SANFL Clubs - not the bad guys

[kwame]

question......port has roughly 35,000 members yet there crowds have been as low as 16,000 where are other 20,000 members? not trolling genuine question

also if 35,000 people are members that means 35,000 seats have been payed for at homes games right?? so if a member doesnt show up it doesnt mean port have lost anything right? they have already payed for their membership and their seat?

genuine questions as a victorian im a bit ignorant on how it works in SA

 

[Macca19]

Root of the problem is the Power aren't able to operate under the conditions that they agreed to enter the AFL under.

Port are stuck in the past

Those comments one after the other are a bit humerous. Port might be stuck in the past, but you dont think original terms of a contract written 15 years ago wouldnt be outdated? The footballing world has changed significantly since 1994-6 when the contract would have been written up. Might have been alright then in a semi-professional AFL when there wasnt such a concern over revenue, teams had 1 assistant coach etc.

So if there was no Adelaide Oval deal, when would it be acceptable for Port to re-negotiate a new stadium deal with the SANFL? 30 years? 50 years?

 

[Macca19]

question......port has roughly 35,000 members yet there crowds have been as low as 16,000 where are other 20,000 members? not trolling genuine question

also if 35,000 people are members that means 35,000 seats have been payed for at homes games right?? so if a member doesnt show up it doesnt mean port have lost anything right? they have already payed for their membership and their seat?

genuine questions as a victorian im a bit ignorant on how it works in SA

Collingwood have 70,000 members but they dont get 70,000 every week. Depends what the break up of membership is. Port might only have 36,000 members of which 18,000 might be season ticket holders, 8000 might be AAMI Stadium members, 6000 might be non-ticketed club or country members and 4000 might be on 3-game passes or the like.

 

[Slattery_20]

Many of us think that this is really a fight between the AFL and the SANFL.

That was my read.
SANFL won't win.

 

[Subprime]

So what you're saying is that even though the SANFL owns the two AFL licenses they aren't entitled to any revenue from the license?

Don't think I said that did I?

The SANFL needs revenue to maintain AAMI stadium and generally promote football in SA.

However, the last few days have highlighted that the dividends from the SANFL which the 2 SA-based AFL clubs generate don't appear to be sustainable.

The SANFL can't fund Port anymore due to its debts, and despite deciding 15 years ago that Port was the most viable option (of the 4 available at that time) Port has now had to get bridging funding from the AFL.

Something has to give, what's your choice?

 

[kwame]

Collingwood have 70,000 members but they dont get 70,000 every week. Depends what the break up of membership is. Port might only have 36,000 members of which 18,000 might be season ticket holders, 8000 might be AAMI Stadium members, 6000 might be non-ticketed club or country members and 4000 might be on 3-game passes or the like.

thanks for the response....appreciate it

 

[kwame]

The SANFL needs revenue to maintain AAMI stadium and generally promote football in SA.

nobody has a problem with that.....i believe that the SANFl giving the money to the state league clubs to pay players is the problem

 

[absfab]

nobody has a problem with that.....i believe that the SANFl giving the money to the state league clubs to pay players is the problem

Why? What they do with their revenue stream is a side issue.

It's no secret that Etihad have bent more than one Victorian based Club over a log and r*ped them.

Do we now assume that Etihad should give some of the money back if the Clubs concerned are struggling? Can't see that happening.

Or that the Club's with Etihad Stadium deals are somehow entitled to tell Etihad how to spend their money?

 

[WhyAlwaysMe]

I'm going to use Norwood as an example here. Over the off season Nathan Eagleton signaled his intentions to come back to the SANFL after his time in the AFL. He could have gone back to his original club West Adelaide where he received his "junior development", instead he shopped himself around to SANFL clubs and finally decided to go with Norwood. Nathan would be on at least 40k a year, not to mention any other "positions" he would have been offered inside or outside the club.

Yet all we hear from the SANFL mob is how the money generated from the AFL clubs is going in to junior development, junior coaching etc etc. Yeah right give me a break.... If they were so concerned about junior development they wouldn't be throwing cash at these AFL rejects.

 

[kwame]

not saying give it back....saying that the SANFL are living in the past..... their salary cap is far too high and clubs cant afford it.... SANFL dont seem too concerned about the AFL licences and their financial situations just that the SANFL is healthy even though its not


SANFL has obligations to both state league clubs and AFL clubs

 

[sigur]

nobody has a problem with that.....i believe that the SANFl giving the money to the state league clubs to pay players is the problem

Once again - if the SANFL clubs themselves generate more revenue themselves through higher match attendances and pokies/membership revenue - why shouldn't they be able to spend it on their main asset - the league players?

The financial crisis here has been caused by port members not turning up to games. The stadium deal they signed with the SANFL means that this costs them money. How is any of this the fault of Sturt or Norwood?

 

[kwame]

how many SANFL clubs are healthy financially??

 

[PortBrillance]

1. Centrals.

rest are spending more money then they have

 

[kwame]

1. Centrals.

rest are spending more money then they have

thats my point

 

[sigur]

how many SANFL clubs are healthy financially??

