TOPIC:

SB and Mudlark. based on DF's figures Subi aint very good business managers.
A $200k profit represents only a 4% return on a turnover of $4.5 mill.
With no shareholders to pay that isn't much of a profit. In the real business world the shareholders would be demanding heads to roll.
I wonder why Subi members aren't up in arms.
Bearing in mind that we are talking a football club here, just what is the $4.3m expenditure spent on????? No way is it the cost of unsold seats etc.
Number of bums on seats are irrelevant. Turnover is actual income which includes bar turnover from a packed bar at 20 plus AFL games each year a privilege the other 8 clubs do not enjoy.
And if you think that Subi don't have a huge financial advantage over all other clubs then you are delusional.

Custodian wrote: Delusional! When were other clubs offered the same deal? Another urban myth!

Spot on! I`m trying to find out the times lines on this myself!

Demons Forever wrote: Swandog that's interesting
Are you saying that Subiaco promoted the event or are you suggesting that the $180-$200k was purely from bar takings.
Bar takings for the 2 nights would not have been anywhere near that figure I wouldn't have thought.
Still nice to have your bar full though.
An advantage no other WAFL Club has.

Just on the future my understanding is and I stand to be corrected, that the Sub premises are built on Council land. It is only the building that is owned by SFC.
As I said I stand to be corrected.
Subiaco Oval IMHO will be demolished and redeveloped and one would question the value of having a Football Club premises there after that.
Not sure what the land lease would say if Subiaco Council were to take the land back.

SFC probably to get paid $100m for the inconvenience.

I`m just quoting what a prominent club official told me outside Subi oval on Friday night post concert number one..he was sitting with Frank Cooper and co, even if it was half that over two nights its massive, ACDC fans drink a lot of piss too

Swandog, did Subi promote the whole event or did they just make bar money from their premises?
It gets worse doesn't it.
I wasn't aware of seat arrangements for all Subi Oval functions.
I never thought of it before it if there is an event there, they can open their bar.
This becomes even more farcical.

Demons Forever wrote: Swandog, did Subi promote the whole event or did they just make bar money from their premises?
It gets worse doesn't it.
I wasn't aware of seat arrangements for all Subi Oval functions.
I never thought of it before it if there is an event there, they can open their bar.
This becomes even more farcical.

I don't know what they promoted mate or the finer details, but this club official had a defeated stance as if to say what the fuck can we do about it??

Custodian wrote: Delusional! When were other clubs offered the same deal? Another urban myth!

Exactly! How could seven club ceo's all reject such a massively lucrative deal?

So asking a question whether you understand turnover Demons Forever implies that you're not all there?
You have quoted many times about Subi's turnover and that you can't see where they spend it on, it is gross turnover every time you mention it (unless the Perth turnover of $2.2m you mentioned is net?)Fine to look to change definitions after the fact but you know what figures you are quoting
Was just making the point about where much of this additional money is spent, buying the seats, managing their rooms, catering etc
Absolutely no doubt it is a great deal but is takes spending a lot of money to make money and sometimes (like the Western Force tickets) you actually lose
Was also confirming that they buy the tickets which some posters in the past either didn't know or choose to ignore
People can think what they like about whether all clubs were given the opportunity to also have seats at the ground when the deal first started but it is fact

You forget the enormous turnover from your bar at Subiacdo Oval SB.
How many Clubs have 40,000 people streaming by for at least 20 weeks of the year.
Yes, and I am aware that not all of the 40,000 go to your bar.
How many people would be in your bar on an AFL game day?
The only Club that I am aware of that has come remotely close to a turnover of $4m is SFC.
As for the PFC a really good year would be about $2.4m with the Football Department spending about $700k for all areas of operation.
There are a lot of things which would not appear on your P&L, good luck to you for having the resources to play the games.
Shame on you for not respecting the competition.
Look at your squads over the last 15 years and tell how you could afford them without playing games.
Some of us are not quite so naive as some of your supporters.

What I would like to know is with all of those financial advantages they have that none of the G6 clubs have how on earth is it that $ubi receive the same amount re development grant from the WAFC each year as the G6 clubs receive? This mob are self sufficient and shouldn't receive a dime from the WAFC!

BH....I find it interesting you consider Subi utilising their own clubrooms to generate income as a "financial advantage". I think the members would start a riot if the club didn't make the most out of it's own assets. Next time they have a Commodore festival or Mr and Mrs Bogan of the Year at Basso, I take it based on your comments the bar and social premises won't be open.