Adelaide Oval Football Membership Price Increase

[MatteeG]

Who makes the coin from the $13.50 CC cans? Cos I want in on that racket.

[Booney]

Who makes the coin from the $13.50 CC cans? Cos I want in on that racket.

Yes, I'm on the wrong side of that deal. That's fo shiz.

[Tiger83]

When will existing AO members be getting any correspondence confirming the price increase???

[Tassie Blues]

what was the cost of the membership this year?

Isn't the Powa president some finance guru maybe he need to pop into the finance department as give out some advice.

[Special One]

Apparently the AFL has told the SMA membership were under valued the season just gone, hence an increase for the new season.

[Spargo]

Who makes the coin from the $13.50 CC cans? Cos I want in on that racket.

Yes, I'm on the wrong side of that deal. That's fo shiz.

$13.50??? WTF - surely you blokes smuggle a few cans in.......

[Booney]

Who makes the coin from the $13.50 CC cans? Cos I want in on that racket.

Yes, I'm on the wrong side of that deal. That's fo shiz.

$13.50??? WTF - surely you blokes smuggle a few cans in.......

I thought about it, now the White Marquee with $5 pales and $8 Beam/CC cans is the pre-match and half time venue of choice.

[Wedgie]

When will existing AO members be getting any correspondence confirming the price increase???

I posted this topic after getting emails from them about renewals.
Nothing needs to be confirmed, its in their own email!

[kickinit]

The problem is Wedgie both the crows and Port had a figure they would make with a average attendance.

And accepted the deal on that basis? (Btw I agree with you in expecting higher than average attendance should equate to greater revenue for the clubs - Surely the clubs themselves confirmed this through the negotiation process?)

It was they would get a percentage of the dollars generated, there was nothing set against attendances. So there is no reason why if the attendances were higher the money wasn't.

[JK]

The problem is Wedgie both the crows and Port had a figure they would make with a average attendance.

And accepted the deal on that basis? (Btw I agree with you in expecting higher than average attendance should equate to greater revenue for the clubs - Surely the clubs themselves confirmed this through the negotiation process?)

It was they would get a percentage of the dollars generated, there was nothing set against attendances. So there is no reason why if the attendances were higher the money wasn't.

So does this mean the SMA or SANFL haven't delivered the agreed terms?

[kickinit]

So does this mean the SMA or SANFL haven't delivered the agreed terms?

The way it's been done the SANFl have delivered to agreed terms. What the SANFL have done though is raised the prices for services at the oval which gets taken out of the revenue. Like the cost of traffic management, $18,000 which is outrageous compared to all the other ovals in the country, you can also guess who runs that as well.

The thing that annoys me is the situation we are now in. The reason for the move to AO was to setup a oval which would bring more money back to the clubs and while taking the pressure off the SANFL having to pay the bill when it went bad. You know have the SANFL taking every $ they can get their hands on, while the AFL clubs are making less money then they were at Football park.

[Tiger83]

When will existing AO members be getting any correspondence confirming the price increase???

I posted this topic after getting emails from them about renewals.
Nothing needs to be confirmed, its in their own email!

I only ask because i have 2 AO Memberships and have received no such email.. Must be working their way through the list..

[JK]

http://www.sen.com.au/news/adelaide-oval-deal-sucking-crows-and-power-dry

[gossipgirl]

http://www.sen.com.au/news/adelaide-oval-deal-sucking-crows-and-power-dry

rucci is a shocker

[Dutchy]

Again Port unhappy with a deal that they signed!

Questions need to be asked of the administration who continue to enter agreements that are detrimental to their business!!!

[valleys07]

Forget PA for a second here, GG.

You don't think your club should be generating more from the stadium deal?

[valleys07]

Again Port unhappy with a deal that they signed!

Questions need to be asked of the administration who continue to enter agreements that are detrimental to their business!!!

FFS Dutchy, the AFC are involved in this too!

Port obviously have some financial issues that need sorting, but focus on the issue at hand which is both clubs, and the SANFL/SMA getting what they should out of this deal.

Yes a deal was signed, but its obviously not a good one if the Crows are just scraping evens with record attendances and record membership levels, with 100% corporate sales. That tells me that something has to be done for BOTH SA clubs to get what they are entitle to, without hanging the SANFL/SMA out to dry.

Fingers crossed it gets sorted soon.

[kickinit]

Again Port unhappy with a deal that they signed!

Questions need to be asked of the administration who continue to enter agreements that are detrimental to their business!!!

FFS Dutchy, the AFC are involved in this too!

Port obviously have some financial issues that need sorting, but focus on the issue at hand which is both clubs, and the SANFL/SMA getting what they should out of this deal.

Yes a deal was signed, but its obviously not a good one if the Crows are just scraping evens with record attendances and record membership levels, with 100% corporate sales. That tells me that something has to be done for BOTH SA clubs to get what they are entitle to, without hanging the SANFL/SMA out to dry.

Fingers crossed it gets sorted soon.

It's also funny how the SANFl won't release the financial report either.

[Booney]

Again Port unhappy with a deal that they signed!

Questions need to be asked of the administration who continue to enter agreements that are detrimental to their business!!!

....while they were still under the control of the SANFL.

The licence had not been sold, no "actual" date for the licence sale was in place.

What do you propose they did, tell the SANFL to jam it?

[Booney]

Again Port unhappy with a deal that they signed!

Questions need to be asked of the administration who continue to enter agreements that are detrimental to their business!!!

Let's wait and see, if and when all the cards are laid on the table then and only then can we point fingers. Fair to say that we'll likely never know the truth about the money from 2014....