AFL Team Financials - club rankings

Lidge · Mar 27, 2006

From the BRW. Source: Club Annual Reports/BRW

Value

Collingwood ($44m)
Brisbane ($37m)
Hawthorn ($34m)
West Coast ($33m)
Essendon ($33m)
Sydney ($32m)
Geelong ($31m)
Fremantle ($29m)
------------------
Port Adelaide ($27m)
Richmond ($27m)
Melbourne ($26m)
Adelaide ($25m)
St Kilda ($25m)
Carlton ($24m)
North Melbourne ($24m)
Western Bulldogs ($23m)

Total Revenue

Collingwood ($38.61m)
Brisbane ($31.99m)
Hawthorn ($29.46m)
West Coast ($29.0m)
Essendon ($28.44m)
Sydney ($28.0m)
Geelong ($26.59m)
Fremantle ($25.5m)
-------------------
Melbourne ($24.04m)
Port Adelaide ($23.86m)
Richmond ($23.48m)
North Melbourne ($22.38m)
Adelaide ($21.98m)
St Kilda ($21.43m)
Western Bulldogs ($21.23m)
Carlton ($19.80m)

Sponsorship Revenue

Port Adelaide ($14.71m) - includes membership revenue
Essendon ($14.51m) - includes membership revenue
Collingwood ($14.18m)
Fremantle ($12.93m)
Brisbane ($12.69m)
Richmond ($11.58m)
North Melbourne ($11.31m)
West Coast ($11.07m)
----------------------
Sydney ($10.59m)
Adelaide ($10.12m)
Hawthorn ($10.09m)
Carlton ($10.09m)
Melbourne ($7.58m)
Geelong ($7.14m)
St Kilda ($7.00m)
Western Bulldogs ($4.66m)

Football Operations Expenditure

Sydney ($14.61m)
Richmond ($13.96m)
Hawthorn ($13.76m)
Collingwood ($13.06m)
North Melbourne ($12.60m)
Adelaide ($12.43m)
Brisbane ($12.21m)
West Coast ($12.07m)
----------------------
Essendon ($11.76m)
Port Adelaide ($11.64m)
Geelong ($11.04m)
Melbourne ($10.69m)
Western Bulldogs ($10.58m)
Carlton ($10.55m)
St Kilda ($10.38m)
Freemantle ($10.15m)

Total Assets

Essendon ($16.26m)
Brisbane ($14.61m)
Geelong ($13.54m)
West Coast ($12.97m)
Collingwood ($12.03m)
Port Adelaide ($11.33m)
Adelaide ($10.45m)
Hawthorn ($10.22m)
----------------------
Richmond ($8.23m)
Fremantle ($7.23m)
Western Bulldogs ($7.23m)
Sydney ($6.89)
Carlton ($5.23m)
St Kilda ($3.86m)
North Melbourne ($2.76m)
Melbourne ($2.52m)

rick James · Mar 27, 2006

Melbourne rank better than I thought. Low on assets, which isn't too flash (though means our maintenance costs would be down), and our sponsorship is low as expected - but other than that we appear to be improving.

ThePope · Mar 27, 2006

Fremantle more sponsorship than West Coast? I doubt that. Might have included the advancing of the CUB sponsorship money.

And it's not Freemantle.

Lidge · Mar 27, 2006

ThePope said:
Fremantle more sponsorship than West Coast? I doubt that. Might have included the advancing of the CUB sponsorship money.

And it's not Freemantle.

Don't shoot the messenger - from annual reports.

And sorry about the typo, we all know it's Fremental

chapmanmagic35 · Mar 27, 2006

This really indicates the depths of Carlton's troubles.

Good stats.

understudy · Mar 27, 2006

Liabilities?

understudy · Mar 27, 2006

Liabilities?

Unwritten_Law · Mar 27, 2006

North having 4 million dollars more sponsorship than both Geelong and St Kilda is a bit of an eye brow raiser.

Football Operations Expenditure

Sydney ($14.61m)
Richmond ($13.96m)
Hawthorn ($13.76m)
Collingwood ($13.06m)
North Melbourne ($12.60m)
Adelaide ($12.43m)
Brisbane ($12.21m)
West Coast ($12.07m)
----------------------
Essendon ($11.76m)
Port Adelaide ($11.64m)
Geelong ($11.04m)
Melbourne ($10.69m)
Western Bulldogs ($10.58m)
Carlton ($10.55m)
St Kilda ($10.38m)
Freemantle ($10.15m)

Richmond spend their money on Wallet. What the hell do Hawthorn blow it on? 100k for Clarko, 13 million on hair products? Also, I thought North were operating on a shoestring? What the hell. Do the figures include Hawthorn and Norths training updgrades or something?

Lidge · Mar 27, 2006

understudy said:
Liabilities?

Dunno. BRW didn't list liabilities - but I'm also curious to see how the clubs rank in that category.

MarkT · Mar 27, 2006

Interesting to see how high North rank in football dept. spending.

Ripper · Mar 27, 2006

understudy said:
Liabilities?

I would say the "Assets" should be "Net Assets".

*Danni* · Mar 27, 2006

Amazing what clubs can do when they put their brains in gear. Lions had an operating loss of 830k in 2001, the year they won their first premiership and also closed down the social club at the Gabba because it was (and had been for some time) losing money instead of making it.

