Rumour The St Kilda debt situation - no more tick

[The_Wookie]

They are supposed to be a custodian of the game.
Instead they have slowly but surely morphed into sleazy capitalists who thinks the game owes them a living and seeking to commercialise everything to the absolute nth degree.

The game has become a slave to commerce rather than the other way around .

If you were a young kid or an alien you'd be certain that NAB invented the game.

the other way around? You thought commerce would be a slave to the game?

 

[WillHayward]

the other way around? You thought commerce would be a slave to the game?

Well not a "slave" but you know what I mean.

I meant the game's integrity would prevail and be paramount when there is a conflict or clash between the two.

Now they are activity seeking new ways to commercialise everything as though that is the primary objective.

 

[Freomaniac]

Not at the moment, I recall The Frydenberg rushed something through to protect directors during COVID.

Lookin' at Vladmir Putins led Russian invasion of Ukraine, i dont think debt is stopping Putin doing anything lol.

Putin's not using Ross Lyon defensive tactics invading Ukraine LoL

 

[Freomaniac]

You still have not provided any concrete financials on this. If this was Twitter it’d come with a warning.

I am convinced that SimpkinByTheDockOfTheBay is actually Vince Russo lol

 

[Freomaniac]

If you have a team, any team, constantly spending below standard to service debt, then they are reducing their ability to be competitive over a long period of time.

Entrenching yourself as a non competitive team then makes it harder to grow revenue once the debt is paid off.
If you’ve done it for a serious number of years you’ve also made yourself unattractive to potentially a generation of future supporters, and so the cycle continues.

Debateable.... When mancjester united were bought out by the Glazer's back in 2005, it was through a leveraged buyout. The Glazer's borrowed 1 billion to buy the club out. Only problem is man united were 1 billion pounds in debt because of it.

Man united still won 5 EPL titles and one champs league title despite it.

Saying that, you claimed cutting costs to service debt is a bad thing..... Well the other option is to spend more to hope the club or team improves to get more revenue, which is smart in theory but not 100 per cent certain to happen.

 

[craffles]

They are supposed to be a custodian of the game.
Instead they have slowly but surely morphed into sleazy capitalists who thinks the game owes them a living and seeking to commercialise everything to the absolute nth degree.

The game has become a slave to commerce rather than the other way around .

If you were a young kid or an alien you'd be certain that NAB invented the game.

Blame Demetriou and Gillon. It's ridiculous that Tasmania doesn't have a team "because it's not viable".

**** off, they are a football state and you are a not for profit organisation

 

[The Warlord]

The AFL now printing official confirmation of my OP.

Saints' debt levels queried by rivals, Gill backs AFL funding model

Club presidents have questioned Gill McLachlan and Richard Goyder over St Kilda's financial assistance

www.afl.com.au

 

[VinnieB]

No, that's just the typical ignorant view of it.

When St. Kilda were a top 4 team, and Richmond were a bottom 4 team, their attendances were much the same.

When St. Kilda were a bottom 4 team and Richmond were top 4 - the difference was astronomical.

So these lunatics that support the big clubs - are battlers with nothing else in their life. Footy is number 1. They rock up in huge numbers even if their team is sh*t. Whereas the small clubs' fans still don't really even rock up when their team is doing really well. They just have better things to do than go to the footy on a weekend.

Some clubs' supporters just don't really care that much.

They are not a new club. They have been around for over 125 years. They have won 1 premiership. They have the most wooden spoons in the game. They have low member numbers. They have too many excuses. Should be a lot better. To still need to be bailed out each year is plain embarrassing.

 

[VinnieB]

Like Collingwood in 2022?

I’m sure you’ll win another wooden spoon to add to your huge collection well before we win one.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

They are not a new club. They have been around for over 125 years. They have won 1 premiership. They have the most wooden spoons in the game. They have low member numbers. They have too many excuses. Should be a lot better. To still need to be bailed out each year is plain embarrassing.

But only 7 of the 18 clubs operate at a profit.

11 clubs get bailed out.

And the ones that don't, get handouts in the form of primetime exposure and blockbuster fixtures.


But regardless, think about this for a second...

How many new supporters would a club get each year? And where do these new supporters supposedly come from?

Babies? Immigrants? People that suddenly notice AFL footy?

