Talking Footy

Xman, higher turnover and higher outlays, have a think about that.

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

Xman, higher turnover and higher outlays, have a think about that.

For Adelaide oval? the SANFL own AAMI stadium and screw both the crows and power. They'll be far better off without that

Xman wrote:

The Adelaide Crows have posted a net profit of $122,434 for the AFL year.

http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Sport/2 ... 26207.html

Business model projections indicate the Crows can budget for significantly increased corporate and match-day revenue playing home games from the refurbished Adelaide Oval.

and this will benefit the power as well

f me thats embarrasing .... A bloke I know who owns Fish n chip shop down the road from where I live told me recently they'll pop about 150,000 dollars in the bank as after tax profit for the last 12 months

the Crows have 50K members
the Broncos 25K

the Crows turnover of 45 mill ?
the Broncos 35 mill

but
the Broncos made a 4 million plus profit in their football dept ... F knows how much it would be with their gaming arm added

again showing beyond doubt
revenue means nothing

its how you balance it with costs
if you earn 45 million
& spend 44.878 Million .. yr on a knife edge .. you are committed to these costs , a few bad years & you turn into poort poopelaide very quickly

if you earn 35 million
& spend 31 Million

yr in a far .... far better possie

end of financial lesson

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

The Adelaide Crows have posted a net profit of $122,434 for the AFL year.

http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Sport/2 ... 26207.html

Business model projections indicate the Crows can budget for significantly increased corporate and match-day revenue playing home games from the refurbished Adelaide Oval.

and this will benefit the power as well

f me thats embarrasing .... A bloke I know who owns Fish n chip shop down the road from where I live told me recently they'll pop about 150,000 dollars in the bank as after tax profit for the last 12 months

the Crows have 50K members
the Broncos 25K

the Crows turnover of 45 mill ?
the Broncos 35 mill

but
the Broncos made a 4 million plus profit in their football dept ... F knows how much it would be with their gaming arm added

again showing beyond doubt
revenue means nothing

its how you balance it with costs
if you earn 45 million
& spend 44.878 Million .. yr on a knife edge .. you are committed to these costs , a few bad years & you turn into poort poopelaide very quickly

if you earn 35 million
& spend 31 Million

yr in a far .... far better possie

end of financial lesson

You obviously know nothing about business dave.Ill give you a lesson in business 101.It is easier to cut expenditure than it is to raise revenue.Fact. What about the raiders.Turnover 61 million profit 3 million.That is a thin margin my friend.Pokies revenue being smashed around the country.A billion less from last year.When the grubby money runs out dave where to then for a club with less members than Yarrawonga.

pookus wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

The Adelaide Crows have posted a net profit of $122,434 for the AFL year.

http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Sport/2 ... 26207.html


and this will benefit the power as well

f me thats embarrasing .... A bloke I know who owns Fish n chip shop down the road from where I live told me recently they'll pop about 150,000 dollars in the bank as after tax profit for the last 12 months

the Crows have 50K members
the Broncos 25K

the Crows turnover of 45 mill ?
the Broncos 35 mill

but
the Broncos made a 4 million plus profit in their football dept ... F knows how much it would be with their gaming arm added

again showing beyond doubt
revenue means nothing

its how you balance it with costs
if you earn 45 million
& spend 44.878 Million .. yr on a knife edge .. you are committed to these costs , a few bad years & you turn into poort poopelaide very quickly

if you earn 35 million
& spend 31 Million

yr in a far .... far better possie

end of financial lesson

You obviously know nothing about business dave.Ill give you a lesson in business 101.It is easier to cut expenditure than it is to raise revenue.Fact. What about the raiders.Turnover 61 million profit 3 million.That is a thin margin my friend.Pokies revenue being smashed around the country.A billion less from last year.When the grubby money runs out dave where to then for a club with less members than Yarrawonga.

I know a lot more then you ... you can only cut costs so far before the entire business suffers .. you become committed to them over time to remain competitive
you can't have both
the entire culture in the VFL where spending to try n compete is concerned .... is out of control & these simpleton solutions of ... " oh we'll just cut expenditure " are the stuff of fairies & goblens .... just garbage in fact

as for the Raiders profit margins .... it was just over 5% , & for the Raiders to be able to make a profit at all with all the changes to gaming laws cutting revenue hugely .. is remarkable in itself ... well done to them ... wel done =D> =D>

& you want a thin margin
hows the Crows magin ?

