Magpies and Power merger to be announced in a fortnight.

[Booney]

No more "useless" than the spitefull comments from you on what, in all reality, is a subject you have little interest in. Or do you?

As for our "perceived" loyalty. I am very loyal and I'm smart enough to not have to read "Mr.Rucci's" articles to be informed. Not everyone is by the look of it though. I trust that isn't where you get your information from or form your opinion on these matters?

[Royal City]

No more "useless" than the spitefull comments from you on what, in all reality, is a subject you have little interest in. Or do you?

As for our "perceived" loyalty. I am very loyal and I'm smart enough to not have to read "Mr.Rucci's" articles to be informed. Not everyone is by the look of it though. I trust that isn't where you get your information from or form your opinion on these matters?

seems to be a few of my posts have Been applauded on this thread by other posters. Unlike you booney . Unless I have missed them.

You can deny the articles about your club failures and refuse to read them all you want. Just proves how out of touch you are with your thinly veiled snipes at the sanfl truly are. Oh. That's right you didn't try to blame anyone else. Hahaha!!!

11500 members in 1996
13500 season ticket holders on 2010
with a forecasted increase of 23% with adelaide oval. taking it up by an extra 3000 s/ticket holders per year. WOW!! that should have that $5.6 mill worth of debt paid off in no time.

To quote Troy mclure from the simpsons "port Adelaide a club on the grow" NOT!!

[Booney]

What's your concern with all of this, really?

Why so passionate? You must have some vested interest.

Or is it just because you hate Port Adelaide as you are a Dog-man?

[Ronnie]

What's your concern with all of this, really?

Why so passionate? You must have some vested interest.

Or is it just because you hate Port Adelaide as you are a Dog-man?

This isn't just an internal Port matter, it has very real ramifications for every SANFL club and the competition as a whole.

[Royal City]

What's your concern with all of this, really?

Why so passionate? You must have some vested interest.

Or is it just because you hate Port Adelaide as you are a Dog-man?

why is an sanfl fan concerned about it's investment and lack of return in an afl club. Plus defending the sanfl organisation from any blame ???

You seriously can not be this out of touch surely. Or is trying to destroy Someones motivation is port fans last resort when you have run out of excuses. I wonder ???

[beenreal]

No more "useless" than the spitefull comments from you on what, in all reality, is a subject you have little interest in. Or do you?

As for our "perceived" loyalty. I am very loyal and I'm smart enough to not have to read "Mr.Rucci's" articles to be informed. Not everyone is by the look of it though. I trust that isn't where you get your information from or form your opinion on these matters?

seems to be a few of my posts have Been applauded on this thread by other posters. Unlike you booney . Unless I have missed them.

You can deny the articles about your club failures and refuse to read them all you want. Just proves how out of touch you are with your thinly veiled snipes at the sanfl truly are. Oh. That's right you didn't try to blame anyone else. Hahaha!!!

11500 members in 1996
13500 season ticket holders on 2010
with a forecasted increase of 23% with adelaide oval. taking it up by an extra 3000 s/ticket holders per year. WOW!! that should have that $5.6 mill worth of debt paid off in no time.

To quote Troy mclure from the simpsons "port Adelaide a club on the grow" NOT!!

Nothing like patting yourself on the back RC. But you know what they say about self praise?

Your posts are based on nothing but hyperbole and rhetoric. The SANFL built Footy Park, so what? A huge amount of that revenue was generated by Port Adelaide supporters carrying the competition for over 100+ years.

The SANFL was fearful of Port being too dominant so they slashed their revenue stream and separated them on and off-field. All that did was hand a decade of dominance to your mob on a platter.

OnePAFC is now putting right what once went wrong. And (I'm over sugar-coating it) there's nothing you can do about it, so if you don't like it? STIFF!

[Sojourner]

The SANFL was fearful of Port being too dominant so they slashed their revenue stream and separated them on and off-field. All that did was hand a decade of dominance to your mob on a platter.

Don't actually disagree with that point, one could even add that the reason that the Woodville FC was brought into the competition was to clip the wings of the Magpies, yet resulted in problems for West Torrens instead. - If at first you don't succeed, try and try again perhaps?

