Port tell league: we'll go broke without assistance

[Ford Fairlane]

well can you imagine the furore if there was 35-10 free kick count in NM's favour and they won by a kick?

KG would have frothed at the mouth and jumped out the box - they'd still be whining about it. 31 years later they are still on about Foster, quite right too. Prat.

Can't argue there. Sorry, OT, SANFL Board, I know.

 

[Docker Clint]

I still don't understand why Port didn't maintain the momentum they had when joining the league in 1997.

The supporters keep harping on about how they are a real football club compared to the Crows composite corporation. I know people who jumped ship for that reason.. ffs, I even considered following them in the AFL for the same reasons.

Promoting themselves as a real, traditional football club from the get go (and sticking with that all the way) surely wouldn't have alienated the old school supporters? Letting the pendulum swing too far the other way by only focusing on the creed, 1870 etc just disenfranchises people who weren't Port supporters when they were only in the SANFL.

 

[DJ75]

Which news broke the 1990 licence announcement or the December 1994, licence announcement. 1990

You wrote this bullshit on the Port board in April last year so I will cut and past my answer to you from then. Maybe because I'm not trying to shit stir I'm actually telling you what I saw and heard myself, not through a 3rd party like some.
BULLSHIT! The SANFL set up an independent committee to investigate the awarding of the 2nd licence. It was comprised of 9 independent me from around Australia. They took just over a month to assess the tenders. The decision was unanimous!

Are you saying that all the businessmen appointed to the independent evaluating committee were wasting their time and were lied to about the process? Max had already done a deal? That these businessmen were bought out? Was a deal already done? YES. Did the businessmen know that? That I can't comment on.
Are you saying that this whole process had 0% integrity? Correct
Are you saying that all the Port haters at SANFL clubs and the SANFL all just let it happen? It was that or Port entered the AFL in 1991

Are you saying that when Leigh Whicker and Max came out and said this is the hardest and biggest decisions the SANFL had ever had to make, it was all lies? Are you saying that for over a 4 year period Max blatantly lied to footy public? How come he stopped handing out the premiership cup to Port post 1990? I'm saying the decision was made in 1990

Are you saying that the recruiting of Bucky to broker peace with the SANFL was all a facade and an unnecessary move by Port? No, peace was still along way away and brokering was required.

Are you saying that the $200,000+ Port spent to put together their bid and the thousands of hours that was put in between October 1990 and Oct 1994 when the tender documents were lodged, was all a charade? I hope you have the balls to tell Brian Cunningham that to his face and I hope you have the guts to make your accusations public so he and a few others can sue your arse? Yes and no. Was the money wasted? No, it was part of the preparation for their entry. Did they need to tnder, well technically yes, but from what I heard in 1990 it was a foregone conclusion.
Are you saying that when Norwood lost, their indignation was all an act because their mates at the SANFL had told them to act that way to cover things up? No. Do you really think the SANFL chiefs told the rest of the clubs about the deal? Of course not. If you are negotiating with terrorists, you don't tell the world about it!
Are you saying that the approx $500,000 spent by the 3 bidding groups was all a charade to fool the football public. The SANFL was happy to see them "waste" this money, so it looked good to the public. I'm saying it was all wasted on bids that were never going to be successful.
Maybe you should look at some facts. Firstly it wasn't Webber that pulled the pin on Port's initial bid. It was the AFL clubs who had control and overturned the AFL executives and the commission for the first time since it was set up in late 1985. They in the end voted the same way in October 1990 as they did in July 1990 which initially was to delay a final vote. When they finally went for the SANFL proposal, the votes went basically the same way as they did in July. Correct. Webber didn't pull the pin ultimately. Port had already been voted in. The AFL clubs voted to accept the SANFL bid instead based on the recommendation of the AFL. As part of that a deal had to be struck with Port for them accept this change. The deal from what I heard was that they would be given the 2nd licence.

