One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: WilliamPowell on September 26, 2011, 06:02:58 PM
-
Tigers welcome AFL support
richmondfc.com.au
4:47 PM Mon 26 Sep, 2011
Richmond CEO Brendon Gale today welcomed an AFL announcement outlining its club investment strategy for the next five years.
The AFL announced it will inject $7.95 million into the Tigers over the next five years (2012 - 2016) as part of its strategic investment to ensure strong, viable clubs and the health of the competition.
The $7.95 million investment comprises a $3.25 million component - an amount provided to each AFL club as a base figure - and a further $4.7 million discretionary investment to assist Richmond in meeting its strategic targets.
“This is a very significant contribution towards the future of the Richmond Football Club and we congratulate the AFL on the investment they have made in the long-term health of the competition,” Gale said.
“The Club will continue to drive its Fighting Tiger Fund and the successful achievement of FTF targets, combined with the AFL investment announced today, gives us a wonderful opportunity to not only compete, but succeed, on and off the field.
Full Article:
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/6301/newsid/124163/default.aspx
-
From the AFL Site:
Struggling clubs hit jackpot
By Luke Holmesby
5:30 PM Mon 26 Sep, 2011
PERENNIAL financial strugglers North Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs are the big winners in the AFL's latest club funding and equalisation strategy.
The Bulldogs and the Kangaroos have each been allocated $10.2 million under the AFL's $144 million club future fund strategy.
The future fund forms part of a $1.1 billion package delivered to the 18 AFL clubs in 2012-16 - an increase of $320 million on 2007-11 - and will see money invested in the specific needs of each club. These include facilities, debt reduction, football departments, membership, sponsorship, fan development and digital media.
Melbourne has received the next highest amount with $9.1 million, while St Kilda follows closely behind with $8.9 million.
The AFL's expansion clubs Gold Coast and Greater Western Sydney will receive just $3.25 million as they have been entirely funded by the league so far.
Geelong, Hawthorn and Adelaide will also receive the basic $3.25 million package.
AFL officials met with club representatives in Melbourne on Monday after an 18-month consultation process.
Chairman of the AFL Commission Mike Fitzpatrick said the strategy would ensure the league had 18 viable clubs in five years time.
"The clubs needed certainty for planning purposes and today we gave them that certainty by unveiling the package that will go to clubs over the next five years to ensure we also leave a legacy of having 18 sustainable and viable clubs at the end of the next five-year broadcasting period," Fitzpatrick said.
Under the new agreement, the AFL will approve all key appointments at clubs and will hold the ability to conduct a detailed review of procedures if required.
AFL CEO Andrew Demetriou described the process of consultation with the clubs for the distribution as the most comprehensive the AFL had ever undertaken.
And he warned that clubs having to pay coaches out after breaking their contracts would risk affecting their package.
"Clubs will have to think twice about that if they're receiving club funding out of the club future fund," Demetriou said.
"As long as they operate within their means it shouldn't be an issue. But they do know that if there is any material shift to what has been signed on as the plan there will be consequences."
The announcement just two weeks after the AFL Players' Association rejected a $1.144 billion offer from the AFL to be spread over five years.
The AFLPA instead pushed for a three-year deal.
Demetriou said the negotiations with the AFLPA would affect the settled distribution as the league would not offer any more than the $1.144 put on the table.
"There won't be any more money going to the players. We've said that."
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/124148/default.aspx
For full details of how much each club gets see: http://mm.afl.com.au/portals/0/2011/finals/club_funding_presentation_260911.pdf
Page 14 to be precise ;D
-
Total distribution by Club for 2012-2016 amounts in Millions
Bulldogs $10.25 mil
N0rt $10.25
Melb $9.15
Saints $8.95
Rich $7.95
Port $7.25
Lions $7.25
Swans $7.25
Ess $4.75
Freo $4.25
WCE $4.25
Carl $4.25
C’wood $4.25 :o (why :-\)
Adel $3.25
Hawth $3.25
Geelong $3.25
GC $3.25
GWS $3.25
All clubs get a minimum of $3.25mil
**Freo now added in I forget them ;D
-
Yes exactly why??
