North Adelaide FC Financial results

[Hondo]

I don't think it's a gold mine just yet Drebs

Yes, if you add back the "sponsorship" contribution back to the Footy club it's a profit, but not a huge one (around $1-200K). The cash flow is higher again once you add back depreciation expense. That must be the $600K they are talking about. I agree the numbers as presented in the report (that I quoted to start the thread) don't paint the right picture and it shouldn't need verbal explanation at the AGM to make that clear. They should make it clearer in the report.

A simple sub-total called "profit before contribution to football operations" would do the trick.

Still, it looks like a strong revenue stream for us into the future. As Wedgie said, having those venues free-hold in a few years' time will make the club very strong financially.

The real positive is the Grand North which is about $450K profit if you add back the sponsorship contribution to the Footy club.

[drebin]

Goldmine and Cash cows are just terms to describe that it has a very healthy income. Had there not been full "write offs" for both venues re renovations / alterations for the smoking laws (e.g. had they spread that over 3-5 years as has been done in the past or add it to the existing borrowings debt) then the actual opperating profit would have been very, very large.

Unfortunately none of that is clearly reported in the financials so unless you ask you don't get told!

[dash61]

Goldmine and Cash cows are just terms to describe that it has a very healthy income. Had there not been full "write offs" for both venues re renovations / alterations for the smoking laws (e.g. had they spread that over 3-5 years as has been done in the past or add it to the existing borrowings debt) then the actual opperating profit would have been very, very large.

Unfortunately none of that is clearly reported in the financials so unless you ask you don't get told!

Drebin or whoever

I believe what u r saying is 100% correct, did the brains trust think in a year where so many clubs made very bad losses it was the perfect opportunity to clear these debts and join the trend of losses as it would have been very obvious to all that Norths were the odd one out and made "A very healthy profit"

Is it also true and hard to fathom that BJ when questioned did not really in the public forum of the AGM not wanna answer questions? If this is true Why? as it makes no sense.