Alberton sale

[beenreal]

Alberton is owned by the council. In 1995/96, most of the tangible assets of the Magpies were taken by the Power. Compensation was $800K, plus $300K in player transfer payments. A large chunk of this was spent in building new training/ rehab facilities at Ethelton.

I think you've mixed up a couple of things there br. The $800,000 went from the existing PAFC (in the SANFL) to the Power, along with $1.7m in assets.

Given that the Power and the "existing" PAFC are the same entity, they weren't paid to move to the AFL. They took the assets and made a one off payment to the Magpies, plus player transfer fees.

[Magpiespower]

Wow, no wonder I didn't remember it, almost 8 years ago. Must admit I was wrong at the time about which club was the new one... but the rest has stood up incredibly well...

Even this bit?

I actually like Rucci.

[Wedgie]

Wow, no wonder I didn't remember it, almost 8 years ago. Must admit I was wrong at the time about which club was the new one... but the rest has stood up incredibly well...

Even this bit?

I actually like Rucci.

Nah, that was before I met the bloke.

[Ian]

Wow, no wonder I didn't remember it, almost 8 years ago. Must admit I was wrong at the time about which club was the new one... but the rest has stood up incredibly well...

Even this bit?

I actually like Rucci.

[Mark_Beswick]

Interesting stuff Barto - You articulated perfectly my understanding of the two entities. Thus my stats have PAMFC est 1870 and PAFC(Power) 1996

If we merge the two ports, we could have Port Adelaide Est 2010

[Barto]

Several years ago Wedgie did a huge write up on an other site about PAMFC receiving a million $$$$$$ from the power for all assets at Alberton Oval.

Wedgie, can you help me with this and prove that it indeed did happen and the figures are correct ?

If it's true, it's another nail in the coffin of "Port Power = same old club that moved to the AFL". How can they sell stuff to themselves?

Then it's lucky it's not true.

Alberton is owned by the council. In 1995/96, most of the tangible assets of the Magpies were taken by the Power. Compensation was $800K, plus $300K in player transfer payments. A large chunk of this was spent in building new training/ rehab facilities at Ethelton.

I'm aware the the ground itself is owned by the local council as the club wouldn't have been moved to Adelaide Oval for a brief period in the 70's. But there must be assets there that aren't owned by the council, you cant tell me the club rooms etc, the training facility, gym equipment etc belongs to the Port Adelaide Enfield council.

What I'm saying is that if the assets that were owned by the Port Adelaide Football Club in 1996 were transferred to the Power, why would it be if it's the same club? The oval itself doesn't count as "stuff", apologies if that isn't clear to you.

[nickname]

Alberton is owned by the council. In 1995/96, most of the tangible assets of the Magpies were taken by the Power. Compensation was $800K, plus $300K in player transfer payments. A large chunk of this was spent in building new training/ rehab facilities at Ethelton.

I think you've mixed up a couple of things there br. The $800,000 went from the existing PAFC (in the SANFL) to the Power, along with $1.7m in assets.

Given that the Power and the "existing" PAFC are the same entity, they weren't paid to move to the AFL. They took the assets and made a one off payment to the Magpies, plus player transfer fees.

Well, it was stipulated (i.e. it's documented) that the $800K went to the Power, not to the Magpies.

[Hondo]

This has been proven time and time again to be spin by the Power to claim the "1870" history. There's no legal way that a club can leave the SANFL and play in the AFL, the court injunction back in 1990 saw to that. The Power had to be a brand new club.

PAMFC Inc, have the association number A1764, which was issued in 1951. All they did was change their name from PAFC to PAMFC at the end of 1996. They still have this association number, how can an incorporated club take someone elses licence if they are new?

PAFC (AFL) Ltd, ACN 068 839 547 was registered in 1995 and changed their name to PAFC Ltd after the Magpies changed theirs.

The Magpies were not miraculously "born" in 1997 when the "original club moved to the AFL", they're still the same old club from legal standpoint. If their supporters want to see it as that because they wanted into the AFL and out of the SANFL that's their business, but it's not the truth.

We're any of the Port players who didn't get an AFL call up at the end 1996 playing for a completely different club the following year?

Barto, as many times as this argument gets raised it gets proven to be as much spin as you claim the other version to be.

Organisations in sport and business are more than an entity number. Business structures can change all the time and with it entities that organisations trade though. None of it can take away the heritage of where an organisation came from.

Obviously the AFL club needed a new, modern entity to handle the technicalities and complexities of the license agreement, ownership by the SANFL, etc. It's completely understandable that a brand new entity got created. I have been involved with similar sort of restructures and you don't try to change the structure of a 45 year old legal entity, you start a new one.

To try to say that the only way the PAFC could take their SANFL tradition with them is to use the old 1951 entity is pedantics. That's what the ACN argument is .. pedantics. Have you traced the ACN / ARBN / ABN of every football club in the country to make sure no club is claiming heritage beyond the life of it's current ABN? Course not. Collingwood did not start in 1982ish just like PAFC did not start in 1951.

There's a buzz term in the legal world called "substance over form". That's what this is. There's probably actually no 'new' club it's just that some people get too hung up on trying to find one.

I know this has been done to death many times before but there it is.

[Barto]

MARK WILLIAMS: When the Power formed in '97, the Port Adelaide Magpies basically continued in the SANFL.

http://www.abc.net.au/dimensions/dimens ... 555065.htm

So who is correct then? A group of supporters? Which group? Even within the Port supporter camp they're split on this one. I think it it was No Mercy who said that the Power stole the Magpies history. Do we go with what Wikipedia says?

There's no spin in my position, just the facts I've discovered and comments from blokes like Williams etc. I'll stick with "the Magpies are the real club and the Power were formed to represent Port in the AFL" based on what I've discovered, not what a few people on the internet say.

If you think I'm saying that Port started in 1951 because they got that association number at that point in time, then you're missing the point. ABNs came in in 2000, that doesn't mean every business that got one then starts anew, but if they change the name of their shop 5 years later, it's still the same entity.

[Hondo]

Barto, I think some people spend too much time on it and analyse it to death. There's no precedent and there's no right or wrong answer to be found in legal documents. It's substance over form. What was intended to happen, happened. I think you are trying to find facts to suit the answer you want. You want PAP to be the new team so you clutch at the corporate registration number as your proof.

When Brisbane and Fitzroy merged, Fitzroy's history was handed over to the Brisbane Lions as part of the merger agreement. The Fitzroy Football Club still exists and still references their own history too. If you can sign over history by a legal document, you can do anything.

[am Bays]

[Barto]

Barto, I think some people spend too much time on it and analyse it to death. There's no precedent and there's no right or wrong answer to be found in legal documents. It's substance over form. What was intended to happen, happened. I think you are trying to find facts to suit the answer you want. You want PAP to be the new team so you clutch at the corporate registration number as your proof.

When Brisbane and Fitzroy merged, Fitzroy's history was handed over to the Brisbane Lions as part of the merger agreement. The Fitzroy Football Club still exists and still references their own history too. If you can sign over history by a legal document, you can do anything.

Anything can be said about the Power, I agree that it's ambiguous and subjective but you'll never convince me that the Magpies are a new club formed in 1996 because they are not.

[Psyber]

Well at least when they both collapse the argument about which was the original club will become redundant perhaps..
Or does the argument now exist as a distinct entity?