[nickname]

The only way I can think of that OnePAFC could play in two different competitions is the way Collingwood and Geelong do it. One team in the AFL, and their reserves team in the state league. That is a scenario that the SA Football Commission and the other SANFL clubs don't want.

[Slots It Through]

The only way I can think of that OnePAFC could play in two different competitions is the way Collingwood and Geelong do it. One team in the AFL, and their reserves team in the state league. That is a scenario that the SA Football Commission and the other SANFL clubs don't want.

The Port Adelaide Magpies do not want this either. They do not want to be the reserves side, and they do not want to change colours either. The 2 Port clubs are doing it tough competing with each other in this side of town for sponsors and supporters.

[nickname]

The only way I can think of that OnePAFC could play in two different competitions is the way Collingwood and Geelong do it. One team in the AFL, and their reserves team in the state league. That is a scenario that the SA Football Commission and the other SANFL clubs don't want.

The Port Adelaide Magpies do not want this either. They do not want to be the reserves side, and they do not want to change colours either. The 2 Port clubs are doing it tough competing with each other in this side of town for sponsors and supporters.

But the 2000 -3000 people who follow the Magpies each week and don't also follow Power are hardly going to pull the Power out of their financial mire, even if all of them started following the Power. So they get 25,000 instead of 23,000...that's not going to save them.

[Royal City]

No more "useless" than the spitefull comments from you on what, in all reality, is a subject you have little interest in. Or do you?

As for our "perceived" loyalty. I am very loyal and I'm smart enough to not have to read "Mr.Rucci's" articles to be informed. Not everyone is by the look of it though. I trust that isn't where you get your information from or form your opinion on these matters?

seems to be a few of my posts have Been applauded on this thread by other posters. Unlike you booney . Unless I have missed them.

You can deny the articles about your club failures and refuse to read them all you want. Just proves how out of touch you are with your thinly veiled snipes at the sanfl truly are. Oh. That's right you didn't try to blame anyone else. Hahaha!!!

11500 members in 1996
13500 season ticket holders on 2010
with a forecasted increase of 23% with adelaide oval. taking it up by an extra 3000 s/ticket holders per year. WOW!! that should have that $5.6 mill worth of debt paid off in no time.

To quote Troy mclure from the simpsons "port Adelaide a club on the grow" NOT!!

Nothing like patting yourself on the back RC. But you know what they say about self praise?

Your posts are based on nothing but hyperbole and rhetoric. The SANFL built Footy Park, so what? A huge amount of that revenue was generated by Port Adelaide supporters carrying the competition for over 100+ years.

The SANFL was fearful of Port being too dominant so they slashed their revenue stream and separated them on and off-field. All that did was hand a decade of dominance to your mob on a platter.

OnePAFC is now putting right what once went wrong. And (I'm over sugar-coating it) there's nothing you can do about it, so if you don't like it? STIFF!

YAWN!!! Here we go again. Just to prove your not contradicting yourself and talking a pile of rheotoric or hyperbole as you normally do BR.

Lets play your uneducated game . ANy chance you could (for the 100th time) give us some proof of this "huge" amount of revenue you raised for the SANFL above all other SANFL Clubs. Could you quantify a ballpark figure of how much extra it was or maybe give us a figure as a % . Cos if you cant you are aware what you are talking BR. AGAIN!!!

BTW if Port did have this figure of extra revenue raised to hand. WHy didnt your club provide this undeniable figure to the SANFL and argue for an increase portion of AAMI stadium when it was given out equally to all SANFL clubs. Let me guess the SANFL fault this didnt happen. OR incompetence by the PAFC board ???? Or simply you didnt have the figures and are just making up an argument in retrospect.

BTW have you accepted PAFC has the lowest attendance in the AFL yet. Cos you argued all last year and labelled everyone as" jealous or having long memories. THen laughed at the suggestion Port had the lowest attandance in the AFL. And when it was proven to you did you back down or accept the figures. Or abuse the person who provided you with your clubs figures.HINT for you. PORT came last yet again this year.

I always knew you were clueless BR. But I must admit I thought Booney had some idea. You learn something knew everyday I guess.

