AFL HANDOUTS by George on The Outer

Are some more equal than others?

Between the clubs themselves and AFL House, it is difficult to get a true appreciation of the financial well-being of individual clubs.  The annual reports take well into the New Year in some cases and the AFL doesn’t produce its own report until May the following year!  Even then, it seems to be un-published for months afterward.  

Perhaps it is planned that way, in the middle of the new football season, when no-one cares what happened last year. 

Regardless, it is interesting to extract the information from all these data-bases and put them together.  

It is worth noting the absolute financial support that the AFL is providing to the Northern state clubs, outside of draft picks, additional salary cap space and cost of living allowances. 

Here are the results for the 2015 Year: 

2015	Base	Bonus	Additional	Total	Profit/Loss
GREATER WESTERN SYDNEY GIANTS	7,890,840	1,200,000	11,490,642	20,581,482	-529,000
GOLD COAST	7,890,840	1,200,000	8,854,524	17,945,364	-300,000
ST KILDA	7,890,840	1,200,000	8,337,466	17,428,306	-848,000
BRISBANE LIONS	7,890,840	1,200,000	7,349,619	16,440,459	-681,000
WESTERN BULLDOGS	7,890,840	1,200,000	6,640,343	15,731,183	388,000
NORTH MELBOURNE	7,890,840	1,200,000	5,492,480	14,583,320	530,000
MELBOURNE	7,890,840	1,200,000	4,909,031	13,999,871	562,000
PORT ADELAIDE	7,890,840	1,200,000	3,795,418	12,886,258	211,000
RICHMOND	7,890,840	1,200,000	3,416,500	12,507,340	459,000
HAWTHORN	7,890,840	1,200,000	3,267,685	12,358,525	3,300,000
SYDNEY SWANS	7,890,840	1,200,000	3,144,805	12,235,645	300,000
ESSENDON	7,890,840	1,200,000	2,737,272	11,828,112	-1,300,000
FREMANTLE	7,890,840	1,200,000	2,570,346	11,661,186	763,000
CARLTON	7,890,840	1,200,000	2,495,684	11,586,524	-2,700,000
WEST COAST EAGLES	7,890,840	1,200,000	2,386,781	11,477,621	5,500,000
COLLINGWOOD	7,890,840	1,200,000	1,904,152	10,994,992	850,000
ADELAIDE CROWS	7,890,840	1,200,000	1,542,653	10,633,493	1,400,000

Some of the outcomes are explainable, such as Geelongs loss resulting from a building programme at Kardinia Park.  Others such as Carlton seem to have arisen purely from spending more than they earn, particularly when the on-field results continue to be mediocre. 

What is truly amazing is the extent of support provided to St.Kilda and the Western Bulldogs, when compared to clubs like our own.  Similar membership bases, similar fixtures, similar ladder positions and yet St.Kilda were gifted an addition $3.5 million dollars more than Melbourne.  The Bulldogs were given an extra $1.5M.

Worrying signs for the AFL is that despite all this additional money thrown their way, the Saints still lost nearly $850,000.  Not all that can be as a result of a lousy fixture, Etihad stadium or a lowly finishing position. 

The other point to note is despite these individual anomalies, the extent of support from the AFL is probably about right.  Take away the outliers and 12 of the teams receive monies within a $4 million range. 

What is galling for a many fans is that the likes of Richmond, Essendon, Carlton and Collingwood are receiving nearly as much support financially. Yet these same clubs demand priority in fixturing and TV slots.  These are the clubs who claim others are held up by their largesse.

As Julius Sumner Miller used to say “Why is it so?”

Perhaps it’s because some clubs are more equal than others, in the socialist Animal Farm known as the AFL.

any further detail on what 'additional' constitutes?

44 minutes ago, Demonland said:

AFL HANDOUTS by George on The Outer

Are some more equal than others?

Between the clubs themselves and AFL House, it is difficult to get a true appreciation of the financial well-being of individual clubs.  The annual reports take well into the New Year in some cases and the AFL doesn’t produce its own report until May the following year!  Even then, it seems to be un-published for months afterward.  

