SA Footy

But it’s easier to ignore the truth if it doesn’t suit.

what is the truth?

MW wrote:what is the truth?

That you are paying a pittance to play in our comp and that the piddly amount you are paying has more than been offset by losses from people turning their backs on the comp

Jim05 wrote:

MW wrote:what is the truth?

That you are paying a pittance to play in our comp and that the piddly amount you are paying has more than been offset by losses from people turning their backs on the comp

ok.
So the $400k p.a. is to pay for restitution because supporters loathe the AFL clubs being there and won't come?
So in reality, the $ amount is irrelevant isn't it?
From an SANFL purest point of view, it's either they are in and I am out, or they are out and I am in.

MW wrote:

Jim05 wrote:

MW wrote:what is the truth?

That you are paying a pittance to play in our comp and that the piddly amount you are paying has more than been offset by losses from people turning their backs on the comp

ok.
So the $400k p.a. is to pay for restitution because supporters loathe the AFL clubs being there and won't come?
So in reality, the $ amount is irrelevant isn't it?
From an SANFL purest point of view, it's either they are in and I am out, or they are out and I am in.

Your last sentence definitely applies to purests but for the clubs the amount does matter. The clubs need to be paid far more than $50k to recover costs. Would just be better if they were pissed off altogether though

amber_fluid wrote:

heater31 wrote:

MW wrote:

Dutchy wrote:
Time to increase their paltry $50k per season fee to play in the SANFL

I thought it was $400k crows pay (each club gets $50k).

It is....given the profit result the SANFL should review the fee they pay. Think they are causing greater financial pain than $50,000 each!

It should be a % of profit paid back to each SANFL club and not a set fee.
That’s a win/win surely for all.

On that basis wouldn’t the SANFL be paying Port

True.

But also true for the AFL clubs in the VFL and the WAFL.

Unless you call for the likes of Essendon, West Coast and North Melbourne etc to also cough, then I guess its very easy to take a stand that has no consequence.

The answer is, for the members of Glenelg, Sturt, Norwood, West, North and the quitters to have the gumption to actually do something besides piddling around the edge and get the matter resolved.

South and Central members lobbied their boards.Centrals board members sought the view of ALL the other clubs and despite assurances, especially from Norwood who did the dirty. The other six and their members did nothing and are, to be frank, the ones who are culpable.

MW wrote:

UK Fan wrote:

MW wrote:Didn't answer my question

We have adnauseum over the past 300 pages.

What a surprise a crows fan expecting to be spoon fed from sanfl supporters

Yeah you're right, $400k to just play in the same league is not spoon feeding the SANFL clubs...

50k a year to an organisation that makes $8 mill in revenue a year(cdfc) is not spoon feeding mate.

It’s drip feeding.

Its spoon feeding when the reason for it is fickle supporters leaving their club

MW wrote:Its spoon feeding when the reason for it is fickle supporters leaving their club

Coming from a club with one of the most fickle supporter bases in the AFL that’s hilarious

DOC wrote:True.

But also true for the AFL clubs in the VFL and the WAFL.

Unless you call for the likes of Essendon, West Coast and North Melbourne etc to also cough, then I guess its very easy to take a stand that has no consequence.

The answer is, for the members of Glenelg, Sturt, Norwood, West, North and the quitters to have the gumption to actually do something besides piddling around the edge and get the matter resolved.

South and Central members lobbied their boards.Centrals board members sought the view of ALL the other clubs and despite assurances, especially from Norwood who did the dirty. The other six and their members did nothing and are, to be frank, the ones who are culpable.

To be fair, I think the Eagles members probably tried as much as South's did, and were completely ignored.
I hear similar from North. correct me if I am wrong on that.

therisingblues wrote:

DOC wrote:True.

But also true for the AFL clubs in the VFL and the WAFL.

Unless you call for the likes of Essendon, West Coast and North Melbourne etc to also cough, then I guess its very easy to take a stand that has no consequence.

The answer is, for the members of Glenelg, Sturt, Norwood, West, North and the quitters to have the gumption to actually do something besides piddling around the edge and get the matter resolved.

