SANFL Stuffing up our league

[fish]

little kids will follow the Power if the Power win games, simple as that

Not if their dads have anything to do with it. I'm neutral in the AFL but there's no way I'm gonna let my two boys support Port Power.

[Psyber]

I really can't see the advantage to the SANFL of basing the two AFL teams at different ovals as has been suggested above.

Surely the increased costs of running two venues would more than counter any theoretical extra public turn out, even if there is extra turn out after they first few matches.
Similarly, I can see no gain in moving both AFL teams from an oval they own at West Lakes to one they don't own elsewhere.
There would need to be large subsidies being offered by someone with a vested interest, or they would need to make huge capital profits from selling West Lakes.

[Royal City]

I really can't see the advantage to the SANFL of basing the two AFL teams at different ovals as has been suggested above.

Surely the increased costs of running two venues would more than counter any theoretical extra public turn out, even if there is extra turn out after they first few matches.
Similarly, I can see no gain in moving both AFL teams from an oval they own at West Lakes to one they don't own elsewhere.
There would need to be large subsidies being offered by someone with a vested interest, or they would need to make huge capital profits from selling West Lakes.

Plus very hard to work out ground sponsorship agreements when teams are divided over 2 stadiums.

Can I also ask those who say we couldnt survive without AFl revenue.
On average how much "Profit" does the SANFL comp make each year for the SANFL ??????

Can I also ask how football leagues have survived in less leagues like Canberra, Northern Territory and Tasmania without an AFL team to provide essential revenue ???

[oldfella]

Mate,

Believe a lot of the answers you are seeking are in this document - have not had time to find them sorry.

http://www.sanfl.com.au/files/_system/F ... screen.pdf

[Royal City]

Do you think the SANFL and the 9 clubs are financially healthier as a group than they were 20 years ago? I think they might be.

ROYAL CITY

If you think the SANFL clubs are better off now competing with the AFl clubs for fans ,members , sponsors , tv ratings etc............ then thats your opinion. All I can say Is I 100% disagree.

BTW the SANFL clubs "FINANCIALLY" survived without pokie revenue 20 years ago. Do you honestly think we could do that now ?????

HONDO

"You keep telling me what I am saying but it's different from what I am actually saying!
I said the SANFL clubs are stronger financially now than they were say 5 years ago and possibly than they were 20 years ago"

Yep I keep reading it wrong obviously.

[doggies4eva]

I really can't see the advantage to the SANFL of basing the two AFL teams at different ovals as has been suggested above.

Surely the increased costs of running two venues would more than counter any theoretical extra public turn out, even if there is extra turn out after they first few matches.
Similarly, I can see no gain in moving both AFL teams from an oval they own at West Lakes to one they don't own elsewhere.
There would need to be large subsidies being offered by someone with a vested interest, or they would need to make huge capital profits from selling West Lakes.

Plus very hard to work out ground sponsorship agreements when teams are divided over 2 stadiums.

Can I also ask those who say we couldnt survive without AFl revenue.
On average how much "Profit" does the SANFL comp make each year for the SANFL ??????

Can I also ask how football leagues have survived in less leagues like Canberra, Northern Territory and Tasmania without an AFL team to provide essential revenue ???

Royal City - I want to try and answer your questions. First a disclaimer - the only information that I have are the SANFL, Crows and Port annual reports - this information is highly summarised so I must make some assumptions which may not be accurate.

Anyway, the SANFL distribute a little over $3M each year to the clubs - this "profit" comes from Footy Park - ie the Crows and Power games plus SANFL finals (of course some years the minor finals are at Adelaide Oval but the league receives the profit from these too).

The lesser leagues survive by paying players less, having volunteers in most positions and by having generous benefacators. The SANFL is in a better position because years ago they built their own stadium and now they own licences from 2 AFL clubs who regularly (almost) fill their 50,000 stadium. If we didn't have this revenue we would be in the same situation as the lesser leagues - ie have to take a serious back step in payments to players and staff.

[Hondo]

Royal City

I am not going to get into another hyped up debate with you. You keep saying I am calling you paranoid, etc. Which I haven't. On the other points were are debating I can't add anything more to what I have already said without repeating myself.

