Talking Footy

Football Federation Australia has money in the bank for the first time, thanks to the sale of the Western Sydney Wanderers, its latest financial accounts show.

The FFA’s accounts for the 2013-14 financial year, recently lodged with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, showed the organisation made a net profit of $7.3 million from revenue of $136 million.

FFA chief operating officer John Kelly told The Australian Financial Review the organisation made an operating profit of about $500,000 during the year and that revenue and the surplus included one-off items, such as its share of the Wanderers sale, the 2014 World Cup and $10 million income spent to host the 2015 Asian Cup in January.
Equity unprecedented

“The result means there’s equity in the game for the first time and hopefully it will help in growing the game further in Australia,” Kelly said.

The FFA’s accounts revealed the Wanderers were sold for exactly $10 million on June 30 to a consortium led by BRW Rich List member Paul Lederer .

It is understood the nine remaining A-League clubs each received about $300,000 from the FFA from the Wanderers deal, with the FFA keeping the rest. The accounts showed the FFA now has net assets of about $7.4 million.

The $136 million income included about $10 million in revenue from Australia competing in the 2014 World Cup in Brazil, but most of the money was spent on player wages and expenses such as travel and accommodation.

Revenue is likely to fall in the current financial year, with FFA receiving little of the money spent on hosting the Asian Cup.

The organisation is also still ­searching for a major sponsor for the national Socceroos side, although FFA executives are said to be in discussions with several interested companies.

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

Haha so they actually lost a heap of money and only made up for it by selling a club or two?

What happens when there are no more clubs to sell?

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

Haha so they actually lost a heap of money and only made up for it by selling a club or two?

What happens when there are no more clubs to sell?

sydneyfc wrote:

http://www.afr.com/p/lifestyle/sport/fo ... OMDcoWAQYM

Football Federation Australia has money in the bank for the first time, thanks to the sale of the Western Sydney Wanderers, its latest financial accounts show.

The FFA’s accounts for the 2013-14 financial year, recently lodged with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, showed the organisation made a net profit of $7.3 million from revenue of $136 million.

FFA chief operating officer John Kelly told The Australian Financial Review the organisation made an operating profit of about $500,000 during the year and that revenue and the surplus included one-off items, such as its share of the Wanderers sale, the 2014 World Cup and $10 million income spent to host the 2015 Asian Cup in January.
Equity unprecedented

“The result means there’s equity in the game for the first time and hopefully it will help in growing the game further in Australia,” Kelly said.

The FFA’s accounts revealed the Wanderers were sold for exactly $10 million on June 30 to a consortium led by BRW Rich List member Paul Lederer .

It is understood the nine remaining A-League clubs each received about $300,000 from the FFA from the Wanderers deal, with the FFA keeping the rest. The accounts showed the FFA now has net assets of about $7.4 million.

The $136 million income included about $10 million in revenue from Australia competing in the 2014 World Cup in Brazil, but most of the money was spent on player wages and expenses such as travel and accommodation.

Revenue is likely to fall in the current financial year, with FFA receiving little of the money spent on hosting the Asian Cup.

The organisation is also still ­searching for a major sponsor for the national Socceroos side, although FFA executives are said to be in discussions with several interested companies.

=D>

The_Wookie wrote:

In 2012, it made a $1.45 million profit, but only after $7 million worth of asset sales. Its annual report showed net liabilities and members deficit of $597,000. (http://www.afr.com/p/lifestyle/sport/ff ... jUMYR89HuO)

The Aleagues broadcast revenue is 40 million per year. Interestingly enough, this would put its non broadcast revenue at 96 million for 2014 - higher than the NRLs 90 million for non broadcast revenue in 2013 at least (which included origin and finals income), and which for mine, will make that little sideshow a touch interesting when the NRL releases its financial data, although with increased ticket prices and sellouts this year, origin revenue will be much higher than last year.

leagueiscrap wrote:

The_Wookie wrote:

In 2012, it made a $1.45 million profit, but only after $7 million worth of asset sales. Its annual report showed net liabilities and members deficit of $597,000. (http://www.afr.com/p/lifestyle/sport/ff ... jUMYR89HuO)

The Aleagues broadcast revenue is 40 million per year. Interestingly enough, this would put its non broadcast revenue at 96 million for 2014 - higher than the NRLs 90 million for non broadcast revenue in 2013 at least (which included origin pand finals income), and which for mine, will make that little sideshow a touch interesting when the NRL releases its financial data, although with increased ticket prices and sellouts this year, origin revenue will be much higher than last year.

ta
i was going to make reference to the NRL low non broadcast revenue , but wasn't sure with the A league revenue what is consisted of.

the NRL non broadcast revenue is the lowest of the 4 main football codes in the country
AFL 267 million
Union 104 million
Soccer 96 million
League 90 million which depending on what article you read SOO makes 10 to 20 million included in to that revenue.

Raiderdave wrote:

leagueiscrap wrote:

The_Wookie wrote:

In 2012, it made a $1.45 million profit, but only after $7 million worth of asset sales. Its annual report showed net liabilities and members deficit of $597,000. (http://www.afr.com/p/lifestyle/sport/ff ... jUMYR89HuO)

The Aleagues broadcast revenue is 40 million per year. Interestingly enough, this would put its non broadcast revenue at 96 million for 2014 - higher than the NRLs 90 million for non broadcast revenue in 2013 at least (which included origin pand finals income), and which for mine, will make that little sideshow a touch interesting when the NRL releases its financial data, although with increased ticket prices and sellouts this year, origin revenue will be much higher than last year.

ta
i was going to make reference to the NRL low non broadcast revenue , but wasn't sure with the A league revenue what is consisted of.

the NRL non broadcast revenue is the lowest of the 4 main football codes in the country
AFL 267 million
Union 104 million
Soccer 96 million
League 90 million which depending on what article you read SOO makes 10 to 20 million included in to that revenue.

:_<>

Lies & bullshit
From the first word to the last


But
Wot would one expect from the dumbest person on the net

Too stupid to be the village idiot
:_<>

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

lol yeah like when all the papers use AFL figures from 2013 to prove how big it is yet every single newspaper used the NRL's old figures from the last contract that had the game half owned by News Ltd to prove how small RL is.

Well I couldn't give a rats really because I follow RL and I know what is going on, BS always gets caught out.

The_Wookie wrote:

Parra, you know i compare with the latest annual reports available. I said that I was waiting for the NRL report to get final figures.

As for the rest

NRL revenue from non broadcast sources was $92.96 million. Its there in black and white in 2013. According to the Annual Report those figures broke down as:

Sponsorship - $25.7 million
Gate Reciepts - $36.4 million
- The Grand Final - $10.0 million
- The Finals Series - $4.8 million
- State of Origin - $19.4 million
- All Stars - $1.3 million
LIcensing - $4.5 million
Wagering - $4.4 million
Government incentives - $8.1 million
Digital - $5.7 million
Interest - $2.8 million

AFLcrap1 wrote:

Why would you take out a figure that is derived from one of our marquee games?

Lol what a fruit loop.