million each year.

True robbie, and it'd make sense. Seems the only publicly available figures the AFL are releasing are total numbers. Total AFL club revenue was $416 million but total club expenditure was $405 million

 

[pcpp]

It's in last years BRW top 1000 magazine. And also keep in mind that financial report was made BEFORE the new TV ratings deal and before Swans back to back grand finals. There are plenty of publicly available sources stating that total AFL club revenue is $420 million per year (http://afl.com.au/cp2/c2/webi/article/240699al.ppt), and I think to pull in only 10% of that figure would be an underestimate, certainly these days. But when you put it into context, and compare the NRL total revenue being just $66 million (and 497th on the BRW list according to wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rugby_League) - it certainly shows what a massive footy club the Sydney Swans are. Easily the biggest club in NSW... that's just not in dispute.

How about you read that a little more carefully:

"In 2005 Business Review Weekly ranked the NRL 497 in revenue of Australian private companies, with revenue of A$66.1m (+7%) with 35 employees"

That $66 million is how much the NRL makes (as a private company) NOT what all the clubs in total make in revenue.

 

[dr nick]

http://afl.com.au/cp2/c2/webi/article/240699al.ppt)

Why doesn't this link work.. ah well, if you type AFL Revenue 2005 into google it's the top hit.

 

[dr nick]

How about you read that a little more carefully:

"In 2005 Business Review Weekly ranked the NRL 497 in revenue of Australian private companies, with revenue of A$66.1m (+7%) with 35 employees"

That $66 million is how much the NRL makes (as a private company) NOT what all the clubs in total make in revenue.

hmm perhaps, but in that BRW article the Brisbane Broncos had the most revenue out of all of the NRL clubs with $14 million. I cant for the life of me remember what they all added up to but Manly also had $5 million revenue per year.

 

[dr nick]

(when we paid the last of the 1992 loans the AFL gave us, 6 years ahead of time)

Thanks robbie - means i won't have to explain in the PM i got from Parra about the AFL giving the swans money every year.

And I believe it was around the time Richard Colless was crying poor it was revealed the Swans were the most sponsored club in Australian sport - and there was a lot of flack for inefficient wasting of funds on the football dept and training facilities... but it paid off in the end didn't it

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

I haven't said the Swans are a failure, I'm saying they are not as big as you are making out, you said they are the biggest Team in Sydney.

They are not, plenty of teams have way more of a following in Sydney, do they sell more Jumpers and merchandise than say Wests Tigers-Bulldogs-Eels?

You seem to forget the History involved with these teams and the others in and around Sydney, some have near on 100 years of loyal support, families and generations have followed the same team.

The swans have been around a quarter of that and for most of it, they were lepers.