The SANFL and the Port Power Financial Issue

[Hondo]

Iam assured from a friend that works in the SANFL that they're not even close. ie the SANFL and its clubs were better off without them

Is he saying that the annual distribution to the SANFL clubs is less now than it was in 1996?

Iam assured from a friend that works in the SANFL that they're not even close. ie the SANFL and its clubs were better off without them

That's a big blanket statement he's making I hope he's got some sensible numbers to back it up

[JK]

In the end it all comes out of the one money bucket despite what containers are tipping it in to start with so technically you are correct (but so am I

I'll take that, it's the closest Ive been to being right about something so far today

[am Bays]

If Port want to renegotiate the mechanics of their stadium deal with the SANFL well fine maybe the SANFL should step and say okay we want more control over the club (get rid of the Port members elected board members) and force the PAFC to look beyond its traditional market place for members and supporters etc.

I mean FFS the stadium deal is the same as the Crows so it comes down to people not wanting to follow the PAFC in its current guise so dump this creed crap. I mean if you keep going back to the same well for members and supporters eventually it is going to run dry so the club has to look beyond that for support.

Don't allign yourself to teh Port allign yourself to teh North the Northern Adelaide Football CLub.

yep sure it will cause short term pain (the great unwashed will be up in arms) but long term....

[Pseudo]

Good to see the AFL has rejected the plea from Port

They've told the SANFL to sort it out !

Demonstrating what the rational football fans have known for years: Tha AFL was NEVER about taking the game to a national level; it was, and always will be, about perpetuating a bunch of fat-cat Victorian clubs. The only reason Port Power (and the Crows) exist in the first place is to prop up a bunch of big-spending Victorian clubs via license fees and television rights, so those same Vic clubs could continue to spend exorbitant amounts on recruiting the best talent from SA. If a traditional (read: Victorian) club is about to keel over, watch the AFL throw millions of dollars at it in emergency money (with Fitzroy being a notable exception; even the AFL knows a lost cause when it sees one). If a composite team (read: Port Power) is about to keel over, watch the AFL let that team die. If Port isn't making money for the competition (read: for the Victorian clubs) then it is of no use to the AFL.

The AFL is a blight on the sport. I will never understand why so many of you lot support that fetid league.

[Macca19]

What Port make or help make is irrelevent.
If they cover the revenue loss to the SANFL and its clubs from when they entered the AFL is the pertinent point.
Iam assured from a friend that works in the SANFL that they're not even close. ie the SANFL and its clubs were better off without them

I'll believe that when I see some factual evidence to back it up. If the magic break even number is 30,000, which Brian Cunningham used to mention a lot back in the day, then we have gone over that in 7 years and even including the poor crowds of the past few years, the average Port Adelaide home crowd attendance during the minor round from 97-08 is over 30,000. So even if we have only been covering the losses for eg. the past three years, the SANFL should still be on top anyway, due to reaching and going above target figures in 7 of the first 9 seasons. In 1996 the SANFL distribution was $340k, that rose to $410k in 1997, and has hovered around the $450 for some time now. On a purely dollars and cents view, I cant see how this call that the SANFL were better off without a 2nd team is at all possibly true, so would love to see this friends figures.

Personally, I call bullshit.

[Macca19]

If Port want to renegotiate the mechanics of their stadium deal with the SANFL well fine maybe the SANFL should step and say okay we want more control over the club (get rid of the Port members elected board members) and force the PAFC to look beyond its traditional market place for members and supporters etc.

They already have control over the club and can step in at any moment. They havent.

As for looking beyond its traditional market, its what the club has been doing. I stated earlier in this thread steps the club has taken to move away from being Port Adelaide (Planet Teal, never calling the club Port Adelaide but always calling it 'the Power' etc). Its done this for the past 3-4 seasons now. Its hasnt worked. Its made things worse. Ready-made Port supporters are dropping off because of the direction of the club. Making the most of what we got is surely the way to go currently.

Don't allign yourself to teh Port allign yourself to teh North the Northern Adelaide Football CLub.

yep sure it will cause short term pain (the great unwashed will be up in arms) but long term....

But long term there is zero evidence to suggest that going down this tack will make a spot of difference.

