South Australian football - where is it at?

[Geoffa32]

Just wondering what major changes the Port people expect when they hold their own licence?

Will it make the rent on the playing venue cheaper? Will it make it viable to play out of a 50,000 seated stadium with crowds of <25,000. These are your biggest issues, too small a crowd in a venue you can't afford to have.

A big deal is made about how the SANFL generate $4 each year from holding Port home games. However looking at other clubs financial statements this is about the ballpark for rent on a stadium for an AFL club in a big stadium. The other fee the SANFL take is the distribution of about $320k.

I can't see how being "independent" makes you better off right now.


In an ideal world the Power really should be playing out of a smaller (30,000) stadium. Like Geelong and GOld Coast you guys will make money in that scenario. But like the small Vic clubs tied to the Docklands you lose money in the bigger stadium.

 

[Rob]

I'd dispute the assertion that SA produces significantly less draftees than WA. Over the last five years, my guess is that they're not significantly different... I stand to be corrected of course.

Anybody bored enough to spend time coming up with the figures?

Wikipedia does it for you.

2011 ND + PSD: 14 WAFL, 11 SANFL

2010 ND + PSD: 14 WAFL, 12 SANFL

2009 ND + PSD: 15 WAFL, 9 SANFL

2008 ND + PSD: 16 WAFL, 13 SANFL

2007 ND + PSD: 18 WAFL, 4 SANFL

Over 5 years: 77 WAFL, 49 SANFL

A fair difference there, although close to reflective of the population differences. Not that this would be entirely accurate as it doesn't include rookie drafts and players listed outside the draft. eg. I know we picked up Mzungu as a trade from the Gold Coast and I guess wouldn't be counted in the figures. It also only looks at the last club of the drafted player - so players did not necessarily grow up in the state they were drafted from.

 

[Geoffa32]

The SANFL is too concerned with being the second best comp in the land, and inviting guys just below AFL level to the comp, than developing talented footballers for the AFL.


We should have a stand alone TAC cup style comp with 6 teams/zones.

North Metro
North Country
South Metro
South Country
Western Suburbs
Eastern Suburbs

The two country sides we split the state in two halves North/South.

 

[Bone71]

Interesting. Could you explain the difference between a real club and and a corporation in today's AFL environment?

 

[Geoffa32]

Interesting. Could you explain the difference between a real club and and a corporation in today's AFL environment?

Yes I would be interested to know the answer as well. And where Collingwood sit in this.

 

[*PAF]

Just wondering what major changes the Port people expect when they hold their own licence?
...

There wouldn't have been a need for people to discuss owning licences if the SANFL had done the job properly. There is a conflict when the SANFL is not independent and the SANFL clubs, who run the SANFL, think they are competing with the AFL clubs for the same pie.

If the Crows were more independent would they release their financial statements? Hard to say.
It is hard to work out just how much the SANFL makes from the AFL clubs. It is hard to work out from the SANFL financial report, hard from the PAFC financial report and the AFC's financial report atm is top secret.

...

Will it make the rent on the playing venue cheaper? Will it make it viable to play out of a 50,000 seated stadium with crowds of <25,000. These are your biggest issues, too small a crowd in a venue you can't afford to have.

Clubs and businesses make money during the good times and lose during the bad times.
Fremantle are becoming a financial powerhouse, yet they have only averaged about 800 spectators more than Port over the journey. A couple of years back Port's average was higher than theirs but the profits just weren't there during the good years. Why not is the question and we all know the answer.

...
...
A big deal is made about how the SANFL generate $4 each year from holding Port home games. However looking at other clubs financial statements this is about the ballpark for rent on a stadium for an AFL club in a big stadium. The other fee the SANFL take is the distribution of about $320k.

I can't see how being "independent" makes you better off right now.
...

What about the hidden income such as catering, corporate boxes, car parking, advertising etc? That is where the real money is.
What proportion of the SANFL's income comes directly as a result of the AFL teams? Try deciphering that from the SANFL's or Port's annual report.

...
...
I can't see how being "independent" makes you better off right now.
...

Neither can I. Replace a crap deal at AAMI with a crap deal at AO and it is hard to see any improvement. Might get a few more spectators but doubt if that alone will make a difference.

