SA Footy

*An update from the club on its concerning financial situation*

Dear members and supporters,

2016 has been a particularly challenging year for the South Adelaide Football Club. On field, the Club has performed with credit. Competitiveness has been enhanced across all grades. This produced a second place finish in the Stanley H Lewis Trophy, which is the best result for South Adelaide in many years. There was greater engagement by local players from our zones and the leakage of players from the senior squad was minimal. There was palpable commitment to the Club and pride shown in wearing the Blue & White jumper for the 140th Year. The playing group has embraced the trademarks that they have developed with the assistance of Leading Teams. Regrettably, off field performance by the Club has been poor and financial constraints are now a harsh reality.

Traditional revenue streams associated with Club membership and game day attendance have declined markedly. The Licensed Venue, Jimmy Deane's, has experienced its most difficult trading year since its refurbishment in 2008. This was undertaken with a bank loan of $3.5M with the expectation of annual principal reductions. The Club's anticipated full year performance will be a loss for the third year in a row. Along with the seven other constituent clubs, South Adelaide will receive assistance from the SANFL's Land Divestment Grants distributed over coming years from the sale of land at Football Park. These funds will be used to retire debt. Budget forecasts for 2017 have necessarily been struck on the basis of significant cuts in expenditure. This will impact on the Football Department.

Over the past five years the performance of South Adelaide's junior grades has improved significantly. In 2015, and again this year, the U16s have performed extremely well and the U18s have also become competitive. The recasting of SANFL zone boundaries in 2014 handed back to the Club the traditionally strong recruiting grounds of Flagstaff Hill, Happy Valley and Sheidow Park. If properly developed, this should see our senior squads becoming more evenly balanced between local players and recruits. The need to continue to improve and grow our playing talent from within is clear, and is an established goal for the Club. This improved position in junior football has created a genuine challenge given our overall financial position.

In order for the club to be able to continue to improve and grow our playing talent from within our local recruiting zones, South Adelaide has established, via the Australian Sports Foundation, a tax deductible donation opportunity for members and supporters to directly fund the club's junior football programs. Our target is to raise $200,000 which will ensure that our junior programs will be fully funded over the next two years, during which time the Club will concentrate on working to reduce legacy debt and seeing that finances overall are re-balanced. It would be a tragedy for the Club to have to cut expenditure in the football development area which can underpin our future success.

May I earnestly request your consideration to the provision of a tax deductible donation for this purpose? Follow this link to donate to the South Adelaide Football Club Junior Development Fund.

In closing, I wish to acknowledge the contribution of Dave Flanagan who died recently. Dave stepped down at last year's AGM after serving on the Board for nine years. He was a former Chairman of the Club and SANFL delegate. Dave was a passionate man who truly loved this Club. My condolences are extended to Sue and their children as well as to Dave's wide circle of friends.

A Club cannot exist for 140 years without the dedicated support of members and supporters. Please do what you can at this time of challenge and opportunity.

South Adelaide Football Club needs your assistance.

I've done my bit with $$ just as many did back in the late 1980's, the club has much to look forward to after many years as being perennial battlers.It's not like the club spent beyond its means, the loan built a facility to the standard expected of an SANFL club and if those funds weren't borrowed to build those facilities at Noarlunga Oval (as it was then called) then the grand old club may still be looking for a home as the previous facilities were far from adequate for support from both the football public and the broader community.

Not good news for the Panthers, I would've thought.

Traditional revenue streams associated with Club membership and game day attendance have declined markedly.

I hope they can raise the money required, but If people aren't prepared to put money into the club via membership and match day spending, then I'm not sure a donation is able to address what appears to be an issue for the longer term?

Magellan wrote:Not good news for the Panthers, I would've thought.

Traditional revenue streams associated with Club membership and game day attendance have declined markedly.

I hope they can raise the money required, but If people aren't prepared to put money into the club via membership and match day spending, then I'm not sure a donation is able to address what appears to be an issue for the longer term?

Would think all clubs have to not rely on 'traditional' revenue streams anymore. Nature of the beast these days.

