Club Reports a $80,257 Loss for 2016

[(•))(©™]

Richmond members currently looking as stupid as the libtards.

This woman is putting her personal agenda ahead of the good of "HER" club.

Whilst reality boasts failed presidency, she bides time on the off chance, things might turn around..l before she's assasinated (politically speaking, of course )

[🏅Dooks]

And this, lesser amount is acceptable, because why?

Not sure anyone said it's acceptable

How does a club with 75,000 members make a loss of any sort?

Other clubs with upto 40000 less members (approx 8million dollars) must be bleeding.

Oh wait, they have proper sponsorship deals and other revenue streams.

Well clubs with less than 40k members get hand outs from the AFL, take away that and they make losses (Hi N0rt, Saints, Dogs and Dees). Dogs will make a first time profit on their own this year ONLY because they won the flag

So I suppose it begs the question how does a club with nearly 80k members, turnover of of close to $60mil, superior sponsorship deals, better deal with the MCG than we do make only just on a $1mil rather than their normal  $2-3mill  (pies saying howdy too U to)

Or isn't that relevant?

Would have thought it is somewhat  relevant but instead of a very carefully contrived and inferenced contextual defense of the club, perhaps you could comment on our specific situation and whether two wrongs make a right. In your opinion
 

[WilliamPowell]

I dunno WP.
I'll defer to your superior accounting knowledge but doesn't that assume that all accounts were paid out.
They were after all, due to finish their current sponsorship in November.

PS I've just been reading the Age story about Goulburn Murray's accounts being questioned by Morris Forensic who claim they're off by $150M so you can understand why I'm a bit wary.

Get what you are saying

But BLK's deal has another 2 years to run up until 31 Oct 2018

Only ones running out in November read 1st November were Dιcor, AGL & Viagogo (the legal ticket scalping mob)

I am assuming they have paid all monies owed to 31/10/2016 = in the fin year they are due

As BLK have only informed ASIC today I just find it hard to believe that we knew before hand; especially when you consider they only announced a new 3 year deal with St Kilda late last week....

This is all very sudden

But we will know when the annual accounts are released after the audit of them are completed



 

[WilliamPowell]

This woman is putting her personal agenda ahead of the good of "HER" club.

Sorry you've lost

Based on the article and her comments about the financial results for this year please point out to me "her personal agenda" in those comments

[taztiger4]

Richmond members currently looking as stupid as the libtards.

This woman is putting her personal agenda ahead of the good of "HER" club.

Whilst reality boasts failed presidency, she bides time on the off chance, things might turn around..l before she's assasinated (politically speaking, of course )

seriously brackets you have lost the plot

[RedanTiger]

Sorry WP my mistake.

So many seem to be running out in November I got confused.
IIRC even the Bingle one was finishing in November.
Thought it might be a set date for all deals before the AGM but as you say the accounts are done.

[blaisee]

And this, lesser amount is acceptable, because why?

Not sure anyone said it's acceptable

How does a club with 75,000 members make a loss of any sort?

Other clubs with upto 40000 less members (approx 8million dollars) must be bleeding.

Oh wait, they have proper sponsorship deals and other revenue streams.

Well clubs with less than 40k members get hand outs from the AFL, take away that and they make losses (Hi N0rt, Saints, Dogs and Dees). Dogs will make a first time profit on their own this year ONLY because they won the flag

So I suppose it begs the question how does a club with nearly 80k members, turnover of of close to $60mil, superior sponsorship deals, better deal with the MCG than we do make only just on a $1mil rather than their normal  $2-3mill  (pies saying howdy too U to)

Or isn't that relevant?

Probably because they have a recruitment department and football department that is properly resourced and not from the Stone Age I would have thought willy

And now we are cutting costs and going into 2017 with less coaches . But is a complete joke and confirmation to me that any money given to the RICHMOND football club is a waste of money .

They should give us all back our ftf money as they have peeed it up the wall

[WilliamPowell]

Sorry WP my mistake.

So many seem to be running out in November I got confused.
IIRC even the Bingle one was finishing in November.
Thought it might be a set date for all deals before the AGM but as you say the accounts are done.

