Talking Footy

eelofwest wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Stewie wrote:

Cronulla

Move them to Adelaide

the Sharks put a 10 million dollar debt to rest last week
paid it off completely in one foul swoop to the St George Bank

they're now .. debt free

can pork swordelaide say the same ?

EXCLUSIVE: The future of the Cronulla Sharks has been secured by final NSW government approval for a $300 million Leagues club development.

The decision, to be revealed later today, allows the Sharks to immediately pay off a debt of more than $10 million to St George Bank.

Under the proposal approved by government’s planning assessment commission, a consortium of building developers will pay off the loan in return for sales from home units that will be built on the site.

The development will include a shopping centre, a residential area and a refurbishment of Shark Park.

“This secures our long term future in the NRL,” said one senior Sharks official.

“It is the biggest financial injection in the club’s history.

“We can now compete with the strongest clubs.”

The project will create 1100 jobs over an eight-year period

The club's chairman Damian Irvine said project managers were keen to re-employ hundreds of Caltex Refinery workers from the area who recently lost their jobs.

close em down ..... they're a joke

Cronulla's future is secure with there 300million development passing last month. More then i can say for Port.......

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/c ... 6460031097

Xman wrote:

eelofwest wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

the Sharks put a 10 million dollar debt to rest last week
paid it off completely in one foul swoop to the St George Bank

they're now .. debt free

can pork swordelaide say the same ?





close em down ..... they're a joke

Cronulla's future is secure with there 300million development passing last month. More then i can say for Port.......

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/c ... 6460031097

That should make a few thousand people in Sydney very happy

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

So 15 of 16 NRL clubs lose money year after year, yet the sharks will mysteriously make money next year

a few hundred K here & there
hardly anything ... a couple of million in total as a comp

9 out of 18 VFL clubs lose money
11 if you included the 2 latest basketcases .... & these losses combined in the tens of millions
hell .. the wions & pork swordelaide .. 5 million between them

& in 2013
it will be ZERO ... out of 16 NRL clubs losing money ... with an extra 3 million straight to every clubs bottom lines ... easily covering their tiny losses will the VFL be able to claim the same ...... ?

ppphhtttttt

9 clubs out of 17 last year made a loss. Most were minor, especially when compared to the yearly budget. This year that may be 10 out of 18 with the vast majority being minor losses. However the clubs making a profit are by a number of millions.

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

a few hundred K here & there
hardly anything ... a couple of million in total as a comp

9 out of 18 VFL clubs lose money
11 if you included the 2 latest basketcases .... & these losses combined in the tens of millions
hell .. the wions & pork swordelaide .. 5 million between them

& in 2013
it will be ZERO ... out of 16 NRL clubs losing money ... with an extra 3 million straight to every clubs bottom lines ... easily covering their tiny losses will the VFL be able to claim the same ...... ?

ppphhtttttt

9 clubs out of 17 last year made a loss. Most were minor, especially when compared to the yearly budget. This year that may be 10 out of 18 with the vast majority being minor losses. However the clubs making a profit are by a number of millions.

minor ...

2 of the 9 ... Pork & Wions .. had 6 million in losses between them
the other 7 , probably another 6 Mill

as was reported , VFL clubs held 41 Million in debts coming into this year
minor against the budget is .... not a consideration ,because as their budgets grow ... so do their debts it appears
even with extra handouts from govt & VFL ... VFL clubs continue further into the red

NRL clubs would barely have had 3 Million all up & all of them had their losses covered by their leagues clubs.
every club will be 3 million PA better off next year , straight off the bat.
this would cover every clubs losses in their football dept ..... easily

16 out of 16 NRL clubs...... in the black.. in 2013





minor againt the year

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

9 clubs out of 17 last year made a loss. Most were minor, especially when compared to the yearly budget. This year that may be 10 out of 18 with the vast majority being minor losses. However the clubs making a profit are by a number of millions.

minor ...

