Port Lose $4.12 million in 2012

[Jimmy_041]

Collingwood records $7m in black and white as financial power increases divide between rich and poor

[Wedgie]

The difference between the rich and the poor seems to be the same as the difference between competence and incompetence.

[UK Fan]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl ... 6531585920


Yet again port lied.

They've actually lost $6.3 mill this year so the title of the thread will need to be changed.

Had to urgently borrow $1.2 mill from afl to "pay bills".

Gold!!!!!!!!

[stan]

Bloody hell they must be using the same accounts as the federal government.

They need to have a good hard look at what the **** they are doing otherwise they will be the Hobart power pretty soon.

I mean you to look at collingwood and then north and work out how they have turned it around.

[mighty_tiger_79]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/port-adelaides-trading-loss-is-63m/story-e6freck3-1226531585920


Yet again port lied.

They've actually lost $6.3 mill this year so the title of the thread will need to be changed.

Had to urgently borrow $1.2 mill from afl to "pay bills".

Gold!!!!!!!!

heard KT on 5AA this morning and he says its incorrect.
Says the journalist was told and shown the info
the article has no people named
KT will talk with Leigh Whicker to find out who is giving out false info
KT says he is happy to open the books to anybody
they received $1.6mill from afl but it wasnt considered an emergency loan

[mighty_tiger_79]

The difference between the rich and the poor seems to be the same as the difference between competence and incompetence.

collingwood did lose a lot of cash investing in pubs etc

[Wedgie]

Holy ****. At least they can do something well and not half arsed.

x 153%!

[Booney]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/port-adelaides-trading-loss-is-63m/story-e6freck3-1226531585920
Yet again port lied.
They've actually lost $6.3 mill this year so the title of the thread will need to be changed.
Had to urgently borrow $1.2 mill from afl to "pay bills".
Gold!!!!!!!!

heard KT on 5AA this morning and he says its incorrect.
Says the journalist was told and shown the info
the article has no people named
KT will talk with Leigh Whicker to find out who is giving out false info
KT says he is happy to open the books to anybody
they received $1.6mill from afl but it wasnt considered an emergency loan

So UK jumped the gun using The Advertiser reporting as his source?

[mighty_tiger_79]

well not really, just might be his sauce is rosella

[Jimmy_041]

The difference between the rich and the poor seems to be the same as the difference between competence and incompetence.

collingwood did lose a lot of cash investing in pubs etc

and Port want to buy one????

Ron Fredericks will presently sticking a For Sale sign on the Birkenhead Bridge

[tigermad]

any bets on what 2013`s losses will be ?

[Strawb]

any bets on what 2013`s losses will be ?

I will take 5.12 Million

[UK Fan]

any bets on what 2013`s losses will be ?

I will take 5.12 Million

I'll take $2.5 mill trading deficit.

Plus afl grants of $3.5 mill.

Totalling a $6 mill Loss without grants.

KT is the master of saying nothing.

[Booney]

KT is the master of saying nothing.

From the CEO - December 7 2012

With so much positive action happening at your club, it’s a pity that today we are being forced to confront another damaging, destructive article in The Advertiser, relating to our financial position.

Let me give you the facts: Last week we reported a loss of $2.1m. Included in that loss was an SANFL grant of $2m, making the consolidated loss $4.1m. This figure is endorsed by our auditors and the AFL.

The Advertiser “revealed” today that the loss is actually $6.3m, as a result of a “$1.2m emergency payment” that was made by the AFL to help us meet short term financial requirements. This statement is wrong.

There was also no $1.2m emergency bail-out. Money flows between the AFL, SANFL and its clubs virtually every day. There was nothing extraordinary this year.

So let’s talk about the gap between our actual result ($4.1m loss excluding SANFL grants) and the $6.3m number being reported by The Advertiser.

The AFL provides a Future Fund for ALL of its clubs, with a strategic view to creating 18 competitive teams and building the most even and strongest competition possible.

