Toast 2014 Operating Profit

[GarnerSmash]

The NMFC has recorded an operating profit of $423,074 for 2014 and has knocked off another $700,000 from their debt, leaving another $2.05 million to go.

In am environment where many clubs are recording losses this is a very good result.

 

[Flawed Genius]

http://www.nmfc.com.au/news/2014-12-04/north-records-profit

North Melbourne is delighted to announce an operating profit of $423,074 for the 2014 financial year.

CEO Carl Dilena said the result is significant given the tough economic environment.

"This is more fantastic news for our club as we continue to strengthen the organisation and move in the right direction.

“Our improved off-field position is a credit to our hard working players and staff and highlights our wonderful members and supporters who have contributed generously over the years and enabled us to grow and prosper.”

Dilena said one of the key factors was North’s membership record of more than 40,000. The club was also able to reduce its debt by a further $700,000 while increasing its investment in the football department.

“We are determined to grow our membership further and keep investing in our football department to ensure more on-field success and give Brad and the players every opportunity to improve.

"We have reduced our once crippling debt to just $2.05M. This was made possible through significant fundraising efforts and generous member donations.

"This current Board vowed to wipe out our debt when it took over in 2008 and we are very close to making good on that promise."

Increased support in Tasmania with steady membership and two sell out games bolstered the club’s position along with sensational results on the field which included two brilliant finals wins and a top four finish.

"Credit goes to the players, hardworking administration and football department, but most importantly, our passionate supporters.

"We are in a solid position on and off the field but we must continue to be bold and find ways to grow.

“We must manage our financial position and continue to invest in our football operations which will ultimately help us achieve a fifth premiership and achieve sustained success.”

 

[Flawed Genius]

But yeah, we need Tasmania and we should be looking towards the Map Of as a lucrative partnership.

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

Well done.

I'm furiously buying Lotto tickets to remove the last $2m.

Any day now....

 

[Only Forwards]

But yeah, we need Tasmania and we should be looking towards the Map Of as a lucrative partnership.

I am happy to continue the Tassie agreement long term, I think these are the 2 conditions that should be place upon it.

1. No more than 4 games ever.
2. Any replacement Home game should be scheduled at the MCG.

I would have zero qualms, in fact I would potentially pay extra per year if we got something that felt like a home game at the G against decent Melbourne sides. With reserved seating for reserved seating members.

 

[scooby1279]

Great result but as a business if your making a profit and have debt you use that profit to slowly wipe the debt, i wonder if north are doing this or just relying on members to pay the debt?

 

[TooUglyForFugly]

I don't know if they are allowed to do that.

 

[Lavy_Panther]

This is a good result.

I do not wish to be a wet blanket, but I do note that we would have been given $330,000 for making the prelim final (that figure was the 2013 amount, not sure what it was this year).

Just underlines that our off field strategy is so closely tied with our on field work, at least for the short to medium term. We need to make the most of these few years where we're going to be highly competitive in order to sure-up I've situation if we do nosedive any time in the future.

 

[Lavy_Panther]

Great result but as a business if your making a profit and have debt you use that profit to slowly wipe the debt, i wonder if north are doing this or just relying on members to pay the debt?

Debt isn't necessarily a bad thing. It becomes bad when it becomes, as Dilena describes it, crippling. Essentially if the debt can be serviced satisfactorily without eating into too much of an operating profit it's fine. If you need a large chunk of that profit to service the debt, them you have a problem.

I wouldn't want NMFC to use that 400k to service that debt.

 

[Twinkletoes]

Funky Carl will be on SEN with KB after the 10am news.

 

[roodav]

Great result but as a business if your making a profit and have debt you use that profit to slowly wipe the debt, i wonder if north are doing this or just relying on members to pay the debt?

Nah as a business you pay dividends out to your shareholders and you keep a reasonable level of debt as it's cheaper than equity.

Since NMFC isn't like a normal business then yes the surplus will probably have gone to paying off debt. it's likely there is some non operating income which is why the reduction in the debt is more than the operating profit.

 

[Grogg]

Carl Dilemma you say?

Don't know if I want that one to stick.

 

[GarnerSmash]

Great result but as a business if your making a profit and have debt you use that profit to slowly wipe the debt, i wonder if north are doing this or just relying on members to pay the debt?

They are relying on donations I believe and focussing profits towards on field success.

 

[Higgins2Waite]

The NMFC has recorded an operating profit of $423,074 for 2014 and has knocked off another $700,000 from their debt, leaving another $2.05 million to go.

In am environment where many clubs are recording losses this is a very good result.

So we've raised half of Cameron's wage then.

