SANFL Stuffing up our league

[beenreal]

As I understand it Port Adelaide generates revenue for football in SA overall. Their books show big operating losses but the SANFL makes a good amount from them through their books.

SHHHHH... that kind of talk is regarded as Heresy by some on here.

[Grahaml]

As I understand it Port Adelaide generates revenue for football in SA overall. Their books show big operating losses but the SANFL makes a good amount from them through their books.

SHHHHH... that kind of talk is regarded as Heresy by some on here.

Lol. I did qualify it because I'm not certain.

Not even sure that moving to AO or unifying the Port Adelaides will really change the SANFL competition at all. If anyone is likely to be compromised financially and/or competetively it'll be the Crows, so all parties just have to keep an eye on that. And if the Magpies seem to be getting any sort of significant advantage out of it, then we just tweak the arrangement to balance things out.

Anyway, decision made, all clubs happy in the end so time to move energies onto more interesting discussions.

[Royal City]

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?

Any chance you could share this theory with the reps from City Mazda and Adelaide Galvanising next time they are at Richmond Oval R&B.

See if they can move their sponsorship to the AFL.

It might cost them a bit more and sure West will lose a sponsor . But it will be more beneficial to the SANFL overall R&B.

[Royal City]

As I understand it Port Adelaide generates revenue for football in SA overall. Their books show big operating losses but the SANFL makes a good amount from them through their books.

SHHHHH... that kind of talk is regarded as Heresy by some on here.

As I understand it the SANFL makes revenue out of holding SANFL Grand Finals at AAMI stadium for football in SA overall.

As I understand it Centrals have competed in the last 11 SANFL GFS.

Using the same logic surely Centrals should be receiving a multi million dollar handout soon ???

[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?

Any chance you could share this theory with the reps from City Mazda and Adelaide Galvanising next time they are at Richmond Oval R&B.

See if they can move their sponsorship to the AFL.

It might cost them a bit more and sure West will lose a sponsor . But it will be more beneficial to the SANFL overall R&B.

I'm not sure what you're on about, RC? Your comment doesn't seem to match the quote??

Anyway, I'm happy to talk to our sponsors next time I'm at CITY MAZDA STADIUM. I'm sure Adelaide Galv will be happy to get the extra exposure on our guernsey in the new comp and on Foxtel.

[Royal City]

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?

Any chance you could share this theory with the reps from City Mazda and Adelaide Galvanising next time they are at Richmond Oval R&B.

See if they can move their sponsorship to the AFL.

It might cost them a bit more and sure West will lose a sponsor . But it will be more beneficial to the SANFL overall R&B.

I'm not sure what you're on about, RC? Your comment doesn't seem to match the quote??

Anyway, I'm happy to talk to our sponsors next time I'm at CITY MAZDA STADIUM. I'm sure Adelaide Galv will be happy to get the extra exposure on our guernsey in the new comp and on Foxtel.

So by the same rationale. City Mazda sponsoring the Power/crows would also be more beneficial to the wider SA footballing community than them simply sponsoring West Adelaide.

It might cost City Mazda a bit more but they would get national exposure for 22 weeks instead 2-3 maybe 4 weeks at most with West.

Sure it will cost West a sponsor but it would be better for the SANFL community.

Could you please pass on your theory to all of the current West Adelaide sponsors for me.

[Darth Vader]

just read the last coupla pages of this debate. Am amazed no one has mentioned Leigh Whicker in all this. If anyone is a serial snout in the trough freeloader he is the king daddy surely. I believe if he retired and just got out of the way the SANFL could boom. Sorry to upset any of you decent people who might be employees at Footy Park.

[redandblack]

RC

Sponsorship 101: (1)

1 Most SANFL club sponsors do it for part commercial reasons and to raise their profile, but also

2 Out of a wish to be involved, or

3 Because they know someone at the club, or

4 They've been persuaded by someone at the club to be a benefactor, or

5 All of the above.

Sponsorship 101 (2)

It may surprise you, but it costs a shitload more money to get the same exposure sponsoring an AFL club.

West Adelaide FC sponsorship:

As it happens, I've already spoken to our sponsors. West are very fortunate to have great sponsors who love the club and they have all renewed their sponsorship again. The nature of some of their businesses is that they wouldn't necessarily get a lot of commercial gain from their sponsorship, so they do it for all the right reasons and are very generous. I have no doubt at all that Adelaide Galvanising, Broadspectrum and City Mazda are all very happy with their current sponsorship and any extra exposure they may get is welcome.

Your argument is a non-sequitur anyway, but the above makes it even less relevant.