Maybe you should consider the fact that Port produced suitcases of documentation with their bid compared to Norwood-Sturt's briefcase and the cartels folder, then you might realise Port actually did more work to win it. Maybe the other teams off the field gave a performance just like they did on the field, ie they gave up because they weren't good enough not because a deal had been done. I'm sure this is all true. And I have no doubt that if a deal hadn't already been done, Port would have been the best and logical choice anyway.
My best mate who is a Norwood supporter, somewhat crows supporter, not a Port lover but neither a Port hater, moved to Sydney around when I did in the early 90's, ended up working for 1 of the 9 businessmen on the evaluation committee in early 1995, a few months after the 2nd licence was granted. Because my mate was from SA and interested in the footy he told him about the tender evaluation process. There were several non SA businessmen on that committee to enhance it's independence. My mate's boss said that Port's bid was way ahead of the other 2 and nobody on that committee could have vote for the other 2 bids because they were so inferior.
Yes well my friends, uncle's girlfriend said....... I'm sorry mate but I'm talking from 1st hand experience not what a 3rd party told me. I am inclined to believe that Ports bid was the best, they had the longest to work on it and most likely the help of the SANFL and AFL bosses. However this is something I can't actually speak about with confidence as I wasn't around for this part.

What we have from you is hearsay and speculation. You haven't even presented a skerrick, a skerrick of evidence to back up your claim. Why? Because it's just bullshit fabrication. No. I was there. I heard it from the person who actually did the deal. What evidence would you like me to provide? Unfortunately Bruce has since passed and unless Rucci or others got the full story (and I think they did) before he died the full truth may not ever be revealed. I'm just trying to counter some of the garbage that has been said since, when I know what really happened.

I want you to answer these one or two questions, are you saying that Max Basheer, Leigh Whicker and all their SANFL cronies blatantly, willfully and deceptively lied to you and the SA footy public? YES or NO! YES or NO! I'm saying I heard from a source involved in the discussions a different story to the one publicly presented. Other than Bruce, I can't tell you exactly who was in the room when the deal was done. You believe what you want.
If no, what are you saying then?

My answers to your questions are above. What you believe is up to you, but given you're a Port man I'm surprised your so happy to believe the (what did you call them? oh that's right) cronies at the SANFL told you.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

^^ Sorry for not getting back to you before.

Ok I am not saying that you are bullshitting or lying. I'm saying that what you were told, was bullshit.

So I reckon, basically one of three things happened based on what you said you were privy to.

Either

1. The AFL and/or SANFL bullshitted to Bruce, gave him a guarantee that they could never absolutely guarantee and he repeated their story and probably genuinely believed it, or

2. He didn't believe it but repeated it because he didn't want to look bad after failing to get the deal done, or

3. They told him the truth and Max and Leigh lied to their colleagues at the SANFL, the other clubs and the SA footy public.

I'll put my money on the first or second situation. Why would Max and Leigh feel they had to be honest with Weber after they thought he had betrayed them and spend several year lying to colleagues they trusted?

Lets look at some facts remembering that the tender for the second licence was formally announced in August 1994.

1. Alan Schwab was our biggest supporter at the AFL executive. He mysteriously died in a Kings Cross hotel room in June 1993.

2. In 1990 when Bruce told you the story, the AFL were working under the Commission's 1985 rules not the ones proposed by David Crawford and passed by the clubs in July 1993, when they effectively handed over just about all their powers to a truly independent AFL Commission.

3. It was the AFL clubs who stopped Port getting in. Driven by presidents Peter Gordon of Footscray and Alan McAlister of Collingwood it was the clubs who were the ones who opposed the leagues scheme to borrow $2.8mil and give them an immediate $200,000 dividend and use Port's licence fee to pay off the loan and interest, as they had offered Port a $4mil fee payable over 10 years. How could anyone guarantee the clubs wouldn't do the same sort of thing again in 5 years time?

4. It was the clubs that voted time and again to delay making a decision until late September, not the AFL.

5. There was no guarantee there would be a second licence. Australia was in a recession, Brisbane and Sydney were financial basket cases which effected their on field performance greatly and the West Coast was in a financial mess as the public float of Indian Pacific Ltd was a flop and they had huge borrowings to get them onto the field. These were the days of 17% interest rates.

