Port Adelaide Magpie$$$$$$$$

All discussions to do with the SANFL

Postby Booney » Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:49 am

As Gravel has stated,the $2 campaign was initiated to increase revenue to allow for any short comings that may arrise in the future.It was far from a desperate plea for help from a struggling club.
Another issue that I,like many other followers of both Port identities would like to know is,where does all the money from the Port Adelaide Football Club Foundation,which was set up in 1997 go? Without being a QC or having access to all the relating paper work,I am unable to ascertain the whereabouts of that cash flow.Can Gravel help?
If you want to go quickly, go alone.

If you want to go far, go together.
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 61472
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 8165 times
Been liked: 11892 times

Postby doggies4eva » Mon Mar 27, 2006 9:09 am

Gravel wrote:Wedgie - The$28k profits over the last 2 years is after all payments to players, admin and running costs etc
They don't have $28k to pay the costs. In 2004 they had $1.404m and that amount increased in 2005 to $1.572m
The $28k is what was left over


Gravel, the point that Wedgie is making is that in the last couple of years they were spending virtually all of their income. So the question is, where are the savings coming from which allows them to pay for so many high profile recruits?
We used to be good :-(
User avatar
doggies4eva
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 2473
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 2:23 pm
Location: In front of a computer screen
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Postby JK » Mon Mar 27, 2006 9:40 am

Possibly from an increase in allocated funds set aside for Player Payments due to increases in revenue levels or cutting of other expenditure
User avatar
JK
Coach
 
 
Posts: 37459
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 10:11 am
Location: Coopers Hill
Has liked: 4485 times
Been liked: 3022 times
Grassroots Team: SMOSH West Lakes

Postby Rik E Boy » Mon Mar 27, 2006 9:41 am

Booney wrote:As Gravel has stated,the $2 campaign was initiated to increase revenue to allow for any short comings that may arrise in the future.It was far from a desperate plea for help from a struggling club.....


So THAT's why I gave your mob jack 5hit! I wish Norwood (and Sturt) would lift their game financially as Strut 1 has suggested. Maybe we could worry about winning flags again if we had some coin in the coffers.

regards,

REB
User avatar
Rik E Boy
Coach
 
 
Posts: 28558
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:55 pm
Location: The Switch
Has liked: 1772 times
Been liked: 1882 times

Postby JK » Mon Mar 27, 2006 9:50 am

Rik E Boy wrote:
Booney wrote:As Gravel has stated,the $2 campaign was initiated to increase revenue to allow for any short comings that may arrise in the future.It was far from a desperate plea for help from a struggling club.....


So THAT's why I gave your mob jack 5hit! I wish Norwood (and Sturt) would lift their game financially as Strut 1 has suggested. Maybe we could worry about winning flags again if we had some coin in the coffers.

regards,

REB


Agreed REB, it's tough to near on impossible without it, think things are starting to turn for us, am hoping to see (would say "expecting to see" but everytime we think that there seems to be a setback of some sort) the first sign of improvement in around 12 months.
User avatar
JK
Coach
 
 
Posts: 37459
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 10:11 am
Location: Coopers Hill
Has liked: 4485 times
Been liked: 3022 times
Grassroots Team: SMOSH West Lakes

Postby drebin » Mon Mar 27, 2006 5:37 pm

doggies4eva wrote:
Gravel wrote:Wedgie - The$28k profits over the last 2 years is after all payments to players, admin and running costs etc
They don't have $28k to pay the costs. In 2004 they had $1.404m and that amount increased in 2005 to $1.572m
The $28k is what was left over


Gravel, the point that Wedgie is making is that in the last couple of years they were spending virtually all of their income. So the question is, where are the savings coming from which allows them to pay for so many high profile recruits?


Yep - no one has actually answered that question have they?
drebin
 

Postby stan » Mon Mar 27, 2006 5:59 pm

drebin wrote:
doggies4eva wrote:
Gravel wrote:Wedgie - The$28k profits over the last 2 years is after all payments to players, admin and running costs etc
They don't have $28k to pay the costs. In 2004 they had $1.404m and that amount increased in 2005 to $1.572m
The $28k is what was left over


Gravel, the point that Wedgie is making is that in the last couple of years they were spending virtually all of their income. So the question is, where are the savings coming from which allows them to pay for so many high profile recruits?


Yep - no one has actually answered that question have they?


Yes answer the question, people here are keen to find out exactly what is happening.
User avatar
stan
Coach
 
 
Posts: 15501
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:53 am
Location: North Eastern Suburbs
Has liked: 88 times
Been liked: 1318 times
Grassroots Team: Goodwood Saints

Postby Macca19 » Mon Mar 27, 2006 6:02 pm

Does the sign on fee count towards the salary cap?
Macca19
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 1961
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:54 pm
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 10 times
Grassroots Team: Ports

Postby stan » Mon Mar 27, 2006 6:05 pm

Macca19 wrote:Does the sign on fee count towards the salary cap?


I thought it was only match payments that count, but i could be wrong.
User avatar
stan
Coach
 
 
Posts: 15501
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 8:53 am
Location: North Eastern Suburbs
Has liked: 88 times
Been liked: 1318 times
Grassroots Team: Goodwood Saints

Postby Gravel » Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:06 pm

Booney - Unfortunatyely No. In the annual report there is an income item named - PAFC Foundation gift $398,726. I think it collects the lotteries income but does other things as well. I would also like to know more.
I think sign on fees are included in the salary cap.
Gravel
Rookie
 
 
Posts: 231
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 8:16 am
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 8 times

Postby Booney » Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:36 am

Gravel wrote:Booney - Unfortunatyely No. In the annual report there is an income item named - PAFC Foundation gift $398,726. I think it collects the lotteries income but does other things as well. I would also like to know more.
I think sign on fees are included in the salary cap.


Think you,me and much of the Sa Footy public would be interested,but,without a lawyer in your corner I dont feel many of us would make sense of it.
If you want to go quickly, go alone.

If you want to go far, go together.
User avatar
Booney
Coach
 
 
Posts: 61472
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 1:47 pm
Location: Alberton proud
Has liked: 8165 times
Been liked: 11892 times

Postby doggies4eva » Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:37 am

Booney wrote:
Gravel wrote:Booney - Unfortunatyely No. In the annual report there is an income item named - PAFC Foundation gift $398,726. I think it collects the lotteries income but does other things as well. I would also like to know more.
I think sign on fees are included in the salary cap.


Think you,me and much of the Sa Footy public would be interested,but,without a lawyer in your corner I dont feel many of us would make sense of it.


Sign-on fees are part of the cap. They are a payment to a player from the club. Otherwise it would be an easy loophole to take advantage of. Eg Club A signs a player pays them $50,000 sign on fee and $50 a game. Clearly the sign on fee is a form a payment for services.
We used to be good :-(
User avatar
doggies4eva
League - Best 21
 
 
Posts: 2473
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 2:23 pm
Location: In front of a computer screen
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Previous

Board index   Football  SANFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |