Tigers to Get $7.95mil Under New AFL Funding Scheme

[one-eyed]

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.''



Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dollars-and-sense-20110926-1ktsz.html#ixzz1Z55w2p1U

[WilliamPowell]

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

[RollsRoyce]

So any chance this means we can stop selling off our home games now? Or is this just wishful thinking?

[10 FLAGS]

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.

[10 FLAGS]

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.

[Penelope]

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.

[WilliamPowell]

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 

[10 FLAGS]

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 

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.

[WilliamPowell]

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 

[WilliamPowell]

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

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

[smasha]

All praise Benny Gale.
 
Been a godsend to our club.

Gary March stayed out of the limelight too this year.

Great stuff Richmond.

[WilliamPowell]

All praise Benny Gale.
 

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   

BTW anyone want to guess which club (based on the data in the press release) has the highest debt? 

[JVT]

All praise Benny Gale.
 

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   

BTW anyone want to guess which club (based on the data in the press release) has the highest debt? 

Collingwood?

[Oiafi]

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?

[WilliamPowell]

Collingwood?

Nah they are debt free