There seems to be this thought that there are 30-50k football supporters in Adelaide who are willing to pay money to go to an AFL game if Port were to change name to something else. Id love to know where these people are supposed to come from. Quite simply, they dont really exist. Which is why a different combination for the 2nd licence would have been pushing shit up hill...relying almost solely on Crows supporters to jump on a different bandwagaon.

[am Bays]

They already have control over the club and can step in at any moment. They havent.

As for looking beyond its traditional market, its what the club has been doing. I stated earlier in this thread steps the club has taken to move away from being Port Adelaide (Planet Teal, never calling the club Port Adelaide but always calling it 'the Power' etc). Its done this for the past 3-4 seasons now. Its hasnt worked. Its made things worse. Ready-made Port supporters are dropping off because of the direction of the club. Making the most of what we got is surely the way to go currently.

Don't give me that rubbish Macca, you're smarter than that.

the PAFC board is managed by 5 SANFL appointees and 5 PAFC elected members, compared to the Crows where only 1 person can be nominated by the members and the SANFL don't have to accept that nomination.

The SANFL has nowhere near the same control over the Power compared to the Crows as effectively the 5 PAFC board members can block any directve from the SANFL.

AS I said time for the SANFL to have greater control to it can change some of marketing direction.

3-4 years ins't going to change a culture and membership base long term - the long term fiancial viability of teh PAFC relies on it making itself attractive to members and supporters outsde its traditional 30% share of teh football public of SA.

Whilst it cligs to the past and its existing supporting base it is doomed to failure.

Yes some of teh current members won't like it but they wont be around in 50 years (well a very small %age will) the club will be though - if it makes changes.

[whatever]

I haven't read this thread but this is my thoughts

Help the club as a last resort as we need two teams in this city.

However put the pressure on the club to stand on its own two feet so that by fighting its way out you end up with a lot more stable organisation than the one that gets help right from the begining.

No money should be cut from the football department.

Management need to find new ways of generating money. This may be through ticket sales, membership, sponsorship, donations, merchandise, functions. The focus has got to be an going outsid eof the current box on these issues, fine tuning what we currently do wont be enough unless the fringe supporters stand up to be counted. Fringe supporters dont blindly give money, they want something from it, an experience or something like that.

[Wedgie]

What Port make or help make is irrelevent.
If they cover the revenue loss to the SANFL and its clubs from when they entered the AFL is the pertinent point.
Iam assured from a friend that works in the SANFL that they're not even close. ie the SANFL and its clubs were better off without them

I'll believe that when I see some factual evidence to back it up. If the magic break even number is 30,000, which Brian Cunningham used to mention a lot back in the day, then we have gone over that in 7 years and even including the poor crowds of the past few years, the average Port Adelaide home crowd attendance during the minor round from 97-08 is over 30,000. So even if we have only been covering the losses for eg. the past three years, the SANFL should still be on top anyway, due to reaching and going above target figures in 7 of the first 9 seasons. In 1996 the SANFL distribution was $340k, that rose to $410k in 1997, and has hovered around the $450 for some time now. On a purely dollars and cents view, I cant see how this call that the SANFL were better off without a 2nd team is at all possibly true, so would love to see this friends figures.

Personally, I call bullshit.

You call *naughty word* yet your 30k figure proves it true as the discussion is about now not 10 years ago. Taking into account the cost of the license the Power have been of zero benefit to the SANFL and every indication shows things are getting worse.
The figures are there in all the clubs, the Powrrs and SANFLs Annual Reports Ive been told from this person who knows a lot more about figures than you or I but we can see if we can prove him wrong.
If I get time Ill try and find North's reports over the relevent period to compare, if you could get the Magpies and show where they were 91 to 96 as compared to now and get back to us it would be appreciated.
Will let you know how I fare.


PS Dont forget to tie in the significant contribution inflation will make when collaborating your figures.

[JK]

No money should be cut from the football department.

Management need to find new ways of generating money. This may be through ticket sales, membership, sponsorship, donations, merchandise, functions. The focus has got to be an going outsid eof the current box on these issues, fine tuning what we currently do wont be enough unless the fringe supporters stand up to be counted. Fringe supporters dont blindly give money, they want something from it, an experience or something like that.