2 of the 9 ... Pork & Wions .. had 6 million in losses between them
the other 7 , probably another 6 Mill

as was reported , VFL clubs held 41 Million in debts coming into this year
minor against the budget is .... not a consideration ,because as their budgets grow ... so do their debts it appears
even with extra handouts from govt & VFL ... VFL clubs continue further into the red

NRL clubs would barely have had 3 Million all up & all of them had their losses covered by their leagues clubs.
every club will be 3 million PA better off next year , straight off the bat.
this would cover every clubs losses in their football dept ..... easily

16 out of 16 NRL clubs...... in the black.. in 2013





minor againt the year

The majority of said debt was for rich clubs as part of their redevelopment etc. Debt is fine if the clubs can pay it off, and all rich clubs can.

?

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

minor ...

2 of the 9 ... Pork & Wions .. had 6 million in losses between them
the other 7 , probably another 6 Mill

as was reported , VFL clubs held 41 Million in debts coming into this year
minor against the budget is .... not a consideration ,because as their budgets grow ... so do their debts it appears
even with extra handouts from govt & VFL ... VFL clubs continue further into the red

NRL clubs would barely have had 3 Million all up & all of them had their losses covered by their leagues clubs.
every club will be 3 million PA better off next year , straight off the bat.
this would cover every clubs losses in their football dept ..... easily

16 out of 16 NRL clubs...... in the black.. in 2013





minor againt the year

The majority of said debt was for rich clubs as part of their redevelopment etc. Debt is fine if the clubs can pay it off, and all rich clubs can.

?

& the poor ones that can't ?
FMD ....... someone buy this bloke a clue ....

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

The majority of said debt was for rich clubs as part of their redevelopment etc. Debt is fine if the clubs can pay it off, and all rich clubs can.

?

& the poor ones that can't ?
FMD ....... someone buy this bloke a clue ....

At the moment some of the poor one's can too. Melbourne for example just wiped their debt out with one of the smallest AFL yearly budgets of all

Its all about spending what you earn. Those AFL teams hamstrung by greedy owners like the Power and Crows will soon be released.

Other clubs like the Lions need to work on reducing their costs and will be forced to sooner or later. If Melbourne, and the Kangaroos can do it with smaller budgets then the lions should definately be able to make ends meet.

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

& the poor ones that can't ?
FMD ....... someone buy this bloke a clue ....

At the moment some of the poor one's can too. Melbourne for example just wiped their debt out with one of the smallest AFL yearly budgets of all

Its all about spending what you earn. Those AFL teams hamstrung by greedy owners like the Power and Crows will soon be released.

Other clubs like the Lions need to work on reducing their costs and will be forced to sooner or later. If Melbourne, and the Kangaroos can do it with smaller budgets then the lions should definately be able to make ends meet.

yes the demons .... aren't they going well
they sacrificed being competitive by reducing their spending ... to wipe off their debt
but have to continue to try & compete with a reduced budget or these same debt problems will return. ...
their poor on field form indicates .... they can't compete & be debt free at the same time

meaning .. at the bottom of the ladder is where they'll stay if they want to remain solvent ... but the fiscal pressures remain
because eventually the lack of results will mean even the reduced budget may not keep them out of the red as revenue drops further

its a vicious circle
the uneveness of the VFL is starting to be its downfall
as the Swines chairmen said .... it is a massive .. huge problem that the VFL is not addressing sufficiently ... if in fact its looking at it at all

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

& the poor ones that can't ?
FMD ....... someone buy this bloke a clue ....

At the moment some of the poor one's can too. Melbourne for example just wiped their debt out with one of the smallest AFL yearly budgets of all

Its all about spending what you earn. Those AFL teams hamstrung by greedy owners like the Power and Crows will soon be released.

Other clubs like the Lions need to work on reducing their costs and will be forced to sooner or later. If Melbourne, and the Kangaroos can do it with smaller budgets then the lions should definately be able to make ends meet.

yes the demons .... aren't they going well
they sacrificed being competitive by reducing their spending ... to wipe off their debt
but have to continue to try & compete with a reduced budget or these same debt problems will return. ...
their poor on field form indicates .... they can't compete & be debt free at the same time

meaning .. at the bottom of the ladder is where they'll stay if they want to remain solvent ... but the fiscal pressures remain
because eventually the lack of results will mean even the reduced budget may not keep them out of the red as revenue drops further

its a vicious circle
the uneveness of the VFL is starting to be its downfall
as the Swines chairmen said .... it is a massive .. huge problem that the VFL is not addressing sufficiently ... if in fact its looking at it at all