interesting

[Booney]

if I had the choice of an extra afl clubs revenue. Or the gov change legislation that sanfl clubs are allowed 60 pokies per club instead of 40. I know what I would choose.

Not saying afl revenue isn't healpful. It's justnot as essential as most make out IMHO!

We would find it tough but could survive without afl dividends. But withoutpokie revenue every club would die Within a month.

Interesting comment when you consider the amount of posts you have made over the summer relating to how the SANFL divides up ( or uses ) the monies generated from the two SA-based AFL clubs.

Very interesting indeed.

Oh, how dare they use that money to prop up Port Adelaide....blah blah blah
LMFAO

Keep clutching Mr Boon.

http://static.wix.com/media/024927626f9 ... wix_mp_256

IM sure your post make sense to someone.

I'm sure it was Royal City who was making those comments over the summer. Oh well, you might want to check and make sure nobody else has access to your password or account mate, seems like people have been making posts on your behalf.

[Royal City]

Which gives him a strike rate of one to your zero

Resorting down to trolling now R&B . The signs of desperation continue.

I didnt see anyone looking forwards to your input on this thread BTW R*B. I wonder why ???

BUt mine was.

Looks as if a few more are understanding than you hoped.

[Booney]

Which gives him a strike rate of one to your zero

Resorting down to trolling now R&B . The signs of desperation continue.

I didnt see anyone looking forwards to your input on this thread BTW R*B. I wonder why ???

BUt mine was.
Looks as if a few more are understanding than you hoped.

CP must have been having a slow day.

[Royal City]

if I had the choice of an extra afl clubs revenue. Or the gov change legislation that sanfl clubs are allowed 60 pokies per club instead of 40. I know what I would choose.

Not saying afl revenue isn't healpful. It's justnot as essential as most make out IMHO!

We would find it tough but could survive without afl dividends. But withoutpokie revenue every club would die Within a month.

Interesting comment when you consider the amount of posts you have made over the summer relating to how the SANFL divides up ( or uses ) the monies generated from the two SA-based AFL clubs.

Very interesting indeed.

Oh, how dare they use that money to prop up Port Adelaide....blah blah blah
LMFAO

Keep clutching Mr Boon.

http://static.wix.com/media/024927626f9 ... wix_mp_256

IM sure your post make sense to someone.

I'm sure it was Royal City who was making those comments over the summer. Oh well, you might want to check and make sure nobody else has access to your password or account mate, seems like people have been making posts on your behalf.

what comments would those be Mr Boon. Care to elaborate your point for all.

[Royal City]

Which gives him a strike rate of one to your zero

Resorting down to trolling now R&B . The signs of desperation continue.

I didnt see anyone looking forwards to your input on this thread BTW R*B. I wonder why ???

BUt mine was.
Looks as if a few more are understanding than you hoped.

CP must have been having a slow day.

Hed still be quicker than R&B.

[Booney]

To be honest, I cant be bothered. You'll only find reason within anything said or quoted to argue further. For those that could be arsed keeping up with your comments over the last few months will be as surprised as I am by your comments earlier in this thread.

That too, will be my last comment directed at you. The pointless, endless debate only feeds your ability to argue about anything.

[redandblack]

[quote="Royal City]

R&B you have been banging on for years how 2 healthy AFl clubs is the future for us SANFL clubs and without it we would peril.

YEt again Ill point out to everyone. This year both AFl clubs reported financial losses for the first time ever.

9 SANFL clubs reported a profit.

Can anyone else spot the contradiction ????[/quote]

Now pay attention, RC.

The SANFL's main income is from licence fees, catering and parking from AFL games.

This is why the SANFL clubs get a dividend of about $400K.

In this last year, the SANFL clubs would have (all) posted losses without this dividend.

No contradiction.

Now, in the last two or three years, Port have been a cash drain on the SANFL, but they've still paid the dividends.

Since the Crows came in 20 years ago, the AFL teams have been a cash positive bonus to the SANFL and its teams.

