2nds The SANFL Thread

[Geoffa32]

Not really. By the end of the year, Port would have recieved $14.75m from the SANFL, but the AFL has provided the SANFL with at least $9m of that.

A debt the SANFL has to carry. The rest depleted the SANFL's cash reserves.

The real cost of the Power is not to the actual SANFL clubs. As Gillan stated all clubs get a $400k return, and have always got a return from the SANFL which our clubs provide. And as Macca pointed out the SANFL has never helped out one of its clubs in the past. This is beacuse the SANFL is not a Franchise system that needs X amount of clubs for a TV deal, and each club has to stand on it s own. The AFL is a Franchise system dependant on TV rights money with X amount of clubs, hence it provides financial support for its franchises when they struggle.

The real cost is the money the SANFL used to spend at grassroots level in its underage comps developing draftees has decreased. It has been noted that over the past few years we have provided less draftees. With non traditional football states NSW and QLD now providing as many draftees as us and we are far from the second state in terms of providing AFL talent.

 

[macca23]

We were always going to win in the end....we always do

Have you been in a coma for the last few years??

 

[Papa G]

The real cost is the money the SANFL used to spend at grassroots level in its underage comps developing draftees has decreased. It has been noted that over the past few years we have provided less draftees. With non traditional football states NSW and QLD now providing as many draftees as us and we are far from the second state in terms of providing AFL talent.

6 of last years top 20 ain't too bad. But what is the SANFL's mission? To produce AFL draftees or be the second best league in the country? Which one are you arguing?

And nobody has answered my previous post whereby it was reported in the Tiser that the SANFL has lodged plans to develop 1,800 homes at West Lakes. Are the rest of the SANFL clubs actually wanting Sturt's demise so their share of the riches are greater? With an asset like West Lakes on their books, how any SANFL club can be forced into extinction is beyond me. What is Whicker and his cronies doing?

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Of which $6 million is a loan that has to be repaid relating to Port.

Macca, I respect your loyalty to your club as always, but the facts are undeniable.

Port Adelaide are a financial basket case on financial life support, and the flow-on effect of this is that they have drained the SANFL reserves, who now have to borrow off of the AFL because no commercial lender will lend them any more money - the SANFL recently stated that they have no more capacity to borrow money.

That's crap and we all know it.

The SANFL are driving the Port Adelaide football club into the ground with moronic stadium charges and that has become the unspoken fact. That is the problem both SA based AFL clubs are facing. Both the Crows and the Power should be financial powerhouse AFL club even with 25,000 members. FFS, we own AAMI Stadium, we are not paying a stadium mortgage like the Victorian clubs and we are not going to have to pay anything to towards the Adelaide Oval upgrade, yet the SANFL is taking money hand over fist ever week from both clubs.

The exorbitant fees the SANFL make the 2 AFL club pay is moronic - it's the stadium hire fee that is killing the Power. Not it's inability to attract a crowd.

Why are the SANFL making them pay such a large fee and taking just as much from game day revenue is beyond me. They own 1/10th of the SANFL as they are a member club. Let's not forget the past but let's not make them continue to suffer generation after generation. Kids have been conceived, born and finished high school and university between Ports first AFL attempt and today.

The Port Adelaide Football club own 1/10th of the SANFL as a member club they should not be paying that sort of hire fee. Don't get me wrong, they still need to take some responsibility and help increase the wealth of the other 8 SANFL clubs as they have been awarded that privileged of moving on to a bigger competition but **** me, the SANFL are to blame for this mess, not that club.

I ask you this question - if Port Adelaide Football Club had control of their own license and were able to determine where they played AFL games, would they still be in the same financial predicament as they are now? I doubt it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Port supporter but I'm far less of a supporter of the greed and crap the SANFL have pulled on our club and then the Power since inception. Time to stop that crap and stand on our own 2 feet.

 

[Papa G]

Nice post Alex but I think you'll find that you are wrong about Port owning 1/10th of the SANFL as a member club. Port now own zero as a result of the Power/Magpies realignment.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Nice post Alex but I think you'll find that you are wrong about Port owning 1/10th of the SANFL as a member club. Port now own zero as a result of the Power/Magpies realignment.

Did that get paid out?

Or was some agreement to move to the AFL or the one port?

