Magpies and Power merger to be announced in a fortnight.

[topsywaldron]

The AFL made $213m in 2009 apparently.

Which makes the SANFL's $4M handout to the Power even more questionable. It's time to go now Leigh.

Do the SANFL own the rights to club names and jumpers in the same way the AFL do? If not maybe North and Centrals can help fund a breakaway league.

Partland's article was a ripper this morning, clearly laying out the moral paucity of Port's position. Thank Christ he wrote it.

[Macca19]

can yo provide proof that it will not happen?

proof 1 is Essendon, Hawthorn, Collingwood and to a lesser extent Western Bulldogs who have all over the last 1-20 years looked to grow their membership/supporter base in different markets not appeal to the same market. Essendon, Collingwood and Hawthorn have all thrived and improved their financial health. Western Bulldogs have been able to stave off financial extiction - what Port need to do.

I dont see how Essendon or Collingwood (or Hawthorn really) can be used as any sort of proof in this argument. Both Collingwood and Essendon have improved their supporter base by doing the exact opposite of what you and many others think Port should do. They did it by relentlessly promoting who they are and what they stand for. Hell....neither club would have a bar of clash guernseys for the best part of a decade because of the thought it would dilute their brand. They have pushed and promoted their brand to the nth degree. Everyone else thinks that Port should change their name, change their guernsey, completely erase their history and tradition, have zero links to anything to do with Port Adelaide. How is that anything near what Essendon and Collingwood have done? Hawthorn have successfully marketed themselves to Tasmania, but they arent the Tassie PreyBirds with zero links to Hawthorn roots.

The Bulldogs and the Kangaroos have stayed alive for the sole fact the AFL have made them stay alive with millions of dollars....same as what is currently happening with the Power. If the thought is to get Port Adelaide off life support then those two clubs also arent evidence of it really working. And as Hondo said, Brisbane are losing $2 million a year with regularity so its not like Port are the only AFL club losing money.

[ca]

Maybe three years. Then it will be the Power "killing" off the Magpies and gaining what they were after - the pokies.

Thats what i'm afraid of to be honest.
I don't trust the Power 1 bit.

This is what I think will happen. The Power cant sustain themselves at the moment but are now going to take on a SANFL club. IN a couple of years they will say "it's all too hard" and shut down the SANFL operation now that they've got all the assets.

Exactly right, I bet money that it won't take long for someone atv the Power to say the Magpies are a drain financially on the Power.

[Wedgie]

At least this thread gives people something to do for the entire off season. I'm guessing 27 pages.
It's the 2010 running sheet!

Getting close, might have to lock it soon!

[Booney]

At least this thread gives people something to do for the entire off season. I'm guessing 27 pages.
It's the 2010 running sheet!

Getting close, might have to lock it soon!

Now the decision has been made mate, we might just go around in circles for another 20 odd pages.

[Macca19]

The AFL made $213m in 2009 apparently.

Which makes the SANFL's $4M handout to the Power even more questionable. It's time to go now Leigh.

Do the SANFL own the rights to club names and jumpers in the same way the AFL do? If not maybe North and Centrals can help fund a breakaway league.

Partland's article was a ripper this morning, clearly laying out the moral paucity of Port's position. Thank Christ he wrote it.

Partlands article was one of a scared little man with a chip on his shoulder about Port Adelaide and Victoria. Nothing more.

[Booney]

The AFL made $213m in 2009 apparently.

Which makes the SANFL's $4M handout to the Power even more questionable. It's time to go now Leigh.

Do the SANFL own the rights to club names and jumpers in the same way the AFL do? If not maybe North and Centrals can help fund a breakaway league.

Partland's article was a ripper this morning, clearly laying out the moral paucity of Port's position. Thank Christ he wrote it.

Partlands article was one of a scared little man with a chip on his shoulder about Port Adelaide and Victoria. Nothing more.

The amount of crap Rucci cops is well warranted,I agree 100%, but if Partland isnt ridiculed for his self-indulgent piece of tripe then we need not worry about priniting anything ever again. He really took the opportunity to give his "editorial" on the story when that's not what he is.

[Ronnie]

The AFL made $213m in 2009 apparently.

Which makes the SANFL's $4M handout to the Power even more questionable. It's time to go now Leigh.

Do the SANFL own the rights to club names and jumpers in the same way the AFL do? If not maybe North and Centrals can help fund a breakaway league.

Partland's article was a ripper this morning, clearly laying out the moral paucity of Port's position. Thank Christ he wrote it.

Partlands article was one of a scared little man with a chip on his shoulder about Port Adelaide and Victoria. Nothing more.

A scared little man? interesting description. Scared of what, or whom??
I actually thought he put things in their context a lot better than the absent one would ever attempt to do.
AFL interference, the threat that AFL reserves side pose to the SANFL comp, these and others issues are legitimate concerns, for anyone who cares about a strong SANFL.
The basic point is that the AFL licences need to be financially viable for the benefit of the SANFL clubs, and be a decent return on their investments.