There just can't be that many new supporters appearing out if nowhere for a start.

Secondly, of the actual new supporters that do appear, how many simply follow their mum or dad's team? Almost all I'd imagine.

Then they will be distributed across 18 clubs.
Given only 4-5 clubs get primetime slots and exposure - it's a safe assumption that they would attract the lion's share.

And thirdly, of these new supporters, how many will care enough to actually go to games? How many will care enough to buy memberships?

So based on all that, you're looking at 30 years before you make any meaningful progress in terms of growing a supporter base.

And as per above, other clubs would actually be increasing the gap anyway during this time.


So basically, my view is that supporter bases of the Vic clubs were pretty much decided 100 years ago. I don't believe they've really changed much since, and I don't believe they ever will.

 

[#gosaintas]

But only 7 of the 18 clubs operate at a profit.

11 clubs get bailed out.

And the ones that don't, get handouts in the form of primetime exposure and blockbuster fixtures.


But regardless, think about this for a second...

How many new supporters would a club get each year? And where do these new supporters supposedly come from?

Babies? Immigrants? People that suddenly notice AFL footy?

There just can't be that many new supporters appearing out if nowhere for a start.

Secondly, of the actual new supporters that do appear, how many simply follow their mum or dad's team? Almost all I'd imagine.

Then they will be distributed across 18 clubs.
Given only 4-5 clubs get primetime slots and exposure - it's a safe assumption that they would attract the lion's share.

And thirdly, of these new supporters, how many will care enough to actually go to games? How many will care enough to buy memberships?

So based on all that, you're looking at 30 years before you make any meaningful progress in terms of growing a supporter base.

And as per above, other clubs would actually be increasing the gap anyway during this time.


So basically, my view is that supporter bases of the Vic clubs were pretty much decided 100 years ago. I don't believe they've really changed much since, and I don't believe they ever will.

that's why once the Tassie tax payers stop bailing out North they'll go negative again straight away. They will never grow and be sustainable.

 

[VinnieB]

But only 7 of the 18 clubs operate at a profit.

11 clubs get bailed out.

And the ones that don't, get handouts in the form of primetime exposure and blockbuster fixtures.


But regardless, think about this for a second...

How many new supporters would a club get each year? And where do these new supporters supposedly come from?

Babies? Immigrants? People that suddenly notice AFL footy?

There just can't be that many new supporters appearing out if nowhere for a start.

Secondly, of the actual new supporters that do appear, how many simply follow their mum or dad's team? Almost all I'd imagine.

Then they will be distributed across 18 clubs.
Given only 4-5 clubs get primetime slots and exposure - it's a safe assumption that they would attract the lion's share.

And thirdly, of these new supporters, how many will care enough to actually go to games? How many will care enough to buy memberships?

So based on all that, you're looking at 30 years before you make any meaningful progress in terms of growing a supporter base.

And as per above, other clubs would actually be increasing the gap anyway during this time.


So basically, my view is that supporter bases of the Vic clubs were pretty much decided 100 years ago. I don't believe they've really changed much since, and I don't believe they ever will.

You are making plenty of assumptions here, of which many are very questionable.

Not every kid follows their parent's team. They have a mother and a father, to begin with and it may be their both follow different teams.
My wife is a Carlton supporter, my kids are Collingwood, Essendon and Carlton. Why Essendon? Because her closest friends are Essendon.

I'll give you another example of how kids are influenced.

St Kilda players went a a primary school in their prime catchment area. They promised the kids certain things. They never delivered and treated it as a joke. I can tell you for a fact that those kids felt so let down by the St Kilda football club that it had an affect on who they support. My friend (St Kilda) had his son (and his mate) switch team on the back of that experience.

In soccer, it's hardly surprising there are many kids who follow Melbourne City while their parent follows Melbourne Victory. Why? Again, because Melbourne City put the time in to the junior soccer clubs while Victory don't. Brighton Soccer Club (largest members in Victoria) replaced Victory with Melbourne City as their official partner for that very reason.

If supporter bases of clubs were decided 100 years ago, how do you explain St Kilda having a much lower member/supporter base than a 'new' club like Hawthorn?

Immigration continues and just like in the 50s/60s where many Italians and Greeks came to Australia they adopted teams like Carlton, Richmond, Collingwood etc. This continues and is an opportunity. Which clubs are going down to the local schools where they have a large group of Sudanese, Vietnamese etc?? There's an opportunity right there.

