SA Footy

As just mentioned on 5AA by David Wildy, North Adelaide are lodging Court Action on the SANFL to stop them giving money to prop up the Port Adelaide Power AFL Club. It has been stated that Sturt, West Adelaide and Port Adelaide are knife edge and giving Port this money is believed by the NAFC to have the capacity to push one or more of these clubs over the edge through a shortfall in funding.

Again this is my translation of what I heard on the radio, others closer to the action may be able to correct or add to the details above.

Thoughts?

Good on North for standing by what they think is right.

This will appear to be the thoughts of a Port Adelaide person, but do North really seriously think that the SANFL are more concernced about losing ( potentially ) the AFL licence Port Adelaide use or Sturt/West/Port.

I dont want to see any SANFL clubs disappear, but the SANFL have to look after what makes them the most money.

Im sure others and not just Port fans will see where the SANFL is coming from in this "business decision"*.





* Yes, us punters dont see it as business because of our untold passion for the clubs we love and the game but this is all about the $$$$$ *

Is this supposed to be in the joke of the day or are you claiming it's ridgy didge?

So let me get this right ...

The SANFL gives PAFC some financial relief to help relieve debt but PAFC contributes significantly to the SANFL coffers (for being the AFL licence holder) on an annual basis ... seems reasonable to me.

All the SANFL clubs benefit financially from the vast sums generated by the AFC and PAFC as a dividend is paid each year to them from the SANFL ... no problem here either.

The SANFL clubs are effectively operating in a niche market and make do with limited funds and earning capacity, and without the SANFL dividend it would be hard to imagine than many of the clubs would survive ... all making sense.

With the revenue from the it's AFL licences, the SANFL is able to reinvest to augment and improve it's assets, the main one being football park ... mmm, that's good too.

Now, this is where is goes a tad skewy, apparently NAFC think that 3 other SANFL clubs are doing it hard, and because of that, they are more deserving of funds than PAFC, so they are going to take the SANFL to court to stop them providing those funds to PAFC ... did I get this bit correct?

Makes perfect sense to me ...

If they've done it then its fantastic and well done to them for standing up to the SANFL on yet another matter that the SANFL has stuffed up. The SANFL made their own bed in 2003 when they left a SANFL club in the lurch keen on getting rid of the bye.

On the negative I can see us getting a crap draw again next year!

Only thing that makes me query this is North have nothing to gain out of it but the Magpies, Sturt and maybe 1 or 2 other clubs do. Would there be a hidden agenda or are North just really nice championing the cause of the poorer clubs? Hmmm.
Or are they just doing it on principal after what happened in 2003 and know only too well what its like to be in that situation?

Sojourner wrote:As just mentioned on 5AA by David Wildy, North Adelaide are lodging Court Action on the SANFL to stop them giving money to prop up the Port Adelaide Power AFL Club. It has been stated that Sturt, West Adelaide and Port Adelaide are knife edge and giving Port this money is believed by the NAFC to have the capacity to push one or more of these clubs over the edge through a shortfall in funding.

Again this is my translation of what I heard on the radio, others closer to the action may be able to correct or add to the details above.

Thoughts?

All SANFL clubs should do the same.Well done NAFC.

Every SANFL club has debt they would love to be rid of.

dedja wrote:The SANFL gives PAFC some financial relief to help relieve debt but PAFC contributes significantly to the SANFL coffers (for being the AFL licence holder) on an annual basis ... seems reasonable to me.

When did this start to happen?

dedja wrote:Is this supposed to be in the joke of the day or are you claiming it's ridgy didge?

So let me get this right ...

The SANFL gives PAFC some financial relief to help relieve debt but PAFC contributes significantly to the SANFL coffers (for being the AFL licence holder) on an annual basis ... seems reasonable to me.

All the SANFL clubs benefit financially from the vast sums generated by the AFC and PAFC as a dividend is paid each year to them from the SANFL ... no problem here either.

The SANFL clubs are effectively operating in a niche market and make do with limited funds and earning capacity, and without the SANFL dividend it would be hard to imagine than many of the clubs would survive ... all making sense.

With the revenue from the it's AFL licences, the SANFL is able to reinvest to augment and improve it's assets, the main one being football park ... mmm, that's good too.

Now, this is where is goes a tad skewy, apparently NAFC think that 3 other SANFL clubs are doing it hard, and because of that, they are more deserving of funds than PAFC, so they are going to take the SANFL to court to stop them providing those funds to PAFC ... did I get this bit correct?

Makes perfect sense to me ...

Agree dedja.