All businesses need to find either alternate streams of revenue, or increases to the existing channels, particularly when budgets and actuals aren't lining up and leaving a shortfall/loss (or budget is forecasting a loss).

However, the cutting of overheads becomes a pretty important and common requirement in that same situation, so they very well may have to look at reduction of staff if they're unable to reduce other overheads or increase revenue by as much as they need to put themselves in the Black.

Agree with the tone of your post though mate.

[Macca19]

Don't give me that rubbish Macca, you're smarter than that.

the PAFC board is managed by 5 SANFL appointees and 5 PAFC elected members, compared to the Crows where only 1 person can be nominated by the members and the SANFL don't have to accept that nomination.

The SANFL has nowhere near the same control over the Power compared to the Crows as effectively the 5 PAFC board members can block any directve from the SANFL.

Not necessarily. The SANFL have made it known over the years that if Port are being mismanaged or are deep in the poo then they will take over the running of the club as per the licence agreement.

3-4 years ins't going to change a culture and membership base long term - the long term fiancial viability of teh PAFC relies on it making itself attractive to members and supporters outsde its traditional 30% share of teh football public of SA.

Whilst it cligs to the past and its existing supporting base it is doomed to failure.

Yes some of teh current members won't like it but they wont be around in 50 years (well a very small %age will) the club will be though - if it makes changes.

Correct that 3-4 years wont change, but its a double edged sword. The club cant simply come out and go 'hey, we arent port adelaide' and change the name and refute the history of the club. Many many Port supporters would not support the club if that was the case. This is why it cant just make the change like a click of the fingers. So unless this 30-50k group of non-Port supporting 2nd-AFL team waiting people jump on immediately to cover the thousands of Port supporters that would no longer be members, then the club would die before any new marketing would have any effect. Thats my opinion anyway.

[Macca19]

You call *naughty word* yet your 30k figure proves it true as the discussion is about now not 10 years ago.

Moot point as you are the one that brought up 'from when they entered the AFL' so I gave the stats from then.

Taking into account the cost of the license the Power have been of zero benefit to the SANFL and every indication shows things are getting worse.

The cost of the licence came from Ports profits, not out of the SANFLs dividend or profits. Similar to the 'dividend' the club had to pay it regardless. I dont see how it is relevant. As I mentioned, Freo lost $5 million in 4 years and didnt pay a cent towards the WAFC for 8 years. They turned it around and were given the chance to by the WAFC. Port should be granted similar.

The figures are there in all the clubs, the Powrrs and SANFLs Annual Reports Ive been told from this person who knows a lot more about figures than you or I but we can see if we can prove him wrong.

Yes he would know more. Im going by dividend figures given to SANFL clubs. In terms of money going to the clubs, I dont see how Port could be 'under' so to speak.

If I get time Ill try and find North's reports over the relevent period to compare, if you could get the Magpies and show where they were 91 to 96 as compared to now and get back to us it would be appreciated.
Will let you know how I fare.

I only have a scattering of annual reports due to a large amount of budgets and reports being 'lost in transit' ( ). Ill see if someone else has the Magpies ones for a comparison.

PS Dont forget to tie in the significant contribution inflation will make when collaborating your figures.

More money is still more money. AS I said in a previous post, in 96 the distribution was $340k. The next year it was $410k. In 98 it was $415k. Last year it was $450k. Obviously its not growing with inflation but it also means that the money the Crows contribute has also not grown with inflation.

Will be interesting to see the facts anyway.

[sjt]

If Port want to renegotiate the mechanics of their stadium deal with the SANFL well fine maybe the SANFL should step and say okay we want more control over the club (get rid of the Port members elected board members) and force the PAFC to look beyond its traditional market place for members and supporters etc.

They already have control over the club and can step in at any moment. They havent.

As for looking beyond its traditional market, its what the club has been doing. I stated earlier in this thread steps the club has taken to move away from being Port Adelaide (Planet Teal, never calling the club Port Adelaide but always calling it 'the Power' etc). Its done this for the past 3-4 seasons now. Its hasnt worked. Its made things worse. Ready-made Port supporters are dropping off because of the direction of the club. Making the most of what we got is surely the way to go currently.