IM so glad the SANFL gave you the second licence like you begged for. How silly of us to expect gratitude for helping you achieve your goal.

[beenreal]

My, you are a angry little man RC.

Not only can't you think up your own "rhetoric and hyperbole", you can't even get your facts straight, despite castigating others for allegedly doing the very same.

I'm too busy to bother but you obviously have (way) too much time on your hands, so if you go back to that "attendance issue", you'll note that not only did I not abuse the individual who rightly corrected me, I commended him on his superior research in that particular instance.

But that clearly doesn't suit your selective quoting.

[Royal City]

My, you are a angry little man RC.

Not only can't you think up your own "rhetoric and hyperbole", you can't even get your facts straight, despite castigating others for allegedly doing the very same.

I'm too busy to bother but you obviously have (way) too much time on your hands, so if you go back to that "attendance issue", you'll note that not only did I not abuse the individual who rightly corrected me, I commended him on his superior research in that particular instance.

But that clearly doesn't suit your selective quoting.

Easiest way to prove a man has contradicted himself is to use his own words I find. Especially when dealing with those people who obviously need things SPELLED out to them clearly as yourself.

So just to clarify you have no idea if Port Did raise any extra revenue and if they did how much extra it was ????? YOu also have no idea why Port sat idle on ths figure for 13 years only to complain in retrospect ????

You are more than welcome to argue with any of the figures i have proivded. But as of yet I havent heard anything from you or Boon but abusing others, whingeing and dodging of the blame for your clubs predicament. And Im not overly surprised I must say as that is all you Port fans do these days. Keep abusing me ad hominem it just proves that you got no facts as I have elluded to constantly thru out.


"OnePAFC is now putting right what once went wrong. And (I'm over sugar-coating it) there's nothing you can do about it, so if you don't like it? STIFF!" See Id label this rheoteric more than anything written on this entire debate .

[beenreal]

What have you offered, a few membership figures? Big deal.

As for abuse? I'd say there was a fair bit flying around, but most of it seems to be emanating from your end.

And Ports financial input? For over 100 years we had the biggest supporter base in SA and the most success, of course that translates into pumping more $$ into the SANFL. It doesn't mean they should have got more than a 1/10 share of Footy Park though.

Using that as a segue, why don't you tell us how much Port generated into the SANFL coffers last year?

[CENTURION]

who cares? Guess what? Despite all this crap, SOMETHING is going to happen & whatever happens, We won't be able to control, so let's sit down, buckle up and ENJOY THE OUTCOME!! I'm going for another Pale Ale.

[Macca19]

seems to be a few of my posts have Been applauded on this thread by other posters.

Non-Port supporter bags Port Adelaide and gets applauded by other non-Port supporters. Gee, stop the press!

[smithy]

We often bag out the WAFL for bending over but having been in the system I can understand the reasons. The WAFL didn't actually own their home ground like the SANFL did and as a result nearly every club was effectively insolvent. They only thing keeping them afloat was transfer fees for players going to the VFL, they had to join or die.

That is true Barto, from memory 7 of the 8 WAFL clubs were technically insolvent in 1984 with Claremont (i think) being the exception.

1. Before Port pushed the buttons that lead to the formation of the Crows, SA was sensibly holding out for a truly national league not run by the VFL - a worthy objective.

I did a big write up on this on bigfooty several years ago.
When the NFL was the governing body, the voting body had 12 casting members.
6 of those members came from the VFL, 1 each from the SANFL, WAFL, NTFL, QFL, TFL and NSWFL.
Basically, the VFL ran footy anyway, always getting the majority vote.
Whilst a club based national league had been discussed as far back as the mid 60's, and indeed would've been preferable, VFL clubs were just as broke as the WAFL clubs and needed that national exposure as well as the licence fees.
And off topic, did I read somewhere that Port were broke in the early 80's and NOrwood actually loaned them money ?

[Macca19]

The sanfl makes revenue out of afl games held at aami due to the fact they had the foresight to build own and pay for aami stadium. Just like the one million people in oz who own investment properties which others rent/lease. And whilst those renting/leasing provide revenue to the house/stadiums owners. That's doesn't mean the renter can claim his rent back.