I don't know, I was just working on the assumption member clubs had some ownership and that's why Centrals and Woodville has to demonstrate that long term financial play before being allowed to play league football in the 1960's

Wasn't it also, only the voting right removed from Port, not the ownership?

How can the SANFL remove that ownership?

 

[Cap]

That's crap and we all know it.

The SANFL are driving the Port Adelaide football club into the ground with moronic stadium charges and that has become the unspoken fact. That is the problem both SA based AFL clubs are facing. Both the Crows and the Power should be financial powerhouse AFL club even with 25,000 members. FFS, we own AAMI Stadium, we are not paying a stadium mortgage like the Victorian clubs and we are not going to have to pay anything to towards the Adelaide Oval upgrade, yet the SANFL is taking money hand over fist ever week from both clubs.

The exorbitant fees the SANFL make the 2 AFL club pay is moronic - it's the stadium hire fee that is killing the Power. Not it's inability to attract a crowd.

Why are the SANFL making them pay such a large fee and taking just as much from game day revenue is beyond me. They own 1/10th of the SANFL as they are a member club. Let's not forget the past but let's not make them continue to suffer generation after generation. Kids have been conceived, born and finished high school and university between Ports first AFL attempt and today.

The Port Adelaide Football club own 1/10th of the SANFL as a member club they should not be paying that sort of hire fee. Don't get me wrong, they still need to take some responsibility and help increase the wealth of the other 8 SANFL clubs as they have been awarded that privileged of moving on to a bigger competition but **** me, the SANFL are to blame for this mess, not that club.

I ask you this question - if Port Adelaide Football Club had control of their own license and were able to determine where they played AFL games, would they still be in the same financial predicament as they are now? I doubt it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Port supporter but I'm far less of a supporter of the greed and crap the SANFL have pulled on our club and then the Power since inception. Time to stop that crap and stand on our own 2 feet.

where do you get your information from alex?

While I commend your enthusiasm, I do question if you are getting things that everyone believe to be true, but aren't mixed up with actual facts.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

where do you get your information from alex?

While I commend your enthusiasm, I do question if you are getting things that everyone believe to be true, but aren't mixed up with actual facts.

So we haven't make a loss the past few years? averaging 44,000 odd members?

We must have spend some crazy money on bingo tickets.

Are you making a suggestion the AAMI Stadium fee is about right? They don't take the catering money on match day, car parking, corporate boxed and seating as their own? Money that should rightfully go to the clubs?

 

[Geoffa32]

Nice post Alex but I think you'll find that you are wrong about Port owning 1/10th of the SANFL as a member club. Port now own zero as a result of the Power/Magpies realignment.

Both Power and Crows are effectively SANFL subsiduaries, the SANFL clubs are not and each has representation on the SANFL Board of Directors. Hence when the Magpies became part of the Power, they gave up their seat on the SANFL board as they are represented by Olsen and Whicker under the Power umbrella.

 

[Geoffa32]

That's crap and we all know it.

The SANFL are driving the Port Adelaide football club into the ground with moronic stadium charges and that has become the unspoken fact. That is the problem both SA based AFL clubs are facing. Both the Crows and the Power should be financial powerhouse AFL club even with 25,000 members. FFS, we own AAMI Stadium, we are not paying a stadium mortgage like the Victorian clubs and we are not going to have to pay anything to towards the Adelaide Oval upgrade, yet the SANFL is taking money hand over fist ever week from both clubs.

The exorbitant fees the SANFL make the 2 AFL club pay is moronic - it's the stadium hire fee that is killing the Power. Not it's inability to attract a crowd.

Why are the SANFL making them pay such a large fee and taking just as much from game day revenue is beyond me. They own 1/10th of the SANFL as they are a member club. Let's not forget the past but let's not make them continue to suffer generation after generation. Kids have been conceived, born and finished high school and university between Ports first AFL attempt and today.

The Port Adelaide Football club own 1/10th of the SANFL as a member club they should not be paying that sort of hire fee. Don't get me wrong, they still need to take some responsibility and help increase the wealth of the other 8 SANFL clubs as they have been awarded that privileged of moving on to a bigger competition but **** me, the SANFL are to blame for this mess, not that club.

