Port Magpies Crisis

[X Runna]

That's getting off topic a bit though, the point is the Magpies/Power situation is a very unique one, the questions are how much more they're disadvantaged than other clubs? are they disadvantaged? should the Power even exist and as they knew what they were getting into in the mid 90s should both clubs just be allowed to follow out their natural discourse as nothing's really changed since then?

They'd like to be able to share off field administration which is smart business and something a lot of businesses do, one could argue there's nothing stopping other SANFL clubs merging their adminisration with other businesses too. But I suspect their would be suspicioun that not only would give this the Magpies a slight advantage other clubs don't have access too as freely but there might also be behind the scenes benefits which might occur.

A hard one

Yes it is hard, and merged administration would be one thing other clubs would want to be sure was above board. On the flip side of the merged admin being a potential advantage, I'd suggest that the club having to start with very few assets in 1997 presents them with a new disadvantage as unlike other clubs, their asset base with which to borrow against or derive revenue from was crippled. This was how it had to be because the assets needed to be in the main movedto support the AFL side, but it means the maggies probably have the smallest asset set in the comp. (I could be wrong) ... but this makes it hard for them to trade their way out.

Great posts, explains things very well.....

What a lot of people (with respect, the majority being non Port supporters) fail to realise and was obviously not considered by the two clubs at the onset is that in one of the lowest socio-economic parts of Adelaide, many supporters can only afford to support one club & can only afford to go to either the Power or Magpies games each week, not both.

Other SANFL clubs do not have this issue. Whilst the Crows have a large membership and I believe, a waiting list - in reality they have only drawn an average of 5,000 to 6,000 supporters from each of the other 8 SANFL clubs, but the demand has been met.

Furthermore, being situated at West Lakes, the Crows do not have a supporter 'conflict' in the same location as any SANFL club, as both Port clubs do. Therefore, the 8 other SANFL clubs still have every opportunity to canvas local businesses & local residents for support. From what I have seen on guernseys, a good deal of SANFL club sponsorship is achieved from local business.

Looking at the Power/Magpies situation, I can see the majority of local businesses down the Port preferring to see their names on the Power's sponsor's board in preference to the Magpies.

Similarly, again in a poor economic environment, Port supporters are being asked to drink, eat & gamble at the Prince of Wales Hotel AND the Port Club. The few who can afford to go to one, are more likely to head to Queen Street than the pub.

In the above I have made the assumption, as would have both the Port clubs in 1996, that Port Magpie supporters, across the board, would align their AFL support to the Power. Unfortunately this did not happen either, so where Port as the Magpies had these people on board - they are now pretty well non Port Adelaide people due to the increasing popularity of the AFL and the circa 1990 overnight diminishing of the SANFL.

In a nutshell, too much is being asked of both sets of Port Adelaide supporters due to locality.........however that locality can not afford to support both clubs. Even those not in the Port localilty have difficulty financially supporting both clubs.One can't get blood out of a stone, especially twice.........

Where from here I don't know. As a Magpie supporter for 30 odd years at the time, my support was always going to follow Port into the AFL. Personally, I would have been more than happy if the Magpies folded & transitioned into the Power in 1996/97. It would have been following the same club as it grew to greater heights (albeit losing our logo and branding), however as the Magpies stayed as the Magpies and stayed in the competition - now I feel it would be a tragedy if they folded as the Magpies.

The proposed merger will I'm sure, alleviate a lot of the administration/marketing costs of both clubs, & particulary help the Magpies in this area. On field, I am sure the condition of acceptance of the merger by the SANFL will ensure the Magpies do not get any unfair advantage of Power listed players.

Just hope like hell if it does go through, the Magpies get to keep their name and logo.

[darley16]

The only question is "will the comp be better off or worse off under this proposal"?
To me it's clear, better off under the merge plan. Therefore YES to the proposal and the Maggies stay.

