Author Topic: Pies head footy's rich list  (Read 3563 times)

froars

  • Guest
Pies head footy's rich list
« on: March 11, 2005, 07:51:21 AM »
COLLINGWOOD, a financial basket case six years ago, has been acclaimed as the most valuable football club in Australia.
 Cup teams and facts

In an in-depth examination of the economic health of the nation's major football codes, national business magazine BRW put the Magpies' value at $42 million.

The Magpies were assessed to be worth $7 million more than the second-placed duo of Brisbane Lions and West Coast and $15 million more valuable than Essendon.

Hawthorn, whose financial state was under question during its off-season board battle, is the No. 2 Victorian club on the list. It comes in at fourth at $33 million, four places above Essendon, which has long been regarded as one of the economic powerhouses of the competition.

The stunning decline of Carlton, off and on the field, is highlighted by its lowly 14th placing. The Blues are valued at $21 million, exactly half of the Magpies.

Another ex-member of the Victorian "big-four", Richmond is even lower, at $19 million, and in last place on the BRW ladder.

Collingwood president Eddie McGuire said yesterday while the club's financial health was a source of pride and satisfaction, there were no illusions about the major objective.

"In the end, premierships are what it is all about," he said.

When McGuire took over the Collingwood presidency in October 1998, he said the club was so bereft of money and business acumen that he feared it could go the way of Fitzroy by 2010.

However, through the collective skills of the new breed of administrators McGuire assembled at the club, as well as his own entrepreneurial flair, the Magpies have managed not only to avoid this doomsday prospect, but to prosper so much that they have become a model of fiscal well-being.

"What we've tried to do is make Collingwood the club we, in our hearts, knew it should always have been," McGuire said.

"We believe if you do enough things right for long enough, hopefully, you'll get the ultimate reward," McGuire said.

"It's an interesting question whether you'd give up half your value for a flag. I reckon if we did win, we'd double our value in two minutes so it would be a good investment."

Collingwood has posted accumulated profits of about $6 million in the past three years and, with a new home base near the city and new facilities at the revamped MCG, it appears poised to continue its financial resurrection.

However, McGuire warned that a successful 2005 was critical, especially after last year's slump to 13th.

"On the financial side, my ambition has always been to make a profit regardless of where we are on the ladder," he said. "These days we do make multi-million dollar profits, but the equation is the same. If we have a good season we'll kill them (financially). If we have another bad season it will turn pear-shaped."

Essendon chief executive, Peter Jackson, said yesterday he could not treat seriously a valuation that put his club $15 million below Collingwood, and $6 million behind Hawthorn.

"We have net assets up around the $14 million mark, which, I would say, is way ahead of any club in the competition. We have also made a profit in every year for the past nine. I don't think any other Victorian club has done that," he said. "It sounds to me they have used a pretty narrow perspective in their attempt at valuation. And it's pretty ridiculous, in one sense, when you are operating in an equalised environment with the AFL controlling every thing you do."

NRL clubs were valued way below AFL clubs. The top club was Brisbane Broncos, at $14 million, while the lowest was Manly-Warringah at $5 million.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,12508914%255E20322,00.html

froars

  • Guest
Re: Pies head footy's rich list
« Reply #1 on: March 11, 2005, 07:55:38 AM »
FFS,  how in the hell did Hawthorn come in at number two Victorian club?

Quote
Another ex-member of the Victorian "big-four", Richmond is even lower, at $19 million, and in last place on the BRW ladder.

I'm gobsmacked  :banghead

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 38963
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Pies head footy's rich list
« Reply #2 on: March 11, 2005, 10:17:53 AM »
Essendon chief executive, Peter Jackson, said yesterday he could not treat seriously a valuation that put his club $15 million below Collingwood, and $6 million behind Hawthorn.

