SA Footy

Grahaml wrote:No doubt Koch has been a big part of Port turning things around and they've done a sensational job from where they were. But the challenge is to sustain it, especially through the inevitable lean years. Seems similar to Cunningham's tenure. When he was there they were a totally different club but things went terribly awry almost as soon as he goes. Whether Koch can set Port up so well he's no longer required is his real challenge.

All theyve done is suck more money away from SA Football to fund their own.

Thomas/Koch is no different to haysman/duncanson just better con men who like to use big words.

All they had to do was fool Olsen to believe them PAFC is SA footballs future


Both are highly overrated!! Like most things PAFC related

Grahaml wrote:No doubt Koch has been a big part of Port turning things around and they've done a sensational job from where they were. But the challenge is to sustain it, especially through the inevitable lean years. Seems similar to Cunningham's tenure. When he was there they were a totally different club but things went terribly awry almost as soon as he goes. Whether Koch can set Port up so well he's no longer required is his real challenge.

Just observations away from the pro Port media in this town. Sure they are getting the members, attendences are up and on field seems to be improving, however they seem to have not converted this into large profits and significant debt reduction. (unlike, dare I say it, Nth Melb)

KT admits they have effectively "bought" members back in 2014 by offering at cost memberships. This is an OK strategy if you can then covert these into profit making memberships, this is yet to be proven.

KT and Kochie have been there a while now but they need to put some runs on the board financially off field to set them up for long term sustainability. I'm not sure any level headed Port people will disagree with that.

Wedgie wrote:I'm glad our guaranteed future excites you, its a pity the same can't be said about your adopted club or your previous club which died. I'm sure you'll find a new bandwagon to jump on when this one rolls over too, it must be nice to be able to be that fickle. Hope to see one of your clubs in another grand final soon, 2007 was fun!

Show's how crap the rest of the comp was, Port were in a rebuilding stage and had a very average squad, they shouldn't have even made the finals in 07.

The plan, in 2012, was to be somewhere near or making an operating profit in 2015. This was the goal, this was achieved. Even the most fervent knockers of the club should admire that.

The aim off field has been to show stability and increase not only membership but the very important corporate support. This too, has been very successful, up 140% since 2012. Investment in the Aboriginal and Broader Community program reached $1.5m in 2015. There was also a direct payment of $1m to the SANFL.

So while the operating profit could be seen as meager ( $211,302 ) it is a near $2.7m turn around from the last year.

We've done many things right in the last 24 months and sustaining that is now the key, obviously further development is crucial but ultimately on field is the reason football clubs exist, close behind is community involvement and while 2015 wasn't great on field the club has again been outstanding in funding and developing pathways for thousands, in fact just on 100,000 kids, in the Northern Territory and South Australia.

Football department spending has stayed below the AFL's "soft cap" and we will ( pending the Monfries / Ryder outcome ) pay 100% of the salary cap this year.

AO revenue is to go up by just over $500k for 2016. Clearly the club is heading in the right direction, knock it if you want, but there has been steady positive improvement off field for 4 years since new leadership has taken over. Any business model that plans to burst onto the scene can fall away just as quickly, the methodical approach Koch has led is building as planned. Pretty sure he knows what he's doing, nothing to show otherwise thus far. A strong sustainable business plan is now in place after many years of chasing our tail year on year.

One thing he emphasized at the AGM on Friday night was this ( not word for word ) "You will never see our club turning $3m profits like Hawthorn, when, not if, we are in that position we will be sending that money directly to our community based programs."

Dont feed the trolls Booney. Especially when those trolls are the ones supposed to keep this site from degenerating into rubbish like that

bennymacca wrote:Dont feed the trolls Booney. Especially when those trolls are the ones supposed to keep this site from degenerating into rubbish like that

I'm fine with reasonable debate, it's healthy. However unreasonable debate on the back of long held dislike and blind hatred doesn't tarnish people's views of me if I choose to debunk the comments, I feel anyway. I probably just need to be more tuned to deciphering what is reasonable, engaging, and what is unreasonable, and ignoring.

Easier said/typed than done.

Booney wrote:

bennymacca wrote:Dont feed the trolls Booney. Especially when those trolls are the ones supposed to keep this site from degenerating into rubbish like that

I'm fine with reasonable debate, it's healthy. However unreasonable debate on the back of long held dislike and blind hatred doesn't tarnish people's views of me if I choose to debunk the comments, I feel anyway. I probably just need to be more tuned to deciphering what is reasonable, engaging, and what is unreasonable, and ignoring.

Easier said/typed than done.

Yes, but please don't refrain from setting the record straight in response to criticism based on blind hatred and disdain.

Both Dutchy's post & Booney's reply were both measured, factual and didn't resemble a troll or contain a snide remark. Dutchy doesn't hide is dislike for Port, his choice. But if anyone is upset/offended by his last post, then I suggest you're a tad precious.

bennymacca wrote:Dont feed the trolls Booney. Especially when those trolls are the ones supposed to keep this site from degenerating into rubbish like that

Not one of your smarter posts Benny.

