Ch9 AFL Division 5 - 2015

[morell]

Think clubs get cranky not over the discussion of paying players but more the stupid amounts that get suggested.

Well then, why not be precise and correct it????

If someone said to me:

"morell, your mother was born in Egypt". I wouldn't come back and say "no, actually, she wasn't born anywhere near there". I would say, "no she was born in Switzerland".

The point of that analogy is, I am not defensive about where my mother is born, I don't mind telling people. So, using a rather astonishing series of logical steps, the only reason why someone wouldn't want to disclose something as banal and impersonal as football budgets is because they're defensive. So, why so defensive?

"none of your business" is not an answer, its just reinforcing the point that your defensive about it.

There are commercial reasons.

My employers don't let us know what their total budget is for staff salary. We're also (like most people) contractually prohibited from discussing pay with other employees/anyone aside from accountants/financial advisors. This is pretty standard across all industries.

Keeping this information as sensitive as possible is very bloody prudent to protect your commercial position.

Additionally, if you come out here and say you spent $100k on players i dare say you may find the salary cap gestapo breathing down your neck a bit tighter next year!

So you're saying that you don't want to publicise player payments because then other players would want to ask for more? Like PNU Player x is on $50/game, finds out PNU are paying $40k a year and therefore might ask for more?

RE commercial position, I would of thought the opposite is true, so that the bigger your budget, the more public you'd want to make it ... no? It's like on seek, if you wanted to attract a gun you put $200k +++!!!!! in the search description....

My pay is on public record. Pay levels, awards, rates and standards are quite widely documented.

[The Bedge]

call me a sceptic but i can't help wonder if this conversation is brought about because some recruiters who are looking to find out who is getting paid what in an attempt to recruit them for their own club

Nah I don't think so, could take a pretty close guess at what certain players would be paid - and you'd offer them what you could afford or think they're worth and you'd quickly find out if you're in the ball park lol - don't need a cryptic discussion on SAFooty

[morell]

call me a sceptic but i can't help wonder if this conversation is brought about because some recruiters who are looking to find out who is getting paid what in an attempt to recruit them for their own club

Nah I don't think so, could take a pretty close guess at what certain players would be paid - and you'd offer them what you could afford or think they're worth and you'd quickly find out if you're in the ball park lol - don't need a cryptic discussion on SAFooty

Well clearly this isn't the case, as the entire discussion was initiated due to someone asking what the budget was and the clubs involved saying it was wildly inaccurate.

[twobob]

It's not defensive, it's just none of your business.

Wow, that's a sentence which contradicts itself in less than 10 words. Quite difficult to achieve that.

I'm quite the wordsmith. Buy a membership, sit through an AGM and you can ask all the questions you like.

I seriously doubt that player payments would be revealed at AGM. That knowledge is only for the football department and the executive, other than that it's none of your business.

[morell]

other than that it's none of your business.

Wooop, there it is.

[The Bedge]

It's not defensive, it's just none of your business.

Wow, that's a sentence which contradicts itself in less than 10 words. Quite difficult to achieve that.

I'm quite the wordsmith. Buy a membership, sit through an AGM and you can ask all the questions you like.

I seriously doubt that player payments would be revealed at AGM. That knowledge is only for the football department and the executive, other than that it's none of your business.

I would argue that

[Arch44]

It's not defensive, it's just none of your business.

Wow, that's a sentence which contradicts itself in less than 10 words. Quite difficult to achieve that.

I'm quite the wordsmith. Buy a membership, sit through an AGM and you can ask all the questions you like.

I seriously doubt that player payments would be revealed at AGM. That knowledge is only for the football department and the executive, other than that it's none of your business.

I would of thought it would be in the Treasurers report at the AGM?

[twobob]

Morrell i heard Nate Mc Donnell was on $300 a game this year. I heard this from a very good source in the front bar at the Marion Hotel

[jo172]

Think clubs get cranky not over the discussion of paying players but more the stupid amounts that get suggested.

Well then, why not be precise and correct it????

If someone said to me:

"morell, your mother was born in Egypt". I wouldn't come back and say "no, actually, she wasn't born anywhere near there". I would say, "no she was born in Switzerland".

The point of that analogy is, I am not defensive about where my mother is born, I don't mind telling people. So, using a rather astonishing series of logical steps, the only reason why someone wouldn't want to disclose something as banal and impersonal as football budgets is because they're defensive. So, why so defensive?

"none of your business" is not an answer, its just reinforcing the point that your defensive about it.

There are commercial reasons.

My employers don't let us know what their total budget is for staff salary. We're also (like most people) contractually prohibited from discussing pay with other employees/anyone aside from accountants/financial advisors. This is pretty standard across all industries.

Keeping this information as sensitive as possible is very bloody prudent to protect your commercial position.

Additionally, if you come out here and say you spent $100k on players i dare say you may find the salary cap gestapo breathing down your neck a bit tighter next year!