I ask you this question - if Port Adelaide Football Club had control of their own license and were able to determine where they played AFL games, would they still be in the same financial predicament as they are now? I doubt it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Port supporter but I'm far less of a supporter of the greed and crap the SANFL have pulled on our club and then the Power since inception. Time to stop that crap and stand on our own 2 feet.

The AFL has final say where clubs play their home games. Part of moving to AO is that there will be a game there every weekend. Regardless of whoever holds the licence neither AFL club has a say where we will play home games.

What is affecting our clubs with the stadium deal is the lack of cashflow. The SANFL collect all revenues then pays the Power/Crows an amount above the breakeven figure (after their profit). Port suffer because with their crowds averaging far below this figure their cashflow from the stadium is non existant.

The WA model gives control of match day revenues to the two AFL clubs. And they pay a flat annual rent. Thus the clubs have more control over cash flow, and can budget for the rent payment.

In terms of raw dollars they pay about the same in rent as our AFL clubs provide to the SANFL each year via the Stadium Deal.

Our club should be up with the bigger clubs in terms of dollars. Not sure about Port, hard to justify they could be much better off with an average crowd below 20,000 in a 50,000 seater stadium.


Sadly it seems the same method at Footy Park will be used at AO and the only way both our clubs will benefit is via an increase in attenadances.

 

[Cap]

So we haven't make a loss the past few years? averaging 44,000 odd members?

We must have spend some crazy money on bingo tickets.

Are you making a suggestion the AAMI Stadium fee is about right? They don't take the catering money on match day, car parking, corporate boxed and seating as their own? Money that should rightfully go to the clubs?

I didn't say all of your post was inaccurate.

but some to me appears contradictory to what I've seen and been told first hand

but given we are 12 months away from AO, I look forward to seeing the "changes"

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

The AFL has final say where clubs play their home games. Part of moving to AO is that there will be a game there every weekend. Regardless of whoever holds the licence neither AFL club has a say where we will play home games.

Yeah, and I'm sure Port Adelaide would have been playing games at the Adelaide Oval years ago to avoid the financial drain being placed on them by the SANFL. I'm not suggesting they would be playing at Alberton.

What is affecting our clubs with the stadium deal is the lack of cashflow. The SANFL collect all revenues then pays the Power/Crows an amount above the breakeven figure (after their profit). Port suffer because with their crowds averaging far below this figure their cashflow from the stadium is non existant.

The WA model gives control of match day revenues to the two AFL clubs. And they pay a flat annual rent. Thus the clubs have more control over cash flow, and can budget for the rent payment.

In terms of raw dollars they pay about the same in rent as our AFL clubs provide to the SANFL each year via the Stadium Deal.

Our club should be up with the bigger clubs in terms of dollars. Not sure about Port, hard to justify they could be much better off with an average crowd below 20,000 in a 50,000 seater stadium.


Sadly it seems the same method at Footy Park will be used at AO and the only way both our clubs will benefit is via an increase in attenadances.

When they start winning games, they will increase their average attendance figure to 25,000 and if you added the catering, car parking, corporate dollars that the game generates - that would be more than enough to make a profit and hire a venue.

It's that greed to try and maintain that second best competition status that they desire. They care more about the SANFL rating then they do about the 2 AFL clubs.

Trigg kept his job because we don't kick up a fuss about the fees and they make a very nice sum of money from us. If we were getting Port like crowds, he would have been gone years ago.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

I didn't say all of your post was inaccurate.

but some to me appears contradictory to what I've seen and been told first hand

but given we are 12 months away from AO, I look forward to seeing the "changes"

Can you differentiate accurate from inaccurate for me then?

and changes, won't be happening.

 

[Cap]

oh it was just the broad stuff, no big deal really.

as for AO, I always thought it was going to be a big let down for those thinking it would be the saviour.

 

[Geoffa32]

oh it was just the broad stuff, no big deal really.

as for AO, I always thought it was going to be a big let down for those thinking it would be the saviour.

Hence our club did not jump at it at first.

 

[Cap]

Hence our club did not jump at it at first.

true, I wasn't concerned about the not jumping, I'm worried how the negotiations went in terms of making us a more powerful club.

hopefully Trigg has done well there.

I'll add, I'm a fan of the development I think it will be better for me.....weather it will be better for the Crows is another thing.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

as for AO, I always thought it was going to be a big let down for those thinking it would be the saviour.