Perhaps it is planned that way, in the middle of the new football season, when no-one cares what happened last year. 

Regardless, it is interesting to extract the information from all these data-bases and put them together.  

It is worth noting the absolute financial support that the AFL is providing to the Northern state clubs, outside of draft picks, additional salary cap space and cost of living allowances. 

Here are the results for the 2015 Year: 

2015	Base	Bonus	Additional	Total	Profit/Loss
GREATER WESTERN SYDNEY GIANTS	7,890,840	1,200,000	11,490,642	20,581,482	-529,000
GOLD COAST	7,890,840	1,200,000	8,854,524	17,945,364	-300,000
ST KILDA	7,890,840	1,200,000	8,337,466	17,428,306	-848,000
BRISBANE LIONS	7,890,840	1,200,000	7,349,619	16,440,459	-681,000
WESTERN BULLDOGS	7,890,840	1,200,000	6,640,343	15,731,183	388,000
NORTH MELBOURNE	7,890,840	1,200,000	5,492,480	14,583,320	530,000
MELBOURNE	7,890,840	1,200,000	4,909,031	13,999,871	562,000
PORT ADELAIDE	7,890,840	1,200,000	3,795,418	12,886,258	211,000
RICHMOND	7,890,840	1,200,000	3,416,500	12,507,340	459,000
HAWTHORN	7,890,840	1,200,000	3,267,685	12,358,525	3,300,000
SYDNEY SWANS	7,890,840	1,200,000	3,144,805	12,235,645	300,000
ESSENDON	7,890,840	1,200,000	2,737,272	11,828,112	-1,300,000
FREMANTLE	7,890,840	1,200,000	2,570,346	11,661,186	763,000
CARLTON	7,890,840	1,200,000	2,495,684	11,586,524	-2,700,000
WEST COAST EAGLES	7,890,840	1,200,000	2,386,781	11,477,621	5,500,000
COLLINGWOOD	7,890,840	1,200,000	1,904,152	10,994,992	850,000
ADELAIDE CROWS	7,890,840	1,200,000	1,542,653	10,633,493	1,400,000

Some of the outcomes are explainable, such as Geelongs loss resulting from a building programme at Kardinia Park.  Others such as Carlton seem to have arisen purely from spending more than they earn, particularly when the on-field results continue to be mediocre. 

What is truly amazing is the extent of support provided to St.Kilda and the Western Bulldogs, when compared to clubs like our own.  Similar membership bases, similar fixtures, similar ladder positions and yet St.Kilda were gifted an addition $3.5 million dollars more than Melbourne.  The Bulldogs were given an extra $1.5M.

Worrying signs for the AFL is that despite all this additional money thrown their way, the Saints still lost nearly $850,000.  Not all that can be as a result of a lousy fixture, Etihad stadium or a lowly finishing position. 

The other point to note is despite these individual anomalies, the extent of support from the AFL is probably about right.  Take away the outliers and 12 of the teams receive monies within a $4 million range. 

What is galling for a many fans is that the likes of Richmond, Essendon, Carlton and Collingwood are receiving nearly as much support financially. Yet these same clubs demand priority in fixturing and TV slots.  These are the clubs who claim others are held up by their largesse.

As Julius Sumner Miller used to say “Why is it so?”

Perhaps it’s because some clubs are more equal than others, in the socialist Animal Farm known as the AFL.

Great post, George. Gee, St Kilda are a real headache for the AFL aren't they? They're receiving more hand outs than the Brisbane Lions? Staggering. They simply couldn't afford to stay down longer than 3-4 years and they basically have to be challenging for a flag within the next 3-4 years, otherwise they must be close to being folded or moved interstate. While I'd hate to see the Bulldogs fold, I wouldn't mind St Kilda going under. 

And aren't Carlton poorly managed? Their list is rubbish too. They are building for a mediocre 5th-8th place ceiling with what they've got and keep bringing in. 

It'll be interesting to see the 2016 results sometime in 2017.  

In truth, a lot of the 'additional' funds push the clubs into the black - which is where you want them to be, which is profitable without having excesses of largesse.

