Sturt in Financial Trouble?

[JK]

You should yell abuse at them on camera!

I'll just tidy that up for you mate

[Dogwatcher]

Well pity the league didn't show North and Coopers any favour when Coopers were going to sponsor the NAFC 3 or 4 years ago. North proposed to sell both West End and Coopers products at Prospect but apparently that was not good for the SANFL?

You can't blame the SANFL for standing up for the league's sponsor. Standard practice. Although I can't understand why Norwood would be allowed to be sponsored by Coopers and North not.

[JK]

Well pity the league didn't show North and Coopers any favour when Coopers were going to sponsor the NAFC 3 or 4 years ago. North proposed to sell both West End and Coopers products at Prospect but apparently that was not good for the SANFL?

You can't blame the SANFL for standing up for the league's sponsor. Standard practice. Although I can't understand why Norwood would be allowed to be sponsored by Coopers and North not.

Maybe Norwood had a sponsorship that pre-dated the West End agreement and was worked in? I'm not sure, but will endeavour to find out.

[Dogwatcher]

Well pity the league didn't show North and Coopers any favour when Coopers were going to sponsor the NAFC 3 or 4 years ago. North proposed to sell both West End and Coopers products at Prospect but apparently that was not good for the SANFL?

You can't blame the SANFL for standing up for the league's sponsor. Standard practice. Although I can't understand why Norwood would be allowed to be sponsored by Coopers and North not.

Maybe Norwood had a sponsorship that pre-dated the West End agreement and was worked in? I'm not sure, but will endeavour to find out.

I wondered if that was the case. You'd assume it'd have to be.

[CENTURION]

Well done Sturt & Norwood, this is an excellent idea. Hopefully Sturt will leave Unley for good & play all home games at Norwood. THEN we might see Port & West combine? Or West & WWT?

[dedja]

WAWWT??? ... NTTAWWT

[on the rails]

Well pity the league didn't show North and Coopers any favour when Coopers were going to sponsor the NAFC 3 or 4 years ago. North proposed to sell both West End and Coopers products at Prospect but apparently that was not good for the SANFL?

You can't blame the SANFL for standing up for the league's sponsor. Standard practice. Although I can't understand why Norwood would be allowed to be sponsored by Coopers and North not.

Maybe Norwood had a sponsorship that pre-dated the West End agreement and was worked in? I'm not sure, but will endeavour to find out.

It did JK. The year Coopers signed with North was not long after the SANFL told the clubs to look for other revenue streams and sponsorship opportunities outside gaming. North's deal with Coopers was going to provide not only good $$$ but also 2 new bar areas similar to what Norwood have re Coopers Corner.

[JK]

Far out that would have been awesome for Prospect, can understand your disappointment then

[Rucciangelo]

So what is the board going to do now?

Can we PLEASE have some open and transparent communication with the members and supporter base? There's obviously something not right if the club cannot post a profit more than a couple of times over the last twenty years.

The club needs to have a review from top to bottom, left to right and everything inbetween. The results of that review need to be recorded and published to all members and any supporters that enquire. The club needs to reduce expenditure to match a figure well under its expected revenue and if that means players and officials have to be shed, it needs to do so, it cannot continue or strive to be competitive on the pitch while posting losses year on year until such time as its very survival is threatened.

Anyone has to admit that if an entity can do nothing but build up debt year on year then there is something either fundamentally wrong with the entity, meaning it just cannot trade or you have to look at those responsible and clean house. My guess is the club has gambled time and time again on schemes it thought would reap large rewards over consolidating revenue and paying down debt. Those gambles have resulted in blow outs to the debt.

If that's not what has happened, then bloody well put something out to the members to let us know what has happened. Not doing so and admitting in private to me to a preference for members not to ask questions makes me question the boards integrity.

I'm told several of the board members are corporate businessmen used to targets and reporting, if that's the case, why aren't we seeing that level of disclosure to stakeholders, why aren't those targets published, why isn't progress reported weekly in the e-newsletters we get rather than filling them with useless crap. When targets are not met year on year, why is there no clean out? I'm not being idealistic, its a level of disclosure I have to submit to in my job.

