Clubs Financials 2010

[on the rails]

Does that mean everyone declared a profit? pretty unusual result if true.

So all clubs made a profit ( although the Magpies had extra ordinary revenue - sale of their share of the Port Club - to do so ) and the SANFL had money to support the second AFL licence it holds and Port Adelaide plays under.

Makes you wonder why everyone is crying so hard, doesn't it?

It was your club that cried the loudest???

[Ronnie]

There are still huge concerns about the financial viability of Port Power. Their situation could have grave consequences for the SANFL clubs.

[Royal City]

There are still huge concerns about the financial viability of Port Power. Their situation could have grave consequences for the SANFL clubs.

hondo and r&b are going to get upset with you. This is an armageddan theory ofcourse that will never happen according to them.

[Booney]

Does that mean everyone declared a profit? pretty unusual result if true.

So all clubs made a profit ( although the Magpies had extra ordinary revenue - sale of their share of the Port Club - to do so ) and the SANFL had money to support the second AFL licence it holds and Port Adelaide plays under.

Makes you wonder why everyone is crying so hard, doesn't it?

It was your club that cried the loudest???

I stated our profit ( meagre ) was due to the extraordinary sale of an asset. Read our financial statement and you will see without that sale ( and subsequent reunification ) the Magpies position would have been far worse than what it currently is.

[redandblack]

There are still huge concerns about the financial viability of Port Power. Their situation could have grave consequences for the SANFL clubs.

hondo and r&b are going to get upset with you. This is an armageddan theory ofcourse that will never happen according to them.

Nonsense.

Quite the opposite, in fact.

[Royal City]

There are still huge concerns about the financial viability of Port Power. Their situation could have grave consequences for the SANFL clubs.

hondo and r&b are going to get upset with you. This is an armageddan theory ofcourse that will never happen according to them.

Nonsense.

Quite the opposite, in fact.

FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you could pass that on to Hondo/Been Real it would be greatly appreciated .

[redandblack]

You didn't read what I said.

That's the opposite of my position.

From previous experience, I'm not even going to start another futile debate about this.

PS: You edited your post after my reply.

Sentence No 3 stands,

[on the rails]

Does that mean everyone declared a profit? pretty unusual result if true.

So all clubs made a profit ( although the Magpies had extra ordinary revenue - sale of their share of the Port Club - to do so ) and the SANFL had money to support the second AFL licence it holds and Port Adelaide plays under.

Makes you wonder why everyone is crying so hard, doesn't it?

It was your club that cried the loudest???

I stated our profit ( meagre ) was due to the extraordinary sale of an asset. Read our financial statement and you will see without that sale ( and subsequent reunification ) the Magpies position would have been far worse than what it currently is.

I realise what you said however don't say everyone else was crying so hard as the other 8 clubs haven't carried on like the Port Magpies, blamed everyone else because of their position then had a commercial advantage gifted to them re the link to an AFL club which no other club is every going to get. Hardly fair to say that eveyone was crying!

[Booney]

My point was, everyone was crying about the SANFL helping one of its two biggest revenue streams stay afloat.

That has, in the short term anyway, had no negative impact on the SANFL and the clubs that play in the SANFL.

In fact, keeping the revenue stream alive now, in the hope ( I wish I could say confidence ) of it becoming much more vibrant in the future has and will help SANFL clubs secure larger profits in the future.

( Obviously memberships and pokie revenue to the clubs does not enter this debate )

[on the rails]

My point was, everyone was crying about the SANFL helping one of its two biggest revenue streams stay afloat.

That has, in the short term anyway, had no negative impact on the SANFL and the clubs that play in the SANFL.

In fact, keeping the revenue stream alive now, in the hope ( I wish I could say confidence ) of it becoming much more vibrant in the future has and will help SANFL clubs secure larger profits in the future.

( Obviously memberships and pokie revenue to the clubs does not enter this debate )

Well you raised some good points and you can understand the other 8 clubs initial reluctance and hence No vote however time will tell how it will go to support both the Magpies and the rest of the SANFL? Personally I think it will hurt the Magpie arm in the long run?

[Royal City]

My point was, everyone was crying about the SANFL helping one of its two biggest revenue streams stay afloat.

That has, in the short term anyway, had no negative impact on the SANFL and the clubs that play in the SANFL.

In fact, keeping the revenue stream alive now, in the hope ( I wish I could say confidence ) of it becoming much more vibrant in the future has and will help SANFL clubs secure larger profits in the future.

( Obviously memberships and pokie revenue to the clubs does not enter this debate )

Well apart from those sanfl clubs/fans affected by curtain raisers.

[Royal City]

You didn't read what I said.

That's the opposite of my position.

From previous experience, I'm not even going to start another futile debate about this.

PS: You edited your post after my reply.