I'm not disputing some form of equalisation for the betterment of the game. However, it comes a time when clubs that have been around 100+ years need to accept they have failed to do enough to close the gap, and there's no excuse for their liabilities to continue to blow out

 

[EconomicDecline]

Can we get this one changed to proven verified fact please mods?

How the AFL’s ‘power’ clubs have lost power

We still call the clubs with the most supporters and dollars “power clubs” but that term is becoming a misnomer in an AFL competition that has increasingly concentrated power.

www.theage.com.au

No need for apologies from the many posters who attacked and smeared me on this thread.

Such are the burdens of truth tellers and prophets.

Listen, champ. No one attacked you. They just pointed out what a sook you are.

Prime example. You necro'd a 7 month old thread to take yet another shot at St Kilda. Find something else to do in your life. Read a book or ride a book. Find something.

 

[The_Wookie]

Blame Demetriou and Gillon. It's ridiculous that Tasmania doesn't have a team "because it's not viable".

fu** off, they are a football state and you are a not for profit organisation

they run a professional football league, and not for profit doesnt mean its a charity.

You can also blame the AFL Commission, not just the CEO.

Well not a "slave" but you know what I mean.

I meant the game's integrity would prevail and be paramount when there is a conflict or clash between the two.

Now they are activity seeking new ways to commercialise everything as though that is the primary objective.

The Commission was literally formed to make money. Players, coaches, umpires and clubs want more money every year, grassroots wants money, states want money.

Yet the Grand Final stays on a saturday afternoon, despite being worth more in prime time to a broadcaster who actively has lobbied for it, Sunday and Monday nights were given away for attendances - as are most Thursdays - despite the ratings and broadcast potential being vastly better.

But only 7 of the 18 clubs operate at a profit.

11 clubs get bailed out.

And the ones that don't, get handouts in the form of primetime exposure and blockbuster fixtures.

This ignores some facts about the league that include "handouts" which are actually centralised revenue distributions some clubs are entitled to in Melbourne, including AFL membership revenue, and revenues from the MCG and Docklands.

 

[WillHayward]

they run a professional football league, and not for profit doesnt mean its a charity.

You can also blame the AFL Commission, not just the CEO.



The Commission was literally formed to make money. Players, coaches, umpires and clubs want more money every year, grassroots wants money, states want money.

Yet the Grand Final stays on a saturday afternoon, despite being worth more in prime time to a broadcaster who actively has lobbied for it, Sunday and Monday nights were given away for attendances - as are most Thursdays - despite the ratings and broadcast potential being vastly better.



This ignores some facts about the league that include "handouts" which are actually centralised revenue distributions some clubs are entitled to in Melbourne, including AFL membership revenue, and revenues from the MCG and Docklands.

Just not true.
The Commission was formed to ensure the financial sustainability of the VFL competition.
This is not the same as "to make money".
I'm sorry you can't understand this nuance.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

You are making plenty of assumptions here, of which many are very questionable.

Not every kid follows their parent's team. They have a mother and a father, to begin with and it may be their both follow different teams.
My wife is a Carlton supporter, my kids are Collingwood, Essendon and Carlton. Why Essendon? Because her closest friends are Essendon.

I'll give you another example of how kids are influenced.

St Kilda players went a a primary school in their prime catchment area. They promised the kids certain things. They never delivered and treated it as a joke. I can tell you for a fact that those kids felt so let down by the St Kilda football club that it had an affect on who they support. My friend (St Kilda) had his son (and his mate) switch team on the back of that experience.

In soccer, it's hardly surprising there are many kids who follow Melbourne City while their parent follows Melbourne Victory. Why? Again, because Melbourne City put the time in to the junior soccer clubs while Victory don't. Brighton Soccer Club (largest members in Victoria) replaced Victory with Melbourne City as their official partner for that very reason.

If supporter bases of clubs were decided 100 years ago, how do you explain St Kilda having a much lower member/supporter base than a 'new' club like Hawthorn?

Immigration continues and just like in the 50s/60s where many Italians and Greeks came to Australia they adopted teams like Carlton, Richmond, Collingwood etc. This continues and is an opportunity. Which clubs are going down to the local schools where they have a large group of Sudanese, Vietnamese etc?? There's an opportunity right there.