...
...

In an ideal world the Power really should be playing out of a smaller (30,000) stadium. Like Geelong and GOld Coast you guys will make money in that scenario. But like the small Vic clubs tied to the Docklands you lose money in the bigger stadium.

Only if there was a better deal in place. Geelong make money from gate takings, car parking fees, catering etc etc. Ticket sales alone is only one slice of the total pie.

 

[Rob]

Fremantle are becoming a financial powerhouse, yet they have only averaged about 800 spectators more than Port over the journey. A couple of years back Port's average was higher than theirs but the profits just weren't there during the good years. Why not is the question and we all know the answer.

Well yeah, because most seats at Subiaco are $50+ a pop and Subiaco has a lot more corporate boxes and facilities than AAMI.

 

[*PAF]

... and Subiaco has a lot more corporate boxes and facilities than AAMI.

And the money from those corporate boxes and facilities does not go directly to the WAFL.

 

[Rob]

And the money from those corporate boxes and facilities does not go directly to the WAFL.

Yeah, but we also pay rent. Over $3m a year. You pay zero.

Whether such a system would work for Port I don't know. I'm on the record on this thread questioning the SANFL's approach, but I think it's naive to suggest unquestionably that the WA model would work for Port. They still have to raise the revenue in the first place. The benefit of it is that it puts the revenue streams of the club 100% in the hands of the club, and they're not competing with another group for membership. Category A SANFL membership costs less than most seats at Subiaco cost for either club for an adult. And SANFL membership also takes up all the best seats at the stadium. That can't be easy for the clubs to compete against. But you replace that with a rental charge, and you still need to sell those seats and corporate boxes that you previously didn't have.

 

[Geoffa32]

There wouldn't have been a need for people to discuss owning licences if the SANFL had done the job properly. There is a conflict when the SANFL is not independent and the SANFL clubs, who run the SANFL, think they are competing with the AFL clubs for the same pie.

If the Crows were more independent would they release their financial statements? Hard to say.
It is hard to work out just how much the SANFL makes from the AFL clubs. It is hard to work out from the SANFL financial report, hard from the PAFC financial report and the AFC's financial report atm is top secret.



Clubs and businesses make money during the good times and lose during the bad times.
Fremantle are becoming a financial powerhouse, yet they have only averaged about 800 spectators more than Port over the journey. A couple of years back Port's average was higher than theirs but the profits just weren't there during the good years. Why not is the question and we all know the answer.



What about the hidden income such as catering, corporate boxes, car parking, advertising etc? That is where the real money is.
What proportion of the SANFL's income comes directly as a result of the AFL teams? Try deciphering that from the SANFL's or Port's annual report.


Neither can I. Replace a crap deal at AAMI with a crap deal at AO and it is hard to see any improvement. Might get a few more spectators but doubt if that alone will make a difference.


Only if there was a better deal in place. Geelong make money from gate takings, car parking fees, catering etc etc. Ticket sales alone is only one slice of the total pie.

So really it is just about the Stadium Deal and not so much about independence?

I posted a few pages back that we should adopt the WA model. Both clubs owned by their state league, but they play out of a clean stadium (not owned/controlled by the State League as like AO) and pay a flat rent to use the stadium. As well as a percentage of profit, not a set distribution, to the state league.

I can't see a loser in this, it works in WA. I guess we have the issue of the SANFL and where they see themselves as a stand alone league, and not a developer of AFL talent?

 

[Geoffa32]

Yeah, but we also pay rent. Over $3m a year. You pay zero.

Whether such a system would work for Port I don't know. I'm on the record on this thread questioning the SANFL's approach, but I think it's naive to suggest unquestionably that the WA model would work for Port. They still have to raise the revenue in the first place. The benefit of it is that it puts the revenue streams of the club 100% in the hands of the club, and they're not competing with another group for membership. Category A SANFL membership costs less than most seats at Subiaco cost for either club for an adult. And SANFL membership also takes up all the best seats at the stadium. That can't be easy for the clubs to compete against. But you replace that with a rental charge, and you still need to sell those seats and corporate boxes that you previously didn't have.