Sentence No 3 stands,

I wish you had the same stance and did everyone a favour on the champion league debate a month ago R&B.

Good to see you finally agree the PAFc need to be shut down "if" they cant get their finances in order. I thought youd catch up soon enough.

Now if you could pass this onto Been Real and Hondo it would be greatly appreciated.

[Booney]

My point was, everyone was crying about the SANFL helping one of its two biggest revenue streams stay afloat.

That has, in the short term anyway, had no negative impact on the SANFL and the clubs that play in the SANFL.

In fact, keeping the revenue stream alive now, in the hope ( I wish I could say confidence ) of it becoming much more vibrant in the future has and will help SANFL clubs secure larger profits in the future.

( Obviously memberships and pokie revenue to the clubs does not enter this debate )

Well apart from those sanfl clubs/fans affected by curtain raisers.

2 curtain raisers......

[redandblack]

You didn't read what I said.

That's the opposite of my position.

From previous experience, I'm not even going to start another futile debate about this.

PS: You edited your post after my reply.

Sentence No 3 stands,

I wish you had the same stance and did everyone a favour on the champion league debate a month ago R&B.

Good to see you finally agree the PAFc need to be shut down "if" they cant get their finances in order. I thought youd catch up soon enough.
Now if you could pass this onto Been Real and Hondo it would be greatly appreciated.

I have never said this and don't agree with it.

Do not misquote me, please.

Do not misrepresent me, please.

I said I didn't want to debate this, so leave me out of it

[Royal City]

My point was, everyone was crying about the SANFL helping one of its two biggest revenue streams stay afloat.

That has, in the short term anyway, had no negative impact on the SANFL and the clubs that play in the SANFL.

In fact, keeping the revenue stream alive now, in the hope ( I wish I could say confidence ) of it becoming much more vibrant in the future has and will help SANFL clubs secure larger profits in the future.

( Obviously memberships and pokie revenue to the clubs does not enter this debate )

Well apart from those sanfl clubs/fans affected by curtain raisers.

2 curtain raisers......

Yep 2 of them. But the main thing is it contradicts the stance of "the merger has had no negative impact".

[csbowes]

My main concern for Port Adelaide is that I'm not convinced the AFL entity doesn't see them as expendable...

[Grahaml]

I feel the same way about 9/9 profits as I did about 2/9 profits; that we really need to view every club's financials over a longer period than 1 year and take into account one off income/expense items and also how much each club is spending on infrastructure.

I wasn't particularly worried when clubs posted a loss because a simple loss doesn't mean all doom and gloom. But equally I'm not about to rejoice now and wonder when we're going to take on the AFL and buy all the best players in the country.

All in all, I'd be very, very surprised if most clubs were't strong financially now. We've gone through that period where clubs didn't know how to manage finances in a modern football environment. If the rules on pokies change then so might the viability of clubs for a short time. But really, the only club to be particularly concerned about it Port and I doubt even that will be an issue in 2-3 years time when the full effect of the merger takes hold.

[Booney]

My point was, everyone was crying about the SANFL helping one of its two biggest revenue streams stay afloat.

That has, in the short term anyway, had no negative impact on the SANFL and the clubs that play in the SANFL.

In fact, keeping the revenue stream alive now, in the hope ( I wish I could say confidence ) of it becoming much more vibrant in the future has and will help SANFL clubs secure larger profits in the future.

( Obviously memberships and pokie revenue to the clubs does not enter this debate )

Well apart from those sanfl clubs/fans affected by curtain raisers.

2 curtain raisers......

Yep 2 of them. But the main thing is it contradicts the stance of "the merger has had no negative impact".

Seriously, you will argue about just about anything, wont you?

[Royal City]

My point was, everyone was crying about the SANFL helping one of its two biggest revenue streams stay afloat.

That has, in the short term anyway, had no negative impact on the SANFL and the clubs that play in the SANFL.

In fact, keeping the revenue stream alive now, in the hope ( I wish I could say confidence ) of it becoming much more vibrant in the future has and will help SANFL clubs secure larger profits in the future.

( Obviously memberships and pokie revenue to the clubs does not enter this debate )

Yep 2 of them. But the main thing is it contradicts the stance of "the merger has had no negative impact".

Seriously, you will argue about just about anything, wont you?

Not at all Mr Boon.

I do know you love to keep using the argument "the merger has had no negative impact on anyone yet" . As it sounded really good. And I do apologise I had to be the one to point yet again you have made another false claim. My bad.

[Booney]

That has, in the short term anyway, had no negative impact on the SANFL and the clubs that play in the SANFL.

Keep using the argument? I have said it once. Also, I did not say "on anyone", my comment was very mch directed towards club financial statements for 2010.Not any individual.

My bad.

Not for the first time and I am very confident it wont be the last.