Saints record a loss for 2008

[thirty-seven!?]

According to Caro Wilson in today's Age, the saints are expected to announce a $445,566 loss for the year.

They attribute it to legal battles with Grant Thomas, and Kingston Council.

Also to the Sacking of Aaron Fiora, and extra spend on the football dept.

We have been somewhat assured by Westaway that this will not be the same case in 2009, due to the "bad blood and skeletons" being cleaned out this past year. Also, we will now have a positive focus on spending, plus a sponsorship deal which will be worth around $2mil this year from JeldWen


Read the full article below:

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/n ... 24231.html

[meher baba]

"skeletons" being cleaned out this past year.

Look, I agree that Fiora might have been more effective if he could have bulked up a bit, but surely this is a bit harsh.........

[Mr Magic]

I suspect we are seeing teh end result of some 'creative accounting' - bring forward any expense you can and delay any income you can - net result is a diminution of your results.

I'd love to know what the total cost of the GT court case was? IIRC there was an amount included in the 2007 accounts to cover the case and now a further 200+k.

[JeffDunne]

Now I've heard some cop-outs in my time but this is a doozy :

Westaway said the Saints' three finals appearances, played in front of total crowds exceeding 200,000, had, in fact, cost the club money because of player and coaching bonus payments and a high proportion of players on base contracts with match payments.

Clearly the club, despite public comments to the contrary, weren't expecting (or at least budgeting) to play finals last year.

Bit like the GT fiasco, we were assured that it was not only budgeted for last season in the that pathetic result, but we were told what they had budgeted for was a worse case scenario. Never fear, we'll trot it out again for good measure because we can't think of any other excuses.

The loss isn't what's disappointing . . . the blatant lies to members is the really disappointing part.

God help the club if the Seaford project goes over budget and that blank cheque we've written needs to be cashed

[InkerSaint]

While several Victorian clubs have struggled to attract major sponsors, the Saints' backloaded partnership with JELD-WEN has two years to run and will be worth more than $2 million to the club in 2009.

The windows and doors group was one of several key AFL club sponsors that expressed some misgivings over plans to recruit Ben Cousins.

Given the other expenses, Benny might have just been a bridge too far...

[InkerSaint]

Bit like the GT fiasco, we were assured that it was not only budgeted for last season in the that pathetic result, but we were told what they had budgeted for was a worse case scenario. Never fear, we'll trot it out again for good measure because we can't think of any other excuses.

The loss isn't what's disappointing . . . the blatant lies to members is the really disappointing part.

Worst case scenario? Did they actually say that?

To be fair to the club, what they probably budgeted for was their own legal costs... you don't go into litigation expecting to lose. Otherwise you'd just save yourself the trouble and settle out of court before the event.

[JeffDunne]

To be fair to the club, what they probably budgeted for was their own legal costs... you don't go into litigation expecting to lose. Otherwise you'd just save yourself the trouble and settle out of court before the event.

If our club is only planning & budgeting for 'best case' outcomes then we are in serious trouble.

TBH I can't really believe they trotted out GT again as an excuse. I can't also believe they used Fiora as an excuse (who re-signed him?). All very typical of our current CEO and pathetic from this board who were supposed to be making a break with the past.

All these issues should have know and budgeted for going into this year.

[InkerSaint]

If you think the club is being badly managed, then you're entitled to that opinion. I don't have a problem with the expenses they have declared. If the deficit could solely be accounted for by Fiora's delisting and the rookie and Irish schemes (and it would probably be close), I'd tell them go for it. PS. Fiora still had a year to go on his existing contract.

Personally I was also surprised by the GT ruling... a six-figure hush money deal written on a napkin? Annual leave paid out to a consultancy firm? Not that I claim to know the details of the case.

[JeffDunne]

The club's advice on the GT payout was as poor as the advice when Baker was rubbed out.

Rather than chest-beating in the press about how he under-mined the previous administration, maybe our 'legal' expert(s) on the board could actually show us for once some of his expertise.

We know he can be a two-faced, back stabbing SOB . . . so there's no need to gloat about that!

[No1_Saint]

If membership doesn't get to at least 33,000 we will probably face another loss this year.

If my memory serves me right most of the match day corporate functions have ceased or been dimimished considerably, hopefully this has produced a positive figure on the balance sheet.

Also, on Ask Archie I had asked if the club was looking at asking members to contribute to the clubs portion of the new training base project and he said yes. If they don't reach their members target does that mean further loss for the club?

I still think the club should consider 1 or 2 "blockbusters" at the G to maximise attendances and hopefully bring in more money. IMHO of course.

How many losses can the club absorb before another S.O.S campaign is needed? Our annual turnover is woefully low compared to most other clubs.

[saintspremiers]

It's all bad news whatever way they spin it....

Memberships stagnating, can't make a cent on match day functions, making a loss during the finals FFS is the final straw!

We don't need the SOS campaign, simply we are getting to the stage of requiring AFL assistance.