2002 saw a profit, but one that had members very worried, because it included the sale of the catering rights from the old social club, and in 02 or 03 it might have been, the sale of the land in Stanley St opposite the Gabba was also another eyebrow raiser! Fortunatly for Lions members, it all turned out ok. The formation of the Lethal Lions exclusive coterie for the big time business men to help advise on securing the club future, the formation of the Lions foundation (you can leave money to it in your will to help secure future of the club) and the stock market investments seem to have paid off. We've a decent amount in cash on hand reserves as well - about $6 or 7M I think it was last reported. To still hit the 30k membership mark when we'd only won one game at home by the cut off date, and to make another Mil+ profit when they must have spent at least 500K on the renovations last year at the Gabba offices is something to feel quite good about imo.

*Danni* · Mar 27, 2006

MarkT said:
Interesting to see how high North rank in football dept. spending.

Interesting to see how far the Lions have dropped in that department. Though I'd dare wager it will be back up there again in 2006.

Mister B · Mar 27, 2006

Must say i am surprised at the swans sponsorship revenue considering we have the most valuable jumper est. at over 1 million worth. Especially having seen the kanga's are ahead yet they always seem to be scrounging for more sponsors

Hearts to hearts · Mar 27, 2006

Gobsmacked by North's football operations spending. What on earth is it going on, given the cheer squad knitted our facilities and we bought our coaching dept from Dimmeys?

ps. If its going to the fitness guys who kept nearly everyone on the park all last year, and are now resurrecting the cripples from Glenferrie as we speak, it's money well spent.

Seriously pleased to see revenue and sponsorship numbers, however. What does "value" mean?

loki04 · Mar 27, 2006

GCB85 said:
Must say i am surprised at the swans sponsorship revenue considering we have the most valuable jumper est. at over 1 million worth. Especially having seen the kanga's are ahead yet they always seem to be scrounging for more sponsors

No you don't Collingwood does @ 3 MIL a year , Swans @ 2.2 Mil and then the Lions @2 Mil.

JeffDunne · Mar 27, 2006

I can't believe anyone would read those figures without a good dose of skepticism.

The fact they ranked Adelaide behind Port in every category should indicate the value of these guestimates.

Rawhead · Mar 27, 2006

A better indicator would be averages from the last 5 years, as we all know that the sale of certain assets, or payment of a long standing debt can skew figures somewhat.

Lidge · Mar 27, 2006

JeffDunne said:
I can't believe anyone would read those figures without a good dose of skepticism.

The fact they ranked Adelaide behind Port in every category should indicate the value of these guestimates.

Not guesstimates. The numbers are those as reported in each club's last annual report.

Perhaps some creative accounting applied by some clubs, but these aren't the usual stabs in the dark by a journo, where they pull numbers out if their back passage to fill up a column and meet a deadline.

Z_K · Mar 27, 2006

Those figures have been made up.

North more revenue than the Crows?

Ahm, no.

Mister B · Mar 27, 2006

loki04 said:
No you don't Collingwood does @ 3 MIL a year , Swans @ 2.2 Mil and then the Lions @2 Mil.

As of the last few weeks of 2005 season the Herald Sun reported our jumper was worth the most. Maybe the deli choice boosted your although i thought that was the coach's shirt only. If not my bad.

understudy · Mar 27, 2006

JeffDunne said:
I can't believe anyone would read those figures without a good dose of skepticism.

The fact they ranked Adelaide behind Port in every category should indicate the value of these guestimates.

Also cant believe those asset figures are net.

Would be surprised if all AFL clubs have positive net assets

(would think quite a few would be in negative territory)

MarkT · Mar 27, 2006

JeffDunne said:
I can't believe anyone would read those figures without a good dose of skepticism.

The fact they ranked Adelaide behind Port in every category should indicate the value of these guestimates.

You are probably right but I would have thought they would have got the Annual Reports for all clubs to put their data together.

MarkT · Mar 27, 2006

*Danni* said:
Interesting to see how far the Lions have dropped in that department. Though I'd dare wager it will be back up there again in 2006.

2 things:
1) The cap extension is smaller than it used to be;
2) When you play finals you pay your players more (finals cal allowances) and you have greater non player costs (medical etc).

Pessimistic · Mar 27, 2006

Unwritten_Law said:
North having 4 million dollars more sponsorship than both Geelong and St Kilda is a bit of an eye brow raiser.

Richmond spend their money on Wallet. What the hell do Hawthorn blow it on? 100k for Clarko, 13 million on hair products? Also, I thought North were operating on a shoestring? What the hell. Do the figures include Hawthorn and Norths training updgrades or something?

Hawks extra payments to original clubs because of large number of games by firat year players is a factor

Log In or Create New Account

AFL Team Financials - club rankings

Brownlow Medallist

Cancelled

Premiership Player

Brownlow Medallist

Norm Smith Medallist

Norm Smith Medallist

Norm Smith Medallist

Norm Smith Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Hall of Famer

Brownlow Medallist

Club Legend

Club Legend

Dour Club Veteran

Brownlow Medallist

Hall of Famer

TheBrownDog

Premiership Player

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Dour Club Veteran

Norm Smith Medallist

Hall of Famer

Hall of Famer

Cancelled

AFL Team Financials - club rankings

Similar threads