Talking Footy

eelofwest wrote:

Xman wrote:

Stewie wrote:

They are the AFL equalisation funds you moron and the majority of clubs receive them. Unfortunately in SA there is a media bias against Port, so the moronic journos will try and pull out anything they can to try and create a headline, so they remove the equalisation funds from Port's financial result to try and make it look worse than what it is. Go figure.

The article they made about the Crows financial result was a profit, but when you remove the fine they receive from their salary cap cheating they are in the red. The Crapvertiser doesn't bother mentioning that though, as they're pretty much not allowed to write anything anti-Adelaide Crows.

Don't fall for media bias Raiderdave. Like you say... "scanning.. scanning... News Ltd "

These fools just dont get it Stewie.

The AFL arrange their draw to enhance crowds and ratings so the greatest number of AFL fans get to see the best games. Teams like Collingwood, Essendon and Carlton, and the teams in form, are scheduled more blockbuster games which also means they earn more revenue. To compensate the less popular teams the AFL use an equalisation fund so teams like port arent disadvantaged for less revenue from being scheduled less blockbusters.

Before dopes like Raiderdave claim this is a rort the NRL do the same by scheduling the broncos almost every Friday night irrespective of their form. However their lowly teams like the Raiders are left with 1/3rd of the Broncos revenue with no compensation for their pathetic FTA TV schedule. Now thats a farce

But but buting again i see..................

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport/AFL ... 6544762334

POWER FAILURE

Friday, December 7, Alberton.

Port's nightmare season went from bad to worse when its operating deficit was revealed as being a whopping $6.3 million before grants.

An The Advertiser investigation found the $4.1 million trading deficit the club initially reported did not include the AFL grant of $1 million for the transition to Adelaide Oval.

Then there was the previously unreported $1.2 million which is understood to have come from the AFL as the club struggled to pay bills.


Lights out Boys.......

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

Link to back that up Xman?

The Storm do not lose $12 million a year, how the hell could they?

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

Link to back that up Xman?

The Storm do not lose $12 million a year, how the hell could they?

Xman wrote:

They have an owner that is forced to fund them to the tune of 12m a year just to keep them afloat. The only reason for this lunatic generosity is because their owner also had ownership over the league.

Storm wouldn't survive with news ltd despite 15yrs of success

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

They have an owner that is forced to fund them to the tune of 12m a year just to keep them afloat. The only reason for this lunatic generosity is because their owner also had ownership over the league.

Storm wouldn't survive with news ltd despite 15yrs of success

funds for their expenditure
& they also get their revenue in return

wow
what a bilthering F wit you are marcus

the Storm , now self sufficient
well done to them
well done indeed

=D> =D> =D>

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

They have an owner that is forced to fund them to the tune of 12m a year just to keep them afloat. The only reason for this lunatic generosity is because their owner also had ownership over the league.

Storm wouldn't survive with news ltd despite 15yrs of success

the Storm , now self sufficient

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

They have an owner that is forced to fund them to the tune of 12m a year just to keep them afloat. The only reason for this lunatic generosity is because their owner also had ownership over the league.

Storm wouldn't survive with news ltd despite 15yrs of success

funds for their expenditure
& they also get their revenue in return

wow
what a bilthering F wit you are marcus

the Storm , now self sufficient
well done to them
well done indeed

=D> =D> =D>

The annual reports show Melbourne turned a $1,648,600 profit last year, the only time it finished in the black during the contentious five-year period.

Valimanda, however, handed over $16, 836,945, exceeding its per-annum investment over the previous four years.

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

They have an owner that is forced to fund them to the tune of 12m a year just to keep them afloat. The only reason for this lunatic generosity is because their owner also had ownership over the league.

Storm wouldn't survive with news ltd despite 15yrs of success

funds for their expenditure
& they also get their revenue in return

wow
what a bilthering F wit you are marcus

the Storm , now self sufficient
well done to them
well done indeed

=D> =D> =D>

The annual reports show Melbourne turned a $1,648,600 profit last year, the only time it finished in the black during the contentious five-year period.

Valimanda, however, handed over $16, 836,945, exceeding its per-annum investment over the previous four years.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/news- ... 5858136152

2009, premiership year for the storm, they made a 1.6m profit but their owners funded them to the tune of 16.8m!

That's a massive return of -15.2m Dave! =D> =D> =D> =D>

self sufficient!!

Xman wrote:

Rubbish

It clearly says news ltd through valimanda kicked in 16.8m. That's a yearly bail out. They fall short with sustainable revenue like gate receipts, memberships, sponsorships, every year.

It clearly says news ltd through valimanda kicked in 16.8m

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Rubbish

It clearly says news ltd through valimanda kicked in 16.8m. That's a yearly bail out. They fall short with sustainable revenue like gate receipts, memberships, sponsorships, every year.

It clearly says news ltd through valimanda kicked in 16.8m

thats expenditure on their football operations you gimp

& they made a 1.6 Million profit
meaning their income was 18.4 Million for that year ......

wow
what a moron

Storm self sufficient
good job

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Rubbish

It clearly says news ltd through valimanda kicked in 16.8m. That's a yearly bail out. They fall short with sustainable revenue like gate receipts, memberships, sponsorships, every year.

It clearly says news ltd through valimanda kicked in 16.8m

thats expenditure on their football operations you gimp

& they made a 1.6 Million profit
meaning their income was 18.4 Million for that year ......

wow
what a moron

Storm self sufficient
good job

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Rubbish

It clearly says news ltd through valimanda kicked in 16.8m. That's a yearly bail out. They fall short with sustainable revenue like gate receipts, memberships, sponsorships, every year.

It clearly says news ltd through valimanda kicked in 16.8m

thats expenditure on their football operations you gimp

& they made a 1.6 Million profit
meaning their income was 18.4 Million for that year ......

wow
what a moron

Storm self sufficient
good job

the storms expenditure is funded by valimanda!! normal sustainable clubs use membership, gate receipt, sponsorship revenue! the storm are a basketcase despite being multiple premiership winners!