Bingle re-signed in Oct. It was due to finish 31/10/2016

Usually all contracts are tied the clubs financial year 1 Nov to 31 Oct

Outside of what we currently not in place (eg Ground naming rights & shorts the 2 biggest gaps as it stands) 2017 is a big year for the club with our 2 majors Jeep & Bingle falling due

[WilliamPowell]

Would have thought it is somewhat  relevant but instead of a very carefully contrived and inferenced contextual defense of the club, perhaps you could comment on our specific situation and whether two wrongs make a right. In your opinion

I will make this very clear

making a loss is unacceptable I never at any time said it was acceptable. Explainable and not at all surprising definitely but acceptable NO

It was you who raised the point of what other clubs do not me. You were the one who said:

How does a club with 75,000 members make a loss of any sort?

Other clubs with upto 40000 less members (approx 8million dollars) must be bleeding.

Oh wait, they have proper sponsorship deals and other revenue streams.

You raised it and used it as a whack at the club taking piece meal info and more importantly assumptions to give out whack.

All I highlighted was that your comparison is not reasonable based on the facts as they have been presented. Compare an apple with an apple and it carries some credence. Compare an apple with a pear and you have mixed fruit

I am not defending the loss but if you want compare clubs results, then either compare full details and not the bits that suit your point

And forgive me for being prepared to wait to see what the actual break up of the numbers are before I go whackety whack whack. Because the actual numbers and their commentary will tell what I need to know rather than a brief summary that has been released so far

[🏅Dooks]

Would have thought it is somewhat  relevant but instead of a very carefully contrived and inferenced contextual defense of the club, perhaps you could comment on our specific situation and whether two wrongs make a right. In your opinion

I will make this very clear

making a loss is unacceptable I never at any time said it was acceptable. Explainable and not at all surprising definitely but acceptable NO

It was you who raised the point of what other clubs do not me. You were the one who said:

How does a club with 75,000 members make a loss of any sort?

Other clubs with upto 40000 less members (approx 8million dollars) must be bleeding.

Oh wait, they have proper sponsorship deals and other revenue streams.

You raised it and used it as a whack at the club taking piece meal info and more importantly assumptions to give out whack.

All I highlighted was that your comparison is not reasonable based on the facts as they have been presented. Compare an apple with an apple and it carries some credence. Compare an apple with a pear and you have mixed fruit

I am not defending the loss but if you want compare clubs results, then either compare full details and not the bits that suit your point

And forgive me for being prepared to wait to see what the actual break up of the numbers are before I go whackety whack whack. Because the actual numbers and their commentary will tell what I need to know rather than a brief summary that has been released so far

Which i have a right to raise and go whack. Youve drawn your conclusions. Ive drawn mine. We made a loss. Enough said.

You say you make it very clear that your not defending the loss but but then you go on to make alot of effort to muddy the waters through inferences, narrative and hypothetical qualifications. People arent idiots. You wait for the figures.

Btw you are responsible for your own words not me. And what a suprise you havent answered my question. 2 wrongs make a right indeed.

[WilliamPowell]

Btw you are responsible for your own words and havent answered my question. 2 wrongs make a right indeed.

I didn't answer it because I didn't get what you were actually asking. What 2 Wrongs exactly? You want an opinion on what that supposedly make up 2 wrongs that I am defending as a making something  right ? Seriously you completely lost me.

What we've been told so far tells us very little. Article says we made a loss, waffles a couple of reasons why but for me at least that isn't enough detail to make a call on the entire result

[RedanTiger]

Bingle re-signed in Oct. It was due to finish 31/10/2016

Usually all contracts are tied the clubs financial year 1 Nov to 31 Oct

Outside of what we currently not in place (eg Ground naming rights & shorts the 2 biggest gaps as it stands) 2017 is a big year for the club with our 2 majors Jeep & Bingle falling due

Thanks for that WP.
Help solidify what you posted previously about Dιcor and AGL.

[RedanTiger]

And now we are cutting costs and going into 2017 with less coaches . But is a complete joke and confirmation to me that any money given to the RICHMOND football club is a waste of money .

I don't think we are cutting costs.
We are merely saving money on coaches to cover the ADDED cost of Balme, since we are also keeping Richardson.
Essentially Balme in and the two Williams' out.
Our footy dept. cost has probably gone up. 

[TigerMonk]

l don't believe those figures at all. 

[Jackstar 1960]

l don't believe those figures at all. 

I don't either 😉