If 2009 goes pear-shaped, which given the economy, is likely, it will be 3 consecutive losses.

The positive is a Jeld-Wen sponsorship that's backended.

[Solar]

It's all bad news whatever way they spin it....

Memberships stagnating, can't make a cent on match day functions, making a loss during the finals FFS is the final straw!

We don't need the SOS campaign, simply we are getting to the stage of requiring AFL assistance.

If 2009 goes pear-shaped, which given the economy, is likely, it will be 3 consecutive losses.

The positive is a Jeld-Wen sponsorship that's backended.

I thnk we a little way off afl assistance but agree that this coming year will be pivitol. In the end they seem to be trying to squeeze every cent out of members and corperates. Would like to know why the major sponsorship is back ended.... strange way to do busines IMO

[Pilgram]

The windows and doors group was one of several key AFL club sponsors that expressed some misgivings over plans to recruit Ben Cousins.

should read:

The windows and doors group were one of several key AFL club sponsors that expressed some misgivings over plans to recruit Ben Cousins.

[ThomasR]

$445566

Looks like a few random numbers bashed together

[saint66au]

Umm yeah...coming out publicly and saying that it cost us money to play in finals is a bit naive. Media could possibly have a field day with that.

I know it sounds a bit simplistic but I can cop a loss if the Football Dept have everything they need. Lots of shiny new gym eqpt, heaps of oppo scouts and aenough money to get an elite conditioning coach....oh and some good rookies too lol

We all patted RB on the back for his years of profit til we heard that requests for even basic footy dept stuff were either knocked back offhand or sweated over before any money was handed out.

Bloody hell, I saw GT walking a lap of Albert Park Lake yesterday. Shouldve asked him to spring for a cup of coffee for a ol' Saints fan..give a bit back as it were lol

[Armoooo]

The windows and doors group was one of several key AFL club sponsors that expressed some misgivings over plans to recruit Ben Cousins.

should read:

The windows and doors group were one of several key AFL club sponsors that expressed some misgivings over plans to recruit Ben Cousins.

I've always been confused about that. I would have thought it would be 'was' instead of 'were'.

Shouldn't it be were because it is the one group that just happen to sell windows and doors? I've never been great with rules like these...

But if there were two companies then it would be 'were' but because there is only one company I would have thought it would be 'was'.

Man, I'm confused

[casey scorp]

But if there were two companies then it would be 'were' but because there is only one company I would have thought it would be 'was'.

Man, I'm confused

You may be confused, but you are correct.

So is Caro.

[markinUSA]

Yes, I would have thought that because it is only one company, the term should have been "was". We need spelly, or maybe in this case "grammary", to advise.

[Otiman]

The idea (in financially sound terms) is to get large payments paid at the start of this boards term. This lead to our operating loss last year, with the hope that this year would see better times. Obviously the economic crisis has affected us too (or at least they can blame it), but I believe leaner times are ahead. When sponsorship contracts close and they are not renewed, our bottom line will look even worse.

Let's just hope Kevin Rudd buys us all saints memberships this year.

[No1_Saint]

Another concern as listed by the auditors in the clubs finance report for 2008 is the net deficiency in assets. I presume the new training base will change that position considerably...unless the club becomes burdoned by debt during it's construction.

Current cash and cash equivalent reserves were a measly $509,726 at the end of 2008. Let's pray that improves by the end of this year.

[chook23]

plus we won 300,000 odd for Nab cup which has to taken into account as well

[Legendary]

We are now spending at least $1.5 million per year more on football than we were since the Westaway board came to office.

On that they have delivered ... to properly staff and resource our football department.


In football, it's much better to get everything you need ... and then find a way to pay for it.

Cutting corners in football purely to make a profit is useless ... we EXIST to win football matches.


Westaway has delivered on part 1 ... get proper football resources.

Now he deserves a couple of years to deliver on part 2 ... pay for it.


If we break even next year, I'd be fairly happy. At least now we have what we bloody need to win a flag.

[saint66au]

We are now spending at least $1.5 million per year more on football than we were since the Westaway board came to office.

On that they have delivered ... to properly staff and resource our football department.


In football, it's much better to get everything you need ... and then find a way to pay for it.

Cutting corners in football purely to make a profit is useless ... we EXIST to win football matches.


Westaway has delivered on part 1 ... get proper football resources.

Now he deserves a couple of years to deliver on part 2 ... pay for it.


If we break even next year, I'd be fairly happy. At least now we have what we bloody need to win a flag.

Hit.nail.head

My sentiments exactly

[Enrico_Misso]

So if the accountants have their way our strategy will now be to avoid those hideous loss making games in September.

[No1_Saint]

So if the accountants have their way our strategy will now be to avoid those hideous loss making games in September.

Remember the AFL keeps all of the gate takings from the finals so they are expensive. Of course one would hope that there would be bonuses from the major sponsor for increased exposure during the finals season...especially for a Prelim.