That is the factual situation.

I'm now joining the Booney silence club with you for the same reasons as he stated.

[redandblack]

I have a genuine question for those worried about the AFL taking over the 2 SA AFL licences.

What do you understand would actually happen if they did this?

What are you fearful of?

[Royal City]

To be honest, I cant be bothered. You'll only find reason within anything said or quoted to argue further. For those that could be arsed keeping up with your comments over the last few months will be as surprised as I am by your comments earlier in this thread.

That too, will be my last comment directed at you. The pointless, endless debate only feeds your ability to argue about anything.

I didnt think you could/would Mr Boon.

And I had a feeling it would be my fault you couldnt/wouldnt add any further substance to your statements.

Its the usual routine.

Apart from that Im Missing you already !!!!!!!

[Royal City]

[

Ofcourse Port paid a dividend this year, it has to every year. It doesnt just give it to us because they choose to. We receive dividends as compensation for the AFL clubs taking the sanfl clubs market share.

R&B Ill agree without dividends not all of the SANFl clubs would have made profit this year. And they would need to look for alternate revenue streams to cover approx $300K in next years budget.

But the offset would be without AFl clubs competing with the SANFL clubs for sponsors, members, tv ratings, increased patronage to home games/clubrooms etc. THus meaning an SANFL clubs revenue would increase.

Whilst It could be tight and I cant quote exact figures. I dont think its unreasonable to say that with some smart marketing /management the SANFL would continue to survive. I know this is not what most of the AFL/Port fans want to hear and I apologise for putting those noses out of joint due to this opinion.

What I dont understand is how a West Adelaide employee on a volunteer basis can get so defiant over this leagues/your clubs viability. And how you find it completely unacceptable to discuss any other scenario but the sanfl withering away and dying due to us leaving the AFl's teet.

If the SANFL can not only survive but grow in its current climate of us being a second fiddle league to the AFL. Please explain to me how this trend would reverse when we dont have AFL competing with us.

R&B without pokie revenue. All 9 SANFL clubs would be dead within two/three months. FACT!!!!!

Pokie revenue is the life blood of all SANFL clubs. NOt AFL clubs dividends that is just a yearly top up. FACT

[Ronnie]

I have a genuine question for those worried about the AFL taking over the 2 SA AFL licences.

What do you understand would actually happen if they did this?

What are you fearful of?

There would be a fundamental shift in the nature of governance of football in this state. The football commission is there to take into account the interests of football state wide and the two AFL licences help to underpin that outlook. The AFL in contrast would have a much narrower focus centered on what is best for the two AFL clubs without proper regard or understanding for the mass of football below the top tier. They would be more interested in propping up failing AFL clubs than game developement for example.
As one very articulate SANFL club CEO said last week, that the AFL would not care if the SANFL disappeared up its own backside tomorrow. The replacement would presumably be some plastic AFL-SA devoid of its strength and character.

[redandblack]

I agree that the AFL couldn't care about the SANFL and I also agree with your general reasoning.

Apart from that, though, I was asking what the practical effect of this change would be for the day to day running of the clubs.

[Barto]

I have a genuine question for those worried about the AFL taking over the 2 SA AFL licences.

What do you understand would actually happen if they did this?

What are you fearful of?

AFLSA.

The same fate befalling SANFL clubs that happened to many of the traditional VFL clubs. Only Pt Melbourne stands on it's own two feet and is still reasonably strong. The AFL have enough control as it is.

[Barto]

That would work, assuming AO doesn't go ahead.

The problem is, Port will still probably scream that they're getting dudded. The only advantage is the league doesn't have a liability when they go belly up.

Don't suppose there's any chance of you making a point WITHOUT having a go at Port Adelaide?

The day Port stop blaming everyone else for their predicament, so the answer is no.

Crows supporters aren't much better these days, they've forgotten where they came from. They're the sort of people that would euthanise their parents even though they're not even ready for the retirement home based on their comments of what should happen to the SANFL.


