SANFL Clubs - not the bad guys

[aneale]

And that $9M figure came from???

us

It's their money. If Port had any claims to the money in the first place they'd have an argument on whose $9M it is. But at no point did Port ever enter into any negotioation or sign any contract that ever said it was their money. It was and always will be under the current set up, the SANFL's money. Port never had any potential claim to it ever.

 

[*PAF]

us
...

WTF?
First King Elvis says that $9M of the $27M debt is Port's fault now you are claiming it is your fault?

 

[aneale]

WTF?
First King Elvis says that $9M of the $27M debt is Port's fault now you are claiming it is your fault?

well you're blaming everyone else, may as well add our name to the list at some point

 

[Cap]

What do we assume the value of an AFL licence is?

Looking from a debt perspective the only reason clubs get access to money is that the lenders have a fair idea that the AFL is there to bail out clubs - or the SANFL in this case.

I realise Banks lend via cashflow, which is why I would be curious to know how other clubs have structured their debt facilities - is it based on the assets the hold outside the AFL licence or based on the cashflow derived by the Licence

The reason I ask, is that there is no market for AFL licences, The AFL can remove it when it wants and licences can only be used in areas the AFL feels fit s very restrictive asset to hold which I would assume the Banks have a massive $0 value next to.

 

[The_Wookie]

What do we assume the value of an AFL licence is?

Looking from a debt perspective the only reason clubs get access to money is that the lenders have a fair idea that the AFL is there to bail out clubs - or the SANFL in this case.

I realise Banks lend via cashflow, which is why I would be curious to know how other clubs have structured their debt facilities - is it based on the assets the hold outside the AFL licence or based on the cashflow derived by the Licence

The reason I ask, is that there is no market for AFL licences, The AFL can remove it when it wants and licences can only be used in areas the AFL feels fit s very restrictive asset to hold which I would assume the Banks have a massive $0 value next to.

Its my understanding that most Victorian - and I assume the Queensland and NSW clubs - operate debt facilities that are underwritten by the AFL itself. There was a report last year that said many auditors found the business models of several clubs would be unsustainable were it not for this underwriting.

For an AFL license to default back to the AFl, there has to be some severe issues indeed.