The AFL clubs are there to support the SANFL and its clubs and if the SANFL need to chip in money to help the Power get into a position, firstly of sustainability, then of strength, then that is only going to help the SANFL clubs in the long run.

I couldn't give a stuff how much money my club makes, as long as they have enough to survive and remain competitive on the field.

Port Power (or whatever is the 2nd SANFL AFL license) will be of more help financially to my club in the long run than North Adelaide will.

I think this is a selfish act by the NAFC, disguised as a "you should be helping out the struggling SANFL clubs, not Port Power". North would be one of the clubs that would flourish if we cut ties with the AFL all together and abolished salary caps and other restrictions designed to even up on the field.

I think we'd lose (and would have lost) more clubs in the past two decades if it wasn't for the success of the Crows and the money they have been able to put back into the SANFL.

dedja wrote:Is this supposed to be in the joke of the day or are you claiming it's ridgy didge?

So let me get this right ...

The SANFL gives PAFC some financial relief to help relieve debt but PAFC contributes significantly to the SANFL coffers (for being the AFL licence holder) on an annual basis ... seems reasonable to me.

All the SANFL clubs benefit financially from the vast sums generated by the AFC and PAFC as a dividend is paid each year to them from the SANFL ... no problem here either.

The SANFL clubs are effectively operating in a niche market and make do with limited funds and earning capacity, and without the SANFL dividend it would be hard to imagine than many of the clubs would survive ... all making sense.

With the revenue from the it's AFL licences, the SANFL is able to reinvest to augment and improve it's assets, the main one being football park ... mmm, that's good too.

Now, this is where is goes a tad skewy, apparently NAFC think that 3 other SANFL clubs are doing it hard, and because of that, they are more deserving of funds than PAFC, so they are going to take the SANFL to court to stop them providing those funds to PAFC ... did I get this bit correct?

Makes perfect sense to me ...

Maybe if Port actually paid its dividends. We wouldnt have to go thru all this.

Interesting the SANFL has done so much for Port. For so little gratitude.

Aerie wrote:I couldn't give a stuff how much money my club makes, as long as they have enough to survive and remain competitive on the field.

Personally I and I would think most on here are the opposite. I/We couldn't give a stuff if they have enough to survive and remain competitive on the field, all I and most are worred about are how much they make. The power are a business to help us make money. Sturt, the Magpies, etc are football clubs which the previously mentioned business should help finance. If other avenues can help the Magpies and Sturt better than they should be pursued, ideally they should have been pursued in 1996 when it was obvious to most that the Power business was on a road to nowhere.
I have as much care for the Power as I do the south eastern hot chippery at Footy Park, they're there to make money for SANFL clubs, if they dont make enough or are basket cases that require handouts close them down and start something that will.

I'll do a bit more digging on Sunday but my only curiosity is why North are being so noble, its like the big brother standing up for their little brothers in the SANFL. I still reckon there has to be an alterior motive unless they have some sort of inside knowledge about the possibility of a more profitable SA side entering the comp or another relocating here?

Aerie wrote:

dedja wrote:Is this supposed to be in the joke of the day or are you claiming it's ridgy didge?

So let me get this right ...

The SANFL gives PAFC some financial relief to help relieve debt but PAFC contributes significantly to the SANFL coffers (for being the AFL licence holder) on an annual basis ... seems reasonable to me.

All the SANFL clubs benefit financially from the vast sums generated by the AFC and PAFC as a dividend is paid each year to them from the SANFL ... no problem here either.

The SANFL clubs are effectively operating in a niche market and make do with limited funds and earning capacity, and without the SANFL dividend it would be hard to imagine than many of the clubs would survive ... all making sense.

With the revenue from the it's AFL licences, the SANFL is able to reinvest to augment and improve it's assets, the main one being football park ... mmm, that's good too.

Now, this is where is goes a tad skewy, apparently NAFC think that 3 other SANFL clubs are doing it hard, and because of that, they are more deserving of funds than PAFC, so they are going to take the SANFL to court to stop them providing those funds to PAFC ... did I get this bit correct?

Makes perfect sense to me ...

Agree dedja.

The AFL clubs are there to support the SANFL and its clubs and if the SANFL need to chip in money to help the Power get into a position, firstly of sustainability, then of strength, then that is only going to help the SANFL clubs in the long run.

I couldn't give a stuff how much money my club makes, as long as they have enough to survive and remain competitive on the field.

Port Power (or whatever is the 2nd SANFL AFL license) will be of more help financially to my club in the long run than North Adelaide will.

