Rumour The St Kilda debt situation - no more tick

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
You made an operating profit, which turned into a loss after you had to pay interest and depreciation of assets. Yet your debt still went up and your assets went down. Don't care what they say, if your cash flow means that debt is increasing and the value of your assets is decreasing that is an issue your club needs to fix. Hopefully they do. North had this problem in the late 2000's and found a way to turn it around. Good luck

dig deeper, why did the assets go down, compare last years report to this years, what changed?

here's a hint they go into detail what changed and there's a whole page on it!!!!!

what happens if the assets were evaluated with the same criteria as last year?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Was never actually specified how much this amount was though ?.

Yes it was, it was clearly noted in the press release. $2.3 million.
Most people commenting on the financial report either haven’t read it, or simply don’t understand it. A lot of nonsense being spread by financially illiterate people
 
Yes it was, it was clearly noted in the press release. $2.3 million.
Most people commenting on the financial report either haven’t read it, or simply don’t understand it. A lot of nonsense being spread by financially illiterate people

I completely missed that, thanks for the heads up.

A fair chunk of cash rolling forward into this year’s revenue.
 
2017 season. It was $1* and pay the rest later however even when people didn’t pay later the club already included all of the $1 members in their membership tally.
got any proof of this? I highly doubt it happened
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

There is always forward thinking for the Saints really isn’t there?

Being broke, a tiny supporter base and a POS history does that to you I guess.

As an aside, do you own ‘the streak’ :)

I’ve always been fascinated by supporters like you. I can’t fathom what it must be like to truly believe you had absolutely anything to do with the team you chose to follow’s success.

Or to think the performance of another person’s chosen team is going to be genuinely taken seriously as an insult.
 
Wasn't butters. It was westaway I believe. Butters finished in 07

Thought Grant Thomas was the main driver - wanted to play more games at Colonial while we were up and about as a club.

In hindsight it looks poor from a business perspective but at the time it was all about trying to jag a second flag. And still is.....
 
Thought Grant Thomas was the main driver - wanted to play more games at Colonial while we were up and about as a club.

In hindsight it looks poor from a business perspective but at the time it was all about trying to jag a second flag. And still is.....
Grant Thomas wanted to end the Tasmania games to improve our chances of finishing top 4.
Archie Fraser, under Westaway, moved us to Seaford. Absolutely horrific decision, horrific execution.
It only takes a couple of clowns to rise to positions of power at your club and they can do untold damage very quickly.
Has happened at all clubs.
Some 12 year old hawks supporters wouldn't remember when it was them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top