National Minnow League Vs the AFL

[Raiderdave]

did you insist Cwapper excuse himself from the forum ... considering he therefore lost the wager to me ?
no



no you didn't

That's because YOU lost the fricking bet, Dave! Where are the figures for all EIGHT FTA games huh? Where's the average for that huh? You still haven't delivered and because you haven't you lost the bet and should be taking a week off!!

everyone knows you lost fuckface
now piss off as you are lower then a gonad pube in the eyes of most in here

[Raiderdave]

You think this supports your claim? >

"A dismal season on the field for the NRL operation last year was matched by below-par financial performance, slumping to a loss of more than $220,000 on revenues of almost $12 million, including nearly $2 million in cash and in-kind benefits from the ACT government."

So without a government handout theyd be over 2 mil in the red.

Just take a step back for a moment, Xman. This isn't about the Raiders RLFC by itself. If it was by itself then you may have something. But it's not and I have to say Raiderdave is correct when referencing the revenue from clubs like Mawson and Queanbeyan. This is what keeps the Raiders going, and don't forget that the Raiders have a historical link with Queanbeyan in that they played their early home games at Seiffort Oval before gaining access to Bruce Stadium.

This is over and above NRL operations that you refer to.

We are mainly talking about the strength, viability, and resources of clubs. Dave claims the raiders earn 70m pa, which is rubbish. They are a 12m club that gets part funding from a business arm that earns 70m but has its own costs meaning it earns a few mil profit per year. Very little of that 70m is available for the raiders to spend, meaning they are a very poor club.

the
strength, viability, and resources of clubs eh ?


how bout we take the 20 million Essenbong earnt from non football club revenues off them
& see how much strength they posses then dickhead :_<> :_<>
they'd last 4 minutes :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>

every cent of the 70 Million in revenue &... the 3 million in profits ... belongs to the Raiders Football club as they own all of their operations .... all of it , they are stable
& have the resources to meet any crisis

shame 9 VFL clubs can't say the same eh twat ? :_<> :_<> :_<>

\

[Xman]

You think this supports your claim? >

"A dismal season on the field for the NRL operation last year was matched by below-par financial performance, slumping to a loss of more than $220,000 on revenues of almost $12 million, including nearly $2 million in cash and in-kind benefits from the ACT government."

So without a government handout theyd be over 2 mil in the red.

Just take a step back for a moment, Xman. This isn't about the Raiders RLFC by itself. If it was by itself then you may have something. But it's not and I have to say Raiderdave is correct when referencing the revenue from clubs like Mawson and Queanbeyan. This is what keeps the Raiders going, and don't forget that the Raiders have a historical link with Queanbeyan in that they played their early home games at Seiffort Oval before gaining access to Bruce Stadium.

This is over and above NRL operations that you refer to.

We are mainly talking about the strength, viability, and resources of clubs. Dave claims the raiders earn 70m pa, which is rubbish. They are a 12m club that gets part funding from a business arm that earns 70m but has its own costs meaning it earns a few mil profit per year. Very little of that 70m is available for the raiders to spend, meaning they are a very poor club.

the
strength, viability, and resources of clubs eh ?


how bout we take the 20 million Essenbong earnt from non football club revenues off them
& see how much strength they posses then dickhead :_<> :_<>
they'd last 4 minutes :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>

every cent of the 70 Million in revenue &... the 3 million in profits ... belongs to the Raiders Football club as they own all of their operations .... all of it , they are stable
& have the resources to meet any crisis

shame 9 VFL clubs can't say the same eh twat ? :_<> :_<> :_<>

\

You're not seriously claiming the raiders are better off than Essendon are you? :_<> Essendon have recently raised funds to build some of the best sports facilities in Australia. As far as ongoing wealth, theyd be in the top 5 in the country.

The raiders get by on 12m. If they had access to their parent companies finances they wouldn't be forced to get by on one of the smallest budgets in Australian professional sport.

[Cracker]

You think this supports your claim? >

"A dismal season on the field for the NRL operation last year was matched by below-par financial performance, slumping to a loss of more than $220,000 on revenues of almost $12 million, including nearly $2 million in cash and in-kind benefits from the ACT government."

So without a government handout theyd be over 2 mil in the red.

Just take a step back for a moment, Xman. This isn't about the Raiders RLFC by itself. If it was by itself then you may have something. But it's not and I have to say Raiderdave is correct when referencing the revenue from clubs like Mawson and Queanbeyan. This is what keeps the Raiders going, and don't forget that the Raiders have a historical link with Queanbeyan in that they played their early home games at Seiffort Oval before gaining access to Bruce Stadium.

This is over and above NRL operations that you refer to.

We are mainly talking about the strength, viability, and resources of clubs. Dave claims the raiders earn 70m pa, which is rubbish. They are a 12m club that gets part funding from a business arm that earns 70m but has its own costs meaning it earns a few mil profit per year. Very little of that 70m is available for the raiders to spend, meaning they are a very poor club.

So as far as you're concerned, the revenue from Mawson, Queanbeyan and the other CDRL sources don't count?

[Xman]

You think this supports your claim? >

"A dismal season on the field for the NRL operation last year was matched by below-par financial performance, slumping to a loss of more than $220,000 on revenues of almost $12 million, including nearly $2 million in cash and in-kind benefits from the ACT government."

So without a government handout theyd be over 2 mil in the red.

Just take a step back for a moment, Xman. This isn't about the Raiders RLFC by itself. If it was by itself then you may have something. But it's not and I have to say Raiderdave is correct when referencing the revenue from clubs like Mawson and Queanbeyan. This is what keeps the Raiders going, and don't forget that the Raiders have a historical link with Queanbeyan in that they played their early home games at Seiffort Oval before gaining access to Bruce Stadium.