I think this is a selfish act by the NAFC, disguised as a "you should be helping out the struggling SANFL clubs, not Port Power". North would be one of the clubs that would flourish if we cut ties with the AFL all together and abolished salary caps and other restrictions designed to even up on the field.

I think we'd lose (and would have lost) more clubs in the past two decades if it wasn't for the success of the Crows and the money they have been able to put back into the SANFL.

Look this isnt a which came first scenario the chicken or the egg. Without the SANFL the crows/power would be a pipe dream.They give us money as compensation for taking our market share. Not cos they want to. THey have to.

If all 9 SANFL clubs were profitable would we even care about the AFl clubs dividends.

We have sacrificed everything for them. I personally would prefer port/crows win a wooden spoon and make $2 mill. than be premiers and make a 2 mill loss.

If they cant produce the dividends for us. What is the point of them.

North have made more profit than Port in the last 5 years. Depsite the fact they have had to build their own clubrooms two of them infact. They just didnt claim somebody elses and kick them out.

Lesson in this for Port Adelaide Officials next time you want to make theSANFL and its 8 clubs your scapegoat. An Old saying "dont bite the hand that feeds you".

We gave Port $4 mill in 96 a stadium and 35 of the leagues finest players. In return we have recieved what $3 mill in dividends over the last 12 years and had our league reduced to a feeder comp. What a brilliant investment.

Hopefully North will succeed in this. Good on them, shame we havent got the cash to support this.

I couldn't imagine/want a SANFL without Sturt or the Magpies.
I couldn't care less (except the less percentage and flags Geelong get) if the Power business were in the AFL or not. They bring nothing to the AFL, the Double Blues and Magpies bring PLENTY to the SANFL
Perhaps give the Power a gig in the SAAFL or Woman's comp to give their followers something to watch if they're not interested in the Magpies.
They'd always have the Thunderbirds too.

Wedgie wrote:I couldn't imagine/want a SANFL without Sturt or the Magpies.
I couldn't care less (except the less percentage and flags Geelong get) if the Power business were in the AFL or not. They bring nothing to the AFL, the Double Blues and Magpies bring PLENTY to the SANFL
Perhaps give the Power a gig in the SAAFL or Woman's comp to give their followers something to watch if they're not interested in the Magpies.
They'd always have the Thunderbirds too.

hahahaha!!!! exactly.

Can someone guarantee that North were told they would get no assistance from the SANFL a few years back.

Also can those that post the financial rumours please back up their claims.

everything could be solved by the SANFL selling a 40 or 50% stake in the Power.....

jeez I hope the Roosters don't open a can or worms in their own backyard?

Adelaide Hawk wrote:

dedja wrote:The SANFL gives PAFC some financial relief to help relieve debt but PAFC contributes significantly to the SANFL coffers (for being the AFL licence holder) on an annual basis ... seems reasonable to me.

When did this start to happen?

Every time Port plays at Footy Park ... just because they don't make any money doesn't mean the SANFL doesn't

Not sure he is right about the three clubs mentioned?

harley d wrote:Can someone guarantee that North were told they would get no assistance from the SANFL a few years back.

I can guarantee no financial assistance was given, I think some other assistance, be it legal or guarantor or other advice might have been given though. I know we couldn't borrow against our share of footy park though.
Certainly not 1.5 mill to North, the Magpies or Sturt ever and I'd argue they've given more to the SANFL in their collective 300+ years in the comp than the Power have given to the SANFL in their 13 years.

who is the political driving force behind north
Bob gerard
Is he acting in the best interests of the crows to upset port and using his minions at north as his hench men

Is he acting in the best interests of north if this is the case

He has been known to use influence to get his own way before

Make up your own mind
But if i was a north member....

EAGLES wrote:who is the political driving force behind north
Bob gerard
Is he acting in the best interests of the crows to upset port and using his minions at north as his hench men

Is he acting in the best interests of north if this is the case

He has been known to use influence to get his own way before

Make up your own mind
But if i was a north member....

Nah, its not Robert Gerard, if anything in recent times IMHO some board member/s have used him as opposed to the other way around. In the past Ive been a bit critical of some people having and using too much power at North but Mr Gerard isn't one of them although you could look at the letter to members in official club envelope earlier this year either way I suppose.
I personally think Mr Gerard has more influence over a lot of members than board or administration.
And don't get me wrong, I'm no Gerard sympathiser these days, his stunt earlier this year lost all respect or loyalty I had for the guy even though I think it was a bigger mistake by some board members/administrators.
And it doesn't make sense to get rid of the Power for the Crows sake, if anything they'd be worse off without the Power.