Analysis Stadium deals - what, how, when - why we need a new one and the SA footy paradigm shift happening

[Kwality]

On the surface, yes. That is the argument of that idiot Graham Cornes, but please tell me you have more intelligence & insight than him!! I wasnt in the room when the parties signed that deal, but we know it was rushed, the two clubs were forced to sign the deal as is, and demanded the review for the very reasons we see now. To apportion blame to Port or the Crows as being "guilty of mismanagement" is ridiculous really, at the least very surficial, and doesnt take into account any of the underlying issues that existed at the time.

Edit: Said "issues" well enunciated by REH in the previous post

No argument, REH put it well, I'm not blaming anyone, my point being no one involved has a clean slate. It is incumbent on all involved to get a fix.

 

[Kwality]

That's where you are missing the key point. Port were dudded, a number of times by some very corrupt dealings. The mess we have been in were caused by these dealings and the murkiness of what is going on now is because people are being called out on it.

Dudded eh, you have blind faith. Read what REH posted & learn.

 

[HighBudget]

I had a dream last night that I was looking at a newspaper article and the heading was something along the lines of "Port gains 800 thousand more with new deal" (who said you couldn't read in dreams? Oh yeah Batman) I'm not 100% how it was written, all I know is that it said Port and $800,000 on there and also that it was about the stadium deal. I felt quite underwhelmed in the dream and when I woke up I thought that I had read it in real life lol

 

[tribey]

I had a dream last night that I was looking at a newspaper article and the heading was something along the lines of "Port gains 800 thousand more with new deal" (who said you couldn't read in dreams? Oh yeah Batman) I'm not 100% how it was written, all I know is that it said Port and $800,000 on there and also that it was about the stadium deal. I felt quite underwhelmed in the dream and when I woke up I thought that I had read it in real life lol

Per game

 

[Ford Fairlane]

I laugh at Kevin Foley referring to a Machiavellian meeting as if that's not business as usual for him.

 

[*PAF]

Cant agree PAF, you missed the point - it was events not bums on seats. Sure you arent just wanting to blame someone else? EVERY party to this deal at Adelaide Oval must share the blame for this fiasco (in differing degrees) & they are all party to this ongoing mess, not just the SANFL, not just Port, not just the Crows, the AFL .....

Yeah I have read your subsequent posts regarding the current agreement.

Still stand by saying that at Etihad the return needed to included the cost of the stadium plus a profit, in a 25 year window close to 25 years, whereas at AO the cost of the stadium is not part of the equation.

 

[1970crow]

I wanna know if this deal will make us better off for when we take our inevitable tumble to the lower parts of the ladder and our crowds start to drop to the High 20's low 30 thousand's or even lower. I'm not saying that those crowd levels are a certainty, they may still be very high when we have a down period, but just in case I'd like to know that we'll be safe if it does happen

No science behind this, but I think the location of the stadium alone puts thousands of extra bums on seats. Then the actual stadium seems to be doing more again and interstaters will be more numerable. My guess is the baseline crowd being at least 5k more than footy park. It's just a guess though.

 

[tribey]

That's where you are missing the key point. Port were dudded, a number of times by some very corrupt dealings. The mess we have been in were caused by these dealings and the murkiness of what is going on now is because people are being called out on it.

Yeah, I'm tired of Port being blamed for this ****ing moronic oh-so-typical Fruchoctopian state-of-affairs precisely because people can't fathom that the situation developed the way it has and therefore "well it can't be all the SANFL's fault".

It can be actually.

The gun-to-head "here you're signing this" tactics on the eve of the 2014 season were straight out of the Affiliation Agreement handbook - what we say goes or else.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

I understand where you are coming from K but when the Monday before the first game you are told you have 36 hours to sign 13 agreements that all tie up the triumvirate of the AO deal, the granting of the licences and independence and the right to put reserves sides in the SANFL - and there is massive public and media build up to the opening of the stadium, there isn't much else that can be done.

What would have happened if we said no? Cancelled the season? The deals were signed because their was a review clause of the stadium deal - I spoke to the lawyer on Port's board who I played footy with, at our old footy club at a club function a couple of weeks after the season started. He said if the review clause wasnt in there we probably wouldnt have signed. It was the compromise to sort out the known unknowns and unknown unknowns from mid season onwards and once the oval had been put through its paces.

And despite the review clause being there and you would think being public knowledge, Port continue to get put in the stocks of public opinion and pelted with rotten fruit by the likes of cRowe and Crones for wanting a revision to the agreed deal because we are not getting our fair share of revenue from the oval deal.