They will most likely win the prem this year... imo its already 60/40 if not more in their favour to win
They will have 85k + members next year
Their merchandise sales alone would overshadow what half the poor clubs are worth??
They will only travel interstate 3 times next year? ::)
anyway :whistle
-
Under the new agreement, the AFL will approve all key appointments at clubs and will hold the ability to conduct a detailed review of procedures if required.
AFL CEO Andrew Demetriou described the process of consultation with the clubs for the distribution as the most comprehensive the AFL had ever undertaken.
And he warned that clubs having to pay coaches out after breaking their contracts would risk affecting their package.
"Clubs will have to think twice about that if they're receiving club funding out of the club future fund," Demetriou said.
"As long as they operate within their means it shouldn't be an issue. But they do know that if there is any material shift to what has been signed on as the plan there will be consequences."
Be interesting to see if that comes to fruition when a club sacks a contracted coach.
-
Total distribution by Club for 2012-2016 amounts in Millions
Bulldogs $10.25 mil
N0rt $10.25
Melb $9.15
Saints $8.95
Rich $7.95
Port $7.25
Lions $7.25
Swans $7.25
Ess $4.75
WCE $4.25
Carl $4.25
C’wood $4.25 :o (why :-\)
Adel $3.25
Hawth $3.25
Geelong $3.25
GC $3.25
GWS $3.25
All clubs get a minimum of $3.25mil
Freo? do they just get 3.25mill?
-
Just bizare that collingwood and wce the clubs withe nost complete footy departments in the afl are getting 4.25 and 3.25mill respectively - bizarre and ridiculous waste of money
-
Freo? do they just get 3.25mill?
Oops forgot about them they are getting $4.25 mil
-
Just bizare that collingwood and wce the clubs withe nost complete footy departments in the afl are getting 4.25 and 3.25mill respectively - bizarre and ridiculous waste of money
All clubs get $3.25mil minimum tony_m
Not sure why C'wood is getting another $1mil but I haven't read the entire Media presentation, so hopefully it will make some sort of sense once I read through it
-
Stkilda :-[ ? I was hoping they would rot
-
Stkilda :-[ ? I was hoping they would rot
Yer how the eff do they get more than us? They've played 3 grand finals and sustained finals. We should be closer to the top. lol
-
Stkilda :-[ ? I was hoping they would rot
Yer how the eff do they get more than us? They've played 3 grand finals and sustained finals. We should be closer to the top. lol
I'm with ya.
-
We are big winners from that IMHO. I also think its good that every club got an allocation because then youd get people like McGuire coming out saying how all other clubs got money except his, now even they get some so they all have to shut up but all up - The Tigers have done really well with the payout.
-
we would have to throw that money on our debt right??? can wipe that all out!!!
-
We are big winners from that IMHO. I also think its good that every club got an allocation because then youd get people like McGuire coming out saying how all other clubs got money except his, now even they get some so they all have to shut up but all up - The Tigers have done really well with the payout.
Eddie, Jeff and the so-called "rich" clubs are already whinging ...
Rich clubs kick up stink over funding
Caroline Wilson
September 27, 2011
OUTGOING Hawthorn president Jeff Kennett and his Collingwood counterpart Eddie McGuire have strongly criticised the AFL for failing to prioritise its clubs in dividing the $1.15 billion in broadcast funds over the next five years.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/rich-clubs-kick-up-stink-over-funding-20110926-1ktlh.html#ixzz1Z55RXUGs
-
Dollars and sense
Jon Pierik
September 27, 2011
AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou has threatened to sack irresponsible club boards and executives if they squander distributions from its club funding and equalisation strategy.
... the distributions come with conditions and a warning. Demetriou said if clubs didn't meet their desired targets these plans could be discontinued. All initiatives were expected to be self-funding in three years and clubs would have to budget for surpluses.
''We also reserve the right to take more serious action for clubs to hold them accountable if they are not delivering on what has been agreed to,'' he said.
''The AFL already has under its licence agreement the ability to put in an administrator if a club is insolvent. So it's already within the rules. That's not what we want to do.
