Port Adelaide: making North/Bulldogs look like Fiscal giants

[R00StaR]

Agreed, blame the AFL then not the SANFL, and while we have a choice of 2 stadiums owned/run by either the SMA or the SANFL we are both screwed no matter who holds the license (unless we sell home games)

Football clubs became money making assets when the AFL decided to sell license's to an organisation that can sublet that license out

To be fair now many people from SA wouldve supported clubs the AFL just put in there. It wouldve been seen as Victoria trying to muscle in on SA footy.

I think the SANFL just have to adjust, start taking a percentage rather than set amount. Then again the SANFL clubs probably wont cop that as it becomes hard to budget.

SA clubs arent to dissimilar to Dockland tenants really, it makes it difficult but at least for us one day the stadium will be owned. Its a tough situation but one the SA people wanted.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

The main issue here is control (I am sure REH and his minions will correct me if I am wrong)

1. The SANFL want funding from the AFL to run the SANFL (like other state leagues get)
2. The AFL will only give funding if the AFL control football in SA (rebadged SAAFL)
3. SANFL will not relinquish control so they get the funding from bleeding both SA AFL licences.

Our licence issues will not be sorted out until points 1 and 2 are resolved.

The SANFL don't want funding to run the SANFL comp and their affairs, they want to stay independent. The same in WA, the WAFC don't want monies to run the WAFL. What the SANFL wants is more of the development monies from the AFL for junior footy.

The 2007-11 Next Generations Strategy set aside $208mil for game development. Around half of that was for NSW and Qld. In the end it was $138mil specifically for juniors Australia wide and $74mil was moved aside for GW and GC and their development as AFL clubs as well as game development in their specific areas.

2012-16 funding is set at $190mil, but once again skewed to the northern markets.

The AFL has told the SANFL to cut the salary cap of the 9 SANFL clubs to bring it into line with the WAFL and VFL. The SANFL refused so the AFL initially decreased game development monies and then over time increased them at a lower percentage than for WA and Victoria. This is the real shit fight issue about $$$$. But because the WAFL salary cap and VFL salary cap is about 60-70% of the SANFL clubs', the game development $$/participant the AFL distribute in WA and Vic is substantially higher than SA.

The other issue is an ego thing. The AFL want the WAFL and SANFL comp to become AFL WA and AFL SA and take over the running of the game from the two state associations like it has done around the rest of Oz. Both those two state associations have told the AFL to get stuffed. A booming decade long WA economy and a small stadium whereby demand for tickets regularly exceeds supply means the WAFC don't have to worry about their finances as much and can hold the AFL at bay. In SA its the opposite, the economy has been ok for the last decade, but Footy Park has gone past its use by date for many fans are staying away. But the SANFL have the land at West Lakes as their nest egg. The WAFC don't own the land that Subiaco Oval is built on so they dont have that nest egg.

The 2 SA licences will being to be sorted post the 30 June 2012 deadline set out in last years funding package.

 

[_Christoh_]

When people place blame at Port Adelaide for their financial situation who exactly are they blaming? The board? The Admin? The football department? The fans?

We have had healthy membership numbers but poor crowds so it could be all the fans fault.

The Football Department has been under funded, could be their fault.

The Admin do the day to day stuff, could be their fault.

or

Maybe just maybe it might have something to do with our SANFL appointed president or maybe our SANFL appointed CEO. Maybe it might even be with our SANFL appointed board members or the ever shrinking (thanks to the SANFL) member elected board members.

When people blame Port Adelaide for being poorly run they are essentially blaming the SANFL for their own doing. If the SANFL have a short fall in revenue from Port Adelaide, they give Port Adelaide a 'grant' that basically ends back up in the SANFL coffers to make up for match day shortfalls that are ironically set by the SANFL stadium deal with the clubs they basically operate in a stadium they fully own and operate. It's complete madness.

If I was wealthy (oh how I wish I was) and wanted to tip some money into Port to make them profitable, I honestly would have to stop and question if its worth it. Mainly due to the fact that a vast majority of any money I tip in will end up at SANFL clubs I despise. I cant help but think smarter and wealthier people than myself came to this conclusion years ago.

Ive said it once and I'll say it again, The SANFL has no business running AFL football clubs when their primary focus is to profiteer from them and funnel that money into a competition that runs at costs far higher than any other state league.

The Port Adelaide Football Club owes the SANFL nothing, the SANFL has made squillions from us in an investment on a license they made us pay for. They get a financial return from an investment they never made. Port Adelaide paid more than its fair share for that stadium before we even entered the AFL.

Shit can us all you like but we're not going anywhere and I will always love the club no matter what ladder position or profit or loss statement, footy is more than that to me at least.

 

[cm_perfect]

When people place blame at Port Adelaide for their financial situation who exactly are they blaming? The board? The Admin? The football department? The fans?

We have had healthy membership numbers but poor crowds so it could be all the fans fault.

The Football Department has been under funded, could be their fault.

The Admin do the day to day stuff, could be their fault.

or

Maybe just maybe it might have something to do with our SANFL appointed president or maybe our SANFL appointed CEO. Maybe it might even be with our SANFL appointed board members or the ever shrinking (thanks to the SANFL) member elected board members.

When people blame Port Adelaide for being poorly run they are essentially blaming the SANFL for their own doing. If the SANFL have a short fall in revenue from Port Adelaide, they give Port Adelaide a 'grant' that basically ends back up in the SANFL coffers to make up for match day shortfalls that are ironically set by the SANFL stadium deal with the clubs they basically operate in a stadium they fully own and operate. It's complete madness.

If I was wealthy (oh how I wish I was) and wanted to tip some money into Port to make them profitable, I honestly would have to stop and question if its worth it. Mainly due to the fact that a vast majority of any money I tip in will end up at SANFL clubs I despise. I cant help but think smarter and wealthier people than myself came to this conclusion years ago.

Ive said it once and I'll say it again, The SANFL has no business running AFL football clubs when their primary focus is to profiteer from them and funnel that money into a competition that runs at costs far higher than any other state league.

The Port Adelaide Football Club owes the SANFL nothing, the SANFL has made squillions from us in an investment on a license they made us pay for. They get a financial return from an investment they never made. Port Adelaide paid more than its fair share for that stadium before we even entered the AFL.

Shit can us all you like but we're not going anywhere and I will always love the club no matter what ladder position or profit or loss statement, footy is more than that to me at least.

I still say it is onfield performance and crowd numbers that have seen us slide.

When the AFC were getting regular 40k+ crowds we had no issues, it was the same for the PAFC when they were regularly getting 30k+

And thanks to REH for putting what I said in a more accurate and detailed manner.