Where Does All the Money Go?

[Slartibartfast 17,657]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-season-2016-debt-down-but-losses-mount-for-afl-clubs-20160206-gmnb1h.html

An article in The Age today gives a summary of the gross income and debt position of all the Victorian clubs.

Hawthorn top the charts with just over $70 million and the poor old Saints the bottom at around $32 million.  We sit at about $44 million and have made a modest profit and we have a debt of about $5 million.  The profit and debt positions can be a little misleading because not shown are the assets of the club (Bentleigh more than offsets our debt) and of course profits can be fudged at year end and can include such things as depreciation and write off of assets which can distort the true position of a club.

But in essence the Hawks have more than twice the income of the Saints and you just wonder where all the money goes.  Once you've adjusted for profits and interest on debt there is a profound difference.  I just wonder where all the money goes.  FD spending?  Admin?  I don't know.  Pokies and the staff to run the facilities?

Does anyone know?  On face value the AFL desperately needs to even up the have and the have nots or we will fast become like the EPL.  I'm glad to see Newbold go, he struck me as an arrogant [censored] who peached equality and then did everything in his power to frustrate AFL attempts to introduce it.

Edit: And the other thing is our profit is marginal at best.  A couple of hundred thousand dollars in $44.5 million is break even at best.  Fine judgement that, but it makes you wonder about the window dressing that may go on.  Not that this administration would be the only ones to dress the result, it's been done for years.  Even with Hawthorns income they still manage to make a profit of about 5% on turnover.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Baghdad Bob

[Willmoy1947 4,150]

9 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-season-2016-debt-down-but-losses-mount-for-afl-clubs-20160206-gmnb1h.html

An article in The Age today gives a summary of the gross income and debt position of all the Victorian clubs.

Hawthorn top the charts with just over $70 million and the poor old Saints the bottom at around $32 million.  We sit at about $44 million and have made a modest profit and we have a debt of about $5 million.  The profit and debt positions can be a little misleading because not shown are the assets of the club (Bentleigh more than offsets our debt) and of course profits can be fudged at year end and can include such things as depreciation and write off of assets which can distort the true position of a club.

But in essence the Hawks have more than twice the income of the Saints and you just wonder where all the money goes.  Once you've adjusted for profits and interest on debt there is a profound difference.  I just wonder where all the money goes.  FD spending?  Admin?  I don't know.  Pokies and the staff to run the facilities?

Does anyone know?  On face value the AFL desperately needs to even up the have and the have nots or we will fast become like the EPL.  I'm glad to see Newbold go, he struck me as an arrogant [censored] who peached equality and then did everything in his power to frustrate AFL attempts to introduce it.

Edit: And the other thing is our profit is marginal at best.  A couple of hundred thousand dollars in $44.5 million is break even at best.  Fine judgement that, but it makes you wonder about the window dressing that may go on.  Not that this administration would be the only ones to dress the result, it's been done for years.  Even with Hawthorns income they still manage to make a profit of about 5% on turnover.

Hawthorn bought the Australian Paper Mills didn't they?

[Cards13 9,117]

Just on the Newbold comment, the AFL can do whatever they like can't they? The AFL runs the show, they choose not to push equalisation harder.

[daisycutter 29,756]

thought hawthorn were building a war chest to fund their new proposed and ambitious training centre

[Steno 200]

49 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

But in essence the Hawks have more than twice the income of the Saints and you just wonder where all the money goes.  .........................

Does anyone know? 

Premiership celebrations and drink drive education.... Court costs are similar between Hawks and Saints.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Steno

[Lucifers Hero 40,375]

It seems the numbers are very 'rubbery'!!!  Some just don't make sense eg MFC profit of $.562m on Rev of $44.5 while CFC figures are $.850 on $66.2m.  Carlton $2.7 loss on $54.1m.  As the core costs of running a football club are the same eg Sal cap, # of coaches/support staff etc you have to wonder what creative accounting the 'power' clubs are doing to make such small profits/big losses.  

I'm not even sure the AFL has mandated accounting policies, practices and formats...at least none that are apparent whenever I have looked at comparing financial reports from clubs' annual reports.  It would help if we could compare 'apples with apples'.  But I fear the AFL is quite happy to have a certain opaqueness in club financials - it enables them to use their financial discretion without other clubs/club supporters saying:  'what about me'?! 

That is just another ?mark on how the AFL operate.

[jnrmac 20,189]

9 hours ago, Baghdad Bob said:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-season-2016-debt-down-but-losses-mount-for-afl-clubs-20160206-gmnb1h.html

An article in The Age today gives a summary of the gross income and debt position of all the Victorian clubs.

Hawthorn top the charts with just over $70 million and the poor old Saints the bottom at around $32 million.  We sit at about $44 million and have made a modest profit and we have a debt of about $5 million.  The profit and debt positions can be a little misleading because not shown are the assets of the club (Bentleigh more than offsets our debt) and of course profits can be fudged at year end and can include such things as depreciation and write off of assets which can distort the true position of a club.