''We have today heard from the clubs; they are demanding the AFL hold clubs accountable.
''Before you get to that, we have got reviews and checks and balances but make no mistake, clubs want this and the ones that are receiving this understand they are receiving this additional funding with conditions.''
(http://images.theage.com.au/2011/09/26/2651386/art-svKEYELEMENTS-420x0.jpg)
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dollars-and-sense-20110926-1ktsz.html#ixzz1Z55w2p1U
-
we would have to throw that money on our debt right??? can wipe that all out!!!
yeah it will most likely go to debt torch because there are conditions attached (see below) to the funding but remember the $7.95mil is payable over 5 years, we don't get it in one hit
(http://images.theage.com.au/2011/09/26/2651386/art-svKEYELEMENTS-420x0.jpg)
-
So any chance this means we can stop selling off our home games now? Or is this just wishful thinking?
-
Seems like we only promised to do what we have already done. In other words .... nothing that will put the clubs funding at risk. Richmond are big winners here.
-
So any chance this means we can stop selling off our home games now? Or is this just wishful thinking?
Not likely infact I wouldnt be surprised to see us continue to sell home games over the next 4 or 5 years to be honest.
-
I reckon this will mean no more selling of home games.
So back to playing low ranking interstate games in front of north melbourne size crowds and barely making any money at Docklands after next year.
-
So any chance this means we can stop selling off our home games now? Or is this just wishful thinking?
In the short term because we have contracts to play games in Darwin in 2012 & Cairns 2012-2013 I would say No but certainly in the longer term the answer would be yes.
The Club has made it very clear that once the debt is gone and we are on par with other clubs re footy dept spending then we wont be doing it. Benny Gale has said that; made it very clear. Or did people conveniently forgotten that little point ;D
-
So any chance this means we can stop selling off our home games now? Or is this just wishful thinking?
In the short term because we have contracts to play games in Darwin in 2012 & Cairns 2012-2013 I would say No but certainly in the longer term the answer would be yes.
The Club has made it very clear that once the debt is gone and we are on par with other clubs re footy dept spending then we wont be doing it. Benny Gale has said that; made it very clear. Or did people conveniently forgotten that little point ;D
Money is sweet and when the time comes the decision will be - do we play Norf or GCS or GWS at Docklands and lose $150,000 on the match or do we sell it and get $500,000 - thats a $650,000 swing right there to revenues. We all want games in Melbourne but I cant see us taking hits of $650,000 a game to be honest.
-
Money is sweet and when the time comes the decision will be - do we play Norf or GCS or GWS at Docklands and lose $150,000 on the match or do we sell it and get $500,000 - thats a $650,000 swing right there to revenues. We all want games in Melbourne but I cant see us taking hits of $650,000 a game to be honest.
If we are winning on regular basis then we wont lose money on games Etihad - if 30k is the break even I reckon we'd get that easily
I've said it many times before we start winning consistently and start making finals our draw will turn dramatically. Clubs will want to play us and with that will come the $$$ by other means, eg increased sponsorship, better TV exposure
Build it and they WILL come ;D
-
Having just read through the media release/presentation it appear the extra $4.7mil we get (Total $7.95 less std $3.25) is going to be paid between 2012-2014 (pg 8)
The presentation actually makes for an interesting read
AFL has set $28mil as the minimum amount that clubs should be spending in Footy depts. The define footy dept spend (Footy Resources) as: Coaching, Development, Conditioning & List Management
We are one of 8 clubs spending less than that. Lowest is Port at $21mil followed by the Dogs & GC at $23mil
-
All praise Benny Gale.
:bow
Been a godsend to our club.
Gary March stayed out of the limelight too this year.
Great stuff Richmond.
-
All praise Benny Gale.
:bow
Sorry but seriously what's Benny got to do with how much the AFL is throwing our way :-\
He had nothing to do with how much we are getting out of this package.
The extra amounts clubs are receiving outside the std $3.25mil has been determined by the AFL based on actual data relating to footy spend by club, debt levels by club and the need to improve facilities not the clubs
Agree benny's done a good job but lets not get carried away and think he got us this handout - he didn't ;D
BTW anyone want to guess which club (based on the data in the press release) has the highest debt? ;D
-
All praise Benny Gale.