Is there no stadium membership at Subi? As we have SANFL and soon SACA members having access to games....

I guess we could split the stadium up. With all revenues in the "outer" going to the clubs and then sharing of that in the members.


But yeah, Port's first issue is to eliminate all sub 20k crowds and get as many people through the gate as possible. I hardly doubt Freo and WCE would make money if Subi was less than half full?

 

[Rob]

Is there no stadium membership at Subi? As we have SANFL and soon SACA members having access to games....

No such thing at Subi. Not really sure why it exists in SA. You want to watch Crows games, join the Crows. Ditto for Port. An archaic system IMO. You had a great chance to get rid of it with the AO redevelopment, but they seem to have kept it for some reason.

I guess we could split the stadium up. With all revenues in the "outer" going to the clubs and then sharing of that in the members.

But yeah, Port's first issue is to eliminate all sub 20k crowds and get as many people through the gate as possible. I hardly doubt Freo and WCE would make money if Subi was less than half full?

All clubs would make money from 20k crowds. Clubs just try and bullshit their way out of it by not including membership revenue in their match day income, as if people would still pay up if they didn't get into matches.

But i'd imagine a reduction of 15,000 less per game would cost us in the vicinity of $4-5 million a year, possibly more.

 

[PAUR]

R U joking^^^^ Geoffa just explained it. Crows make another financial loss --> ignore it but blame it on every organisation bar the SANFL. They need to have a state representative side the equal of Tasmania and someone has to pay for it.

 

[Freomaniac]

So really it is just about the Stadium Deal and not so much about independence?

I posted a few pages back that we should adopt the WA model. Both clubs owned by their state league, but they play out of a clean stadium (not owned/controlled by the State League as like AO) and pay a flat rent to use the stadium. As well as a percentage of profit, not a set distribution, to the state league.

I can't see a loser in this, it works in WA. I guess we have the issue of the SANFL and where they see themselves as a stand alone league, and not a developer of AFL talent?

Of course its a good Idea. Look at it in a crows view... SANFL Get 1-1.5 million from the crows to rent out AAMI/Adelaide oval and can use it to spend it on development.

The rest of the money the crows make goes straight to the crows themselves for them to spend to compete with the other AFL clubs.

Only Question is can it Work for Port Power right now? If Port Were getting 27,000 at home. They would break even. But If I had it my way let Port Pay only 1 million a year until they are good again. If they were good and got 30-35,000 then they can pay the SANFL 1.5 million a year.

 

[Freomaniac]

R U joking^^^^ Geoffa just explained it. Crows make another financial loss --> ignore it but blame it on every organisation bar the SANFL. They need to have a state representative side the equal of Tasmania and someone has to pay for it.

No they dont. Freo and WC could get 25,000 at subiaco and still turn a profit or at worst brak even simply because the price of the tickets are more expensive compared to SA and Victoria.

Gold Coast are in a good position even though they get 15,000-20,000 every home game. they are playing in a smaller stadium which means the rent is cheaper.

Geelong have recently upgraded their ground to 30,000 and sell it out and they turn a profit, they are planning to add another 10,000 seats on the ground.

 

[*PAF]

Here is one of the many articles written on the subject.
This one is by Mark Ricciuto.
A couple of quotes from the article.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/our-afl-clubs-need-more-cash/story-fn83zgw9-1226041384268

The Crows made a loss for the first time in their 20-year history last year. How can that be when the club has averaged 45,000 members in the past decade? Port on the other hand lost a staggering $2 million and this year faces another loss. The Crows are also facing another year in the red.

North Melbourne and other clubs last year finally negotiated a new stadium deal at Docklands which netted them an extra $2 million per year on the bottom line. Even though North Melbourne's crowds were similar to Port Adelaide's.

Geelong at Skilled Stadium, made a $1.28 million profit with an average home crowd of 24,844.

...

At the moment each SANFL club receives a distribution of about $500,000 a year. In total that is $4.5 million coming from the SANFL.

In WA, that total is smaller with each WAFL club receiving $360,000 a year.

That money is coming from profits of Port Adelaide and Adelaide matches at Footy Park.