SANFL Clubs: "I think I'll go for a walk now, I feel happy! I feel happy!"
Crows and Port: "You're not fooling anybody!" *clonk*

[redandblack]

I have a genuine question for those worried about the AFL taking over the 2 SA AFL licences.

What do you understand would actually happen if they did this?

What are you fearful of?

AFLSA.

The same fate befalling SANFL clubs that happened to many of the traditional VFL clubs. Only Pt Melbourne stands on it's own two feet and is still reasonably strong. The AFL have enough control as it is.

All these answers suggest you think the AFL would control each club.

My understanding would be that the AFL would own the licences and the members would run each club, as most clubs in Victoria are run. The SANFL would then merely charge each club a large rental fee for AAMI or Adelaide Oval, thus protexcting its cash flow.

I wouldn't want to see the AFL control the licence either, but I'm not sure that what would happen is fully understood by most of us.

[Barto]

I have a genuine question for those worried about the AFL taking over the 2 SA AFL licences.

What do you understand would actually happen if they did this?

What are you fearful of?

AFLSA.

The same fate befalling SANFL clubs that happened to many of the traditional VFL clubs. Only Pt Melbourne stands on it's own two feet and is still reasonably strong. The AFL have enough control as it is.

All these answers suggest you think the AFL would control each club.

My understanding would be that the AFL would own the licences and the members would run each club, as most clubs in Victoria are run. The SANFL would then merely charge each club a large rental fee for AAMI or Adelaide Oval, thus protexcting its cash flow.

I wouldn't want to see the AFL control the licence either, but I'm not sure that what would happen is fully understood by most of us.

How could the SANFL charge rent on AO? Shame the refurbishment of Footy Park didn't go ahead, wouldn't have a problem with the rental system personally and it might clean things up a bit (and stop the whinging of Ports about the dividend system), but once they move to AO it gets a bit shaky.

[nickname]

I don't know if this is essentially the same thing or whether it's a change in their position, but last year the AFL's stated position was that they wanted Adelaide and Power to own their licences.
R&B my concern about the 'rental' scenario is, I think, similar to what Barto is alluding to. If the AFL or Crows and Power owned the licences, and then a deal was finalised to play AFL games somewhere other than Footy Park, the SANFL are then left without any income stream from AFL activity aren't they?

[redandblack]

I don't know if this is essentially the same thing or whether it's a change in their position, but last year the AFL's stated position was that they wanted Adelaide and Power to own their licences.
R&B my concern about the 'rental' scenario is, I think, similar to what Barto is alluding to. If the AFL or Crows and Power owned the licences, and then a deal was finalised to play AFL games somewhere other than Footy Park, the SANFL are then left without any income stream from AFL activity aren't they?

Yes, that's right, it's a danger, which is why I wouldn't want to see any change.

My point is that I think many people see the AFL 'controlling' the clubs, but I think it would just mean the members controlling the clubs as they generally are with the Victorian teams(?).

As for the other ground scenario, although I agree, it's hard to see where that could possibly happen, without another stadium being built by the AFL here.

Adelaide Oval, if it goes ahead, would be jointly owned by the SACA and the SANFL, so a rental is feasible, I would have thought?

[Dirko]

Adelaide Oval, if it goes ahead, would be jointly owned by the SACA and the SANFL, so a rental is feasible, I would have thought?

Perhaps, but then any revenue would have to be split between both the SACA & the SANFL wouldn't it not ? That'd then decrease by half the dividend paid to the SANFL clubs.

[Booney]

Adelaide Oval, if it goes ahead, would be jointly owned by the SACA and the SANFL, so a rental is feasible, I would have thought?

Perhaps, but then any revenue would have to be split between both the SACA & the SANFL wouldn't it not ? That'd then decrease by half the dividend paid to the SANFL clubs.

...but the SANFL will have, or have the ability to sell the land / Football Park. How much would that little nest egg land the SANFL? $$$?