Annual Reports: Every Club's Profit/Loss Margin for 2012

[Kwality]

I buy 4 memberships and they aren't the cheaper ones. The adult ones are Legends. I don't get any corporate anything out them. It would be cheaper for me to go and pay at the gate when I can go, which is not every week. Even when I do go my wife/kids don't always come along. I could literaly save more than $1,000 and see just as many live game. If the money wasn't going to Collingwood I wouldn't buy these membership - at at the very least not at the same level and not 4. It wouldn't be a membership, it would be an AFL contibution. Actually I very much doubt Legends memebrship would even exist.

I have been a football fan and Collingwood supporter all my life. I have no incentive to be a financial contributer of the AFL. They have Broadcast rights, caterring rights and a host of other ways to rasie funds. I can spend my money an whatever I want. I happen tio want to spend some of Collinwood. I definately do not want to spend any on Carlton.

A reality call for those who want to tax the bigger clubs.

 

[The_Wookie]

A reality call for those who want to tax the bigger clubs.

Actually if the AFL tax gate reciepts, then most of the people who will get taxed will be the AWAY team people who visit as opposed to members, since membership revenue and gate reciepts are usually separate.

Clubs that have accounted for them separately:

• Melbourne – $4,305,292
• Hawthorn – $4,018,101 (“matchday income”)
• Carlton – $3,426,953
• Western Bulldogs – $1,374,525 (“match returns and gate receipts”)
• Essendon – $726,504 (This is not a misprint)

Note the difference between carlton and the bulldogs. Its the difference between playing friday nights and blockbuster games every other week and playing interstate teams at etihad on a saturday or sunday afternoon. Wtf Melbourne is doing I have no idea, but they must have one hell of a deal with the MCC. Essendon would have the majority of its gameday funds in membership.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Docklands - buy it for $330mil in June 2006, give to the the AFL for $1 on 31/12/25, stadium deal by the owner hurting Essendon's gate takings compared to MCG based clubs.

Although $700k looks too low given that Essendon and Collingwood split ANZAC day gate and the other home and away game. There might be some creative accounting and some matchday receipts put into another area.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

I have been a football fan and Collingwood supporter all my life. I have no incentive to be a financial contributer of the AFL. They have Broadcast rights, caterring rights and a host of other ways to rasie funds. I can spend my money an whatever I want. I happen tio want to spend some of Collinwood. I definately do not want to spend any on Carlton.

You would be better off spending all your dough in the Collingwood merchandise shop and staying at home.

Contrary to popular delusion, Collingwood did not get where it is all on its own.

The AFL clubs are symbiotic organisms.

 

[Collingwoodity]

You would be better off spending all your dough in the Collingwood merchandise shop and staying at home.

Contrary to popular delusion, Collingwood did not get where it is all on its own.

The AFL clubs are symbiotic organisms.

You are giving North Melbourne, its supporters and yourself a bad name.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

You are giving North Melbourne, its supporters and yourself a bad name.

Thanks for recognising my superpowers.

 

[Hill2Pav]

I wonder if any of the $600,000 stolen by the doggies former Finance officer will ever be recovered.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/d...y-deluded-finance-officer-20121207-2azkb.html

Doggies stripped of $600,000 by 'deluded' finance officer

The former finance officer with the Western Bulldogs football club has been jailed for fleecing it of more than $600,000.
Jason David Hucker, 30, stole money from the club on an almost daily basis for two years until November, 2010.
The County Court today heard that Hucker stole cash takings from the Whitten Oval merchandise store and off-site game-day stores.
<iframe id="dcAd-1-3" src="http://ad-apac.doubleclick.net/adi/...oria;pos=3;sz=300x250;tile=3;ord=4.1925633E7?" width='300' height='250' scrolling="no" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0"> </iframe>
Prosecutor Michael Hannan said earlier that Hucker also dishonestly obtained a financial advantage by deception through unauthorised credit reversals.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/doggies-stripped-of-600000-by-deluded-finance-officer-20121207-2azkb.html#ixzz2EMSGHNy1

 

[malteaser]

I buy 4 memberships and they aren't the cheaper ones. The adult ones are Legends. I don't get any corporate anything out them. It would be cheaper for me to go and pay at the gate when I can go, which is not every week. Even when I do go my wife/kids don't always come along. I could literaly save more than $1,000 and see just as many live game. If the money wasn't going to Collingwood I wouldn't buy these membership - at at the very least not at the same level and not 4. It wouldn't be a membership, it would be an AFL contibution. Actually I very much doubt Legends memebrship would even exist.

