SANFL Stuffing up our league

[Hondo]

You only have to read the latest annual report to see that the doggies are struggling off-field .....

What's happened? What's their balance sheet looking like and did they make a profit this year?

Are you talking PAM style "struggling" or have they just had a slow year?

[doggies4eva]

You only have to read the latest annual report to see that the doggies are struggling off-field .....

What's happened? What's their balance sheet looking like and did they make a profit this year?

Are you talking PAM style "struggling" or have they just had a slow year?

They made a (combined) profit of about $20K. Not much considering their recent history with on-field success.

There were concerns raised in the reports about the tightening of pokies legislation and the potential impact that could have on revenue into the future.

I wouldn't call PAM struggling - I would call that in crisis!

[Hondo]

Thanks d4eva

I presume though their base business is still sound and their balance sheet is strong? What was their profit in 2009 and what's changed this year? Less revenue or more costs or both? Sorry for all the questions.

I think I have taken a different spin on the word "struggling" when you combined the CDFC and PAMFC in the one comment. Compared to on some SANFL club results over the last decade turning any profit is still a good result I reckon. I heard rumours on here about CDFC making $1m profit per year at some stage so I guess compared to $1m, $20K is a bad year!

[Alby_Green]

The fact we cut future commissions to SANFL clubs for future players drafted this year.

Are you able to elaborate on this point? Or provide a link/reference?

[Gravel]

I would be interested to know if the CDFC $20k Net Profit is before or after AFL distribution, and how much was the total Football Operations spend, ie how does it compare to the $1.38m the Magpies are now able to spend?

[beenreal]

Guys, haven't you learned by now?

Royal city doesn't answer questions, he doesn't argue facts, he doesn't argue opinions...

He just argues.

Why dont you tell us your revenue fact again Schultzy??? I know you love repeating that one over and over again.

Let me know if you need a hand reading the attached financials schultzy. Dont forget to read how much costs the SANFL have.

Petty insults from a know it all, blow hard like you impress me less in 2011 than they did in 2010.

Didn't think that was possible. Congratulations RC, you've actually achieved something.

Good to see you have added nothing to the debate as always Schultzy!!!

some things never change!!!!

No, Ive added that clearly I'm not the only one recognising that you never answer questions, instead preferring to spew forth patronising, hyperbole' and insults. That never changes either.

[SABRE]

If these guys offer to kiss and make up, can someone please check for cyanide capsules.

[topsywaldron]

They made a (combined) profit of about $20K. Not much considering their recent history with on-field success.

There were concerns raised in the reports about the tightening of pokies legislation and the potential impact that could have on revenue into the future.

Are the pokie venues counted in this or does revenue from Grand Central get siphoned off into a trust or some such other accounting quirk?

And we've all read the hysterical letter they drafted before Christmas in response to the completely justified proposed changes to the gaming legislation.

[Royal City]

Guys, haven't you learned by now?

Royal city doesn't answer questions, he doesn't argue facts, he doesn't argue opinions...

He just argues.

Petty insults from a know it all, blow hard like you impress me less in 2011 than they did in 2010.

Didn't think that was possible. Congratulations RC, you've actually achieved something.

No, Ive added that clearly I'm not the only one recognising that you never answer questions, instead preferring to spew forth patronising, hyperbole' and insults. That never changes either.

Firstly let me apologise for not answering your question BR.

Secondly what is your question ???? Ive gone thru this entire thread and I cant see any questions you have asked Schultzy.

[Royal City]

The fact we cut future commissions to SANFL clubs for future players drafted this year.

Are you able to elaborate on this point? Or provide a link/reference?

CEO report from the CDFC annual review

quoting Kris Grant when discussing challenges facing the club and the SANFL comp.

"The financial constraints the SANFL are imposing on the SANFL clubs. 2010 saw a reduction in finals prize money, the reduction in future drafting fees and the cancellation of the premiership dinner(but for a concerted argument by our club to have it re-instated). WHere is it going to stop. "

[Royal City]

You only have to read the latest annual report to see that the doggies are struggling off-field .....

What's happened? What's their balance sheet looking like and did they make a profit this year?

Are you talking PAM style "struggling" or have they just had a slow year?