I am not even clear anymore exactly what point you are trying to make but without all the facts and figures in front of us I think our speculative debate has gone as far as it can. Do you? I think we are arguing opinions.

Refer doggies4eva's last post for more info (good post). As he says, the SANFL/AFC/PAFC annual reports are very summarised and I have read all of them several times over the course of our debate here and other threads in the past. I don't think there's enough detail in them to get real clarity on where and how the finances of footy flow in this state. The SANFL Inc made $7m profit in 2008 and 2009 before accounting (non cash) write offs as best I can tell. From memory that profit was a combined SANFL/AFL/PAFC profit. I haven't seen the 2010 financials.

Mate, keep up the fight the SANFL needs people like you and I mean that seriously.

[beenreal]

Guys, haven't you learned by now?

Royal city doesn't answer questions, he doesn't argue facts, he doesn't argue opinions...

He just argues.

[Hondo]

I have deja vu

Not to be confused with dedja vu

[Royal City]

I really can't see the advantage to the SANFL of basing the two AFL teams at different ovals as has been suggested above.

Surely the increased costs of running two venues would more than counter any theoretical extra public turn out, even if there is extra turn out after they first few matches.
Similarly, I can see no gain in moving both AFL teams from an oval they own at West Lakes to one they don't own elsewhere.
There would need to be large subsidies being offered by someone with a vested interest, or they would need to make huge capital profits from selling West Lakes.

Plus very hard to work out ground sponsorship agreements when teams are divided over 2 stadiums.

Can I also ask those who say we couldnt survive without AFl revenue.
On average how much "Profit" does the SANFL comp make each year for the SANFL ??????

Can I also ask how football leagues have survived in less leagues like Canberra, Northern Territory and Tasmania without an AFL team to provide essential revenue ???

Royal City - I want to try and answer your questions. First a disclaimer - the only information that I have are the SANFL, Crows and Port annual reports - this information is highly summarised so I must make some assumptions which may not be accurate.

Anyway, the SANFL distribute a little over $3M each year to the clubs - this "profit" comes from Footy Park - ie the Crows and Power games plus SANFL finals (of course some years the minor finals are at Adelaide Oval but the league receives the profit from these too).

The lesser leagues survive by paying players less, having volunteers in most positions and by having generous benefacators. The SANFL is in a better position because years ago they built their own stadium and now they own licences from 2 AFL clubs who regularly (almost) fill their 50,000 stadium. If we didn't have this revenue we would be in the same situation as the lesser leagues - ie have to take a serious back step in payments to players and staff.

So to summarise Doggies 4 eva, and I apologise if I have this wrong.

The SANFl would survive without AFL revenue. Just like the other lesser state leagues have.

The SANFL ofcourse would have less revenue then what we do now. But also youll see expenditure also significantly reduce. IM not saying the SANFL would make more $$$$ if it did this BTW.
But to suggest that we qould simply wither and die without the 2 AFl clubs is utter garbage/propaganda.

[Royal City]

Guys, haven't you learned by now?

Royal city doesn't answer questions, he doesn't argue facts, he doesn't argue opinions...

He just argues.

Why dont you tell us your revenue fact again Schultzy??? I know you love repeating that one over and over again.

Let me know if you need a hand reading the attached financials schultzy. Dont forget to read how much costs the SANFL have.

[Royal City]

Royal City

I am not going to get into another hyped up debate with you. You keep saying I am calling you paranoid, etc. Which I haven't. On the other points were are debating I can't add anything more to what I have already said without repeating myself.

I am not even clear anymore exactly what point you are trying to make but without all the facts and figures in front of us I think our speculative debate has gone as far as it can. Do you? I think we are arguing opinions.

Refer doggies4eva's last post for more info (good post). As he says, the SANFL/AFC/PAFC annual reports are very summarised and I have read all of them several times over the course of our debate here and other threads in the past. I don't think there's enough detail in them to get real clarity on where and how the finances of footy flow in this state. The SANFL Inc made $7m profit in 2008 and 2009 before accounting (non cash) write offs as best I can tell. From memory that profit was a combined SANFL/AFL/PAFC profit. I haven't seen the 2010 financials.