It does this in acknowledgment of a number of inequities, including that the competition is structured to maximise attendances and TV audiences. That’s why Collingwood rarely plays outside the MCG and the Friday Night blockbusters on TV almost invariably involve the top clubs. It’s also why the ANZAC Day clash is reserved for Collingwood and Essendon.

We accept these policies because it’s good for the competition commercially.

To compensate for these inequities, the AFL provides additional investment monies to the clubs who are less likely to be directly involved in these promotions.

In 2012, ALL clubs received $500k from the AFL Future Fund.

13 clubs received further AFL Future Funds on top of the $500k, Port Adelaide included.

8 clubs receive the same amount or more than Port Adelaide.

In our case, we received an additional $1.6m, which we must spend in areas agreed by the AFL. In our case this was our football program and Membership, Corporate and Media Departments in 2012.

Far from being hidden, or sinister in any way, this is a legitimate line of revenue from the AFL to their clubs.

It is reported by every other club exactly the same way we have reported it.

Our loss is $2.1m and we receive an agreed $2m grant from the SANFL. End of story.

We’re not happy with it, but we are getting things done to fix it.

The continual desire for faceless/nameless members of the SANFL community to attack Port Adelaide’s credibility is destructive, short-sighted and ill informed. It must stop.

The decision by The Advertiser, despite a comprehensive personal briefing from us, and full disclosure of all relevant documents, to run an unsourced article like today’s is also disappointing.

[UK Fan]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/port-adelaides-trading-loss-is-63m/story-e6freck3-1226531585920
Yet again port lied.
They've actually lost $6.3 mill this year so the title of the thread will need to be changed.
Had to urgently borrow $1.2 mill from afl to "pay bills".
Gold!!!!!!!!

heard KT on 5AA this morning and he says its incorrect.
Says the journalist was told and shown the info
the article has no people named
KT will talk with Leigh Whicker to find out who is giving out false info
KT says he is happy to open the books to anybody
they received $1.6mill from afl but it wasnt considered an emergency loan

So UK jumped the gun using The Advertiser reporting as his source?

http://m.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/w ... 6532483264


Looks like kt and yourself was the ones jumping the gun mr boon.

Yet again kts statement lacks any real substance to it.

[Booney]

Did you read the article? Then, did you understand it?

[UK Fan]

Did you read the article? Then, did you understand it?

CHAIRMAN David Koch has conceded Port Adelaide made a number of blunders as it staggered to a pre-grant operating loss of $6.3 million when he addressed key stakeholders at a lunch at Alberton yesterday.

But Koch, who spoke passionately about a new beginning, said the Power was not alone in struggling to make ends meet.

He said the club's initial report of a loss of $2.1 million - after grants from the AFL and the SANFL had softened the blow - gave a better guide to the club's affairs.

The TV identity and financial expert did not - and could not - dispute The Advertiser's figure of a $6 million-plus operating loss in yesterday's edition, except for questioning what should be considered a grant and what should be considered an entitled revenue.



Maybe you could explain your understanding of the article to us all Mr Boon. ???

[Jim05]

I think all the other clubs dont add ammounts from grants into their figures.
Yes Port did lose $6.3m when you factor in grants etc but Collingwood were spruiking a $7m profit but over $3m of that was grants/loans from the AFL.
If we are to take Ports figures as a whole then we have to do the same with the other 17 clubs.
Whilst I agree Ports figures are not great I would also like to see how some of the other clubs went when you factor in loans/grants

[GWW]

I think all the other clubs dont add ammounts from grants into their figures.
Yes Port did lose $6.3m when you factor in grants etc but Collingwood were spruiking a $7m profit but over $3m of that was grants/loans from the AFL.
If we are to take Ports figures as a whole then we have to do the same with the other 17 clubs.
Whilst I agree Ports figures are not great I would also like to see how some of the other clubs went when you factor in loans/grants

A decent post from a non-Port supporter, unlike most of the repetitive hyperbole posted on this thread.

[Hondo]

All clubs include grants in their revenue from what I can tell