Port Lose $4.12 million in 2012

[Booney]

North - $6.5 in debt.

NORTH Melbourne is asking fans to add a $25 donation to their 2012 membership to help wipe the club's $6.5 million debt.
Kangaroos chairman James Brayshaw has sent a letter to the Roos' 2011 members asking for their help to allow the club to compete on and off the field.

Bulldogs ( in 2011 ) - $5m in debt

THE Western Bulldogs are set to launch an aggressive bid to wipe off their $5 million debt.
Supporters will soon be asked to contribute to a "Bulldoze the debt" appeal, with the club hopeful of clearing its books within three years.
Bulldogs chief executive Campbell Rose yesterday described the task as a "mountain of gigantic proportions", but is confident it is achievable.
Servicing the $5 million debt costs the Dogs about $480,000 a year in interest, hampering the clubs' ability to keep up with others clubs' football budgets.

Geelong in 1999 - $7m in debt

*Under Brian Cook...*
Under his management, the Geelong Football Club cleared its 1999 interest bearing debt of $7 million and has posted twelve consecutive profits.

Melbourne in 2008 - $5m in debt

At one stage, however, despite all the goodwill possible, the Club’s debt seemed insurmountable. It initially stood at $5 million, but after successive Debt Demolition campaigns in 2008 and 2009, supported by the Foundation Heroes group, and followed by stabilising efforts in 2010, the way was clear for building on a sound financial platform.

I 100% agree this is not a good position to be in, but,clubs have been here before...

[Booney]

I think booney has provided more feeble excuses on how to lose money!
Still my original comment remains about port looking at north at what they have achieved.
The the stadium deal is an issuebit 4.1 mil worth of an issue?

Not an issue just need to win more games according to booney and reb

I think I've worked you out. You're a chick, aren't you?

isnt that an oxymoron?

True....too true.

[UK Fan]

North - $6.5 in debt.

NORTH Melbourne is asking fans to add a $25 donation to their 2012 membership to help wipe the club's $6.5 million debt.
Kangaroos chairman James Brayshaw has sent a letter to the Roos' 2011 members asking for their help to allow the club to compete on and off the field.

Bulldogs ( in 2011 ) - $5m in debt

THE Western Bulldogs are set to launch an aggressive bid to wipe off their $5 million debt.
Supporters will soon be asked to contribute to a "Bulldoze the debt" appeal, with the club hopeful of clearing its books within three years.
Bulldogs chief executive Campbell Rose yesterday described the task as a "mountain of gigantic proportions", but is confident it is achievable.
Servicing the $5 million debt costs the Dogs about $480,000 a year in interest, hampering the clubs' ability to keep up with others clubs' football budgets.

Geelong in 1999 - $7m in debt

*Under Brian Cook...*
Under his management, the Geelong Football Club cleared its 1999 interest bearing debt of $7 million and has posted twelve consecutive profits.

Melbourne in 2008 - $5m in debt

At one stage, however, despite all the goodwill possible, the Club’s debt seemed insurmountable. It initially stood at $5 million, but after successive Debt Demolition campaigns in 2008 and 2009, supported by the Foundation Heroes group, and followed by stabilising efforts in 2010, the way was clear for building on a sound financial platform.

I 100% agree this is not a good position to be in, but,clubs have been here before...

Pointless post!!!

Why show clubs debt levels as a reflection of football clubs financial performance.

How much is man uniteds / real madrids debt level ?? $200 Mill

Man they must be 20 times In more trouble than port.

Poor old booney like most port fans love to Pick at the outside of their scab. But then complain when the sore doesn't miraculously heal.

[Rik E Boy]

Poor on field performance = lower crowds.
Lower crowds + lower membership = lower revenue
Lower crowds + rubbish stadium deal = lower revenue
Lower crowds = rubbish time slots and draw = lower sponsorship = lower revenue
Paying out previous coach truck load of money = money for nothing

My chest is hurting now.

You're wasting your time. Nuffy just picks out a particular point and then misses it by miles. It's not even worth trying to explain it to him which is why I don't bother. You try to enlighten the unendurably stupid and he starts talking about EPL! Life is too short my friend.

regards,

REB

[UK Fan]

Poor on field performance = lower crowds.
Lower crowds + lower membership = lower revenue
Lower crowds + rubbish stadium deal = lower revenue
Lower crowds = rubbish time slots and draw = lower sponsorship = lower revenue
Paying out previous coach truck load of money = money for nothing

My chest is hurting now.

You're wasting your time. Nuffy just picks out a particular point and then misses it by miles. It's not even worth trying to explain it to him which is why I don't bother. You try to enlighten the unendurably stupid and he starts talking about EPL! Life is too short my friend.

regards,

REB

I think booney has provided a high level guide of how to lose money!

Still my original comment remains about port looking at north at what they have achieved.