I'm not disputing some form of equalisation for the betterment of the game. However, it comes a time when clubs that have been around 100+ years need to accept they have failed to do enough to close the gap, and there's no excuse for their liabilities to continue to blow out

So how many new supporters to the game each year would there be?

Obviously not an exact figure, but ball park.

Bear in mind, that not all immigrants and children will even follow AFL footy. And also bear in mind that existing supporters die.

 

[The_Wookie]

Just not true.
The Commission was formed to ensure the financial sustainability of the VFL competition.
This is not the same as "to make money".
I'm sorry you can't understand this nuance.

Im sorry you dont understand the growing economic needs of a professional sporting competition as opposed to what you seem to believe is a charity.

 

[Billy the Lid]

My mum's family are rabid St.Kilda fans. Fortunately my father's family had more influence so I tiger I am but have always had a soft spot for the Saints.

Hawthorn is an interesting comparison. Obviously kids jumped on board on the back of some unprecedented success. They won flags in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s 00’and 10s. Between the 83 and 91 they played in 8 grand finals in 9 seasons. And yet by 1996 they went within a whisker of merging with Melbourne. Believe me their supporters are used to winning and if they don’t get back to the pointy end within a few years they will drop off in droves and in 10 -15 years it might be Hawthorn being propped up by the AFL. No club is immune. Richmond and Collingwood, two superpowers, have had to rattle the tin in recent years so I caution against any club getting too smug about the St. Kilda situation.

IMO the more recent St. Kilda situation was created by a perfect storm of ineptitude and circumstances. A forced move and $hit stadium deal at Docklands, the short-sighted (read idiotic) move to Seaford, and after a period contending the re-build aligned with the introduction of two expansion clubs and compromised drafts. This was exacerbated by some appalling recruiting which has led to a decade of mediocrity on and off the field.

They won in a final in 2020 and just missed in 2021 with arguably the toughest draw and worst run of injuries to top players. While obviously they need to stand on their own two feet, they seem to be fighting their way out of it and IMO are better placed then a few other clubs.

 

[craffles]

they run a professional football league, and not for profit doesnt mean its a charity.

You can also blame the AFL Commission, not just the CEO.



The Commission was literally formed to make money. Players, coaches, umpires and clubs want more money every year, grassroots wants money, states want money.

Yet the Grand Final stays on a saturday afternoon, despite being worth more in prime time to a broadcaster who actively has lobbied for it, Sunday and Monday nights were given away for attendances - as are most Thursdays - despite the ratings and broadcast potential being vastly better.



This ignores some facts about the league that include "handouts" which are actually centralised revenue distributions some clubs are entitled to in Melbourne, including AFL membership revenue, and revenues from the MCG and Docklands.

Yes true blame the commission but it's a bitter pill to swallow when they keep flouting commercial viability as an excuse when they will do fine in Tasmania, it just won't deliver as much incremental growth as other areas to line the execs pockets.

 

[VinnieB]

So how many new supporters to the game each year would there be?

Obviously not an exact figure, but ball park.

Bear in mind, that not all immigrants and children will even follow AFL footy. And also bear in mind that existing supporters die.

I can tell you one thing for certain. Fewer St Kilda supporters die each year than many other AFL clubs.

 

[WillHayward]

Im sorry you dont understand the growing economic needs of a professional sporting competition as opposed to what you seem to believe is a charity.

I'll say it again

The Commission was formed to ensure the financial sustainability of the VFL competition.

This is a very different purpose that it was formed to "make money".

 

[Woolly Mammoth]

I have a view on this.

North, Dogs, Saints etc. will never, ever be 'big' clubs.

The reality is that their supporters just aren't that into it.

They have other sh*t in their lives that is more important to them than footy.

Think about it. Think about all the real hardcore deadshit footy nutjobs that you know. I bet you that they're either an Essendon, Collingwood, Richmond or Carlton supporter.

Those dudes are just into it. It's their life. They show up no matter what.

Most Saints, Demons and North fans that I know, have more important sh*t to do with their time.

There's no way a game between two clubs with supporters that generally don't really care all that much, will ever be a Blockbuster.