Why not do away with the 4 byes and play another 2 home games at Noarlunga.
Every struggling club would benefit similarly with 2 extra home games.
Club gets more income.
Players get to represent their club and play the game they love.
Supporters get to go to the footy Clubs they love.
Club sponsors get more exposure so would be happy too.
Win win.
Not rocket science in programming.
Time is short,this time next year may be too late.
Why not SANFL?

VALE PARK wrote:Why not do away with the 4 byes and play another 2 home games at Noarlunga.
Every struggling club would benefit similarly with 2 extra home games.
Club gets more income.
Players get to represent their club and play the game they love.
Supporters get to go to the footy Clubs they love.
Club sponsors get more exposure so would be happy too.
Win win.
Not rocket science in programming.
Time is short,this time next year may be too late.
Why not SANFL?

Sorry that's not the way the SANFL thinks these days

Traditional revenue streams associated with Club membership and game day attendance have declined markedly. The Licensed Venue, Jimmy Deane's, has experienced its most difficult trading year since its refurbishment in 2008. This was undertaken with a bank loan of $3.5M with the expectation of annual principal reductions. The Club's anticipated full year performance will be a loss for the third year in a row. Along with the seven other constituent clubs, South Adelaide will receive assistance from the SANFL's Land Divestment Grants distributed over coming years from the sale of land at Football Park. These funds will be used to retire debt. Budget forecasts for 2017 have necessarily been struck on the basis of significant cuts in expenditure. This will impact on the Football Department.

"Traditional revenue streams associated with Club membership and game day attendance have declined markedly."
"The Club's anticipated full year performance will be a loss for the third year in a row."
Let us just dwell on these statements for a bit, and ask, "Why is it so?".
I think Vale Park has made an extremely good point. Two less games would definitely impact revenue streams associated with game day attendance. I would love to hear from anyone who could convince me otherwise. After all, finding the cause of this problem should be our over-riding objective, as opposed to simply rolling out our preferred view of the situation.
It could be that attendances have also fallen in the past three years at Noarlunga. This would also impact said revenue streams, again, this forum is open to those that could convincingly argue how that would not be a factor.

Imagine if BOTH those things have had an impact, i.e. a drop in attendances and the programming of fewer games?

Now what could have simultaneously caused the introduction of too many byes and a drop in average attendances to the fewer games that are being played? This, in spite of South Adelaide's relatively stronger on field performances?
What could have caused this?

therisingblues wrote:Traditional revenue streams associated with Club membership and game day attendance have declined markedly. The Licensed Venue, Jimmy Deane's, has experienced its most difficult trading year since its refurbishment in 2008. This was undertaken with a bank loan of $3.5M with the expectation of annual principal reductions. The Club's anticipated full year performance will be a loss for the third year in a row. Along with the seven other constituent clubs, South Adelaide will receive assistance from the SANFL's Land Divestment Grants distributed over coming years from the sale of land at Football Park. These funds will be used to retire debt. Budget forecasts for 2017 have necessarily been struck on the basis of significant cuts in expenditure. This will impact on the Football Department.

"Traditional revenue streams associated with Club membership and game day attendance have declined markedly."
"The Club's anticipated full year performance will be a loss for the third year in a row."
Let us just dwell on these statements for a bit, and ask, "Why is it so?".
I think Vale Park has made an extremely good point. Two less games would definitely impact revenue streams associated with game day attendance. I would love to hear from anyone who could convince me otherwise. After all, finding the cause of this problem should be our over-riding objective, as opposed to simply rolling out our preferred view of the situation.
It could be that attendances have also fallen in the past three years at Noarlunga. This would also impact said revenue streams, again, this forum is open to those that could convincingly argue how that would not be a factor.

Imagine if BOTH those things have had an impact, i.e. a drop in attendances and the programming of fewer games?

Now what could have simultaneously caused the introduction of too many byes and a drop in average attendances to the fewer games that are being played? This, in spite of South Adelaide's relatively stronger on field performances?
What could have caused this?

Its a complete mystery to me mate and obviously the SANFL as well.
I cant recall anything significant happening in the last 3 years that may have caused this. It must just be a cycle

Yeah, I think the SANFL goes through a cycle of suddenly planning excessive byes for three years in a row, every 150 years.
Then there's the cycle of regularly breaking various lowest attendance records. This happens about every 150 years too.
Gee, it's a good thing that it is just a cycle and not actually anybody's fault.

therisingblues wrote:Yeah, I think the SANFL goes through a cycle of suddenly planning excessive byes for three years in a row, every 150 years.
Then there's the cycle of regularly breaking various lowest attendance records. This happens about every 150 years too.
Gee, it's a good thing that it is just a cycle and not actually anybody's fault.