The the stadium deal is an issuebit 4.1 mil worth of an issue?

X2 Stan. I'm assuming your post got missed.

Stadium deal booney really ????

So when Bucky Cunningham claimed "we will have port fans hanging from the rafters" he forgot to add the caveat "only if we do ok in the first six or seven games". When the going gets tough Port fans take their bat and ball and go home. Whilst being fully aware of the negative financial impact it is having on Oneclub.

I always thought this was the case with port fans. Thanks for the confirmation gentlemen.

Play on.

[Booney]

"picks out a particular point then misses it by miles..."

Please see post above.

[Rik E Boy]

"picks out a particular point then misses it by miles..."

Please see post above.

He's as consistent as Centrals in their heyday.

regards,

REB

[valleys07]

Poor on field performance = lower crowds.
Lower crowds + lower membership = lower revenue
Lower crowds + rubbish stadium deal = lower revenue
Lower crowds = rubbish time slots and draw = lower sponsorship = lower revenue
Paying out previous coach truck load of money = money for nothing

My chest is hurting now.

You're wasting your time. Nuffy just picks out a particular point and then misses it by miles. It's not even worth trying to explain it to him which is why I don't bother. You try to enlighten the unendurably stupid and he starts talking about EPL! Life is too short my friend.

regards,

REB

[Hondo]

If the AFL culled every team that got itself into debt problems they would have about 4 teams left. The only precedent in modern AFL is Fitzroy who were left to rot on and off the field.

Fitzroy's demise was also during a different era of the AFL when funds were tight and the AFL were actively trying to reduce the number of teams in the comp. Now the opposite is true. I suspect in today's times Fitzroy would have been supported better.

So while on field success is not the silver bullet (not that anyone said it was ) it is a key step in the right direction and I think KT is on the right track in lifting the footy department spend to ensure a competitive on field team.

The AFL also have Brisbane to worry about as they just posted a $2.5m loss after losses of $1.8m loss and $2.5m in the previous two years. Plus losses in the two years preceeding that making 5 years of consecutive losses. Then there is the massive funds being invested into GCS and GWS. The AFL are not short of money right now so Port are fortunate to be in this position now rather than 20 years go.

We also have to remember that 22 AFL games is a key part of the SMA modelling so again I think it is vested interests will ensure 22 AFL home in Adelaide. What Port need to avoid is being forced into a re-brand which I think is more likely what the AFL's plan B would be rather than culling them.

[UK Fan]

Poor on field performance = lower crowds.
Lower crowds + lower membership = lower revenue
Lower crowds + rubbish stadium deal = lower revenue
Lower crowds = rubbish time slots and draw = lower sponsorship = lower revenue
Paying out previous coach truck load of money = money for nothing

My chest is hurting now.

You're wasting your time. Nuffy just picks out a particular point and then misses it by miles. It's not even worth trying to explain it to him which is why I don't bother. You try to enlighten the unendurably stupid and he starts talking about EPL! Life is too short my friend.

regards,

REB

It's a brilliant point you make. As Stan and yourself have pointed out it's not the cause or cure to ports $4.1 mill annual deficit. But you jusr decided to nitpick this one point anyway.

As predicted many posts ago.

" I Didn't think Booney was the type that would just sit around and fight around for useless scraps off port adelside carcass.

Let me guess you have no real point to add to the argument ???? Just another pathetic attempt at chest beating about how port aren't reallY that useless ."

Need to make it less obvious mr boon

How is your chest feeling now ?? Poor old port I'm sure it will simply turn around one day.

[Frosty]

I have a theory on this which stretches back to the good old SANFL days before the Crows even existed. Just my opinion of course being a Sturt fan...

Being the most successful SANFL club in history meant that Port Adelaide had intense rivalries with some of the other SANFL powerhouses over the years like Sturt, Norwood, Glenelg and North Adelaide. In fact, I'm sure at some stage everyone except Port fans have hated Port - moreso for their success than anything else. You either love them or you hate them.

When the Crows entered the AFL in 1991 players came from most SANFL clubs so had the support of most of the state. When Port joined the AFL in 1997 it was probably a case of having support from the Port Adelaide faithful in the SANFL, a bunch of Crows fans who would have supported Port in the SANFL and defected to the Power and a new bunch of fans from the mainly Western suburbs.

Because of the SANFL rivalry and Port's insistence of aligning themselves with their SANFL club they are alienating many supporters of rival SANFL clubs. They will never have the same fan base as the Crows and will struggle for crowds due to their smaller supporter base.

Look at Western Australia. The WAFL was in a similiar position to the SANFL but probably a bit weaker competition. Originally they came together to form the Eagles and the state as a whole embraced that - like the Crows. Then came Fremantle - but unlike Port Adelaide they drew their name and support from two WAFL clubs in South Fremantle and East Fremantle. They didn't go out alone and as far as I know the Fremantle clubs never had the same level on field success and hence rivalry as Port did in Adelaide. As a consequence Freo is supported more widely in WA and they have better crowds at games as a result.