They made a (combined) profit of about $20K. Not much considering their recent history with on-field success.

There were concerns raised in the reports about the tightening of pokies legislation and the potential impact that could have on revenue into the future.

I wouldn't call PAM struggling - I would call that in crisis!

From memory the CDFC only made $40K - $50K last year aswell.

[topsywaldron]

what is your question ???? Ive gone thru this entire thread and I cant see any questions you have asked Schultzy.

However I asked a fairly concise question above about whether every dollar of CDFC's revenue from its gaming venues is reported in the financials to its members.

Eagerly awaiting a reply.

Anyone who's got a copy of the freakily self absorbed letter they asked members to pass onto MPs is welcome to post it here too.

[Hondo]

Topsy unless he can find a quote from Kris Grant you won't get a reply to your question

I fear that Kris Grant's CEO report is the full extent of his research!

If Kris says the sky is red well FFS Hondo it's red

because he said so in the CEO Report

[doggies4eva]

They made a (combined) profit of about $20K. Not much considering their recent history with on-field success.

There were concerns raised in the reports about the tightening of pokies legislation and the potential impact that could have on revenue into the future.

Are the pokie venues counted in this or does revenue from Grand Central get siphoned off into a trust or some such other accounting quirk?

And we've all read the hysterical letter they drafted before Christmas in response to the completely justified proposed changes to the gaming legislation.

CDFC consists of 2 entities - the Football Club and the Footballers club. One runs the football operations and the other the member's club inlcluding the pokies. All revenue and expenditure is recorded but a "rent" of about $300K from memory is paid from the members club to the football operations.

To simplify matters I just add the net result together. Yes as RC said last year the combined result was about $50K. To my recollection the highest combined profit was a few years back - about $300K if I recall correctly. I can go back and check if anyone is really interested. The reason for the fall as stated in the report and evident in the audited numbers is that the costs of the pokies operation (along with other costs) are rising but revenue is fairly stable. The club is concerned that the govt is grabbing more of the pokies revenue. In fact the government is the major beneficiary of CDFC's operations and I guess this would be the same for most clubs.

[redandblack]

I would think Centrals are travelling very well financially. What is their net asset position, d4eva?

With respect, I think Kris Grant would have a whinge whatever the circumstances. I don't feel very sorry for him. His club has rightly won umpteen premierships, along with the extra revenue that produces and he has managed to limit the player payments for many multi-premiership players to keep well under the salary cap, so I'm sure he'll muddle through financially.

As for the bigger picture, relating to the Port v Norwood curtain-raiser, I would guess this would have been a request from Port Magpies, in the same vein as West asked for their first round last year to be at City Mazda under lights.

All clubs put in a 'wish-list' for programming and the SANFL try to accommodate as much of these as is practicable.

Looking at the crowds for that game, I'd ask a question.

What benefits the SANFL clubs more? A 10,000 increase in crowds at a Power game, or a 10,000 increase in an SANFL round?

[JK]

What benefits the SANFL clubs more? A 10,000 increase in crowds at a Power game, or a 10,000 increase in an SANFL round?

I can't answer that mate, but as per a point I made earlier on, I reckon in the last 5 years Port v Norwood games at Alberton have only attracted between say 2,800-3,800. (That might not be quite right, but regardless they haven't been earth shattering crowds)

So really, Port don't have much to lose - They would be confident they could still get close to that 2800 for the SANFL game in absolute worst case scenario, but the likelihood is that they'll get many more than that, and hopefully sew non Power Magpie fans into the AFL team and vice versa - Really I think what Port are trying to do here, from their perspective is a common sense no-brainer.

I feel bad for my Norwood supporting comrades (non-season ticket holders) that are faced with the choice of paying AFL rates to see their SANFL club play or not go - But all SANFL clubs have stated it's in their best interests to have 2 flourishing SA AFL Clubs, and to that extent I guess it means all clubs have to do their bit to help make it happen where possible.

Hopefully Norwood & Sturt can gain some benefit from this themselves ..

Norwood Home Match Ticket = $65
AFL Entry = $30 (approx)
TOTAL = $95

Norwood All Grounds Season Ticket = $110

So hopefully the club can convince many from the top bracket to up their level to the season pass.

