SA Footy

tipper wrote:

UK Fan wrote:
They want more control of the revenue simple. Otherwise they’d be happy with the status quo.

Has saca got visibility of smas finances ?

If not why do port and crows need it ?

or for that matter, any of the promotions companies that book concerts or monster trucks or whatever, lol.

the afl clubs are a tennant. the tennants in my rental property dont get a look at my finances, or any say in what i do with the money

on a related note, and im asking because i dont actually know, does anyone know if any of the victorian clubs have representation in the management of the melbourne stadiums? mcg or marvel stadium? if be amazed if they did

So your saying that the SANFL are the land lords has they have the majority seats on the SMA?

Why is this the case? Does the SANFL need to be part of the AFL teams and Adelaide Oval arrangement?

The analaogy of the domestic housing landlord to the Adelaide oval situation is poor at best and not relevant.

SACA I believe are like the SANFL and have representation on the SMA.

harric wrote:

tipper wrote:

UK Fan wrote:
They want more control of the revenue simple. Otherwise they’d be happy with the status quo.

Has saca got visibility of smas finances ?

If not why do port and crows need it ?

or for that matter, any of the promotions companies that book concerts or monster trucks or whatever, lol.

the afl clubs are a tennant. the tennants in my rental property dont get a look at my finances, or any say in what i do with the money

on a related note, and im asking because i dont actually know, does anyone know if any of the victorian clubs have representation in the management of the melbourne stadiums? mcg or marvel stadium? if be amazed if they did

So your saying that the SANFL are the land lords has they have the majority seats on the SMA?

Why is this the case? Does the SANFL need to be part of the AFL teams and Adelaide Oval arrangement?

The analaogy of the domestic housing landlord to the Adelaide oval situation is poor at best and not relevant.

SACA I believe are like the SANFL and have representation on the SMA.

Nope sma are the landlords and yes sanfl as the governing body of football in this state needs to have representation on sma.

Port and crows are 2 of over 200 footy clubs in SA. That’s it.

Do the sanfl have sight over port Adelaide councils future plans/financials re tenancy at Alberton Oval ??

harric wrote:So your saying that the SANFL are the land lords has they have the majority seats on the SMA?

Why is this the case? Does the SANFL need to be part of the AFL teams and Adelaide Oval arrangement?

The analaogy of the domestic housing landlord to the Adelaide oval situation is poor at best and not relevant.

SACA I believe are like the SANFL and have representation on the SMA.

no, the SMA are the landlords. and the makeup of the SMA was settled when the move from footy park to adelaide oval took place. and the SANFl do not hold a majority, it is made up equally of SANFL and SACA appointees.

and seriously, you need the makeup of the SMA explained to you? it isnt exactly ancient history. as part of the adelaide ovel redevelopment, the SMA were created to manage the oval and its immediate surrounds. the makeup was decided a that time, and the SANFL, as the governing body of aussie rules footy in this state, were given significant input into it.

the analogy of domestic housing is accurate, however much you would like it to not be. my tennants could whinge and whine all they like, im not giving them a look at my books as its none of their business.

the crows and power are just 2 of many organisations that hire the venue, they just do so more regularly than some others. they dont, and they shouldnt get a say in what that venue decides to do with its money. can you see me getting a say on what Mark Ruccuito does with his money if i hire a room at his pub on a regular basis?

tipper wrote:

UK Fan wrote:
They want more control of the revenue simple. Otherwise they’d be happy with the status quo.

Has saca got visibility of smas finances ?

If not why do port and crows need it ?

or for that matter, any of the promotions companies that book concerts or monster trucks or whatever, lol.

the afl clubs are a tennant. the tennants in my rental property dont get a look at my finances, or any say in what i do with the money

on a related note, and im asking because i dont actually know, does anyone know if any of the victorian clubs have representation in the management of the melbourne stadiums? mcg or marvel stadium? if be amazed if they did

Heard of a bloke called Eddie Mcguire

tipper wrote:

harric wrote:So your saying that the SANFL are the land lords has they have the majority seats on the SMA?

Why is this the case? Does the SANFL need to be part of the AFL teams and Adelaide Oval arrangement?

The analaogy of the domestic housing landlord to the Adelaide oval situation is poor at best and not relevant.

SACA I believe are like the SANFL and have representation on the SMA.

no, the SMA are the landlords. and the makeup of the SMA was settled when the move from footy park to adelaide oval took place. and the SANFl do not hold a majority, it is made up equally of SANFL and SACA appointees.

and seriously, you need the makeup of the SMA explained to you? it isnt exactly ancient history. as part of the adelaide ovel redevelopment, the SMA were created to manage the oval and its immediate surrounds. the makeup was decided a that time, and the SANFL, as the governing body of aussie rules footy in this state, were given significant input into it.

the analogy of domestic housing is accurate, however much you would like it to not be. my tennants could whinge and whine all they like, im not giving them a look at my books as its none of their business.

the crows and power are just 2 of many organisations that hire the venue, they just do so more regularly than some others. they dont, and they shouldnt get a say in what that venue decides to do with its money. can you see me getting a say on what Mark Ruccuito does with his money if i hire a room at his pub on a regular basis?

My question about the SMA make up is almost rhetorical there pal so calm the pitch forks and torches for 5 mins. I was just have a nice discussion with UK fan.