1. Centrals.

rest are spending more money then they have

From the 2010 SANFL report

:Football participation levels increased by 10 per
cent to eclipse the 100,000 mark for the first
time.
• In terms of talent development, the League
recorded its most successful year since 1997,
with 32 South Australian players drafted to the
AFL – four of whom were drafted in the first
round.
• The SA Community Football Board led the way
in supporting country sport by raising more
than $1 million for community football clubs
across the state.
• AAMI Stadium hosted the most closely-contested
SANFL Grand Final in years, as Central District
claimed its ninth premiership by just six points
against Norwood. The 35,647-strong Grand
Final crowd capped off a strong year for the
State League Competition, which recorded a 5.1
per cent increase in home and away attendance.

• All nine SANFL clubs recorded a profit for the 2010
financial year.

 

[Subprime]

From the 2010 SANFL report

...
• All nine SANFL clubs recorded a profit for the 2010
financial year.

How many of the SA-based AFL clubs recorded a profit?

 

[BornPort]

From the 2010 SANFL report

:Football participation levels increased by 10 per
cent to eclipse the 100,000 mark for the first
time.
• In terms of talent development, the League
recorded its most successful year since 1997,
with 32 South Australian players drafted to the
AFL – four of whom were drafted in the first
round.
• The SA Community Football Board led the way
in supporting country sport by raising more
than $1 million for community football clubs
across the state.
• AAMI Stadium hosted the most closely-contested
SANFL Grand Final in years, as Central District
claimed its ninth premiership by just six points
against Norwood. The 35,647-strong Grand
Final crowd capped off a strong year for the
State League Competition, which recorded a 5.1
per cent increase in home and away attendance.

• All nine SANFL clubs recorded a profit for the 2010
financial year.

That's the funniest thing I have read all week!

 

[aneale]

The pre AFL situation in footy was the same. The best players from WA and SA chased the money to Victoria. No Victorian worth a pinch of snuff moved the other way.

You mean like Len Fitzgerald who was inducted in the Hall of Fame in the initial intake in 1996? a star at Collingwood who then was offered better money and a job from Sturt and moved. But yeah you're right ... we should all bow down to your keen knowledge on the subject.

 

[Tas]

The problem I see with Crows, Port and the SANFL is that clubs need to invest for the future during the good times and provide enough fat for the lean times. I am not sure the SANFL model allows for that, they take a big chunk of the fat during the good times and the cupboard runs bare during lean times.

If Crows would go into a 30 year Richmond-like era even they wouldn't last with the current model, extensive failure has a big impact on crowds, no matter how many downhill skier supporters latch on during the good times.

AFL should not put one cent into Port with this current model in place because it is going to go into Port and straight back out into the SANFL. If the AFL funds state leagues, they expect to run the leagues.

SANFL is responsible for handling their license, if they lack the means to properly manage the license then they can sell it back to the AFL and the AFL can give it to the member run Port Adelaide Football Club.

AFL demanded that we return to a member run club before they continue assistance with us, there is precendence as much as the AFL hate that word and the AFL did us, the supporters, a massive favour getting the club out of the grips of power mad individuals.

 

[King Elvis]

How many of the SA-based AFL clubs recorded a profit?

Sub, you know there are other factors involved with the Crows - a blow-out in injury payments and the funding of their new facility being two significant ones.

 

[Subprime]

Sub, you know there are other factors involved with the Crows - a blow-out in injury payments and the funding of their new facility being two significant ones.

I'm sure these are factors but the margin for safety seems a lot slimmer these days than it used to.

I can't see how SA footy can run with a higher state league salary cap than WA & Vic and lower state GDP and hope to compete in the national competition.

Surely its time to review the whole set-up.

 

[_Christoh_]

Why Don't Port fans stop blaiming the SANFL for thier woes?

Why don't people who say Port are mismanaged realise the SANFL make up 50% of our board. This whole problem is their own doing. Those SANFL appointed board members at Port sided with Port when the SANFL tried their little take over stunt this week. Make of that what you will.

 

[King Elvis]

I'm sure these are factors but the margin for safety seems a lot slimmer these days than it used to.

I can't see how SA footy can run with a higher state league salary cap than WA & Vic and lower state GDP and hope to compete in the national competition.

Surely its time to review the whole set-up.

Safety margin for the Crows has diminished a lot as well; while we might not get sub 20k crowds like Port do, we rarely get the 45k plus that we did either - which is where I'd suggest a lot of that margin has gone.

As I've said, I think they'll review the entire setup when the Adelaide Oval redevelopment is finally underway; in the meantime, I think it's a case of everybody trying to protect their current position - which is obviously far from ideal.

christoh - No troll, who are the SANFL appointed board members at Port? Somebody said Duncanson was one, that isn't right, is it

 

[Punchy Bassett]

1. Centrals.

rest are spending more money then they have

Wrong, as usual.

 

[bomberclifford]

christoh - No troll, who are the SANFL appointed board members at Port? Somebody said Duncanson was one, that isn't right, is it

Up until this week, it was Duncanson, Basheer and Hood.

Hood has just resigned.