Port's Profit

[Woodstock]

This isn't an attack on Port, they made the GF and finished 2nd, we won the Wooden Spoon, they are by far better than us on the field.

I can't for the life of me understand how they make a $930K profit after making the GF, yet we make a $1.030 milllion profit and finish on the bottom. They're a relatively new team, in a football state, of which there's only 2 teams.

Thoughts?

 

[Troy Wingate]

We only have roughly 20% of the state's support in SA.

Also, the club only gets $600,000 of that profit, as the rest goes to the sub-license fee we have to give to the SANFL.

 

[HBK619]

We only have roughly 20% of the state's support in SA.

Also, the club only gets $600,000 of that profit, as the rest goes to the sub-license fee we have to give to the SANFL.

And Richmond have 9 other teams to compete with in Victoria, that point means absolutely nothing.

 

[Troy Wingate]

Well, Port and Collingwood have one thing in common, you either love us or hate us. For Port, it's much worse than it is Collingwood.

We are despised, hated, etc etc.

Majority of Power supporters are also Port Magpies supporters, and that's basically where our supporter base comes from. The Port Magpies. We do have a ton of supporters who supported/support other SANFL clubs, but they are mainly all Port Maggies supporters.

It is much harder for us to get supporters than you realise. I've heard some people say that we basically break-away from Alberton Oval and almost abandon the heritage of the club from 1870-1996, because apparently we would have 20-30 thousand more supporters/members.

 

[zacaxel1975]

They might spend more than us on their football dept. or recruiting or player development or tracksuits or bottled water...
I dont think the aim of football clubs should be to turn the biggest profit.

What is the point? Are the going to invest these profits in something that will return a better result for the football club, than investing it in the football club?

Profits are important as you dont want to become insolvent like the Kangas, but I would prefer the biggest revenue while still making a reasonable profit = most money coming in, most spending (hopefully on football dept not GM's company car/office furniture).

I dont know if they generate bigger revenues and spend more than us?

 

[WhyAlwaysMe]

Smaller population and a low supporter % would contribute to it. We also charge the least amount of any team for members because admittedly a lot of our supporters are in the lower socio economic group. But like the last post said it's not about how much money you make, it's about what you do in the field, eh

 

[hagansbull]

Well, Port and Collingwood have one thing in common, you either love us or hate us. For Port, it's much worse than it is Collingwood.

We are despised, hated, etc etc.

Majority of Power supporters are also Port Magpies supporters, and that's basically where our supporter base comes from. The Port Magpies. We do have a ton of supporters who supported/support other SANFL clubs, but they are mainly all Port Maggies supporters.

Troy, First, from a Traditional Vic POV if you don't love Coll/wood,you hate them, it was drummed into me at an early age. I'm not SA so I believe there is a common line there with Port ( probably because of their success.)I would think that the love/hate thing would be bigger in Vic than but then i'm assuming. I've been to games in Adelaide with Adelaide people and if say Port were playing Tiges, Crows supporters would be hoping Port win. That doesn't happen when the similar thing happens in Melb. Eg Crows play Coll in Final like 2002. Go Crows. As for other point well I think you do OK out of a city that majority of people would follow the Crows. You are far more passionate than Crow supporters and are willing to travel to see your team play anywhere.

 

[peechers]

This isn't an attack on Port, they made the GF and finished 2nd, we won the Wooden Spoon, they are by far better than us on the field.

I can't for the life of me understand how they make a $930K profit after making the GF, yet we make a $1.030 milllion profit and finish on the bottom. They're a relatively new team, in a football state, of which there's only 2 teams.

Thoughts?

To be honest, to me a profit indicates revenue generated that should have gone back into the club. On that basis a healthy year end profit indicates a delay in the deployment of funds for resources.

Generally though, i rarely believe the financial reports and assume they are manipulated for whatever purpose. Call me cycnical I spose.

 

[sante]

Isn't it rare for them to make a profit?

 

[King_Tredrea]

cmon the Power

 

[Madtiger2006]

I have noticed that their crowds have increased though. They pulled 45,000 in round 22 at aami againts Freo and they pretty much had a full house against the Roos in the final at aami. Freo's home crowds average about 37,000 these days but was only about 25,000 five years ago

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Really you need to look at breakdown of figures to comment. Port's profit largely came on the back of the AFL Redistribution and improved corporate input. Our home crowd figures kill us (marginally up on 2006 but still averaging only upper 27K) and we're looking for new non-football related income streams.

I don't know about Richmond's football/non-football income, but you guys average 10,000+ more per home game than us. That has to help and would probably reflect memberships/home match ticket sales too.

 

[- PC -]

Isn't it rare for them to make a profit?

This is the second year in a row I believe. There were other reasons behind that.

Not sure where I stand on this. Like the Oz economy I prefer to see a minimal spread sheet and infrastructure spending occurring. A few posters have allready alluded to putting the money back into the football dept rather than the bank.

I would lean towards that ideal, but also recognise that a healthy balance sheet shows , for want of a better word, commonsense spending. Would you rather the money kept in the bank or it being spent on Nepalese walking hoildays to oxygenate the blood?

zacaxel has it right , balanced spending/saving

 

[Terry Tan]

Just shows how great a club RFC is

No other club could finish on the bottom and make $1 million profit...and that includes Collingwood.

 

[Weaver]

I don't know about Richmond's football/non-football income, but you guys average 10,000+ more per home game than us. That has to help and would probably reflect memberships/home match ticket sales too.

Does SA have pokies? If not that would explain a bit. Pokies are a bit of a free gift to the Vic clubs (and Swans). It was reported that something like $18m goes into the 10 clubs.

Adjust for that and Port making cash on footy alone doesn't look so bad.