The SMA should never have been created. It was always going to be an organization looking out for the parties involved best interest. the SACA and the SANFL, however the new Adelaide Oval should be made available to soccer, rugby (union and league) converts, different sports.

An example and it will never happen but how awesome would it be if Baseball South Australia (whatever their name is) were allowed to hire the Adelaide Oval for $1 and tried to being a Major League game to Adelaide.It won't happen because the sunk cost to get something like that could be enormous and you're behind the 8 ball all ready with stadium hire.

It should have always been ran by the Sports Ministers office and fair dealing distributed that way in the interest of the state of South Australia. It's SA oval, not football and crickets after all.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

I'll add, I'm a fan of the development I think it will be better for me.....weather it will be better for the Crows is another thing.

I agree, I feel in the long run it will be better for cricket and footy fans but that's about it.

 

[Geoffa32]

true, I wasn't concerned about the not jumping, I'm worried how the negotiations went in terms of making us a more powerful club.

hopefully Trigg has done well there.

I'll add, I'm a fan of the development I think it will be better for me.....weather it will be better for the Crows is another thing.

This is how I feel as well. Really can't wait to watch the footy at a decen venue every week. And not jsut experiencing that when I go to Melbourne.

 

[ploppy]

We need the SANFL kicked out of the SMA and replaced by a Crows and Port representive. The all proceeds from games is kept by the clubs. The SANFL didnt put anything into AO anyway the taxpayers did. The clubs should own there licences and the SANFL can go and run their SANFL all by themselves and stay out of AFL.

 

[Macca19]

A debt the SANFL has to carry. The rest depleted the SANFL's cash reserves.

Their cash reserves fell from $16m to $3m. They gave us $5m of their own money. Wheres the other $8m gone? Their debt went from $16m to $32m. Wheres the $10m of that gone? Easy to put 100% of the blame on Port for the ills of the local comp but it doesnt stand up when you dig a little deeper.

And Port should be playing at the old Adelaide Oval. Not the new one.

 

[Cap]

And Port should be playing at the old Adelaide Oval. Not the new one.

that might be a bit hard Macca...

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

We need the SANFL kicked out of the SMA and replaced by a Crows and Port representive. The all proceeds from games is kept by the clubs. The SANFL didnt put anything into AO anyway the taxpayers did. The clubs should own there licences and the SANFL can go and run their SANFL all by themselves and stay out of AFL.

See, this type of comment pisses me off as well.

Port Adelaide and the Crows have to understand the history of the SANFL and respect the privileged position they are in. Without the other 8 SANFL clubs, Port Adelaide would not be in the AFL and the Crows would have found it much harder to develop a successful supporter base.

Therefore, it's both clubs historical and futuristic responsibility to put something back into the local league and allow that league to prosper. Their is enough financial supporter in South Australian Football for the Crows, Power and the 9 SANFL clubs to run at a profit but greed can not play a part. Sadly, it is and I can not see it changing anytime soon.

We are a football driven state and without that, Port or the Crows wouldn't be in the AFL. I just hope a few people can remember that.

 

[Geoffa32]

See, this type of comment pisses me off as well.

Port Adelaide and the Crows have to understand the history of the SANFL and respect the privileged position they are in. Without the other 8 SANFL clubs, Port Adelaide would not be in the AFL and the Crows would have found it much harder to develop a successful supporter base.

Therefore, it's both clubs historical and futuristic responsibility to put something back into the local league and allow that league to prosper. Their is enough financial supporter in South Australian Football for the Crows, Power and the 9 SANFL clubs to run at a profit but greed can not play a part. Sadly, it is and I can not see it changing anytime soon.








We are a football driven state and without that, Port or the Crows wouldn't be in the AFL. I just hope a few people can remember that.

I don't think it is greed. It is mismanagement and incompetence.

The business model worked when we had no live against the gate and/or when both clubs are doing well on the field.

It worked in the 90s and early 2000s.

Neks minnut we have Foxtel and FTA showing games from Footy Park live and Port fall into a heap in field and the business model is exposed to be a failure.


The entire business model is dated and needs to change.

 

[ploppy]

i agree times of changed and the old models dont work. thats why repeating the old model at AO worries me..theres no reason for the SANFL to be involved with their hand in the pie. They could go off and run the SANFL with the proceeds from new housing suburb. Crows and Port should operate under the AFL like the other clubs.