[Royal City]

RC

Sponsorship 101: (1)

1 Most SANFL club sponsors do it for part commercial reasons and to raise their profile, but also

2 Out of a wish to be involved, or

3 Because they know someone at the club, or

4 They've been persuaded by someone at the club to be a benefactor, or

5 All of the above.

Sponsorship 101 (2)

It may surprise you, but it costs a shitload more money to get the same exposure sponsoring an AFL club.

West Adelaide FC sponsorship:

As it happens, I've already spoken to our sponsors. West are very fortunate to have great sponsors who love the club and they have all renewed their sponsorship again. The nature of some of their businesses is that they wouldn't necessarily get a lot of commercial gain from their sponsorship, so they do it for all the right reasons and are very generous. I have no doubt at all that Adelaide Galvanising, Broadspectrum and City Mazda are all very happy with their current sponsorship and any extra exposure they may get is welcome.

Your argument is a non-sequitur anyway, but the above makes it even less relevant.

Well thankyou for explaining why people sponsor. Im sure I like everybody else on the site had no idea before.

So your stance is it is OK for SANFL fans from opposition clubs to pay more to see their team play in an AFL curtain raiser. Feeble justfication is it benefits the SANFL/SANFL clubs more due to extra revenue gained.

But you dont want West Adelaide's current sponsors changing its sponsorship to the SA-AFl clubs cos it will cost alot more for them to gain extra national exposure. Eventhough the extra cost of sponsorship via an AFL club will benefit the SANFL/SANFL clubs more due to extra revenue gained.

What else can be said. I thought so.

[Gravel]

just read the last coupla pages of this debate. Am amazed no one has mentioned Leigh Whicker in all this. If anyone is a serial snout in the trough freeloader he is the king daddy surely. I believe if he retired and just got out of the way the SANFL could boom. Sorry to upset any of you decent people who might be employees at Footy Park.

Interesting comment. It is difficult to find out how much he is paid by the SANFL but if the figure I hear is correct then your comments are more than justified and the average footy supporter would be angry.

[JK]

just read the last coupla pages of this debate. Am amazed no one has mentioned Leigh Whicker in all this. If anyone is a serial snout in the trough freeloader he is the king daddy surely. I believe if he retired and just got out of the way the SANFL could boom. Sorry to upset any of you decent people who might be employees at Footy Park.

Interesting comment. It is difficult to find out how much he is paid by the SANFL but if the figure I hear is correct then your comments are more than justified and the average footy supporter would be angry.

I too found it to be an interesting post

[sjt]

just read the last coupla pages of this debate. Am amazed no one has mentioned Leigh Whicker in all this. If anyone is a serial snout in the trough freeloader he is the king daddy surely. I believe if he retired and just got out of the way the SANFL could boom. Sorry to upset any of you decent people who might be employees at Footy Park.

Interesting comment. It is difficult to find out how much he is paid by the SANFL but if the figure I hear is correct then your comments are more than justified and the average footy supporter would be angry.

I too found it to be an interesting post

How much? Where is it? I couldn't see it in the Annual report of 2009. I'm an "average" football supporter, I'd be interested to know.

[Royal City]

just read the last coupla pages of this debate. Am amazed no one has mentioned Leigh Whicker in all this. If anyone is a serial snout in the trough freeloader he is the king daddy surely. I believe if he retired and just got out of the way the SANFL could boom. Sorry to upset any of you decent people who might be employees at Footy Park.

Interesting comment. It is difficult to find out how much he is paid by the SANFL but if the figure I hear is correct then your comments are more than justified and the average footy supporter would be angry.

I too found it to be an interesting post

I agree. I cant believe how little the SANFL commission is avoiding blame aswell.

POrt Adelaide was allowed to go $6 mill in debt without its shareholders knowing due to ??????
How did the commission fix the problem ?????

[doggies4eva]

RC

Sponsorship 101: (1)

1 Most SANFL club sponsors do it for part commercial reasons and to raise their profile, but also

2 Out of a wish to be involved, or

3 Because they know someone at the club, or

4 They've been persuaded by someone at the club to be a benefactor, or

5 All of the above.

Sponsorship 101 (2)

It may surprise you, but it costs a shitload more money to get the same exposure sponsoring an AFL club.

West Adelaide FC sponsorship:

As it happens, I've already spoken to our sponsors. West are very fortunate to have great sponsors who love the club and they have all renewed their sponsorship again. The nature of some of their businesses is that they wouldn't necessarily get a lot of commercial gain from their sponsorship, so they do it for all the right reasons and are very generous. I have no doubt at all that Adelaide Galvanising, Broadspectrum and City Mazda are all very happy with their current sponsorship and any extra exposure they may get is welcome.