[Grahaml]

And all this time we heard North complaining they didn't get enough help. Here was their chance to show the comp how it should have been done and they're trying to tell the football community what? That North should have been left to rot and die? So now when we hear North Adelaide bleating about how they should have been helped by other clubs we can tell them that their own club feels opposition clubs don't deserve help. Fair enough to get the info and then vote against it if it looks like it's not good enough, but to not get the info? That is the mindset of a paranoid and weak club.

[dedja]

And all this time we heard North complaining they didn't get enough help. Here was their chance to show the comp how it should have been done and they're trying to tell the football community what? That North should have been left to rot and die? So now when we hear North Adelaide bleating about how they should have been helped by other clubs we can tell them that their own club feels opposition clubs don't deserve help. Fair enough to get the info and then vote against it if it looks like it's not good enough, but to not get the info? That is the mindset of a paranoid and weak club.

what he said ...

[nickname]

What a lot of people (with respect, the majority being non Port supporters) fail to realise and was obviously not considered by the two clubs at the onset is that in one of the lowest socio-economic parts of Adelaide, many supporters can only afford to support one club & can only afford to go to either the Power or Magpies games each week, not both.

That situation won't change under the amended proposal. But Port's thinking seems to be that merging the two clubs will mean more Port supporters will follow both teams.

[Wedgie]

And all this time we heard North complaining they didn't get enough help. Here was their chance to show the comp how it should have been done and they're trying to tell the football community what? That North should have been left to rot and die? So now when we hear North Adelaide bleating about how they should have been helped by other clubs we can tell them that their own club feels opposition clubs don't deserve help. Fair enough to get the info and then vote against it if it looks like it's not good enough, but to not get the info? That is the mindset of a paranoid and weak club.

North complained at the time they got no help.
They're saying other clubs should get the same help and although I disagree with their stance I certainly can understand it.
The fact of the matter that North were left to rot and die by the SANFL, they're just saying all clubs should get the same treatement.
I do agree they should at least look at the info, IMHO its the mindset of a very bitter group of people but I can understand their bitterness.
At the end of the day will the SANFL (and North) be better or worse off without the Magpies?
North are so wealthy it makes no difference to them but it will make a difference to some.
At the end of the day the North board are backed up by most North supporters/members who I've seen discuss the issue so I suppose they're just doing their job in representing their members.
Also, at least they're honest, there's probably clubs that have already made up their mind but don't have the guts to say what North have and make their position clear instead of playing the political game.

PS Good post X Runna with plenty of great points and a good read.

[dedja]

And all this time we heard North complaining they didn't get enough help. Here was their chance to show the comp how it should have been done and they're trying to tell the football community what? That North should have been left to rot and die? So now when we hear North Adelaide bleating about how they should have been helped by other clubs we can tell them that their own club feels opposition clubs don't deserve help. Fair enough to get the info and then vote against it if it looks like it's not good enough, but to not get the info? That is the mindset of a paranoid and weak club.

North complained at the time they got no help.
They're saying other clubs should get the same help and although I disagree with their stance I certainly can understand it.
The fact of the matter that North were left to rot and die by the SANFL, they're just saying all clubs should get the same treatement.
I do agree they should at least look at the info, IMHO its the mindset of a very bitter group of people but I can understand their bitterness.
At the end of the day will the SANFL (and North) be better or worse off without the Magpies?
North are so wealthy it makes no difference to them but it will make a difference to some.
At the end of the day the North board are backed up by most North supporters/members who I've seen discuss the issue so I suppose they're just doing their job in representing their members.
Also, at least they're honest, there's probably clubs that have already made up their mind but don't have the guts to say what North have and make their position clear instead of playing the political game.

... and that's a fair reply.

[nickname]

The only question is "will the comp be better off or worse off under this proposal"?
To me it's clear, better off under the merge plan. Therefore YES to the proposal and the Maggies stay.

If you knew that Adelaide would insist on having their own second team in the SANFL if the merger goes through, would you still think the comp would be better off?

[darley16]

No Nickname, i don't beleive this is on the table.