So you're saying that you don't want to publicise player payments because then other players would want to ask for more? Like PNU Player x is on $50/game, finds out PNU are paying $40k a year and therefore might ask for more?

RE commercial position, I would of thought the opposite is true, so that the bigger your budget, the more public you'd want to make it ... no? It's like on seek, if you wanted to attract a gun you put $200k +++!!!!! in the search description....

My pay is on public record. Pay levels, awards, rates and standards are quite widely documented.

Let's say you're in a workplace that isn't under a CBA/modern award (or a football club) where commercial operations such as payment are not publicised.

Wouldn't you be upset to learn that the inferior employee next door to you (who is however a superior negotiator) is on 25% more than you? Might this cause disruption to the commercial operations of the business as you would either seek to be paid more and/or take your talents to a competitor?

As for total spend, it does require people to do a bit of division and supposition, but any of the employees who graduated year 10 maths could do roughly the same sums.

[jo172]

I do understand some of your point Morell in that paying footballers is still considered "uncouth" as a hangover from the days where it was prohibited. This cultural bias does play a significant part in limiting this conversation.

[morell]

Morrell i heard Nate Mc Donnell was on $300 a game this year. I heard this from a very good source in the front bar at the Marion Hotel

No, Nat plays for the cost of subs. If there is anyone in the world that isn't motivated by money, its Nat McDonnell. He wears op shop suits to our presentation nights.

I agree that personalising and getting into specifics about what each player earns is going a bit far as that would be up to them to disclose that.

[Mr Beefy]

It's not defensive, it's just none of your business.

Wow, that's a sentence which contradicts itself in less than 10 words. Quite difficult to achieve that.

I'm quite the wordsmith. Buy a membership, sit through an AGM and you can ask all the questions you like.

I seriously doubt that player payments would be revealed at AGM. That knowledge is only for the football department and the executive, other than that it's none of your business.

Individual payments - no, budgets and actuals - yes.
Don't know about your club but most members are only interested in the financial reports.

[morell]

I do understand some of your point Morell in that paying footballers is still considered "uncouth" as a hangover from the days where it was prohibited. This cultural bias does play a significant part in limiting this conversation.

Yeah and I guess that's the crux of my misunderstanding. I didn't grow up in footy clubs so this ethos and culture is strange to me.

[morell]

Wow, that's a sentence which contradicts itself in less than 10 words. Quite difficult to achieve that.

I'm quite the wordsmith. Buy a membership, sit through an AGM and you can ask all the questions you like.

I seriously doubt that player payments would be revealed at AGM. That knowledge is only for the football department and the executive, other than that it's none of your business.

Individual payments - no, budgets and actuals - yes.
Don't know about your club but most members are only interested in the financial reports.

So its $50 for membership and I can rock up and ask precisely:

"How much did "we" spend, in total, for player payments, awards and other incentives"

[twobob]

Morrell i heard Nate Mc Donnell was on $300 a game this year. I heard this from a very good source in the front bar at the Marion Hotel

No, Nat plays for the cost of subs. If there is anyone in the world that isn't motivated by money, its Nat McDonnell. He wears op shop suits to our presentation nights.

I agree that personalising and getting into specifics about what each player earns is going a bit far as that would be up to them to disclose that.

I knew that mate, i have known the Mc Donnells for a lot of years and know what great club people they have been for your club. It was a silly statement and i was just seeing if you were being true to your previous comments on this thread and trying to see if you would react when one of your own players came into question.

[Mr Beefy]

I seriously doubt that player payments would be revealed at AGM. That knowledge is only for the football department and the executive, other than that it's none of your business.

Individual payments - no, budgets and actuals - yes.
Don't know about your club but most members are only interested in the financial reports.

So its $50 for membership and I can rock up and ask precisely:

"How much did "we" spend, in total, for player payments, awards and other incentives"

Yes, you can ask, that is a members right. No different to asking what we spent on electricity, meat for the bbq, shorts and socks, etc. You have 2 weeks to buy a 2015 membership before they close

[The Bedge]

Mr Beefy looks like he just made RFC an extra $50 this year

[morell]

I seriously doubt that player payments would be revealed at AGM. That knowledge is only for the football department and the executive, other than that it's none of your business.

Individual payments - no, budgets and actuals - yes.
Don't know about your club but most members are only interested in the financial reports.

So its $50 for membership and I can rock up and ask precisely:

"How much did "we" spend, in total, for player payments, awards and other incentives"

Yes, you can ask, that is a members right. No different to asking what we spent on electricity, meat for the bbq, shorts and socks, etc. You have 2 weeks to buy a 2015 membership before they close

Can I just send you $50 and you tell me so we save a bunch of time?

Mr Beefy looks like he just made RFC an extra $50 this year

and it looks like morell will work out how much money we need to competitive in D6, D5 and beyond.

[Mr Beefy]

Mr Beefy looks like he just made RFC an extra $50 this year

Oh, I just read the constitution, he needs to be nominated and seconded by member and then approved by the committee.

[morell]

Just to be a member or to ask a question?