[Macca19]

Booney is right. If Rucci wrote that about the Crows or any SANFL club you'd never hear the end of it. Talkback radio and online fora would go into meltdown. But because its about Port Adelaide....hey what a ripper article! Forget the fact its full of spiteful bullshit and riddled with mistruths and lies....why would that matter!

[sjt]

Booney is right. If Rucci wrote that about the Crows or any SANFL club you'd never hear the end of it. Talkback radio and online fora would go into meltdown. But because its about Port Adelaide....hey what a ripper article! Forget the fact its full of spiteful bullshit and riddled with mistruths and lies....why would that matter!

You guys lost me. What are the mistruths and lies, in the article? What (even as Port supporters) do you disagree with? "Because it's about Port Adelaide".. it's about Port Adelaide because they've just merged with Port Power. Who should it be about?
Maybe I thought it was good, because I agreed with it. I'd be interested in hearing the opposing view and reasons.

[Psyber]

OK. It has been reported as unanimously approved so they must have presented a convincing case for the financial merger with suitable promises of functional separation.
It will be interesting to see what happens next, and whether the deal gets renegotiated later.
I wonder how long before we get, "We're struggling and must be saved so you must let the Magpies be our seconds team."
Any predictions?

[Jim05]

Intetested in who the true port fans are when the sanfl programs magpies games at the same time power are playing at home. Guess we will see what allegiances they have

[Hodges 153!]

Curtain raisers, Jimbo.

Looking forward to it.

[once_were_warriors]

Agree that Partlands article was one sided , must be taking lessons from Rucci.

At no time have either of them reported both sides factually.

The way I see it:

Powers key objectives in order

1. Gain Prince of Wales Hotel
2. Eliminate arguement on who is the real Port
3. Gains financially from joint sponorship and administration costs
4. Potentially gain more members
5. Saves the Magpies

Magpies benifits

1.Underwritten by Power

Magpies non benifits:

1.Have lost control of their destiny as an SANFL Club.

SANFL Clubs objections:

1.Magpies now have achieved something that no other SANFL club can have , be financially underwitten
SANFL/AFL underwrites Power who underwrites Magpies.
2. Provides a conduit for the potential intergration of a Power and Crows Reserve Side into the SANFL.

SANFL benifits:

Potentially reducing exposure to continually fork out monies to prop up the Power.



Personally I agree with the SANFL clubs objections.

I am going to hate the day that another SANFL club folds due to poor financials due no one underwrighting them.

I will mourn the day the SANFL includes Power and Crow reserve teams into the competition

[Psyber]

Curtain raisers, Jimbo. Looking forward to it.

Will the supporters of other teams who want to see their team thrash the Magpies have to pay to watch the Power too?

[Hodges 153!]

Curtain raisers, Jimbo. Looking forward to it.

Will the supporters of other teams who want to see their team thrash the Magpies have to pay to watch the Power too?

Dont care.

[Macca19]

You guys lost me. What are the mistruths and lies, in the article?

1)
The Power did not care for the Magpies when it went into the big league in 1997

Pure unadulterated horse shit. Port Adelaide was the one who wanted the Magpies to remain in the SANFL. The other clubs attempted to stop the Magpies from competing in the SANFL and it was Port Adelaide who go the SANFL to agree that Port should have a presence in the SANFL. However, they wanted a situation like what will happen now. Two teams run seperately under the one club. Again, the split etc. was organised by the SANFL and the other clubs, not Port Adelaide.

2)
But among the early requests from the Power front office will be another set of keys to be cut for the Prince of Wales Hotel. It can deny it until it is red in the face but this is a key component of the Power’s push for the merger.

The club has stated this was one of its aims previously. It has never denied that it wanted the POW. So again, bull shit.

3)
The Power said it had a better business plan on the table this time. But does it?

How would he know if it isnt? Mischeivous comment.

4)
Don’t be surprised if the Magpies cease to exist in a few years.

Again, mischeivous comment. There is nothing to suggest that the Power will shut down the Magpies except for online chitchat. Im sure the SANFL will have something to say about it too.

5)
They have introduced a rookie draft in March, so clubs prepare all summer and then could lose a key player on the eve of the first round.

Again, just plain bull shit. The PS/Rookie draft is in December and hasnt been held at the start of the new year for a long time.

6)
The concern now is the merger will spark another push for the Crows and Power to have reserves teams in the SANFL.

Whilst true, it probably will, its the Crows that seem to be pushing louder for this to happen. A fact that is conveniently overlooked though.

No talk of the potential positives of the move at all. Its a nothing piece, written by a nothing "journalist". And for all the legitimate shit that Rucci cops, when he writes something as spiteful and ridiculous like that about another club, you let me know!

[whufc]

RIP SANFL

[fish]

RIP SANFL

If this is true whufc, why did our SANFL club vote for it?

[on the rails]

They have introduced a rookie draft in March, so clubs prepare all summer and then could lose a key player on the eve of the first round.

Again, just plain bull ****. The PS/Rookie draft is in December and hasnt been held at the start of the new year for a long time.

Macca - there is an additional top up draft in March from 2011 onwards to cater for pre-season injuries etc so potentially a decent mature age player could be nabbed from a SANFL club which of course will hurt them in trying to cover that loss a week or two from the start of the season.