But in essence the Hawks have more than twice the income of the Saints and you just wonder where all the money goes.  Once you've adjusted for profits and interest on debt there is a profound difference.  I just wonder where all the money goes.  FD spending?  Admin?  I don't know.  Pokies and the staff to run the facilities?

Does anyone know?  On face value the AFL desperately needs to even up the have and the have nots or we will fast become like the EPL.  I'm glad to see Newbold go, he struck me as an arrogant [censored] who peached equality and then did everything in his power to frustrate AFL attempts to introduce it.

Edit: And the other thing is our profit is marginal at best.  A couple of hundred thousand dollars in $44.5 million is break even at best.  Fine judgement that, but it makes you wonder about the window dressing that may go on.  Not that this administration would be the only ones to dress the result, it's been done for years.  Even with Hawthorns income they still manage to make a profit of about 5% on turnover.

I remember around 5yrs ago WCE and Coll were spending $300k a week more than Melbourne on their football depts. Just over $15m a year. High altitude chambers, recovery rooms, trips to Arizona , more doctors, more physios, better gyms, etc etc etc

Pretty easy to rack up a lot more spending. Plus some of them divert money to other property plays, pubs, pokie venues etc

[george_on_the_outer 7,727]

Her are some simple numbers for a couple of clubs:

Melbourne

Revenue 44M

Football expenses $22M

Sponsorship, membership, Fundraising, marketing $8.6M

Admin $3M

Other $3M

Profit 0.5M

Hawthorn:

Revenue $71M.  

Employee and Staff $32M. 

Sponsorship, marketing and membership expenses $13M

Other? 10M

Profit $5M

 

Collingwood

Revenue $66M

Football expenses $22M

Sponsorship, membership, matchday and commercial expenses 18M

Gaming expenses and functions 12M

Other? 8M

Profit 0.8M

Carlton

Revenue $54M

Football department $22M

Marketing, membership, venue expenses $26M

Wages and Salaries $24M

Loss 2.7M

 

 

Football expenses seem to be much the same ( which is what you would expect with salary cap)

The expenses in "other staff" "wages and salaries" & "admin" is the big ticket item.  There is certainly a relationship between membership size and the number of staff you need to service them. 

 

[beelzebub 23,383]

1 minute ago, george_on_the_outer said:

I'll try to dig out some numbers in the next couple of days ( at the moment I can't find our own financials from 2015!)

Simple numbers:

Hawthorn:

Revenue $71M.  

Employee and Staff $32M. 

Sponsorship, marketing and membership expenses $13M

Other? 10M

Profit $5M

Strangely a debt of....8

[biggestred 5,148]

Apparently half the afl staff were in san Francisco today watching some superb owl.

Not sure what owls have to do with footy but its a fair junket considering youve only gotta go down the Peninsula to see some owls

[DeeSpencer 26,090]

Most of the clubs spend about 20mil on footy department spending, with 'the gap' not really that big in the scheme of things now there's the cap. https://au.sports.yahoo.com/afl/a/27913568/afl-football-department-spending-figures-revealed/

I'd suggest Melbourne run the non football department staff pretty miserly. Other clubs are investing a lot more in their websites and social media presence. The bigger clubs no doubt spend more on advertising as well. 

Our challenge is definitely to try and grow revenue behind footy success over the next few years, starting with getting 10k more members. If we do that we will be able to keep touch with the big boys.

[Delusional demon 82 1,197]

3 minutes ago, biggestred said:

Apparently half the afl staff were in san Francisco today watching some superb owl.

Not sure what owls have to do with footy but its a fair junket considering youve only gotta go down the Peninsula to see some owls

As long as they can knock up a power point presentation on the insights learned from the NFL they can wholly justify their business class juncket.... 

[Delusional demon 82 1,197]

17 minutes ago, george_on_the_outer said:

I'll try to dig out some numbers in the next couple of days ( at the moment I can't find our own financials from 2015!)

Simple numbers:

Hawthorn:

Revenue $71M.  

Employee and Staff $32M. 

Sponsorship, marketing and membership expenses $13M

Other? 10M

Profit $5M

 

Collingwood

Revenue $66M

Football expenses $22M

Sponsorship, membership, matchday and commercial expenses 18M

Gaming expenses and functions 12M

Other? 8M

Profit 0.8M

http://m.melbournefc.com.au/news/2015-11-26/melbourne-announces-agm-date

Link to the 2015 financial report on the club website page on the AGM

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,410]

9 hours ago, Cards13 said:

Just on the Newbold comment, the AFL can do whatever they like can't they? The AFL runs the show, they choose not to push equalisation harder.

What else would you like to see in terms of equalisation? No doubt the draw is always a hot topic but in fairness the we only have ourselves to blame. The networks pay for the rights and they want blockbuster games in prime time slots. If we can play big game football for a consistent period we will get rewarded, regardless of who plays on a Friday night I'm normally watching because there's a fair chance the game will be entertaining. 

I also thought each year the AFL released how much funding each club received for that year. Whilst every club was allocated the base rate, we along with the Doggies/Saints etc got extra.