South and Central members lobbied their boards.Centrals board members sought the view of ALL the other clubs and despite assurances, especially from Norwood who did the dirty. The other six and their members did nothing and are, to be frank, the ones who are culpable.

To be fair, I think the Eagles members probably tried as much as South's did, and were completely ignored.
I hear similar from North. correct me if I am wrong on that.

All clubs members had a percentage, some a majority, that did not want them in

You have to replace them in order to effect change.

Magellan wrote:

UK Fan wrote:

MW wrote:

Dutchy wrote:Time to increase their paltry $50k per season fee to play in the SANFL

?

Vfl clubs get $250k for afl club reserves set up
WAFL clubs get $275 for afl club reserves set up
Sanfl clubs get $50k

Crows making $3.5 mill a year.

Thanks sanfl !!!

Absolutely, they should be asked to cough up and contribute more. I'm sure the Crows' brains trust will readily admit that their SANFL side has been a critical and integral aspect of the club's success in the last few years. Since no-one apart from the Crows receives any match day benefit from playing these games, they can at least compensate the clubs who are providing their less-than-AFL standard players with a genuine football club experience, or whatever internal benefits they claim their presence offers.

In fairness the Crows have had no success this century.

Back on topic though, I used to spend 5-10k a year at my club. I now spend nothing.
Would only take 5-10 people like me and my club is down thanks to the AFL sides.
What are average crowds down? About 2k.
Do the maths.
How much rent do the Crows pay at Footy Park again?

Even simpiler maths, crowds are roughly down 2k.

For arguments sake let's say half of them were full paying adults

What a ticket worth $10 (been so long since I've gone)

That's $10k a home game down on entrance fees, that's not to mention secondary spend items such as kiosk, merchandise and gambling

It's a strange formula to suggest a club entering a competition should pay for the short comings of the other clubs revenue stream because their supporters choose not to support their teams anymore.

MW wrote:It's a strange formula to suggest a club entering a competition should pay for the short comings of the other clubs revenue stream because their supporters choose not to support their teams anymore.

It's a strange formula that a team and franchise worth millions is competing against clubs who players primary job is your local brickie and school teachers.

The world is a weird yet wonderful place

MW wrote:It's a strange formula to suggest a club entering a competition should pay for the short comings of the other clubs revenue stream because their supporters choose not to support their teams anymore.

No supporters choose not to support their teams, I tried the first year the Crows came in by re-signing up as a member of the Vice Presidents group. I just lost complete interest in a comp that has 3 sets of rules for clubs in it. 3 sets of rules that are extremely different to each other too.
Thousands of others felt the same.

I'd have no interest in the AFL too if suddenly my club got to pay about 5% of the salary cap of another, I'd have no interet in the Olympics if some competitiors got to start the 100 metre sprint 90 metres in front of others, I'd also have no interest in 30 year old playing a 2 year old at chess.

If a club wants to come in and ruin a competition they should compensate for those not interested in a ruined competition. Noone will be going in 10 years time, noone wil be members.

Don't hate on people because they enjoy fair competitions with the same rules for all competitors.
Integrity.
Some people value integrity, some don't.
Hate those who have no respect for integrity if anything.

How dare those who don't respect integrity judge and insult those that do.

I get what you are trying to say. Seems strange that Port or the Crows have not won every GF or even how have they lost a game in the last three years or however long they've been in...

MW wrote:I get what you are trying to say. Seems strange that Port or the Crows have not won every GF or even how have they lost a game in the last three years or however long they've been in...

Absolutely irrelevent, and it doesn't seem strange at all, underdogs with everything stacked against them quite often win all over the world. At the end of the day some people/organisations with massive advantages can still lose because they cant buy heart or success. But those teams/people with unfair advantages usually succeed or do better than they should or deserve to.
But as I said, thats irrelevent, its all about integrity, it wouldn't make any difference if the Crows and Power lost by 100 points each week or win by 100 points each week. It makes no difference if they win every flag or never win a flag. No difference.

IMHO Port will address that issue and win the flag easily,
maybe they may go through the season undefeated.
That may put the cat amongst the pigeons,