Next thing cRowe and Crones will be calling for an investor-state dispute settlement inserted in the agreement so the $anfl can sue the government for lost revenue from any variation on the original deal.

 

[Pedro59]

No argument, REH put it well, I'm not blaming anyone, my point being no one involved has a clean slate. It is incumbent on all involved to get a fix.

Kwality what you are more gently espousing of course is pushed more vigorously on some other BF forums ie the AO take is the smaller part of a clubs income compared to sponsorships , good fiscal management etc implying that Port aren't doing a good enough job in other areas
To me this is a SANFL and their media darlings counter argument to leave things as they ( junior footy development yada yada ) and Oh just work harder Port

Well we will see soon wont we

If Kwality and some of the aforementioned SANFL / Crow Bf scribes are correct no matter how fair the new deal is Port will still go broke

But if next year we make a good profit (and the crows slay it)
Will you guys then admit that an unfair stadium deal can majorly hinder a clubs success ?

 

[AdsGoNads]

I understand where you are coming from K but when the Monday before the first game you are told you have 36 hours to sign 13 agreements that all tie up the triumvirate of the AO deal, the granting of the licences and independence and the right to put reserves sides in the SANFL - and there is massive public and media build up to the opening of the stadium, there isn't much else that can be done.

What would have happened if we said no? Cancelled the season? The deals were signed because their was a review clause of the stadium deal - I spoke to the lawyer on Port's board who I played footy with, at our old footy club at a club function a couple of weeks after the season started. He said if the review clause wasnt in there we probably wouldnt have signed. It was the compromise to sort out the known unknowns and unknown unknowns from mid season onwards and once the oval had been put through its paces.

If the SANFL dont budge then the deal stays the same. Port has no legal power because of the monopoly situation thanks to the failed bid in 1990. That's why I have said its up to Gill and the premier more than KT and Port to fix this. KT doesn't have the power. He only has his wits, power of persuasion and maybe public embarrassment of the SANFL on his side, and maybe Fagan from the crows. The SANFL had all the monopoly power. That's not an easy thing to budge. Remember dealing with Telstra when they had monopoly power? The Ombudsman wasnt much use in most disputes. You had to pay up to continue getting a telephony service - there was no alternative - and then spend time and resources fighting that dispute post paying, to get the problem resolved. Not much difference here.

Sure Port have to take some responsibility - but one thing is for sure - if Port didnt agitate - there would no new AO. From the article in 'Tsier the day of the first game and ex Treasurer and Port man - ex Member for Port Adelaide Kevin Foley said

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/...nt-adelaide-oval/story-fni6uo1m-1226868051811


and


http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/...nt-adelaide-oval/story-fni6uo1m-1226868051811

I love the new AO, but a part of me would rather be in an undeveloped stadium if it meant the Crows were still at West Lakes + we had AO to ourselves..

 

[AdsGoNads]

ps - Day 162

 

[noddy]

All goods things come to those that wait patiently.

 

[Rankor]

All goods things come to those that wait patiently.

Ok dad.

 

[raman]

All goods things come to those that wait patiently.

This is patently untrue.

 

[Dalphonso]

All goods things come to those that wait patiently.

Like Shane Watson making a hundred?

 

[Holden Hillbilly]

Like Shane Watson making a hundred?

As a bowler?

 

[Rankor]

Like Shane Watson making a hundred?

No. Like richmond supporters seeing a premiership.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

All goods things come to those that wait patiently.

Like my wife deciding she won't complain anymore?

 

[Andre]

Like my wife deciding she won't complain anymore?

You just need to outlive her.

 

[TheFVK]

All goods things come to those that wait patiently.

Happy to wait but I refuse to do so patiently

 

[Dalphonso]

Happy to wait but I refuse to do so patiently

Or wondering!

 

[Traveling_Power]

All goods things come to those that wait patiently.

with how long we are waiting (after 160 + days) it should be a good $$$ profit

 

[tribey]

All goods things come to those that wait patiently.

Like those Lorenzo's Oil parents or NASA.

 

[Kwality]

Kwality what you are more gently espousing of course is pushed more vigorously on some other BF forums ie the AO take is the smaller part of a clubs income compared to sponsorships , good fiscal management etc implying that Port aren't doing a good enough job in other areas
To me this is a SANFL and their media darlings counter argument to leave things as they ( junior footy development yada yada ) and Oh just work harder Port

Well we will see soon wont we

If Kwality and some of the aforementioned SANFL / Crow Bf scribes are correct no matter how fair the new deal is Port will still go broke

But if next year we make a good profit (and the crows slay it)
Will you guys then admit that an unfair stadium deal can majorly hinder a clubs success ?