I have been a football fan and Collingwood supporter all my life. I have no incentive to be a financial contributer of the AFL. They have Broadcast rights, caterring rights and a host of other ways to rasie funds. I can spend my money an whatever I want. I happen tio want to spend some of Collinwood. I definately do not want to spend any on Carlton.

Here here. I couldn't agree with you more.

it astounds me, supporters of teams who winge about the power of some teams and the unfair draw, the lack of big games etc etc, bagging those powerful clubs mercifully, then they think we will just turn around and pay them our money because its good for their club. Get Stuffed.

Of course some of these teams that seem to splutter and choke consistently, plagarise ideas and try to move in on other peoples hard work. Funny really

 

[Kwality]

Here here. I couldn't agree with you more.

it astounds me, supporters of teams who winge about the power of some teams and the unfair draw, the lack of big games etc etc, bagging those powerful clubs mercifully, then they think we will just turn around and pay them our money because its good for their club. Get Stuffed.

Of course some of these teams that seem to splutter and choke consistently, plagarise ideas and try to move in on other peoples hard work. Funny really

Got to agree, many Eagles fans are happy to see our surpluses being turned back into WA footy but the idea that WA footy should be shortchanged to pump up the tyres of 100 year old clubs that simply arent valued enough by Melbourne fans to make a profit is flabbergasting !!
There are many Eagles fans that want the club to retain all its profits just as the Pies do, and when the new stadium gets built in WA , the Eagles might need to keep all its money to fund the joint.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Got to agree, many Eagles fans are happy to see our surpluses being turned back into WA footy but the idea that WA footy should be shortchanged to pump up the tyres of 100 year old clubs that simply arent valued enough by Melbourne fans to make a profit is flabbergasting !!
There are many Eagles fans that want the club to retain all its profits just as the Pies do, and when the new stadium gets built in WA , the Eagles might need to keep all its money to fund the joint.

As with most Western Australians, you are seriously delusional when it comes to this issue. The victim mentality over there is off the charts.

If it wasn't for the VFL you would have no local competition. Fact.

The VFL are responsible for the emergence of the cash cow known as the West Coast Eagles, so it's only right that VFL clubs should reap (minor) benefits from that fact. This VFL created entity also props up your local competition.

Instead of constantly bitching and moaning (Yes, BOOOOOO) you should just show your appreciation by saying thanks and then go about your business.

 

[B4Bear]

How is it that a talk about club's profits turns into a pissing contest between the smaller clubs and the larger clubs; every time a rational discussion starts it devolves into a mud slinging exercise.

Despite the wishes of the myopic, the smaller clubs are just as important to the competition as those that have a larger supporter base. While the fixture remains compromised and the exposure remains unequal the AFL will continue to help the smaller clubs remain viable and help them get their financial house in order.

If the larger clubs dislike the way things are, they are more than free to go set up their own competition. The fact that it did not work for the Super League should not discourage them; after all BF experts know everything. I am not sure how your tv ratings will go with <10 clubs playing off every week; still I am sure you can work it out.

 

[tonk]

I buy 4 memberships and they aren't the cheaper ones. The adult ones are Legends. I don't get any corporate anything out them. It would be cheaper for me to go and pay at the gate when I can go, which is not every week. Even when I do go my wife/kids don't always come along. I could literaly save more than $1,000 and see just as many live game. If the money wasn't going to Collingwood I wouldn't buy these membership - at at the very least not at the same level and not 4. It wouldn't be a membership, it would be an AFL contibution. Actually I very much doubt Legends memebrship would even exist.

I have been a football fan and Collingwood supporter all my life. I have no incentive to be a financial contributer of the AFL. They have Broadcast rights, caterring rights and a host of other ways to rasie funds. I can spend my money an whatever I want. I happen tio want to spend some of Collinwood. I definately do not want to spend any on Carlton.

Fair enough

 

[Kwality]

How is it that a talk about club's profits turns into a pissing contest between the smaller clubs and the larger clubs; every time a rational discussion starts it devolves into a mud slinging exercise.

Despite the wishes of the myopic, the smaller clubs are just as important to the competition as those that have a larger supporter base. While the fixture remains compromised and the exposure remains unequal the AFL will continue to help the smaller clubs remain viable and help them get their financial house in order.

If the larger clubs dislike the way things are, they are more than free to go set up their own competition. The fact that it did not work for the Super League should not discourage them; after all BF experts know everything. I am not sure how your tv ratings will go with <10 clubs playing off every week; still I am sure you can work it out.

Dont worry about the myopic, the context of the last few posts is the proposal to tax some clubs & give the money to other clubs.
I've no problem if the clubs that benefit from the FIXturing are charged a portion of extra benefits accrued.