Mate, keep up the fight the SANFL needs people like you and I mean that seriously.

Agreed Hondo. Your of the opinion the SANFL couldnt survive without the AFL clubs. And we are better of for the AFL clubs.

I am 100% certain the SANFL would survive. My proof the SANFL is a profitable league on its own right,the survival of the NTFL & TFL etc for the last 20 years without any AFL team revenue. Plus the fact two SANFL clubs have made more money in the last decade than Port Power.

And I honestly think if you ask any SANFL CEO about their clubs finances from 1991 - 2010 they would answer "it has been a real challenge" . I doubt theyll answer " it has been fine the AFL clubs have provided everything we require".

I think people are just to stubborn in their beliefs that this was all inevitable.
The writing has been on the wall for many years. The blaring alarm that cant be denied not forgetting PAFC's finacial situation. Is now the Adelaide Football CLub hs struggled to make a significant profit for the last 2 years(wrote off a large loss last year). And has no huge forecast in site for this seasons profit either.

Are we to believe this lack of profitability 10 years into the 2 teams joining the AFL was also inevitable and all part of the big plan ???

Or is this inevitable plan not exactly working out as people expected.

I know which one the recent cost cutting trends of the SANFL lead me to believe.

[CENTURION]

Guys, haven't you learned by now?

Royal city doesn't answer questions, he doesn't argue facts, he doesn't argue opinions...

He just argues.

OH no he doesn't!

[doggies4eva]

I really can't see the advantage to the SANFL of basing the two AFL teams at different ovals as has been suggested above.

Surely the increased costs of running two venues would more than counter any theoretical extra public turn out, even if there is extra turn out after they first few matches.
Similarly, I can see no gain in moving both AFL teams from an oval they own at West Lakes to one they don't own elsewhere.
There would need to be large subsidies being offered by someone with a vested interest, or they would need to make huge capital profits from selling West Lakes.

Plus very hard to work out ground sponsorship agreements when teams are divided over 2 stadiums.

Can I also ask those who say we couldnt survive without AFl revenue.
On average how much "Profit" does the SANFL comp make each year for the SANFL ??????

Can I also ask how football leagues have survived in less leagues like Canberra, Northern Territory and Tasmania without an AFL team to provide essential revenue ???

Royal City - I want to try and answer your questions. First a disclaimer - the only information that I have are the SANFL, Crows and Port annual reports - this information is highly summarised so I must make some assumptions which may not be accurate.

Anyway, the SANFL distribute a little over $3M each year to the clubs - this "profit" comes from Footy Park - ie the Crows and Power games plus SANFL finals (of course some years the minor finals are at Adelaide Oval but the league receives the profit from these too).

The lesser leagues survive by paying players less, having volunteers in most positions and by having generous benefacators. The SANFL is in a better position because years ago they built their own stadium and now they own licences from 2 AFL clubs who regularly (almost) fill their 50,000 stadium. If we didn't have this revenue we would be in the same situation as the lesser leagues - ie have to take a serious back step in payments to players and staff.

So to summarise Doggies 4 eva, and I apologise if I have this wrong.

The SANFl would survive without AFL revenue. Just like the other lesser state leagues have.

The SANFL ofcourse would have less revenue then what we do now. But also youll see expenditure also significantly reduce. IM not saying the SANFL would make more $$$$ if it did this BTW.
But to suggest that we qould simply wither and die without the 2 AFl clubs is utter garbage/propaganda.

Well RC that is a matter of speculation and opinion. I would think that with less revenue and lower player payments that crowds would drop off and some clubs would be unviable - it would lead to a different looking setup to what we have now. My philosophy is that we must grow or die. That is why I have often advocated on this site some innovative ideas. I suspect that real change will only happen when a crisis is reached.

[doggies4eva]

Guys, haven't you learned by now?

Royal city doesn't answer questions, he doesn't argue facts, he doesn't argue opinions...

He just argues.

OH no he doesn't!

That's not an argument - its just a simple denial of fact

[Royal City]

Plus very hard to work out ground sponsorship agreements when teams are divided over 2 stadiums.