There is a strong nucleus of truth to that observation, and it's often an overlooked factor as to why some supporter bases seem so fickle compared to others, but as for "There's no way a game between two clubs with supporters that generally don't really care all that much, will ever be a Blockbuster" NTH v WB pulled 47.6k in 2016, the last time we were both playing well. There are many factors working against it (ironically good friday in of itself is one of the biggest hurdles) but that shows it can be done.

 

[StCicatriz]

My mum's family are rabid St.Kilda fans. Fortunately my father's family had more influence so I tiger I am but have always had a soft spot for the Saints.

Hawthorn is an interesting comparison. Obviously kids jumped on board on the back of some unprecedented success. They won flags in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s 00’and 10s. Between the 83 and 91 they played in 8 grand finals in 9 seasons. And yet by 1996 they went within a whisker of merging with Melbourne. Believe me their supporters are used to winning and if they don’t get back to the pointy end within a few years they will drop off in droves and in 10 -15 years it might be Hawthorn being propped up by the AFL. No club is immune. Richmond and Collingwood, two superpowers, have had to rattle the tin in recent years so I caution against any club getting too smug about the St. Kilda situation.

IMO the more recent St. Kilda situation was created by a perfect storm of ineptitude and circumstances. A forced move and $hit stadium deal at Docklands, the short-sighted (read idiotic) move to Seaford, and after a period contending the re-build aligned with the introduction of two expansion clubs and compromised drafts. This was exacerbated by some appalling recruiting which has led to a decade of mediocrity on and off the field.

They won in a final in 2020 and just missed in 2021 with arguably the toughest draw and worst run of injuries to top players. While obviously they need to stand on their own two feet, they seem to be fighting their way out of it and IMO are better placed then a few other clubs.

thats a pretty nice post!

 

[StCicatriz]

I have a view on this.

North, Dogs, Saints etc. will never, ever be 'big' clubs.

The reality is that their supporters just aren't that into it.

They have other sh*t in their lives that is more important to them than footy.

Think about it. Think about all the real hardcore deadshit footy nutjobs that you know. I bet you that they're either an Essendon, Collingwood, Richmond or Carlton supporter.

Those dudes are just into it. It's their life. They show up no matter what.

Most Saints, Demons and North fans that I know, have more important sh*t to do with their time.

There's no way a game between two clubs with supporters that generally don't really care all that much, will ever be a Blockbuster.

1 flag in 140 years and being consistently shit would make it hard for their supports to be anything other than "just aren't that into it".

 

[Rooster 24]

My mum's family are rabid St.Kilda fans. Fortunately my father's family had more influence so I tiger I am but have always had a soft spot for the Saints.

Hawthorn is an interesting comparison. Obviously kids jumped on board on the back of some unprecedented success. They won flags in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s 00’and 10s. Between the 83 and 91 they played in 8 grand finals in 9 seasons. And yet by 1996 they went within a whisker of merging with Melbourne. Believe me their supporters are used to winning and if they don’t get back to the pointy end within a few years they will drop off in droves and in 10 -15 years it might be Hawthorn being propped up by the AFL. No club is immune. Richmond and Collingwood, two superpowers, have had to rattle the tin in recent years so I caution against any club getting too smug about the St. Kilda situation.

IMO the more recent St. Kilda situation was created by a perfect storm of ineptitude and circumstances. A forced move and $hit stadium deal at Docklands, the short-sighted (read idiotic) move to Seaford, and after a period contending the re-build aligned with the introduction of two expansion clubs and compromised drafts. This was exacerbated by some appalling recruiting which has led to a decade of mediocrity on and off the field.

They won in a final in 2020 and just missed in 2021 with arguably the toughest draw and worst run of injuries to top players. While obviously they need to stand on their own two feet, they seem to be fighting their way out of it and IMO are better placed then a few other clubs.

Agree St Ciatriz. A very balanced and accurate summation of our current predicament. And by a Richmond supporter no less! Notwithstanding our historical pursuit of mediocrity, the 2004 – 2011 years should have set us up for a sustained period pf growth. Instead Archie Fraser, aided by Elshaugh, Pelchen, Watters and others set up back 20 years and several million $. At least we are slowly eating into our debt but agree with BTL, we must stand on our own cannot expect to be propped up forever. Would personally rather see us move to Tassie then survive on hand outs for another 20 years.