 

[*PAF]

Dont worry about the myopic, the context of the last few posts is the proposal to tax some clubs & give the money to other clubs.
I've no problem if the clubs that benefit from the FIXturing are charged a portion of extra benefits accrued.

Better fixturing not only results in having a greater share of gate takings but it also impacts negatively on the ability to attract sponsors for clubs that do not have access to the better timeslots and fixtures.

It is debateable if blockbusters have increased the number of spectators or TV audiences but it has definitely helped the AFL getting better TV deals.

Now the AFL has to balance the two. Take away the ability to attract sponsors and to maximise gate takings with one hand but it must give back with the other, if it doesn't the competition will inevitably fail.

 

[Obese Arachnid]

Dont worry about the myopic, the context of the last few posts is the proposal to tax some clubs & give the money to other clubs.
I've no problem if the clubs that benefit from the FIXturing are charged a portion of extra benefits accrued.

And WC have been fixtured in a major city with only one competitor, so fair enough you pony up.

 

[Kwality]

And WC have been fixtured in a major city with only one competitor, so fair enough you pony up.

No worries.We get an extra game every second year. We put in millions to WA footy every year & thats a good thing for the game both locally & nationally.

The Pies get an extra 7 games every year?

Really the point is, both the Pies & Eagles put bums on seats & games at home (as distinct from on the road) always pay its way. Not sure the Pies on the road are not profitable for most clubs BUT why the Eagles play a club like Melbourne @ Etihad & the game cant break even (the 2 km road trip is too much it seems), it beggars belief ... Melbourne members dont support the game SO transfer it to Subi where it will turn a buck - I know charity begins at home, so Melbourne should at least break even on such a deal. Are they really entitled to profit?

 

[Obese Arachnid]

No worries.We get an extra game every second year. We put in millions to WA footy every year & thats a good thing for the game both locally & nationally.

The Pies get an extra 7 games every year?

Really the point is, both the Pies & Eagles put bums on seats & games at home (as distinct from on the road) always pay its way. Not sure the Pies on the road are not profitable for most clubs BUT why the Eagles play a club like Melbourne @ Etihad & the game cant break even (the 2 km road trip is too much it seems), it beggars belief ... Melbourne members dont support the game SO transfer it to Subi where it will turn a buck - I know charity begins at home, so Melbourne should at least break even on such a deal. Are they really entitled to profit?

I'm talking about the club itself when it came into existence.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

I'm talking about the club itself when it came into existence.

He's a franchise supporter.

He just doesn't understand.

He never will.

 

[Obese Arachnid]

Yep, we in Melb fight for TV spots (OK so not much my club) while they were gifted half a state. No a whole state at first then Freo picked up the scraps.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Yep, we in Melb fight for TV spots (OK so not much my club) while they were gifted half a state. No a whole state at first then Freo picked up the scraps.

They were gifted their entire existence.

 

[Kwality]

I'm talking about the club itself when it came into existence.

Mate, I'm a Subi supporter (1986 WAFL premiers), what is your point, not enough recruits for the Pies out of WA ... ? You have no idea how hard it was to embrace the national comp, but WA footy had no financial alternative ... Just as Luc Longley in the 90s was embracing basketball at the highest level & Andrew Gaze was kicking arse in Aus, the national level brought most of the best players into one comp - some of the best in 1990, ALL of the best in 1992 Obesity!!!

 

[telsor]

Mate, I'm a Subi supporter (1986 WAFL premiers), what is your point, not enough recruits for the Pies out of WA ... ? You have no idea how hard it was to embrace the national comp, but WA footy had no financial alternative ... Just as Luc Longley in the 90s was embracing basketball at the highest level & Andrew Gaze was kicking arse in Aus, the national level brought most of the best players into one comp - some of the best in 1990, ALL of the best in 1992 Obesity!!!

Most of the best players were already in the one comp.

 

[Kwality]

Yep, we in Melb fight for TV spots (OK so not much my club) while they were gifted half a state. No a whole state at first then Freo picked up the scraps.

Too few residents, too few Tv viewers
OR
too many teams in Melbourne.

Dum it down ...

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Too few residents, too few Tv viewers
OR
too many teams in Melbourne.

Dum it down ...

We're still here.

"Dum" that down.

 

[Kwality]

Most of the best players were already in the one comp.

As you say Telsor most, e.g indigenous players won 4 x Sandovers in the 50s ... Richmond were BIG BIG in the lesser comp so everyone understands you yearn for a lower level, given you absolute failure at the national level.