[Pseudo]

If and when the merged entity achieves positive cash flow and regular operating profits, i.e. when the club(s) are out of trouble, will the merger be reversed? Or will Port Magpies be allowed continued existence with its admin being propped up by the AFL dollar, thereby enjoying a clear advantage over the remaining teams? It's one thing to suggest a merger to save a club; it's another thing entirely to allow that club an advantage when it is no longer needed. Allowing this merger may well be opening Pandora's box, which club will be next?

[baysman]

If and when the merged entity achieves positive cash flow and regular operating profits, i.e. when the club(s) are out of trouble, will the merger be reversed? Or will Port Magpies be allowed continued existence with its admin being propped up by the AFL dollar, thereby enjoying a clear advantage over the remaining teams? It's one thing to suggest a merger to save a club; it's another thing entirely to allow that club an advantage when it is no longer needed. Allowing this merger may well be opening Pandora's box, which club will be next?

On the money Pseudo !

[Barto]

North Adelaide are perfectly in their rights to do what is in the best interest of North Adelaide, which is precisely what Port did in 1990. I would expect Sturt to do the same: if the current board determines that the Port merger will benefit us and secondly the competition as a whole then they will vote accordingly.

My major concern is if we save them and several years down the track we are again in a precarious financial position and are seeking help while Port are again financially stable, will Port vote to save us? They've made it very difficult to trust them based on past actions.

[mackdaddy]

opinions aside on whether the magpies shouldve been allowed to stay in the SANFL....

the fact is the club is at a $400k disadvantage to every other club as thats roughly what it costs to lease the POW hotel. whereas other clubs own there own facilities and venues

[Booney]

North Adelaide are perfectly in their rights to do what is in the best interest of North Adelaide, which is precisely what Port did in 1990. I would expect Sturt to do the same: if the current board determines that the Port merger will benefit us and secondly the competition as a whole then they will vote accordingly.

My major concern is if we save them and several years down the track we are again in a precarious financial position and are seeking help while Port are again financially stable, will Port vote to save us? They've made it very difficult to trust them based on past actions.

20+ years on I think the administration and managment are a slightly different group to the group you are referring to.

[Barto]

North Adelaide are perfectly in their rights to do what is in the best interest of North Adelaide, which is precisely what Port did in 1990. I would expect Sturt to do the same: if the current board determines that the Port merger will benefit us and secondly the competition as a whole then they will vote accordingly.

My major concern is if we save them and several years down the track we are again in a precarious financial position and are seeking help while Port are again financially stable, will Port vote to save us? They've made it very difficult to trust them based on past actions.

20+ years on I think the administration and managment are a slightly different group to the group you are referring to.

This is always true but there are many times when people see just the entity and maintain the rage. North Adelaide's wounds still appear raw.

[topsywaldron]

the fact is the club is at a $400k disadvantage to every other club as thats roughly what it costs to lease the POW hotel. whereas other clubs own there own facilities and venues

And that's our problem because...?

[topsywaldron]

North are so wealthy it makes no difference to them but it will make a difference to some.

By that premise you'll finish up playing Centrals each week or only with yourselves.

[Hodges 153!]

Sorry if this has been posted already but when will the vote take place to determine whether Port's x 2 proposal is a goer for 2010?

Funny how Port seems to polarise opinion ... always have and always will.

I for one hope that they survive.

Brett Duncanson was on 5AA last night, and said Feb 9 is the day.

Should the proposal get the green light at this stage, PAFC and PAMFC would then present it to their respective members.

[nickname]

No Nickname, i don't beleive this is on the table.

I'm pretty sure it is.

[nickname]

If and when the merged entity achieves positive cash flow and regular operating profits, i.e. when the club(s) are out of trouble, will the merger be reversed? Or will Port Magpies be allowed continued existence with its admin being propped up by the AFL dollar, thereby enjoying a clear advantage over the remaining teams? It's one thing to suggest a merger to save a club; it's another thing entirely to allow that club an advantage when it is no longer needed. Allowing this merger may well be opening Pandora's box, which club will be next?

Agreed Pseudo, though I would go further and say I don't think they should get the advantage of being propped up by the AFL dollar from day one.