Very true. Though whilst your stuck in an outdated dump transportable paying $400 a week, I think its fair to say youll get jaded and look for somewhere else to live when everyone else on your street is living in nicer, bigger, state of the art houses and only paying $180 a week.

Crows are in financial trouble due to the fact they spent $20mill on clubrooms at a stadium with no future. They would of forecasted revenue increases with having such a venue. And yet again crowds have dropped off for them and now they are making less revenue with an increase inexpenditure is affecting their bottom line.

And yet its Trigg that states every chance he gets that the number 1 issue facing the Adelaide Crows finances at the moment is their poor stadium deal. This, a club with supposedly a waiting list, twice the crowds and a hell of a lot more support than the Power will ever have, are stating that their stadium deal is a rip off.

Forget about Port for a minute. As stated numerous times by the club, Adelaide makes ~ $4.5 million less than the average stadium deal. This, a club with a waiting list, who prior to this season has sold out close to every game its ever played in. Its no wonder they have become vocal in their angst over this issue.

Can I ask you for your theory on why afl crowds continue to decrease in adelaide over thelast four years . Whilst sanfl crowds have increased everyyear over the same period. Bearing in mind we have one game go live against the gate everyweek?

Poor form can explain most of the Powers drop off in Crows. But what about the Crows. Before this year they were very consistent in making finals and playing decent football, and yet their crowds have been on a steady decline since they pretty well peaked in 03. Maybe, just maybe, the outdated stadium has something to do with it.

I have nothing really against Footy Park. It was an ok stadium and ive seen my club win a lot of big games there. But, as ive written before on this forum, it is now very outdated. What improvements have been made to Footy Park since Port came into the AFL competition? The Northern grandstand, bucket seats, video screens and a bunch of corporate facilities (of which a lot was paid and built by Port on its own accord). Now we were only what...10 years behind every other ground in the country in getting video screens and 20 years behind every other ground in the country in getting bucket seats.

Now compare this to the grounds in Melbourne. They got a brand new city located stadium which has incredibly close viewing, something that Footy Park doesnt have due to the camber of the stands. They knocked down and rebuilt about 60% of the MCG, making it one of the best stadiums in the world. At the SCG, they knocked down and rebuilt half the ground. At the Gabba, they knocked down and rebuilt over half the ground. Us South Aussies....what did we get? Bucket seats! And you wonder why people dont want to go to AAMI anymore? Its because most have been to these other grounds and realise that Footy Park is no longer the decent stadium it once was. It now trails pretty much every other AFL ground in the country.

Now I dont think the Adelaide Oval upgrade will be this big saviour of all Ports problems. In fact, im almost the complete opposite. But what it will do, is give South Australians a much better viewing experience than they currently get which when you combine the central location, should lead to bigger crowds for both clubs.

Blaming aami stadium and the sanfl is a cop out. Quite happy with eveything when you could 35000 crowds.

Adelaide get 40,000 a week and complain about the stadium deal on a regular basis yet dont see you having a crack at them all that often.

[Macca19]

Also PAFC are a club that hasn't made the finals for 3 years yet their salary cap is still full, that being the reason they need to offload Motlop to get the Walker deal through. Sounds like your accountants and negotiating team are to blame for any money troubles.

I think youll find Port are actually paying close to bare minimum of the salary cap and its more that they cant afford to pay more as opposed to their being no actual room.

[Macca19]

11500 members in 1996
13500 season ticket holders on 2010

I may have missed it, but where did this 2010 figure get reported?

ANy chance you could (for the 100th time) give us some proof of this "huge" amount of revenue you raised for the SANFL above all other SANFL Clubs.

Its not that hard to figure out is it? Port only made what...90% of finals series up until 1997 and played on average in every 2nd grand final and had the biggest supporter base in the state. If you make the (fair) assumption that the SANFL take/took the revenue from finals/grand finals, then I think it doesnt take a genius to work out that Port have given back more to the SANFL than the likes of South or Woodville or West Torrens or Centrals who had next to no success to speak of for 20-30 years up to 1997.