This is over and above NRL operations that you refer to.

We are mainly talking about the strength, viability, and resources of clubs. Dave claims the raiders earn 70m pa, which is rubbish. They are a 12m club that gets part funding from a business arm that earns 70m but has its own costs meaning it earns a few mil profit per year. Very little of that 70m is available for the raiders to spend, meaning they are a very poor club.

So as far as you're concerned, the revenue from Mawson, Queanbeyan and the other CDRL sources don't count?

What counts is the amount the football club get to spend on their club, as in facilities, staff, etc. The Raiders have one of the smallest football club budgets I know of

A dismal season on the field for the NRL operation last year was matched by below-par financial performance, slumping to a loss of more than $220,000 on revenues of almost $12 million, including nearly $2 million in cash and in-kind benefits from the ACT government.

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-new ... z2vAna8iWJ

12m including 2m from the ACT government. I mean thats less than many AFL clubs would earn from mebership revenue alone!

[Cracker]

$12 million plus the revenue from the other CDRL outlets, Xman. They count whether you like it or not because it's part of the club's bottom line. To ignore it is to understate the club's true financial position. Canberra is in a much more enviable position than some Sydney clubs in this regard - Cronulla for example.

[Xman]

$12 million plus the revenue from the other CDRL outlets, Xman. They count whether you like it or not because it's part of the club's bottom line. To ignore it is to understate the club's true financial position. Canberra is in a much more enviable position than some Sydney clubs in this regard - Cronulla for example.

Got some evidence of your claim? The report clearly states their total revenue was 12m

[Cracker]

Of club operations of the Raiders, which is the limit of your source - not the owners of the club the Canberra District Rugby League.

[Xman]

Of club operations of the Raiders, which is the limit of your source - not the owners of the club the Canberra District Rugby League.

I'm talking about the revenue and therefore spending capacity of the Raider NRL club. 12m seems all they had in 2012. Can you provide a link showing they had more?

[Cracker]

No, because you are intentionally leaving their owners the CDRL out of the equation. I would like to know why you are doing that.

[Xman]

No, because you are intentionally leaving their owners the CDRL out of the equation. I would like to know why you are doing that.

What do these owners add to the spending capacity of this club? If these owners are rolling in cash why do the Raiders rely on such a small budget to get by?

For example, Collingwoods budget is around 70m. They send their entire team overseas for altitude training every year. They have a larger staff, including trainers, coaches, support and medical staff than many decent sized businesses. They are loaded and their club members, fans and players benefit. Thats wealth

[Cracker]

That (the second part) I don't know the answer to, although I could guess and say it's because they have other responsibilities and interests in the ACT.

But the first part simply goes to backing capacity in an emergency.

[Xman]

That (the second part) I don't know the answer to, although I could guess and say it's because they have other responsibilities and interests in the ACT.

But the first part simply goes to backing capacity in an emergency.

So their parent owner is only there in case theyre in trouble?

Collingwood are lavish in their spending, on everything. They could easily survive on half that budget. But why should they? They have that income every single year, and its only growing. Meanwhile the Raiders have a strong owner but are left with a budget so low most AFL clubs earn more in membership revenue alone, let alone sponsorship and TV money.

[adamj1300]

You think this supports your claim? >

"A dismal season on the field for the NRL operation last year was matched by below-par financial performance, slumping to a loss of more than $220,000 on revenues of almost $12 million, including nearly $2 million in cash and in-kind benefits from the ACT government."

So without a government handout theyd be over 2 mil in the red.

Just take a step back for a moment, Xman. This isn't about the Raiders RLFC by itself. If it was by itself then you may have something. But it's not and I have to say Raiderdave is correct when referencing the revenue from clubs like Mawson and Queanbeyan. This is what keeps the Raiders going, and don't forget that the Raiders have a historical link with Queanbeyan in that they played their early home games at Seiffort Oval before gaining access to Bruce Stadium.

This is over and above NRL operations that you refer to.

We are mainly talking about the strength, viability, and resources of clubs. Dave claims the raiders earn 70m pa, which is rubbish. They are a 12m club that gets part funding from a business arm that earns 70m but has its own costs meaning it earns a few mil profit per year. Very little of that 70m is available for the raiders to spend, meaning they are a very poor club.

the
strength, viability, and resources of clubs eh ?


how bout we take the 20 million Essenbong earnt from non football club revenues off them
& see how much strength they posses then dickhead :_<> :_<>
they'd last 4 minutes :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>

every cent of the 70 Million in revenue &... the 3 million in profits ... belongs to the Raiders Football club as they own all of their operations .... all of it , they are stable
& have the resources to meet any crisis

shame 9 VFL clubs can't say the same eh twat ? :_<> :_<> :_<>

\

essendon the club earn't 63 million dollars last season
only 8.6 came from pokes
thats 54.4 million from AFL revenue
16.54 in sponsorship revenue alone
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/2 ... n.1037934/

your shitty little raiders struggle to do 12 million in total revenue with help from pokes & the ACT government.

[adamj1300]

No, because you are intentionally leaving their owners the CDRL out of the equation. I would like to know why you are doing that.

What do these owners add to the spending capacity of this club? If these owners are rolling in cash why do the Raiders rely on such a small budget to get by?

For example, Collingwoods budget is around 70m. They send their entire team overseas for altitude training every year. They have a larger staff, including trainers, coaches, support and medical staff than many decent sized businesses. They are loaded and their club members, fans and players benefit. Thats wealth

a lot of the clubs did the whole trip over seas for altitude training earlier this year, & came back to their first class training facilities. where as the NRL clubs trained in the council paddocks, dodging the dog crap. behind their poke filled leagues club all summer. yet the NRL are still chest beating about their 50 million dollar profit