I can guess we can wait and see how this plays out, my question is about the need for the SANFL to be so involved in the SMA and AO in general.

LMA wrote:

tipper wrote:

UK Fan wrote:
They want more control of the revenue simple. Otherwise they’d be happy with the status quo.

Has saca got visibility of smas finances ?

If not why do port and crows need it ?

or for that matter, any of the promotions companies that book concerts or monster trucks or whatever, lol.

the afl clubs are a tennant. the tennants in my rental property dont get a look at my finances, or any say in what i do with the money

on a related note, and im asking because i dont actually know, does anyone know if any of the victorian clubs have representation in the management of the melbourne stadiums? mcg or marvel stadium? if be amazed if they did

Heard of a bloke called Eddie Mcguire

This is true that Collingwood and Essendon vent there power via different means.

At the moment Essendon wouldn't have visability of Marvel Stadium but Marvel Stadium basically beg them them to be there as they are the crowd pulling tenant.

In regards to tenant and landlords the point is valid about Port and the Crows, however the issue remains in my opinion around the SANFL being part of it. Using the Victorian example which has been brought up, the VFL are not part of the MCG or Marvel arrangement at all and also the WAFL are not part of the new stadium in WA either. Sa seems to be a unique case at the moment.

I think the original point I was getting back to was to UK fan about the article in regards to Port making comment on the hotel. I looked into it further and it turns out Port and the Crows were asked for information as part of a parliamentary enquiry into the proposed hotel. Both clubs have stated they have asked for more details and been kept in the dark at this stage.

SANFL gave up Footy Park so that footy could move to Adelaide Oval. Of course they now have a big say (along with the SACA) in the running of the new home of footy in this state.
Capisce?

BTW. NO ONE ever has a "nice discussion with U.K fan"

Holy shit I’m agreeing with cornes



https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/af ... MeBapaGBcw

UK Fan wrote:Holy shit I’m agreeing with cornes



https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/af ... MeBapaGBcw

Paywall there big fella. I assume that is Wrinkles and not Kane.

stan wrote:

UK Fan wrote:Holy shit I’m agreeing with cornes



https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/af ... MeBapaGBcw

Paywall there big fella. I assume that is Wrinkles and not Kane.

Yep Wrinkles “the 2 afl clubs should have no business sticking their nose into the running of Adelaide Oval”

UK Fan wrote:

stan wrote:

UK Fan wrote:Holy shit I’m agreeing with cornes



https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/af ... MeBapaGBcw

Paywall there big fella. I assume that is Wrinkles and not Kane.

Yep Wrinkles “the 2 afl clubs should have no business sticking their nose into the running of Adelaide Oval”

Studley is starting to talk sense in his old age.
Kane dribbles enough sh*t though still for both.

I was looking at this and a thought came to mind. This would be an ideal setup throughout the entire comp.

DOC wrote:I was looking at this and a thought came to mind. This would be an ideal setup throughout the entire comp.

Capture.PNG

There is more chance of the AFL reserves being moved on than Glenelg ever being top of the ladder though.

harric wrote:
In regards to tenant and landlords the point is valid about Port and the Crows, however the issue remains in my opinion around the SANFL being part of it. Using the Victorian example which has been brought up, the VFL are not part of the MCG or Marvel arrangement at all and also the WAFL are not part of the new stadium in WA either. Sa seems to be a unique case at the moment.

.

I’ve probably cocked up quoting again- but expanding on the above its worth noting the VFL & WAFL are both under the control of the AFL and the SANFL isn’t. (At least not officially..)

Break even point for Adelaide oval up to 40k this year for afl clubs.

SACA/SANFL have taken a hit on poor strikers crowds which were well below what was forecast.


Break even point at Footy Park was 26k from memory

UK Fan wrote:Break even point for Adelaide oval up to 40k this year for afl clubs.

Is that before or after factoring in tarps advertising revenue?

[emoji1]

RB wrote:

UK Fan wrote:Break even point for Adelaide oval up to 40k this year for afl clubs.

Is that before or after factoring in tarps advertising revenue?

[emoji1]

35k with tarps lol

I received this in my emails today from the Eagles. I wonder what the response is . South is already trying to get compo for a lost player

The Board and Management of Woodville West Torrens Football Club wish to advise our members and supporters that we, along with other Foundation SANFL Clubs, wish to retain our players should they be selected by the Adelaide or Port Adelaide Football Clubs in the AFL mid-season rookie draft for the remainder of the season in which they are drafted. This draft, along with the pre-season supplementary list draft, was recently introduced by the AFL much to the disappointment of SANFL Clubs.
Woodville West Torrens Football Club accepts that any player taken by Adelaide or Port Adelaide would be required to train with the AFL side, however we strongly believe the player is to be released to play for their SANFL Club if not selected for senior AFL duty. This is to include minor round and finals games. This is the model that the West Coast Eagles have agreed to with the WAFL.
The SANFL, at the request of the Clubs, has approached both Adelaide and Port Adelaide regarding this request and we await their response.

All clubs have released the same Email I believe.

goddy11 wrote:I received this in my emails today from the Eagles. I wonder what the response is . South is already trying to get compo for a lost player

The Board and Management of Woodville West Torrens Football Club wish to advise our members and supporters that we, along with other Foundation SANFL Clubs,

'Club' should be singular - South Adelaide is the only remaining foundation club.