"We have net assets up around the $14 million mark, which, I would say, is way ahead of any club in the competition. We have also made a profit in every year for the past nine. I don't think any other Victorian club has done that," he said. "It sounds to me they have used a pretty narrow perspective in their attempt at valuation. And it's pretty ridiculous, in one sense, when you are operating in an equalised environment with the AFL controlling every thing you do."


It is very rare that I'd take the Bombers side in anything but Jackson is right here. There is no way that the Bombers could be valued at $15 mil below the Pies as for Hawthorn being second - that's a joke right  :o - unless of course the valuation process had included their deal in the Waverley Park re-development. There seems to be a lot of "ifs", "buts" and "maybes" here  :-\

Another ex-member of the Victorian "big-four", Richmond is even lower, at $19 million, and in last place on the BRW ladder.

huh? :banghead Does this mean we are the lowest of the AFL CLubs or the AFL clubs on the BRW list? Where's the value of the Dogs, Kanga and Demons etc :help

If you are going to do a story like this I would suggest you list the valuation of all teams

Which brings me to the NRL team valuations - is that serious ??? I find those figures defy logic. Most NRL teams are controlled by the respective "Leagues Clubs" (pokie venues) some of the Leagues Club have annual tunrovers of over $30 million so how can you value an NRL team at $5 million? I am confused

Really you would want to see the whole BRW report. This story reeks of "selective journalism".... what a surprise :help :banghead
« Last Edit: March 11, 2005, 10:21:12 AM by WilliamPowell »
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

froars

  • Guest
Re: Pies head footy's rich list
« Reply #3 on: March 11, 2005, 10:59:23 AM »
Quote
In an in-depth examination of the economic health of the nation's major football codes, national business magazine BRW put the Magpies' value at $42 million.

Wonder how in-depth it was.  To me, the credibility of BRW is in question with such fanciful results.  Is BRW a Sydney rag anyone know?  Might explain it.

Bulluss

  • Guest
Re: Pies head footy's rich list
« Reply #4 on: March 11, 2005, 11:47:16 AM »
I would think that it is fairly accurate and it just goes to show how poo our club as a whole has been over the last 10 years and probably more.

I hate Collingwood's guts but i take my hat off to Eddie and his team, they have had the balls to develop their club and good on them. Lets just hope that our current crop of off field people can follow in the same direction.

Go Tigers.

Offline Tiger Spirit

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Pies head footy's rich list
« Reply #5 on: March 11, 2005, 12:48:03 PM »
Sadly, you're pretty much spot on TheBull.  Here's the full rankings and how they were arrived at.

Source: BRW (March 10-16, 2005 issue)

For AFL and NRL clubs, BRW used similar valuation methodology to that used on overseas sporting clubs, including European soccer and US football and baseball clubs.

Three methods were used:

1) valuation based on revenue;
2) using a conventional price/earnings multiple; and
3) a combination of both.

BRW used revenue as the main basis for valuation and took into account membership, sponsorship and brand value.

Collingwood
Value: $42m
2004 Revenue: $35.5m

Brisbane Lions
Value: $35m
2004 Revenue: $30.2m

West Coast
Value: $35m
2004 Revenue: $30m*

Hawthorn
Value: $33m
2004 Revenue: $28m

Port Adelaide
Value: $28m
2004 Revenue: $23.6m

Swans
Value: $28m
2004 Revenue: $23.8m

Fremantle
Value: $28m
2004 Revenue: $23.8m

Essendon
Value: $27m
2004 Revenue: $22.6m

Geelong
Value: $26m
2004 Revenue: $22.5m

Melbourne
Value: $26m
2004 Revenue: $22.9m**

Adelaide
Value: $25m
2004 Revenue: $21.2m

St Kilda
Value: $24m
2004 Revenue: $20.6m

Kangaroos**
Value: $23m
2004 Revenue: $19.5m

Carlton
Value: $21m*
2004 Revenue: $18m*

Western Bulldogs
Value: $19.1m
2004 Revenue: $22m

Richmond
Value: $19m
2004 Revenue: $16m

*Estimate
**Includes distribution from AFL’s competitive balance fund
Everything that is done in this world is done by hope.  --Martin Luther

The time you enjoy wasting isn’t wasted time.