 

clubs are not privately owned companies, and technically the afl is a not-for-profit organisation.

 

seems nuts that a lot of very wealthy clubs that make significant profits are being still given lots of coin.

Etihad Stadium privately owned sucks all that money out. 

What a brilliant idea it was....

It would be good to be able to quantify the value of fixturing benefits in dollar terms as I am sick of hearing supporters of big clubs talk about hand outs we are given when i would be surprised if it amounted to anywhere near the value the extra exposure Friday night games would provide. Extra exposure for your product on free to air, ability to reach new members, more attendances at games, grater corporate sales and greater return for sponsors would be far greater particularly over the long term than any perceived welfare.

Also I think Carltons big loss was due to the clean out of its football department similar to what happened with us a few years back.

As a demons fan I will never question AFL handouts.... we've had plenty!

3 hours ago, Demonland said:

AFL HANDOUTS by George on The Outer

Are some more equal than others?

Between the clubs themselves and AFL House, it is difficult to get a true appreciation of the financial well-being of individual clubs.  The annual reports take well into the New Year in some cases and the AFL doesn’t produce its own report until May the following year!  Even then, it seems to be un-published for months afterward.  

Perhaps it is planned that way, in the middle of the new football season, when no-one cares what happened last year. 

Regardless, it is interesting to extract the information from all these data-bases and put them together.  

It is worth noting the absolute financial support that the AFL is providing to the Northern state clubs, outside of draft picks, additional salary cap space and cost of living allowances.

Some of the outcomes are explainable, such as Geelongs loss resulting from a building programme at Kardinia Park.  Others such as Carlton seem to have arisen purely from spending more than they earn, particularly when the on-field results continue to be mediocre. 

What is truly amazing is the extent of support provided to St.Kilda and the Western Bulldogs, when compared to clubs like our own.  Similar membership bases, similar fixtures, similar ladder positions and yet St.Kilda were gifted an addition $3.5 million dollars more than Melbourne.  The Bulldogs were given an extra $1.5M.

Worrying signs for the AFL is that despite all this additional money thrown their way, the Saints still lost nearly $850,000.  Not all that can be as a result of a lousy fixture, Etihad stadium or a lowly finishing position. 

The other point to note is despite these individual anomalies, the extent of support from the AFL is probably about right.  Take away the outliers and 12 of the teams receive monies within a $4 million range. 

What is galling for a many fans is that the likes of Richmond, Essendon, Carlton and Collingwood are receiving nearly as much support financially.

Yet these same clubs demand priority in fixturing and TV slots.  

These are the clubs who claim others are held up by their largesse.

As Julius Sumner Miller used to say “Why is it so?”

Perhaps it’s because some clubs are more equal than others, in the socialist Animal Farm known as the AFL.

I wonder if the saints & dogs are hampered by etihad ?  Anyway its great to see both having some success in recent times rather, than being doormats.

I totally agree with you on tv timeslots & fixturings. 

 

This is where the Afl keep shooting the compettition in both feet at once, helping the powerful, stay powerful.  enough !

I agree to an extent except what many call handouts is just compensation for the poor commercial terms of our fixture.

25 minutes ago, DemonWA said:

As a demons fan I will never question AFL handouts.... we've had plenty!

It’s just fair payment for us, y’know…inventing the game and all.

9 hours ago, Chook said:

It’s just fair payment for us, y’know…inventing the game and all.

yes we could just consider it on-going royalty fees.....and cheap at that 

I guess, since every club gets AFL money, there's not much point arguing about who gets what, except to haggle at the margins.

This article published today adds some flesh to the bones. In summary West Coast and Hawthorn are super strong; St Kilda is precarious and we are OK, but need to be careful. And like it or not, as it stands, we need that pokies money. 

Etihad Stadium keeps the Victorian Clubs poor. 

The long term supporters need a full explanation on this

the shareholders are laughing and we pay for it whether we go or not. 

Wayne Jackson. I am looking at you

[censored]

44 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Etihad Stadium keeps the Victorian Clubs poor. 