45 Mill turnover .... & 120K in profits
thats
0.0025%

better then a loss .... but an insipid , quite ... unimpressive effort when put up against the result the Mighty Green Machine posted

Crows made about 1.2 million in operating profits.

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

The Adelaide Crows have posted a net profit of $122,434 for the AFL year.

http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Sport/2 ... 26207.html

Business model projections indicate the Crows can budget for significantly increased corporate and match-day revenue playing home games from the refurbished Adelaide Oval.

and this will benefit the power as well

f me thats embarrasing .... A bloke I know who owns Fish n chip shop down the road from where I live told me recently they'll pop about 150,000 dollars in the bank as after tax profit for the last 12 months

the Crows have 50K members
the Broncos 25K

the Crows turnover of 45 mill ?
the Broncos 35 mill

but
the Broncos made a 4 million plus profit in their football dept ... F knows how much it would be with their gaming arm added

again showing beyond doubt
revenue means nothing

its how you balance it with costs
if you earn 45 million
& spend 44.878 Million .. yr on a knife edge .. you are committed to these costs , a few bad years & you turn into poort poopelaide very quickly

if you earn 35 million
& spend 31 Million

yr in a far .... far better possie

end of financial lesson

how many times does it need to be said? The AFLs clubs arent there to make profits! They're there to run a football club!

They collect revenue and plan to spend it all, or maybe make a slight profit. Why the f would they save it? For what? They don't have owners

Your mate with his fish and chip shop is making a living. The crows are running a non profit sporting club. You're too stupid to see the difference.

As for the broncos, they spend less because they have less. The crows spend more because they generate more income, not because they have to spend it, but because the can. They would have far more coaches, medical staff, development staff, support staff, better facilities etc etc...

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

The Adelaide Crows have posted a net profit of $122,434 for the AFL year.

http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Sport/2 ... 26207.html


and this will benefit the power as well

f me thats embarrasing .... A bloke I know who owns Fish n chip shop down the road from where I live told me recently they'll pop about 150,000 dollars in the bank as after tax profit for the last 12 months

the Crows have 50K members
the Broncos 25K

the Crows turnover of 45 mill ?
the Broncos 35 mill

but
the Broncos made a 4 million plus profit in their football dept ... F knows how much it would be with their gaming arm added

again showing beyond doubt
revenue means nothing

its how you balance it with costs
if you earn 45 million
& spend 44.878 Million .. yr on a knife edge .. you are committed to these costs , a few bad years & you turn into poort poopelaide very quickly

if you earn 35 million
& spend 31 Million

yr in a far .... far better possie

end of financial lesson

how many times does it need to be said? The AFLs clubs arent there to make profits! ...

I can assure you they aren't there to make losses either F wit

& a club that makes a measly 120K profit out of 45m
is closer to a loss

then one that makes 3.5 Million out of 61M

the lesson endith here

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

f me thats embarrasing .... A bloke I know who owns Fish n chip shop down the road from where I live told me recently they'll pop about 150,000 dollars in the bank as after tax profit for the last 12 months

the Crows have 50K members
the Broncos 25K

the Crows turnover of 45 mill ?
the Broncos 35 mill

but
the Broncos made a 4 million plus profit in their football dept ... F knows how much it would be with their gaming arm added

again showing beyond doubt
revenue means nothing

its how you balance it with costs
if you earn 45 million
& spend 44.878 Million .. yr on a knife edge .. you are committed to these costs , a few bad years & you turn into poort poopelaide very quickly

if you earn 35 million
& spend 31 Million

yr in a far .... far better possie

end of financial lesson

how many times does it need to be said? The AFLs clubs arent there to make profits! ...

I can assure you they aren't there to make losses either F wit

& a club that makes a measly 120K profit out of 45m
is closer to a loss

then one that makes 3.5 Million out of 61M

the lesson endith here

fmd youre a dunce! Clubs budget on expected revenue and expenditure, aiming to make a small profit. If they receive less revenue due to poor attendance or member numbers because of poor on field performance the budget won't balance and they'll make a loss. If they have unexpected costs like Essendon incurred a few years ago to pay out a sacked coaches contract theyll make a loss. If they do better than expected theyll make a small profit.