I'm not expecting them to do anything I wouldn't do myself...

... sadly, I don't think the club wants to be that open.

So do you think any of the board actually read you on here?
I think not...exercise your energy where it works the best.
There is a Marketing Vacancy coming up on the Board very quickly...complain all you like...act if you will

[csbowes]

So do you think any of the board actually read you on here?
I think not...exercise your energy where it works the best.
There is a Marketing Vacancy coming up on the Board very quickly...complain all you like...act if you will

Actually... they must do... as I've been rung up by the club about what's been written on here...

... I doubt they avidly read it, but someone obviously does at times.

Certainly there are SFC board members and ex-board members on here as members.

As for the vacancy, I'm not into marketing. When the club had no merchandise back in the 1990s, I kicked that off while working as a volunteer for the club and the club has done an exceptional job on that front, but that's about the extent of my experience in that field and I'd prefer to leave it at that.

My experience is in business and financial management. I'd be particularly interested in the financial side of things. I think I'd have something to offer, but it'd require the club to become transparent. That's a cultural choice and hard for some organisations to embrace, I'm not sure what other SFC board members would think of that idea.

That said, there's nothing wrong with complaining as long as its constructive and comes with ideas. If the club receives criticism and chooses to ignore it all, then that could be at its peril. Not everyone is a nutjob.

[CENTURION]

Dunno if its financial trouble, things are obviously tight, like most businesses at the minute.

Probably a good decision, no use buying it and then going under cause you couldnt afford the repayments.

Westies are the only club I know that own their premises at their home ground (do Centrals?)

If they are in financial trouble you have to question their buying up of recruits last year.

pretty certain Central do BUT could be wrong!

We built The Club in 2000 on the back of a bloody big loan, so We don't own The Club.

[oldfella]

Centurion,

I believe that Westies club is built on land that they own as well - does Centrals own the land or even after the debt you mention is paid will this create issues in the case of a sale (acknowledging selling the Centrals club rooms would never be considered).

Norwood sold theirs and the land it was on which allowed the clubs finances to be adjusted which resolved an immediate issue but the longer term is still being finalized with council/RSL.

Club finances in a time of economic downturn with corresponding loss of sponsorship dollars is a very vexing question?

Edited to add.

Another issue affecting all clubs is that the lower status of SANFL footy since the AWFULL was introduced means that many local residents do not really care if there is a local SANFL club in their council area and as such council decisions follow the desires of the local constituents who just want to use the facilities that they pay for in their rates any time of the day/night seven days a week -- this can be seen at Sturt (made worse when the left the oval for a period) and is possibly an indication of the thin edge of the wedge for several clubs

[CENTURION]

dunno.

[The Apostle]

Bump!

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl ... 6521862163

[Dutchy]

Bump!: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl ... 6521862163

$400k is a great start, if they can collect it and pay it directly off debt there is ~$32k a year straight to the bottom line.

[SDK]

Why would'nt the Council jump on board and forgive the debt ? The Council serves the area and what better ambassador for the Unley area has there been in the Sturt Football Club ?

[am Bays]

Why would'nt the Council jump on board and forgive the debt ? The Council serves the area and what better ambassador for the Unley area has there been in the Sturt Football Club ?

South Adelaide in the 1890s??

[Go Legs]

WAWWT??? ... NTTAWWT

Nah, MONSFAW is easier to remember

Cheers,

[CENTURION]

this sort of lack of support for your side doesn't help.


KEN WHELAN LUNCHEON at BarZaar.
There is an official club luncheon at BarZaar this Friday 30th where Rick Davies is the guest speaker.
It has not been advertised until now because it was an invitation luncheon to Bequest Society members.
At this stage there are only about 20 people going so it has been opened up to anyone who wants to come along.
There is room at Bar Zaar for only about 75 people, so get in quick.

The cost is $75 per head for 3 courses PLUS the Jumbo Prince, 'cheap'.
The club will donate any profits to the Whelan family.

[Barto]

It has not been advertised until now because it was an invitation luncheon to Bequest Society members.

Herp derp.