The long term supporters need a full explanation on this

the shareholders are laughing and we pay for it whether we go or not. 

Wayne Jackson. I am looking at you

[censored]

The AFL have an option to buy Etihad. it is exercisable next year I think.

Forget what radio show I was listening to but they seemed to think it a foregone conclusion that the AFL would exercise the option. Whether it would be sold for development or kept as a football stadium was the issue.

Different clubs have different deals at Etihad but the ones held by the Bulldogs and probably the Saints are particularly poor.

Sponsorship etc and merchandise is where we have huge room for expansion. Start making the finals regularly and watch those numbers go up. Also need to keep building the asset base.

17 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

The AFL have an option to buy Etihad. it is exercisable next year I think.

Considering the unspeakable evil that Etihad Stadium embodies, are you sure you spelled that word right?

Edited September 21, 20168 yr by Chook

3 hours ago, Clintosaurus said:

Sponsorship etc and merchandise is where we have huge room for expansion. Start making the finals regularly and watch those numbers go up. Also need to keep building the asset base.

Yep, I was surprised (but not bowled over) by corporate and sponsorship revenue being so comparatively low. Roughly half that of North and the Bulldogs which reflects the depths to which we sank. Like it or not, gaming remains an important revenue source. 

Finals, final, finals. Need to keep building that attractive brand.

The Saints would want to ensure they are achieving everything they possibly can on field. Almost half their revenue is coming directly from the AFL. Financially speaking they are on life support.

If the club continues to be run as it is now, rather than 4-5 years ago The MFC will be fine. We must aim to play finals yearly, not just hope

our home ground holds 100,000

We need to maximize that. 

7 hours ago, Chook said:

Considering the unspeakable evil that Etihad Stadium embodies, are you sure you spelled that word right?

The idea of Etihad (Docklands) was a good one as was its location. The execution was terrible. How many mistakes can a stadium designer make not to mention the ground managers.

Remember the guy that told us that it would revolutionise how we went to the footy and that we had better get used to buying tickets in advance.....no more just walking up to the gate. (I think he lasted about 6 weeks.)

What I find amusing was that when the stadium was built the land was dirt cheap yet today the stadium is so built out by surrounding developments it is almost an afterthought. We were so lucky that the city fathers (and mothers) of the turn of the 20th century had the foresight to provide that magnificent precinct which is now the MCG and its surrounds.

It is interesting that the Bulldogs are ahead of us on the 'handout list" but they can afford to field a stand alone VFL side.

Perhaps MFC spends its money on other things or perhaps it is as simple as the fact that the MFC has no ground of its own on which its VFL club could play. (Although one would think there are several grounds available for sharing.)

33 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

It is interesting that the Bulldogs are ahead of us on the 'handout list" but they can afford to field a stand alone VFL side.

Perhaps MFC spends its money on other things or perhaps it is as simple as the fact that the MFC has no ground of its own on which its VFL club could play. (Although one would think there are several grounds available for sharing.)

or maybe they feel that trying to build their supporter base in the casey area is worth pursuing. i'm not convinced yet but i accept it won't be an overnight thing and could take some time

Wouldn't be surprised if the Casey scorpions become the Casey Demons down the track. 

Hawks are still affiliated with Box Hill and the Hawks are doing alright. 

From memory the cost to run a stand alone VFL team was about 500K per year. 

Also didn't the Dee's sign a 20 year deal or something of that nature with Casey. 

22 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

or maybe they feel that trying to build their supporter base in the casey area is worth pursuing. i'm not convinced yet but i accept it won't be an overnight thing and could take some time

I posted this in another thread but can't remember which.

At my son's kinder, there's a photo of every kid under each AFL team, showing which kid goes for who.

Collingwood are at number 1 with 6 I think, with Melbourne and Richmond with 5 kids each.

Then there's one poor kid right at the end under a Melbourne Victory logo, had to giggle.

Kinder is in Berwick (City of Casey), so I'm assuming that's why our representation is high. Then again, it could be an anomaly, one kinder is hardly a massive sample size. Still, it's encouraging