For Port to get anywhere in this state they are going to have to distance themselves somewhat from their SANFL background and appeal to a new group of fans and establish a supporter base that doesn't see them as Port Magpies but Port Power.

The other problem expansion teams into the AFL have is no AFL history and club legends to call on to inspire the faithful. It took Jim Stynes - cult hero, Brownlow Medallist, most consecutive games played, to get Melbourne out of their hole - who can Port rely on to do this? Wanganeen? Tredrea? Port need a saviour or they will continue to struggle and eventually drown from within.

[The Sleeping Giant]

Nearly right. The whole state didn't embrace the crows. In fact I would think less than a 3rd did.

[Jim05]

Nearly right. The whole state didn't embrace the crows. In fact I would think less than a 3rd did.

Hard to embrace a side who's first coach was a knob and filled it with all his Glenelg bum buddies.
Was never going to stop supporting Essendon but probably would have taken the Crows as my second side if they wern't Glenelg Mark II

[Rik E Boy]

Nearly right. The whole state didn't embrace the crows. In fact I would think less than a 3rd did.

Hard to embrace a side who's first coach was a knob and filled it with all his Glenelg bum buddies.
Was never going to stop supporting Essendon but probably would have taken the Crows as my second side if they wern't Glenelg Mark II

This. Which is why I stuck with Geelong.

regards,

REB

[Turbo]

Nearly right. The whole state didn't embrace the crows. In fact I would think less than a 3rd did.

Hard to embrace a side who's first coach was a knob and filled it with all his Glenelg bum buddies.
Was never going to stop supporting Essendon but probably would have taken the Crows as my second side if they wern't Glenelg Mark II

This. Which is why I stuck with Geelong.

regards,

REB

Being a glenelg supporter before the crows this is the reason why I don't mind them

[mighty_tiger_79]

and being a glenelg and geelong fan before the crows and the fact glenelg lost a lot to the crows is why i hate the foookers

[LaughingKookaburra]

To compare WA AFL clubs to SA AFL clubs is like comparing chalk and cheese. If SA had an average 13% financial growth like WA does currently from mining then the Crows would have 70,000 members and Port would have 45,000. There are tens of thousands who have the iq of a rock ape and they are pulling in $200,000 a year and they don't give a shit on what its spent on....... You physically have to see peoples spending habbits to beleive it. It's one of the worlds best economies.
You do however have to ask yourself why crowds in SA have dropped off as well as member numbers. 15 years ago both SA clubs were number 1 and 2 in memberships......

[Wedgie]

To compare WA AFL clubs to SA AFL clubs is like comparing chalk and cheese. If SA had an average 13% financial growth like WA does currently from mining then the Crows would have 70,000 members and Port would have 45,000. There are tens of thousands who have the iq of a rock ape and they are pulling in $200,000 a year and they don't give a shit on what its spent on....... You physically have to see peoples spending habbits to beleive it. It's one of the worlds best economies.
You do however have to ask yourself why crowds in SA have dropped off as well as member numbers. 15 years ago both SA clubs were number 1 and 2 in memberships......

Agreed, I know a heap of Fremantle fans who never had anything to do with South or East Fremantle nor lived down there, in fact I don't know one that lived there or did have something to do with those clubs.
Freo appealed to a lot of West Aussies who wanted to go to games and not have to associate with West Coast supporters who are similar to Crows fans. Port doesn't have that appeal but if similar was done here I know a heap of hard core footy fans who would have gone and watched an alternative to the Crows that wasn't Port.
West Australian's used some brains, South Australians and Victorians didn't when it came to choosing a 2nd team for SA. And its no coincidence that when Port tried to appeal to a wider audience earlier on they got much better crowds and were relatively successful. It really isn't rocket science. I think a few people overestimated Port's supporters in many aspects and they're now aware of what they're like which is probably too late.

[UK Fan]

It really isn't rocket science. I think a few people overestimated Port's supporters in many aspects and they're now aware of what they're like which is probably too late.

Agreed!!!!

[Jimmy_041]

Nearly right. The whole state didn't embrace the crows. In fact I would think less than a 3rd did.

Hard to embrace a side who's first coach was a knob and filled it with all his Glenelg bum buddies.
Was never going to stop supporting Essendon but probably would have taken the Crows as my second side if they wern't Glenelg Mark II

I watched the first Collingwood v Crows game and had no mixed feelings.
My first words were Carn Pies!!
They did not represent the State - this is club football
I hated them from the start because of that sanctimonious **** Cornes and the Glenelg mafia that ran it
Once a couple of Woodville and South blokes took it over and cleaned the Glenelg $hit out, they won a couple of flags, otherwise they would be as successful as Glenelg are............. not