This is one area the SANFL has to trim fairly aggressively in the short term to ensure the Crows and Power are on a level playing field with the rest of the competition.

The nine SANFL clubs will be spewing at this suggestion but maybe they have had it too good for too long and it is one of only two areas that seems obvious to trim back.

If the $4.5 million was cut back to $2.7 million - so each SANFL club instead receives $300,000 - that's an extra $1.8 million for the AFL clubs.



http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/our-afl-clubs-need-more-cash/story-fn83zgw9-1226041384268

 

[*PAF]

...
Geelong have recently upgraded their ground to 30,000 and sell it out and they turn a profit, they are planning to add another 10,000 seats on the ground.

http://stats.rleague.com/afl/crowds/vn_kardinia_park.html

 

[Rob]

Just a quick price comparison for an adult:

Port Platinum: $370
Freo Premium Gold: $637

Port Gold: $290
Freo Premium (this category is about half the ground): $540

Port Silver: $190
Freo Standard: $365

Freo also have a budget category - basically the really shit seats behind the goals - for $273.

Just making the point that there's more to it than just the SANFL. On the same crowd, you'd expect Freo to make nearly double that of Port.

 

[*PAF]

Just a quick price comparison for an adult:

Port Platinum: $370
Freo Premium Gold: $637

Port Gold: $290
Freo Premium (this category is about half the ground): $540

Port Silver: $190
Freo Standard: $365

Freo also have a budget category - basically the really shit seats behind the goals - for $273.

Just making the point that there's more to it than just the SANFL. On the same crowd, you'd expect Freo to make nearly double that of Port.

Almost right.
Port have another category, Club 1870 at $750.
It means you may have to slide the comparisons down by 1 category.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

So...

Port Club 1870: $750
Freo Premium Gold: $637


Port Platinum: $370
Freo Premium: $540

Port Gold: $290
Freo Standard: $365

Port Silver: $190
Freo Budget: $273

Freo are no doubt dragging in more per attendee but not as diverse as suggested.

 

[Rob]

Almost right.
Port have another category, Club 1870 at $750.
It means you may have to slide the comparisons down by 1 category.

I did see that, but it's actually the same seating as Platinum. You just get a bunch of other stuff that you don't get at Premium gold level at Freo, and platinum, which offers you anywhere in the stadium, are much better at aami than plain premium is at Subi. Bear in mind well over half the seats at Subiaco are premium or higher. Consequently Port's platinum is comparable to premium gold, and Port's gold is comparable to premium. Club 1870 is closer to one of Freo's coterie groups with entry to functions and the like.

 

[seanoff]

J

Freo also have a budget category - basically the really shit seats behind the goals - for $273.

PERFECT.

prefer to watch end on, get a much better view of the tactics and the flow of the game.

2nd or 3rd level at Etihad or the MCG behind the goals. please.

 

[Woodpecker Warrior]

Just a quick price comparison for an adult:

Port Platinum: $370
Freo Premium Gold: $637

Port Gold: $290
Freo Premium (this category is about half the ground): $540

Port Silver: $190
Freo Standard: $365

Freo also have a budget category - basically the really shit seats behind the goals - for $273.

Just making the point that there's more to it than just the SANFL. On the same crowd, you'd expect Freo to make nearly double that of Port.

Based on a conservative extra $100/member at 30000 members that's $3million

No wonder the WA clubs are very financially strong.

$35/ticket for a game of AFL footy seems a fair asking price though.

Perhaps increase in ticket prices may help Crows/Power bottom line.

 

[Rob]

PERFECT.

prefer to watch end on, get a much better view of the tactics and the flow of the game.

2nd or 3rd level at Etihad or the MCG behind the goals. please.

LOL, you ever sat in the 3 tier stand? That's the only budget seats that aren't on the ground level, and unless you're 5 foot 6 then you need a crowbar to get in and out of your seat. If you want 2nd level in the Eastern stand behind the goals it's premium, 3rd level is standard.

 

[Freomaniac]

http://stats.rleague.com/afl/crowds/vn_kardinia_park.html

Yeah yeah so they dont average 25,000 at Kardinia. You realise they will add more seats eventually PAF?