Don't allign yourself to teh Port allign yourself to teh North the Northern Adelaide Football CLub.

yep sure it will cause short term pain (the great unwashed will be up in arms) but long term....

But long term there is zero evidence to suggest that going down this tack will make a spot of difference.

There seems to be this thought that there are 30-50k football supporters in Adelaide who are willing to pay money to go to an AFL game if Port were to change name to something else. Id love to know where these people are supposed to come from. Quite simply, they dont really exist. Which is why a different combination for the 2nd licence would have been pushing s***t up hill...relying almost solely on Crows supporters to jump on a different bandwagaon.

I agree with most of what you've said Macca. It's very hard for Port, the Power or whoever they officially are to get any supporters that have ever had other SANFL club affiliation. Somehow, they may manage to get a new generation that perceive the Crows to be elitist or commercial or for whatever other reason. Or success on the field may improve things a marginal amount via memberships and sponsorships. Personally I don't mind the team, it's just the supporters I struggle with. Purely because of the SANFL historical rivalry. Most my mates barracked for Port now the Power, so I used to cop it when Port Magpies were successful. Many of these haven't taken up their memberships this year for three main reasons. They say one is financial, although I don't believe their personal finances have changed from last year. More likely it's cheaper to stay at home and watch it. The other two reasons is the attractiveness or lack of in AFL footy (even though we're told statistically the AFL has never been healthier). It's often a boring basketball style. Finally I think they drop off with lack off on field success. None of these reasons is unique to Port.
Some outweigh others i.e with Richmond membership is up on the expectation of some better success.
At the end of the day, I think they have to rely on making as much as economically possible from the current membership base. Retain these members. I can't see any real supporter growth available to them. If the SANFL is making money out of them. If your figures are correct - which I don't doubt. Then I think the SANFL should cut them some slack even temporarily. I can't believe I said that.
"Told you so" though somewhat satisfying, probably doesn't really help in the end.

[Inflight]

I can't believe some turd stackers are saying Port has done nothing for the SANFL, money wise they are struggling but they have given some of our finest SANFL players from ALL Clubs an opportunity to perform on the big stage even if that stage is maintained by the slimey self centred Victorians

Forget Port and the Crows, overall the way footy is being managed as a spectacle in the AFL is a joke, the game is getting so much like Gaelic football where you can't touch any one, umpires are confused, players are confused.

The SANFL will get bigger crowds this year, you and I can support our clubs and
DRINK alcahol without any fear of retribution.
Pay a more than acceptable entry fee
See a great standard of footy and yes dare I say it better umpiring
Easy access to and from the ovals
Food is eadible and competetive

Compare this with what AAMI stadium and the AFL have to offer and you will see that not just Port but the AFL in SA is on a downward spiral IMHO

[Wedgie]

The AFL must be doing something right since they get the 3rd highest crowd averages for a league behind the NFL and the Bunderslegia.
Considering our population and distance between venues that is quite phenomenal.

[nickname]

Obviously I can't back this up but I don't think the attendances are an indication of the health of the game, I think they're a better indication of the passion we have for the game. To an extent we'll still follow our clubs no matter how much they stuff the game up because we love our clubs and the essence of Australian Rules. I suspect if you polled many people attending AFL games they'd express dissatisfaction with many aspects of it.

[Macca19]

The AFL manipulate the draw so they get the best possible crowd aggregate numbers. Good for them and the bottom line, bad for some clubs. This is why Bulldogs and Kangaroos get a yearly handout. I dont think any other league in the world would manipulate its fixture to the extent the AFL do.

[topsywaldron]

At least Port's cash crisis, exacerbated by pitiful attendances, exposes their belief that they have the most 'loyal' and 'passionate' supporters going around.

[wycbloods]

At least Port's cash crisis, exacerbated by pitiful attendances, exposes their belief that they have the most 'loyal' and 'passionate' supporters going around.

hahahaha you couldn't wait to get that little dig in topsy. I agree by the way

[topsywaldron]

hahahaha you couldn't wait to get that little dig in topsy.

I waited four pages, that's nearly a record for me.