Your argument is a non-sequitur anyway, but the above makes it even less relevant.

R&B - in a past life I worked as a sports administrator and dealt with sponsors and sponsorship ageements. My experience is that there may be a few people who fall into the categories that you describe the big money comes from professional outfits that must report to boards. Commercial reasons are very important to these sponsors.

[redandblack]

I accept that, d4eva, but I think SANFL sponsorship is often driven by different factors and that is certainly partly the case at Westies.

I was talking about SANFL sponsors specifically. I agree it's often for strictly commercial reasons (as I said in para 1), but at SANFL level there are often many other reasons why it's done.

Thanks for the considered reply.

[beenreal]

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?

Any chance you could share this theory with the reps from City Mazda and Adelaide Galvanising next time they are at Richmond Oval R&B.

See if they can move their sponsorship to the AFL.

It might cost them a bit more and sure West will lose a sponsor . But it will be more beneficial to the SANFL overall R&B.

I'm not sure what you're on about, RC? Your comment doesn't seem to match the quote??

Anyway, I'm happy to talk to our sponsors next time I'm at CITY MAZDA STADIUM. I'm sure Adelaide Galv will be happy to get the extra exposure on our guernsey in the new comp and on Foxtel.

It did match before he read subsequent postings and went back and edited his comment to suit.

[Royal City]

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?

Any chance you could share this theory with the reps from City Mazda and Adelaide Galvanising next time they are at Richmond Oval R&B.

See if they can move their sponsorship to the AFL.

It might cost them a bit more and sure West will lose a sponsor . But it will be more beneficial to the SANFL overall R&B.

I'm not sure what you're on about, RC? Your comment doesn't seem to match the quote??

Anyway, I'm happy to talk to our sponsors next time I'm at CITY MAZDA STADIUM. I'm sure Adelaide Galv will be happy to get the extra exposure on our guernsey in the new comp and on Foxtel.

It did match before he read subsequent postings and went back and edited his comment to suit.

It takes a while for R&B to catch up what else can I say.

Good to see your adding your usual hard hitting facts to the argument Been Real, not just sitting back and sniping as per usual.

Must be difficult for you now that others agree and the figures dont lie. As I have been saying for years, the SANFL could easily survive without PAFC's essential to everything revenue if we needed to. Firming up the crows monolopy on the SA-AFL market thus firming up a very profitable revenue stream for the SANFL/SANFL clubs. Without us having to suffer anymore hidden surprises by the SANFL commission/PAFC.

[beenreal]

I run a company that distributes nationally and internationally, so I UNDERSTAND revenue Vs Profit. Therefore when I say Port Adelaide generates $11-12 M in revenue per year for the SANFL, a substantial portion of that must create profit, otherwise the SANFL need to be put squarely under the blowtorch.

Port Adelaide and its supporters have been generating money for the SANFL for 140 years. Your mob of Jonny come latelys with the Decade of dominance doesn't change that.

Like many on here, I also UNDERSTAND the reasons why many companies sponsor SANFL clubs. Most of us don't have a major car manufacturer on our back doorstep.

And finally, I UNDERSTAND that I should never argue with fools. Because they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. UNDERSTAND that RC?

[CENTURION]

I run a company that distributes nationally and internationally, so I UNDERSTAND revenue Vs Profit. Therefore when I say Port Adelaide generates $11-12 M in revenue per year for the SANFL, a substantial portion of that must create profit, otherwise the SANFL need to be put squarely under the blowtorch.

Port Adelaide and its supporters have been generating money for the SANFL for 140 years. Your mob of Jonny come latelys with the Decade of dominance doesn't change that.

Like many on here, I also UNDERSTAND the reasons why many companies sponsor SANFL clubs. Most of us don't have a major car manufacturer on our back doorstep.

And finally, I UNDERSTAND that I should never argue with fools. Because they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. UNDERSTAND that RC?

So, coming to the President's Luncheon this year?

[Darth Vader]

Just a quickie here...
During Port Magpies dominant years I always thought as a supporter of lowly and poorly organised West Torrens that Ports stuffed up the competition because no one else could get a look in and it was bbbboringggg.
Then suddenly Central Districts came out of the woodwork and for the last 10 years we have been back to boring once again. I get free tickets to SANFL major round games (incl the GF) every year and I always give them away because what's the point?
And when I was a young bloke we used to call Richmond Oval Lou Ravesi Park - well before sponsorship was an event