I blame O'Brien. He's caused this and now rumour has it he's buggering off to Vic

johntheclaret wrote:

therisingblues wrote:Yeah, I think the SANFL goes through a cycle of suddenly planning excessive byes for three years in a row, every 150 years.
Then there's the cycle of regularly breaking various lowest attendance records. This happens about every 150 years too.
Gee, it's a good thing that it is just a cycle and not actually anybody's fault.

I blame O'Brien. He's caused this and now rumour has it he's buggering off to Vic

I know, and all the secrecy surrounding it! Just terrible!

Is he going? First I've heard of it.

Well, put it this way. We are really not going to understand until we see the teams run out for the first game of 2017. The Eagles really playing their cards close to their chests with this one.

saintal wrote:The playing group has embraced the trademarks that they have developed with the assistance of Leading Teams.

1 - Can you post the link to the donations page please?

2 - How much does Leading Teams cost? From my understanding it isn't a cheap exercise to bring Leading Teams into an organisation.

Booney the link to donate is:

https://asf.org.au/projects/south-adela ... ment-fund/

I have donated and noticed the fund needs to raise $200k we so far have only $21k.

What is the net $ gain per home match for the club at Noarlunga?

VALE PARK wrote:What is the net $ gain per home match for the club at Noarlunga?

Given some of their crowds this year especially v AFL opposition I would be surprised if it is negative....

Booney wrote:

saintal wrote:The playing group has embraced the trademarks that they have developed with the assistance of Leading Teams.

1 - Can you post the link to the donations page please?

2 - How much does Leading Teams cost? From my understanding it isn't a cheap exercise to bring Leading Teams into an organisation.

'

Between $30 and $35K, I believe. Maybe I'm a bit old school, but, I reckon the senior coach leads the team. Might be O.K for a debutant coach to get through the first season, or so, but, a senior coach, not so sure. If you need to invest in outside psychology to extract and challenge the playing group, then maybe the bloke you've got in charge (and I'm not saying Brad Gotch isn't) isn't the right person. The premier side this year didn't use it. Never been a big fan of it. But, that's just my opinion.

knowledge wrote:

Booney wrote:

saintal wrote:The playing group has embraced the trademarks that they have developed with the assistance of Leading Teams.

1 - Can you post the link to the donations page please?

2 - How much does Leading Teams cost? From my understanding it isn't a cheap exercise to bring Leading Teams into an organisation.

'

Between $30 and $35K, I believe. Maybe I'm a bit old school, but, I reckon the senior coach leads the team. Might be O.K for a debutant coach to get through the first season, or so, but, a senior coach, not so sure. If you need to invest in outside psychology to extract and challenge the playing group, then maybe the bloke you've got in charge (and I'm not saying Brad Gotch isn't) isn't the right person. The premier side this year didn't use it. Never been a big fan of it. But, that's just my opinion.

Yep, I tend to agree. It also seems to be a luxury that most SANFL clubs in the current (and likely future) environment can't really afford?

knowledge wrote:

Booney wrote:

saintal wrote:The playing group has embraced the trademarks that they have developed with the assistance of Leading Teams.

1 - Can you post the link to the donations page please?

2 - How much does Leading Teams cost? From my understanding it isn't a cheap exercise to bring Leading Teams into an organisation.

'

Between $30 and $35K, I believe. Maybe I'm a bit old school, but, I reckon the senior coach leads the team. Might be O.K for a debutant coach to get through the first season, or so, but, a senior coach, not so sure. If you need to invest in outside psychology to extract and challenge the playing group, then maybe the bloke you've got in charge (and I'm not saying Brad Gotch isn't) isn't the right person. The premier side this year didn't use it. Never been a big fan of it. But, that's just my opinion.

That's about the figure I had heard ( $40k plus was what I was told ) and I think you're right, if you need someone to come and tell you whats wrong and how to fix it, have you got the right people in the right places?