Spargo wrote:Both Dutchy's post & Booney's reply were both measured, factual and didn't resemble a troll or contain a snide remark. Dutchy doesn't hide is dislike for Port, his choice. But if anyone is upset/offended by his last post, then I suggest you're a tad precious.

I think he is talking about Wedgie's posts

Mr Beefy wrote:

Spargo wrote:Both Dutchy's post & Booney's reply were both measured, factual and didn't resemble a troll or contain a snide remark. Dutchy doesn't hide is dislike for Port, his choice. But if anyone is upset/offended by his last post, then I suggest you're a tad precious.

I think he is talking about Wedgie's posts

Then I take it back Benny. My bad.

Booney wrote:The plan, in 2012, was to be somewhere near or making an operating profit in 2015. This was the goal, this was achieved. Even the most fervent knockers of the club should admire that.

The aim off field has been to show stability and increase not only membership but the very important corporate support. This too, has been very successful, up 140% since 2012. Investment in the Aboriginal and Broader Community program reached $1.5m in 2015. There was also a direct payment of $1m to the SANFL.

So while the operating profit could be seen as meager ( $211,302 ) it is a near $2.7m turn around from the last year.

We've done many things right in the last 24 months and sustaining that is now the key, obviously further development is crucial but ultimately on field is the reason football clubs exist, close behind is community involvement and while 2015 wasn't great on field the club has again been outstanding in funding and developing pathways for thousands, in fact just on 100,000 kids, in the Northern Territory and South Australia.

Football department spending has stayed below the AFL's "soft cap" and we will ( pending the Monfries / Ryder outcome ) pay 100% of the salary cap this year.

AO revenue is to go up by just over $500k for 2016. Clearly the club is heading in the right direction, knock it if you want, but there has been steady positive improvement off field for 4 years since new leadership has taken over. Any business model that plans to burst onto the scene can fall away just as quickly, the methodical approach Koch has led is building as planned. Pretty sure he knows what he's doing, nothing to show otherwise thus far. A strong sustainable business plan is now in place after many years of chasing our tail year on year.

One thing he emphasized at the AGM on Friday night was this ( not word for word ) "You will never see our club turning $3m profits like Hawthorn,
when, not if, we are in that position we will be sending that money directly to our community based programs."

So the plan over the last 4 season was to pump money into Community programs as opposed to debt reduction for a club that has sustained significant losses over the last decade and needed to be bailed out by the SANFL not more than 5 season ago.

Does not sound like a great plan to me.


Surely the most passionate Port fan would question it ???

UK Fan wrote:So the plan is to pump money into Community programs as opposed to debt reduction.
Genius idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I read it as putting money into community programs as opposed to accumulating cash in the bank AFTER the debt has been cleared.

Spargo wrote:

Mr Beefy wrote:

Spargo wrote:Both Dutchy's post & Booney's reply were both measured, factual and didn't resemble a troll or contain a snide remark. Dutchy doesn't hide is dislike for Port, his choice. But if anyone is upset/offended by his last post, then I suggest you're a tad precious.

I think he is talking about Wedgie's posts

Then I take it back Benny. My bad.

yup, thought what Dutchy posted was fine. and no worries.

Zartan wrote:

UK Fan wrote:So the plan is to pump money into Community programs as opposed to debt reduction.
Genius idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I read it as putting money into community programs as opposed to accumulating cash in the bank AFTER the debt has been cleared.

Then they wouldnt of placed $1.5 mill into a community program this year when they still have signifcant debt levels

Zartan wrote:

UK Fan wrote:So the plan is to pump money into Community programs as opposed to debt reduction.
Genius idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I read it as putting money into community programs as opposed to accumulating cash in the bank AFTER the debt has been cleared.

It's understanding the little things that goes a long way.

Booney wrote:

Zartan wrote:

UK Fan wrote:So the plan is to pump money into Community programs as opposed to debt reduction.
Genius idea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I read it as putting money into community programs as opposed to accumulating cash in the bank AFTER the debt has been cleared.

It's understanding the little things that goes a long way.

So why did PAFC place $1.5 mill into a community program in 2015 when they still have seriously signifcant debt levels Mr Boon ????

What "seriously significant debt levels"?

Didn't we post an operating profit of $200k, inclusive of investments made into our community programs??

Mr Beefy wrote:

Spargo wrote:Both Dutchy's post & Booney's reply were both measured, factual and didn't resemble a troll or contain a snide remark. Dutchy doesn't hide is dislike for Port, his choice. But if anyone is upset/offended by his last post, then I suggest you're a tad precious.

I think he is talking about Wedgie's posts

My initial post gave them Kudos and was only facts!
Benny felt the need to not post a thing about the topic, he should either find the pm button or not bother as no one cares.
If he ever agreed with me I'd feel I was severely wrong!
Once again and on the topic well done to Port, catching up to other entities who are proven cash makers instead of being miles behind them is a good effort, I hope they keep it up!

Booney, I'm genuinely interested in the one million Port gave the SANFL. Was this a straight cash gift, or was it paying back some debt, some licensing agreement or for some other reason? Is it a precedent to perhaps pay back the other 11+ mill the SANFL kicked in to keep the Power afloat?