Today's announcement of a new sponsor is a sign we're heading in the right direction and that we can't just rely on handouts.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,410]

And by consistent period I'm thinking at least two seasons, at the moment we can't even string two good games together.

[rjay 25,155]

10 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

What else would you like to see in terms of equalisation? No doubt the draw is always a hot topic but in fairness the we only have ourselves to blame. The networks pay for the rights and they want blockbuster games in prime time slots. If we can play big game football for a consistent period we will get rewarded, regardless of who plays on a Friday night I'm normally watching because there's a fair chance the game will be entertaining. 

I also thought each year the AFL released how much funding each club received for that year. Whilst every club was allocated the base rate, we along with the Doggies/Saints etc got extra.

Today's announcement of a new sponsor is a sign we're heading in the right direction and that we can't just rely on handouts.

Not last season 'Bombay', I couldn't be bothered with the Carlton fest...

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,410]

8 minutes ago, rjay said:

Not last season 'Bombay', I couldn't be bothered with the Carlton fest...

You got me there, I'd forgotten about that but you get where I'm coming from. They are on the end of the Hulk fists this year getting brought back to earth with no Friday nights games however they open the season with the traditional clash against perrenial finals chokers Richmond.

Edited February 8, 2016 by Bombay Airconditioning

[RalphiusMaximus 6,098]

If they're in any way sensible then profits are invested to generate greater future profits.  Ultimately you want the club to be able to survive a slump in membership and still maintain their levels of spending on football.  The big clubs have other income streams which keep them profitable regardless of their on-field performance.  We need to be get into that league. 

[Chris 2,892]

9 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

What else would you like to see in terms of equalisation? No doubt the draw is always a hot topic but in fairness the we only have ourselves to blame. The networks pay for the rights and they want blockbuster games in prime time slots. If we can play big game football for a consistent period we will get rewarded, regardless of who plays on a Friday night I'm normally watching because there's a fair chance the game will be entertaining. 

I also thought each year the AFL released how much funding each club received for that year. Whilst every club was allocated the base rate, we along with the Doggies/Saints etc got extra.

Today's announcement of a new sponsor is a sign we're heading in the right direction and that we can't just rely on handouts.

It isnt so much about when you play, it is about who you have home games against. The small Melbourne clubs generally only get home games against each other and interstate sides while the big ckubs get home games against each other far more. This makes it far easier for them to make money. Add to that the high profile TV slots and lufe all of a sudden gets a lot easier. 

I say split the gate on every game 50/50 and things instantly get a lot fairer

[jnrmac 20,189]

11 hours ago, rjay said:

Not last season 'Bombay', I couldn't be bothered with the Carlton fest...

6 Friday night games and 2 Saturday night games smashes the "you have to perform to get good TV slots" theory. On 2014's form they deserved nothing.

[jnrmac 20,189]

2 hours ago, Chris said:

It isnt so much about when you play, it is about who you have home games against. The small Melbourne clubs generally only get home games against each other and interstate sides while the big ckubs get home games against each other far more. This makes it far easier for them to make money. Add to that the high profile TV slots and lufe all of a sudden gets a lot easier. 

I say split the gate on every game 50/50 and things instantly get a lot fairer

Still doesn't help if you play GWS at the G and then in Sydney. Half of both of those games is very little. That theory works with EFC, Hawks, Carlton, Coll, Geel, Rich.

And when you play WCE that fill the ground with 90% members, the revenue available to be split diminishes considerably.

[jnrmac 20,189]

The real crux is to get the 18 teams playing each other once and then devise a system so there are 5 more rounds and then finals. That way there are the same number of games for TV. 

Maybe you split the comp after 18 games into 3 segments to decide finals playoffs and draft order at the bottom to keep interest ...

The AFL and TV won't countenance a reduction in total number of games 

[Barney Rubble 1,576]

It's all about the Revenue.

You have to speculate to accumulate.

Hawthorn $13M and Collingwood $18M spend more wining and dining the sponsors than Melbourne $8.6M

They are in the Finals and that's the rewards the sponsors want. Which means that is the Bottom line the club gets.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,910]

11 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

You got me there, I'd forgotten about that but you get where I'm coming from. They are on the end of the Hulk fists this year getting brought back to earth with no Friday nights games however they open the season with the traditional clash against perrenial finals chokers Richmond.

We use the word 'traditional' pretty loosely these days, don't we? I guess if we keep saying it long enough people will start to believe it.

[rjay 25,155]

11 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

You got me there, I'd forgotten about that but you get where I'm coming from. They are on the end of the Hulk fists this year getting brought back to earth with no Friday nights games however they open the season with the traditional clash against perrenial finals chokers Richmond.

 

Just now, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

We use the word 'traditional' pretty loosely these days, don't we? I guess if we keep saying it long enough people will start to believe it.

Carlton fans will realise how bad they actually are and the Tiges will again get an inflated opinion of where they sit.

For the rest of us we will get a false start to the season...