 

[Weaver]

Not sure where I stand on this. Like the Oz economy I prefer to see a minimal spread sheet and infrastructure spending occurring. A few posters have allready alluded to putting the money back into the football dept rather than the bank.

I would lean towards that ideal, but also recognise that a healthy balance sheet shows , for want of a better word, commonsense spending. Would you rather the money kept in the bank or it being spent on Nepalese walking hoildays to oxygenate the blood?

I think Clinton Casey's huge mistake was to think that footy is like every other business. You borrow money, invest it, then sit back and wait for the increased profits.

In footy increased spending does not mean better results. Borrowing to fund increased spending can be fatal.

I like the idea of making the money - then spending it. We have a million dollar profit, so we go out and recruit Cameron and some additional staff that we know we can afford.

The other one to remember that profit is a one-year thing. It does not mean that we aren't in debt. We still have a large debt and profits like this can pay that debt down.

The cost of servicing debt can be a killer. Anyone who has maxed out a credit card and spent their life making payments that only cover the interest would know that treading-water feeling.

As you pay down the debt the reduced interest payments increase the profit - which is more cash to spend on footy.

 

[rfctigerarmy]

This is a bit irrelevant but:

Just look at the Port supporters and how they discuss things. None of this rubbish that we get from a lot of the Victorian teams. I often go to the Port board and it is one of the better boards on BigFooty.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Isn't it rare for them to make a profit?

Port has made 2 losses in it's 11 seasons in the AFL. About $1mil in 2000 when we had to distribute a % of profits back to the SANFL and in 2005 we made a loss of $514k and then had to distribute $220k to the SANFL for a total loss of $734k.

Since 2001 we have made small profits of between $200k and $400k before the SANFL distribution which changed from a % basis (like Freo and WCE) to a set fee in 2002. After the SANFL distribution our net profit has varied from $6k last year (after $320k fee) to $198k ($220k fee) in 2004. Up until the end of 2006 we have been paying of $400k in AFL licence fee and amortising $200k in set up costs as it made sense to write that off over 10 years if we were going to pay the SANFL a distribution based on a % of profits rather than take a hit to the bottom line of $2mil in 1997. We also have had to borrow a lot of money to enter the AFL, build state of the art facilities and improve our social club. One lot of debt is paid off and then another new lot is borrowed. As at October 2006 we had borrowings of $3mil.

Living in Sydney I wont get the AR until next week so I can't really answer Woodstock's question yet. I did look at your AR on your website last weekend. Port's will be up on ours next week. But a starting point is the 2006 figures. This article in the Age had all 16 clubs figures summarised into 5 or 6 major categories of revenue and expenditure.

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/ne...1177788209144.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

 

[Weaver]

Just look at the Port supporters and how they discuss things. None of this rubbish that we get from a lot of the Victorian teams. I often go to the Port board and it is one of the better boards on BigFooty.

Well they can afford to be smug - their team keeps winning.

It is the Carlton, Essendon and Hawthorn (and Richmond) supporters who can't let results speak for themselves who feel the need to bang the drum and shout loudest.

 

[Paralowiepower]

The one thing that holds Port back is stadium deals, acknowledged by the AFL as having the worst deal by any club in the AFL. Unlike Victorian clubs, we can't deal between two major stadiums like you can with Docklands and the MCG. This could change if Adelaide Oval could put some pressure on the SANFL/AFL to get games. Also don't get the corporate box revenue like the WA clubs get from Subi. Because of this we do get special funding by the AFL, but it is pretty much limited.

We are also limited to poker machines in Adelaide, being 40, a far cry to that of Collingwood and St Kilda, not sure on the rest.

Out biggest downfall this year was bad programming, only 1 Saturday night game, which along with Friday is by far the most popular by our supporters. This has been fixed for next season, so I think our home crowds will average atleast another 5000.

 

[Paralowiepower]

Just on another point, I think our supporters are very similar, and I respect Richmond greatly. Obviously not your on field stuff, which im sure will change (oneday) but your fans, are most passionate in the AFL, and also Richmond was the only club to vote for Port Adelaide to join back in 1990 against the SANFL bid (crows).

So I am quite surprised our clubs have not built on a bigger relationship. I know every fixture list that comes out, one of the first things I do is to see when we play the Tiges, and I have only missed one (home or away) since they started.

 

[Weaver]

We are also limited to poker machines in Adelaide, being 40, a far cry to that of Collingwood and St Kilda, not sure on the rest.

Not just numbers. There is an obscene quirk in the rules which allow 'community' clubs to pay less tax on gaming revenue than 'corporates'. Also to claim their 'expenses' (Plasma TVs etc) as right-offs.

 

[Vince Spadea]

Does SA have pokies? If not that would explain a bit. Pokies are a bit of a free gift to the Vic clubs (and Swans). It was reported that something like $18m goes into the 10 clubs.

Adjust for that and Port making cash on footy alone doesn't look so bad.

Pokies in SA. I assume the Power have some at there Alberton facility but not positive on that.

I know nowdays most of the SANFL clubs rely on pokies for most of their income.

 

[Goffa]

Port aren't a rich club - Adelaide got in early and scooped a huge portion of the SA footy community, Port has had to fight back from a weak position from day one. And they've done very well at it too.
Someone else mentioned that Port might be spending more on football, which seems reasonable given their sustained top-level performances.
Richmond's first move to mathcing that is recruiting Craig Cameron from Melbourne, who will probably cost (he'd better damn well cost) a couple of hundred thousand dollars a year more than whatever pigeon has been running your recruiting a list management for the last decade.
And so on...
A side note, Melbourne has also ramped up it's footy department spending for 2008, though a lot of that will be balanced by the lower pay for Bailey compared to Daniher and for whoever replaces the guru Craig Cameron.