:bow
Sorry but seriously what's Benny got to do with how much the AFL is throwing our way :-\
He had nothing to do with how much we are getting out of this package.
The extra amounts clubs are receiving outside the std $3.25mil has been determined by the AFL based on actual data relating to footy spend by club, debt levels by club and the need to improve facilities not the clubs
Agree benny's done a good job but lets not get carried away and think he got us this handout - he didn't ;D
BTW anyone want to guess which club (based on the data in the press release) has the highest debt? ;D
Collingwood?
-
The Scums debt blew out to $18 mil because of some failed business dealings if I remember correctly. Didn't the pay off something like 12 mil of that in one year?
-
Collingwood?
Nah they are debt free ;D
-
Money is sweet and when the time comes the decision will be - do we play Norf or GCS or GWS at Docklands and lose $150,000 on the match or do we sell it and get $500,000 - thats a $650,000 swing right there to revenues. We all want games in Melbourne but I cant see us taking hits of $650,000 a game to be honest.
If we are winning on regular basis then we wont lose money on games Etihad - if 30k is the break even I reckon we'd get that easily
I've said it many times before we start winning consistently and start making finals our draw will turn dramatically. Clubs will want to play us and with that will come the $$$ by other means, eg increased sponsorship, better TV exposure
Build it and they WILL come ;D
If we get our goal of 75,000 members we won't be playing home games at Etihad. Have the Pies played a home game there this year?
-
What are peoples thoughts on this reducing out 'Fighting Tiger Fund' goal to half and pumping all the money into the oval/staffing?
-
What are peoples thoughts on this reducing out 'Fighting Tiger Fund' goal to half and pumping all the money into the oval/staffing?
FTF will stay. 8mill from this plus 6mill from FTF plus 2.5-3mill from selling games plus money saved on interest = good times
-
If we get our goal of 75,000 members we won't be playing home games at Etihad. Have the Pies played a home game there this year?
Yes they did
2 homes games at Etihad -v- Port (rd 1) & adel (rd 9)
-
Here's the full report of the AFL's Club funding & equalisation strategy 2012‐16
http://mm.afl.com.au/portals/0/2011/finals/club_funding_presentation_260911.pdf (http://mm.afl.com.au/portals/0/2011/finals/club_funding_presentation_260911.pdf)
Page 6
A legacy of the Club Future Fund will be to complete the footprint of elite training & administration bases for clubs
Clubs that benefited from major facilities grants over 2007‐11 included: WB, NM, Melb, StK, RFC, Adel, Port, Geel & Carl
Recommendation: Focus distributions to larger Clubs into legacy facility projects
NOTE: smaller facility programs required for Richmond (Punt Road Oval);
Page 8
A legacy of the Club Future Fund will be to accelerate debt reduction for clubs constrained by debt
Recommendation
• Debt reduction is an important legacy for clubs and the industry
• Targeting minimum rate of debt reduction per annum – encourage clubs to find additional contributions
• AFL pay direct to the bank
• Corresponding reductions in AFL $5m guarantee limit
• Debt reduction to be a priority reinvestment area if club exceeds revenue forecasts
• Commitment for 2012‐14 only
In the graph for 2011, we are listed as just below the profitability line and $4m in debt (within the $5m AFL guarantee). North, Brisbane, Carlton and Dogs ($10m debt?) are carrying more debt that us. Carlton, Melbourne, North, St Kilda, Brisbane and Port are less profitable than us.
