TOPIC:

BC wrote: Yes mate...despite what a lot of people on here are saying about the seats deal, we've only been breaking even or making a small profit in recent years due to the economic downturn across the state and increased competition from Freo and WCE as they've struggled to sell their game day packages as well for the same reasons. Admittedly it was a terrific earner during the mining boom and when both AFL sides were travelling well but it's certainly been a lot tougher to make decent coin for the last few years. Subi is very lucky to have long term sponsor QBE stumping up for the last 32 years. I'm not sure how much the deal is worth but they've been very loyal to the club through good times and bad.

Jeez save us the sob story BC, 3.8 million in assets mostly cash, wow! Let's put that in perspective, that is something like 13 times the salary cap, that's the equivalent of an afl club having 200 million worth of assets!
Those who think Subis financial might will end with the new stadium arriving, you'll be waiting a while for that to happen.

As far as I can see, these 'changes' to Wafl Finals is too little too late. What happens now? Is a black line drawn through the last 2. If they were not fraudulent, what is!?

The changes that have been made are so diluted by this vague "special submission clause" and the staggering decision not to trim back the open slather selection in the case of AFL Finals participation totally undermine the integrity & transparency of process in this competition

The WAFC cannot operate with any form of transparency having AFL delegates in it's midst

And it is high time to increase royalties to stream back directly into this competition - fark Cockburn & Lathlain training facilities that cannot be when clubs are in danger of folding

Southerner wrote: The changes that have been made are so diluted by this vague "special submission clause" and the staggering decision not to trim back the open slather selection in the case of AFL Finals participation totally undermine the integrity & transparency of process in this competition

The WAFC cannot operate with any form of transparency having AFL delegates in it's midst

And it is high time to increase royalties to stream back directly into this competition - fark Cockburn & Lathlain training facilities that cannot be when clubs are in danger of folding

Southerner someone said to me that the WAFL is on its last legs. I questioned that opinion; but I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that the end is very much nigh for the WAFL clubs and competition The decisions made by the WAFC are demonstrably to ensure that the WAFL clubs and competition fold From the ripping away the colts' competition from the WAFL; the joke that is the host club alignment; and the reduction to 18 games is for one and ONLY ONE reason: to ensure that the WAFL ceases to exist.

westaussieguy wrote: As far as I can see, these 'changes' to Wafl Finals is too little too late. What happens now? Is a black line drawn through the last 2. If they were not fraudulent, what is!?

Whether you agree or disagree with the old rules or the new changes I don’t understand your claim that Peel’s premierships are fraudulent. They operated within the rules as they were written at the time. No different to Subiaco managing their player points better than every other club since the points cap was introduced.

Tiger Tales wrote:

westaussieguy wrote: As far as I can see, these 'changes' to Wafl Finals is too little too late. What happens now? Is a black line drawn through the last 2. If they were not fraudulent, what is!?

Whether you agree or disagree with the old rules or the new changes I don’t understand your claim that Peel’s premierships are fraudulent. They operated within the rules as they were written at the time. No different to Subiaco managing their player points better than every other club since the points cap was introduced.

QED.

Tiger Tales wrote:

westaussieguy wrote: As far as I can see, these 'changes' to Wafl Finals is too little too late. What happens now? Is a black line drawn through the last 2. If they were not fraudulent, what is!?

Whether you agree or disagree with the old rules or the new changes I don’t understand your claim that Peel’s premierships are fraudulent. They operated within the rules as they were written at the time. No different to Subiaco managing their player points better than every other club since the points cap was introduced.

Mandurah didn't win the last two flags - the AFL did

Put any spin on it , same fact surfaces - and always will , fake contrived results

Understand what you're saying TT & 42. For example, how many peel players were in the Grand Final side of Twenty 16? We all know not very many is the answer. I will grant you it may be true of operating within the rules. That still doesn't make it right. Having a supposedly ""peel"" Wafl team with largely no local Wafl players is simply making a mockery..
Dosn't matter what silly excuse/ s officialdom make, it simply doesn't wash.

Tiger of old wrote:

BC wrote: Yes mate...despite what a lot of people on here are saying about the seats deal, we've only been breaking even or making a small profit in recent years due to the economic downturn across the state and increased competition from Freo and WCE as they've struggled to sell their game day packages as well for the same reasons. Admittedly it was a terrific earner during the mining boom and when both AFL sides were travelling well but it's certainly been a lot tougher to make decent coin for the last few years. Subi is very lucky to have long term sponsor QBE stumping up for the last 32 years. I'm not sure how much the deal is worth but they've been very loyal to the club through good times and bad.

Jeez save us the sob story BC, 3.8 million in assets mostly cash, wow! Let's put that in perspective, that is something like 13 times the salary cap, that's the equivalent of an afl club having 200 million worth of assets!
Those who think Subis financial might will end with the new stadium arriving, you'll be waiting a while for that to happen.

Yep no doubt about it, by WAFL standards 3.8 Million is Assets with 3 Million is Cash, is a a huge amount and with Subi forming a future fund to manage it will see them very comfortable for decades to come, there would not be another club that could come close to that amount of cash base.

Subi finances and future fund could be used as a mini model for the survival of the WAFL as a whole, which is what I have been advocating for years, but the powers that be will never have an independent sustainable WAFL.

In terms of losing the colts, financially it is actually a relief for most WAFL clubs, they will no longer be funding them.

Leedy wrote:

Peter North wrote: Lock Subi in for the flag.

My thoughts exactly PN, $ubi's consistent push for rule changes has payed off, now if they could only here our pleas against the salary cheats it would be a genuine even competition.

So Subi was a lone voice against the player qual rules? interesting. I remember an ex Joondy president being particularly vocal about such things. And as for salary cheats, you have a very short memory.

Anyway you Joondy lot have a really exciting year ahead with your salubrious tax payer funded elitest clubrooms an facilities to enjoy all by yourselves ... how much did that cost again?