6. There was no guarantee the Commission and the club presidents would be the same in 5 years time. Look at the Commission, in 1990 it had Peter Nixon, Graeme Samuel, Peter Scanlon, Albert Mantello and Ross Oakley as the chairman. In 1994, it had John Kennedy as the chairman, Samuel, Oakley, Colin Carter, Ron Evans, Terry O'Connor and John Winneke QC on board. Do you reckon guys like John Kennedy and Ron Evans would have accepted a Port bid based on a 1990 deal, if they thought their bid wasn't good enough?

7. I think the Port board cottoned on to the fact that either Bruce was bullshitting, or he was bullshitted to, or that nobody could be trusted given what happened in 1990. So they dumped him from the board and decided to leave no stone unturned to make sure they won the licence tender. There wasn't going to be any waiting for a theoretical guarantee to turn up.

 

[greennick]

Now I know who the weird guy is outside the gate at Freo games with his hand in his pocket.


It is a good point though. Having been at both team's games, the demographic difference is noticable. The typical Eagle's member goes with wife or husband, no kids, and is 45+.

A far far greater percentage of Freo members are under 30 and or have gone with young families forever and a day. Partly probably because you used to be able lie down on the seats in the day. But now those once were kids, are my age, and are buying memberships for ourselves, because it's what we've always done. It's probably a lot easier to form attachment to Freo, for kids, rather than a "concept" which has its greatest appeal to people that were around at the time, and perhaps more limited appeal from here on.

So many more hot brunettes at Dockers games though. Really easy to dress up purple nicely, and seems quite popular with the young hipster girls.

I know so many Eagle supporters that went with their parents years ago, but stopped going during uni (beer/girls/not hanging with parents/etc became more important) and then now can't get back on without waiting forever. Their parents still go though. They are still fans though, just can't get regular tickets, so just jump on the parents ones when they are not using them. As they are parents, that is an awful lot though. It translates to a generally older crowd, that often doesn't rock up if they can't be arsed. If we got a larger stadium, this would almost change overnight with an influx of new members, many of which we 'know' on this board.

On any waning interest in WC, I think you will find WC will have not trouble attracting new supporters, we are not viewed as "concept" by most people. Just die hard footy fans would think about that and they are hardly going to be thinking about teams now. Kids don't think about that stuff, so it is a silly point really. It is interesting that one of the things Freo is made fun of most (purple) would be the reason many kids are attracted to them. However, I don't think that will outweigh the influence of the two to three times as many parents we have supporting us pushing their teams on to their kids.

 

[greennick]

What was stadium capacity like back then? I noticed that West Coast averaged crowds around the low 30K's at the turn of the millennium - was that around the available capacity? I was tossing around the idea that if that was the case, especially in a growing population, it put even more pressure on those at the tail end of waiting lists to jump the fence to the opposition, to go and see live footy. By the time the stadium capacity increased, people were attached.

With Footy Park we've always had the 50K+ stadium and are lagging in population compared to Perth. Obviously crow season tickets are at a premium, but I know from experience Footy Park Category 1 wasn't much of a wait, but it is expensive. I don't know what the wait is on a Cat 2. Still, the member's area holds more than a third of the ground's capacity.

As has been stated several times in this thread, it's not as if Port haven't been working their butts off to build their membership base. As I mentioned, they have community programs, schools programs, partnerships with local councils, work with migrant groups, target kids as the future members of Port. Probably to the extent of alienating the previously rusted on support base - as they discovered to their horror last year as results - especially the way they lost - went belly up.

The new marketing campaign is aimed squarely at the previously rusted on group, while continuing to work with the other groups. As I've said it's not unfair to say the marketing message has wavered in recent times, but from attending focus groups held by the club, it appears they are sticking their flag in the ground now and holding that position (crows fans might be interested to know that the marketing people at Port conceded that was something the crows did very well).

Stadium size hasn't changed since then. Our crowds dropped because we were shit. Most people kept their memberships and just didn't go. They are an older crowd (many have been members since the start) and if they can't be arsed or have something better on, they just don't go.

 

[Chasing the Dream]

Adelaide United in trouble

I know it is not strictly AFL, but it is Bianco Constructions again being talked about. Fox Sports have reported that the FFA may need to take control of Adelaide United, and that can not go well for Port in their search for cash.

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25250873-12428,00.html