Page 9
The Club Future Fund will raise the minimum level of capability and systems at most resource constrained clubs
Gap in Football Resources (Coaching, Development, Conditioning & List Management)
Minimum required is 28 people
Richmond has 25
Gap in Non Football Resources (Membership, Corporate, Digital, Fan Dev & Brand, Finance/HR/IT)
Minimum required is 40 people
Richmond has 31
Recommendation: Invest in the specific roles and systems each club needs to bridge gap to minimum required capability. Seed fund roles for 2012‐14, with clear KPI’s to test effectiveness. Ambition for roles to be self sustainable by 2014, or else discontinue
Page 10
Legacy of Club Future Fund will be to help clubs penetrate key growth corridors and grow digital businesses
Club & Industry Growth Opportunities
1. Sales resources to fill spare stadia capacity: Richmond - MCG
2. Secondary markets: Richmond - Cairns
3. Connect to population growth corridors: Richmond - North suburbs
Page 11
Club Future Fund will be distributed to the priority needs for each Club
Richmond gains funding for:
* Facilities
* Revenue constraints / stadia
* Football capability
* Non football capability & growth
* Debt reduction
Page 13
Club Future Fund support for most constrained clubs skewed to debt reduction, commercial growth and stadia revenue gap
Committed Funding
Equal (2012-16) Disequal (2012-14) Total (2012-16)
Richmond $3.25m $4.7m $8.0m
Page 15
Key recommendation of club working group was to ensure funding and budgets are managed more tightly
Model applied to Clubs receiving significant disequal funding
Funding of new resources linked to a KPI model
• KPIs agreed for each new resource
• Financial (revenue)
• Non‐financial (web traffic, registered fans etc)
• AFL to approve key appointments
• If resources do not meet KPIs over 2012‐13 then discontinued or alternative strategy pursued
• Objective for roles to be self funding/absorbed by clubs post
• Note: a schedule of Club Future Fund distributions for facilities to be agreed with clubs based on project milestones
Stricter Budget Framework
• Agreed 3 year strategic plans and forecasts
• AFL to approve annual budgets
– Expenditure commitments within achievable revenue forecasts
– Must budget for surpluses
• If revenue achieved above forecast, then agreed reinvestment priorities
• Monthly finance meetings with AFL (tbc)
• Funding at risk 2014
Shared objective that clubs will be less reliant on ‘disequal’ funding for survival in 2015 and 2016
http://mm.afl.com.au/portals/0/2011/finals/club_funding_presentation_260911.pdf
-
If we get our goal of 75,000 members we won't be playing home games at Etihad. Have the Pies played a home game there this year?
Yes they did
2 homes games at Etihad -v- Port (rd 1) & adel (rd 9)
Hmmm. Guess we have to crack 100,000 ;D
I'm sure the Pies didn't lose money there. Just need to fill the place out.
-
If we get our goal of 75,000 members we won't be playing home games at Etihad. Have the Pies played a home game there this year?
Yes they did
2 homes games at Etihad -v- Port (rd 1) & adel (rd 9)
Hmmm. Guess we have to crack 100,000 ;D
I'm sure the Pies didn't lose money there. Just need to fill the place out.
Remember though the Pies got a crowds of around 40k + so they wouldn't have lost money
-
I also agree that we did do the best out of the clubs. We have the greatest potential and strategic plan moving forward from the current financial strugglers. As WP has already mentioned, when we begin to perform on field (unlike every other club this is something we haven't come close to for a few decades) the percentage financial improvement will be significant.
This grant could not have come at a better time for us really. We are at the early stages of a financial resurrection while our debt and spending initially still appears worthy of significant assistance. If the AFL had of been looking at our books in a few years time once our predicted improvement occurs, we would have received far less.
So out of all the clubs, this money will give us the shot in the arm to lift us up to the top far more rapidly than any other club. :gotigers
Now we just need some onfield success but that won't be hard will it....will it :pray
-
If we get our goal of 75,000 members we won't be playing home games at Etihad. Have the Pies played a home game there this year?
Yes they did
2 homes games at Etihad -v- Port (rd 1) & adel (rd 9)
Hmmm. Guess we have to crack 100,000 ;D
I'm sure the Pies didn't lose money there. Just need to fill the place out.
Remember though the Pies got a crowds of around 40k + so they wouldn't have lost money
That's what i mean when i said all we have to do is fill the place out ;D
75,000 members should go close to filling a 50,000 stadium provided our members don't be too precious about the stadium we play at. Look at the PA game (even though it was Cuz's last game our season was shot) we got about 37,000. It's certainly do-able. Until then though we may as well keep selling them and making half a million.