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 38963
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Pies head footy's rich list
« Reply #6 on: March 11, 2005, 01:31:21 PM »
1) valuation based on revenue;

Richmond
Value: $19m
2004 Revenue: $16m


I dispute the 2004 revenue figure.

I must say I saw this $16 mil quoted in an Age story (not by Caro btw) and I was going to complain about it then. Seeing BRW is owned by Fairfax like the Age it makes sense they would use the same figure. So how did they get to the $16 mil? Easy they have take only 2 components of our revenue and have excluded gaming revenue.

I have compared this to the figure BRW have used as Total revenue for the Bombers (their financials are available from their web-site) and the Bombers gaming revenue is included. Ditto for the Hawks!

I have a copy of the RFC Full Finacials with me and the Clubs total revenue for 2004 was

$22.3 million

So using the BRW criteria we have higher revenue than the following Clubs:

Adelaide, St Kilda, Kangaroos, Carlton, Western Bulldogs. I would include Melbourne as well because they received a million form the AFL.

I would argue strongly that we should therefore be valued at least $25-26 million

I have no problem with their method of valuation as long as they apply the same principles for all clubs - they clearly haven't >:(
« Last Edit: March 11, 2005, 01:42:43 PM by WilliamPowell »
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 57951
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: Pies head footy's rich list
« Reply #7 on: March 11, 2005, 04:25:07 PM »
Let's not let facts get in the way of a good story  ::). As WP pointed out our revenue for 2004 was:

http://oneeyed-richmond.com/forum/index.php?topic=1127.0

4. Revenue

2004 2003
$ $
Revenue from the Operating Activities:
Football 6,214,833 5,577,083
Sponsorship & Marketing 9,835,088 10,416,856
Gaming and Social 5,808,985 6,280,807
21,858,906 22,274,746
Revenue from Outside the Operating Activities:
Interest 14,775 19,866
Jack Dyer Foundation 338,331 401,142
Other 10,075 67,896
363,181 488,904
TOTAL REVENUE22,222,087 22,763,650

As for Essendon being that low when they have something like 35,000+ members  ???.

Hawthorn's $27.8m revenue includes the $4.5m from "AFL distribution and prize money" which I presume is the Waverley compensation money they got for 2004- Page 15: http://hawthornfc.com.au/cp2/c2/webi/article/179391av.pdf. They sure have wealthy pets those hawkers  ;D.  From just football operating activies we generate more revenue than them: $21.9m to $21.0m (minus Waverley compo).
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 38963
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Pies head footy's rich list
« Reply #8 on: March 11, 2005, 04:57:36 PM »
As I said I have no problem with the criteria they have used but to not use the correct revenues gives the whole report no credibility at all.

As for those Clubs who received AFL assistance - their results are clouded by the inclusion of those funds because it has inflated the BRW valuation. And in the real world (if those clubs were say privately owned) they wouldn't receive such funding.

« Last Edit: March 11, 2005, 04:59:10 PM by WilliamPowell »
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Offline Tiger Spirit

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Pies head footy's rich list
« Reply #9 on: March 11, 2005, 05:30:48 PM »
As I said I have no problem with the criteria they have used but to not use the correct revenues gives the whole report no credibility at all.

How gullible am I then WP?  :P  Don’t understand why the mis-information.  Wouldn’t have given them so much credence if I had known BRW and Inside Footy used similar ranking systems. :rollin

Regardless of what any figures say though, there’s no doubt RFC’s got some catching up to do, in a few areas.  We don’t need doubtful figures to tell us that.
Everything that is done in this world is done by hope.  --Martin Luther

The time you enjoy wasting isn’t wasted time.