Saying the crows failed because they made a small profit is ludicrous because that was their aim, to spend their years revenue and not make a loss.

Raiderdave wrote:

pookus wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

f me thats embarrasing .... A bloke I know who owns Fish n chip shop down the road from where I live told me recently they'll pop about 150,000 dollars in the bank as after tax profit for the last 12 months

the Crows have 50K members
the Broncos 25K

the Crows turnover of 45 mill ?
the Broncos 35 mill

but
the Broncos made a 4 million plus profit in their football dept ... F knows how much it would be with their gaming arm added

again showing beyond doubt
revenue means nothing

its how you balance it with costs
if you earn 45 million
& spend 44.878 Million .. yr on a knife edge .. you are committed to these costs , a few bad years & you turn into poort poopelaide very quickly

if you earn 35 million
& spend 31 Million

yr in a far .... far better possie

end of financial lesson

You obviously know nothing about business dave.Ill give you a lesson in business 101.It is easier to cut expenditure than it is to raise revenue.Fact. What about the raiders.Turnover 61 million profit 3 million.That is a thin margin my friend.Pokies revenue being smashed around the country.A billion less from last year.When the grubby money runs out dave where to then for a club with less members than Yarrawonga.

I know a lot more then you ... you can only cut costs so far before the entire business suffers .. you become committed to them over time to remain competitive
you can't have both
the entire culture in the VFL where spending to try n compete is concerned .... is out of control & these simpleton solutions of ... " oh we'll just cut expenditure " are the stuff of fairies & goblens .... just garbage in fact

as for the Raiders profit margins .... it was just over 5% , & for the Raiders to be able to make a profit at all with all the changes to gaming laws cutting revenue hugely .. is remarkable in itself ... well done to them ... wel done =D> =D>

& you want a thin margin
hows the Crows magin ?

45 Mill turnover .... & 120K in profits
thats
0.0025%

better then a loss .... but an insipid , quite ... unimpressive effort when put up against the result the Mighty Green Machine posted

No you dont you moron. How would you know what expenditure they have.How the fuck would you know what fat they have to trim.North melbourne have 2 doctors and 4 physios full time and theyre one of the smaller clubs.Plenty of room to move moron.Now what happens when costs rise which is unavoidable but you have limited revenue.You go broke dave.Your club knows this its why you operate on a second division budget.They cant spend it because they havent got it.This is why all the AFL boys are in utah and arizona and you blokes are training in mudgee.And a small profit for a non profit org is an outstanding result.Five percent at a pokie club is a wafer thin margin champ and its gonna get harder,the pokies are on the nose my friend.Then when that dries up and your footy club has to stand on its own 2 feet.It is goodbyeski Canwhogivesafukberra.

THE SYDNEY Swans have capped off their 2012 premiership success with an annual financial profit of $207,007.

Xman wrote:

THE SYDNEY Swans have capped off their 2012 premiership success with an annual financial profit of $207,007.

3.2 Million less then the Raiders ..............

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

THE SYDNEY Swans have capped off their 2012 premiership success with an annual financial profit of $207,007.

3.2 Million less then the Raiders ..............

For starters, BS

Secondly, saving money isn't the game Dave

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

THE SYDNEY Swans have capped off their 2012 premiership success with an annual financial profit of $207,007.

3.2 Million less then the Raiders ..............

For starters, BS

Secondly, saving money isn't the game Dave

losing it aint either d head ... just ask poort snortelaide
& the Swines are 3.2 Million closer to a loss .. then the Raiders were

F me .... the Storm probably did better then a 200K profit ....

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

3.2 Million less then the Raiders ..............

For starters, BS

Secondly, saving money isn't the game Dave

losing it aint either d head ... just ask poort snortelaide
& the Swines are 3.2 Million closer to a loss .. then the Raiders were

F me .... the Storm probably did better then a 200K profit ....

storm losing 13 mil a year?



The swans made a profit, more than can be said for 15 NRL teams