[Hondo]

Good post CP

Back on the CDFC profit. If CDFC choose to channel otherwise surplus funds back into their footy department with the obvious goal of winning premierships which they do very well then whether or not there is a high reported profit at the end arguably doesn't matter. It also doesn't necessarially mean they are struggling financially. Do supporters want a big fat profit at the end of the year or a premiership?

I also wonder if Kris Grant is making too much about the premiership dinner cancellation and then reinstatement and the other cost cuts. In my line of work I have seen many overhead expense line items get pedantic cuts in times of apparent "crisis". Obviously the legacy of the PAFC problems are causing some belt tightening and I think we have to accept some short term pain while it gets sorted out. Whether Kris Grant needs to flame up the issue and incite his supporters into rage against the SANFL Commission as we have seen on here I'm not sure. Just get on with things I would have thought. Focus on winning your 10th flag in 12 years maybe.

[hereselmo1]

What benefits the SANFL clubs more? A 10,000 increase in crowds at a Power game, or a 10,000 increase in an SANFL round?

I can't answer that mate, but as per a point I made earlier on, I reckon in the last 5 years Port v Norwood games at Alberton have only attracted between say 2,800-3,800. (That might not be quite right, but regardless they haven't been earth shattering crowds)

So really, Port don't have much to lose - They would be confident they could still get close to that 2800 for the SANFL game in absolute worst case scenario, but the likelihood is that they'll get many more than that, and hopefully sew non Power Magpie fans into the AFL team and vice versa - Really I think what Port are trying to do here, from their perspective is a common sense no-brainer.

I feel bad for my Norwood supporting comrades (non-season ticket holders) that are faced with the choice of paying AFL rates to see their SANFL club play or not go - But all SANFL clubs have stated it's in their best interests to have 2 flourishing SA AFL Clubs, and to that extent I guess it means all clubs have to do their bit to help make it happen where possible.

Hopefully Norwood & Sturt can gain some benefit from this themselves ..

Norwood Home Match Ticket = $65
AFL Entry = $30 (approx)
TOTAL = $95

Norwood All Grounds Season Ticket = $110

So hopefully the club can convince many from the top bracket to up their level to the season pass.

That is the most sensible post I have seen on here in ages. Well done.

[doggies4eva]

What benefits the SANFL clubs more? A 10,000 increase in crowds at a Power game, or a 10,000 increase in an SANFL round?

I can't answer that mate, but as per a point I made earlier on, I reckon in the last 5 years Port v Norwood games at Alberton have only attracted between say 2,800-3,800. (That might not be quite right, but regardless they haven't been earth shattering crowds)

So really, Port don't have much to lose - They would be confident they could still get close to that 2800 for the SANFL game in absolute worst case scenario, but the likelihood is that they'll get many more than that, and hopefully sew non Power Magpie fans into the AFL team and vice versa - Really I think what Port are trying to do here, from their perspective is a common sense no-brainer.

I feel bad for my Norwood supporting comrades (non-season ticket holders) that are faced with the choice of paying AFL rates to see their SANFL club play or not go - But all SANFL clubs have stated it's in their best interests to have 2 flourishing SA AFL Clubs, and to that extent I guess it means all clubs have to do their bit to help make it happen where possible.

Hopefully Norwood & Sturt can gain some benefit from this themselves ..

Norwood Home Match Ticket = $65
AFL Entry = $30 (approx)
TOTAL = $95

Norwood All Grounds Season Ticket = $110

So hopefully the club can convince many from the top bracket to up their level to the season pass.

That is the most sensible post I have seen on here in ages. Well done.

And just to take CP's point a little further. There will be virtually no additional costs of running an SANFL game as a curtain-raiser as opposed to the staffing, cleaning and other venue costs of opening a suburban ground for this game The profit of a 2,800 crowd must be marginal. Even if only a fraction of the 2,800 crowd turn up at Footy Park and pay their $30 I would think that financially the league would be in front.

[redandblack]

Good discussion.

The answer to my question is that the SANFL make a lot, lot more from an AFL crowd increase, which in turn does more to protect the SANFL dividend to the clubs.

They are therefore fulfilling their obligations.

Finally, it was a Port Magpies request, so those anti-SANFL critics have once again not let the facts affect their argument.