Can I also ask those who say we couldnt survive without AFl revenue.
On average how much "Profit" does the SANFL comp make each year for the SANFL ??????

Can I also ask how football leagues have survived in less leagues like Canberra, Northern Territory and Tasmania without an AFL team to provide essential revenue ???

Royal City - I want to try and answer your questions. First a disclaimer - the only information that I have are the SANFL, Crows and Port annual reports - this information is highly summarised so I must make some assumptions which may not be accurate.

Anyway, the SANFL distribute a little over $3M each year to the clubs - this "profit" comes from Footy Park - ie the Crows and Power games plus SANFL finals (of course some years the minor finals are at Adelaide Oval but the league receives the profit from these too).

The lesser leagues survive by paying players less, having volunteers in most positions and by having generous benefacators. The SANFL is in a better position because years ago they built their own stadium and now they own licences from 2 AFL clubs who regularly (almost) fill their 50,000 stadium. If we didn't have this revenue we would be in the same situation as the lesser leagues - ie have to take a serious back step in payments to players and staff.

So to summarise Doggies 4 eva, and I apologise if I have this wrong.

The SANFl would survive without AFL revenue. Just like the other lesser state leagues have.

The SANFL ofcourse would have less revenue then what we do now. But also youll see expenditure also significantly reduce. IM not saying the SANFL would make more $$$$ if it did this BTW.
But to suggest that we qould simply wither and die without the 2 AFl clubs is utter garbage/propaganda.

Well RC that is a matter of speculation and opinion. I would think that with less revenue and lower player payments that crowds would drop off and some clubs would be unviable - it would lead to a different looking setup to what we have now. My philosophy is that we must grow or die. That is why I have often advocated on this site some innovative ideas. I suspect that real change will only happen when a crisis is reached.

And that is your opinion. I cant agree that crowds would drop off at all is all I can say mate.

I dont think its unrealistic to expect SANFL clubs could expect an increase in patronage , sponsorship and members without AFL clubs competing in its market.

Personally I think we are not to far off a state of crisis now and thats why we are being forced to make changes . The Port debt/merger the proposed move to Adelaide Oval due to lack of crowds and AAMI stadium being made the scapegoat. Alarm bells should be ringing.

[doggies4eva]

RC. There is no doubt that SANFL crowds would rise if there was no AFL - but there is - and even if teh SANFL sold or relinquished their licences the AFL would still have 2 teams in SA.

So your premise is based on something that won't happen.

I do agree that we are at or near crisis. You only have to read the latest annual report to see that the doggies are struggling off-field, Port have ahd to restructure and it would not be unreasonable to assume that 1 or 2 others are doing it tough.

New ideas like the 2nd tier comp need to be tried - although they need to be structured so that the SANFL clubs get maximum benefit!

I therefore agree that the SANFL is stuffing up the league by the ham-fisted way that they are handling new opportunities.

[redandblack]

If they're trying to stuff up the league, they're not doing a very good job of it

[beenreal]

Guys, haven't you learned by now?

Royal city doesn't answer questions, he doesn't argue facts, he doesn't argue opinions...

He just argues.

Why dont you tell us your revenue fact again Schultzy??? I know you love repeating that one over and over again.

Let me know if you need a hand reading the attached financials schultzy. Dont forget to read how much costs the SANFL have.

Petty insults from a know it all, blow hard like you impress me less in 2011 than they did in 2010.

Didn't think that was possible. Congratulations RC, you've actually achieved something.

[Royal City]

Guys, haven't you learned by now?

Royal city doesn't answer questions, he doesn't argue facts, he doesn't argue opinions...

He just argues.

Why dont you tell us your revenue fact again Schultzy??? I know you love repeating that one over and over again.

Let me know if you need a hand reading the attached financials schultzy. Dont forget to read how much costs the SANFL have.

Petty insults from a know it all, blow hard like you impress me less in 2011 than they did in 2010.

Didn't think that was possible. Congratulations RC, you've actually achieved something.

Good to see you have added nothing to the debate as always Schultzy!!!

some things never change!!!!