 

[scooby1279]

They are relying on donations I believe and focussing profits towards on field success.

yeah that is what i figured so if you look at it in a negative way, us members are paying for the clubs crappy previous admin mistakes by continuing donating money.
It is even more concerning that the entire comp as a whole are about $100million dollars in debt.

 

[GarnerSmash]

yeah that is what i figured so if you look at it in a negative way, us members are paying for the clubs crappy previous admin mistakes by continuing donating money.
It is even more concerning that the entire comp as a whole are about $100million dollars in debt.

The other options are to reduce support for the football department, and consequently effect our ability to compete on field, or to reduce support for business development and consequently effect our ability to grow income outside of football. I for one am happy that supporters are paying this off. We are in a precarious position in that without Tassie we simply cannot compete due to lack of alternate income streams. As such we need to be as successful as possible on field to grow the membership and as such grow sponsorship etc and then benefit accordingly in support to key areas of the footy club.

 

[Harvey Manfrenjensenden]

The Shinboner is back

 

[GarnerSmash]

I am happy to continue the Tassie agreement long term, I think these are the 2 conditions that should be place upon it.

1. No more than 4 games ever.
2. Any replacement Home game should be scheduled at the MCG.

I would have zero qualms, in fact I would potentially pay extra per year if we got something that felt like a home game at the G against decent Melbourne sides. With reserved seating for reserved seating members.

The issue with providing reserved seating at replacement games is that it will cost the club. How much will 10,000 reserved seats a game cost the club? I doubt that the MCG/Etihad/AFL will forgo that cost and will want some compensation. Lets just say we get them cheap, say $15 charged to the club per reserved seat membership. If we have 10,000 reserved seat members over 4 games thats $600,000. Thats a lot of money for a club like ours.

 

[scooby1279]

The other options are to reduce support for the football department, and consequently effect our ability to compete on field, or to reduce support for business development and consequently effect our ability to grow income outside of football. I for one am happy that supporters are paying this off. We are in a precarious position in that without Tassie we simply cannot compete due to lack of alternate income streams. As such we need to be as successful as possible on field to grow the membership and as such grow sponsorship etc and then benefit accordingly in support to key areas of the footy club.

totally agree but it gets very tiring that year after year the club is always asking for donations bc it has been run poorly, we are going back to the Greg Miller days as well. Rem if it wasn't for Canberra, Sydney, and now Tas we couldn't compete just an ongoing problem for us.

 

[scooby1279]

The issue with providing reserved seating at replacement games is that it will cost the club. How much will 10,000 reserved seats a game cost the club? I doubt that the MCG/Etihad/AFL will forgo that cost and will want some compensation. Lets just say we get them cheap, say $15 charged to the club per reserved seat membership. If we have 10,000 reserved seat members over 4 games thats $600,000. Thats a lot of money for a club like ours.

how many reserved seating member do we actually have?

 

[Only Forwards]

The issue with providing reserved seating at replacement games is that it will cost the club. How much will 10,000 reserved seats a game cost the club? I doubt that the MCG/Etihad/AFL will forgo that cost and will want some compensation. Lets just say we get them cheap, say $15 charged to the club per reserved seat membership. If we have 10,000 reserved seat members over 4 games thats $600,000. Thats a lot of money for a club like ours.

Then not reserved seating but an dedicated area within the stadium, something like, at replacement homgames the Ponsford stand becomes the North end.

 

[scooby1279]

Then not reserved seating but an dedicated area within the stadium, something like, at replacement homgames the Ponsford stand becomes the North end.

I recall the club having this at the MCG a few years ago, dedicated sections for north members.

 

[Only Forwards]

I recall the club having this at the MCG a few years ago, dedicated sections for north members.

This is something that simply cannot exist at Etihad.

When our replacement homegames are scheduled there we are short changed.

 

[shintemaster]

The issue with providing reserved seating at replacement games is that it will cost the club. How much will 10,000 reserved seats a game cost the club? I doubt that the MCG/Etihad/AFL will forgo that cost and will want some compensation. Lets just say we get them cheap, say $15 charged to the club per reserved seat membership. If we have 10,000 reserved seat members over 4 games thats $600,000. Thats a lot of money for a club like ours.

Here's a wacky idea.

Charge what it costs. I would imagine the number that want this at away games is lower, much lower.

 

[Mr. Blonde]

This is a good result.

I do not wish to be a wet blanket, but I do note that we would have been given $330,000 for making the prelim final (that figure was the 2013 amount, not sure what it was this year).

Just underlines that our off field strategy is so closely tied with our on field work, at least for the short to medium term. We need to make the most of these few years where we're going to be highly competitive in order to sure-up I've situation if we do nosedive any time in the future.

Wouldn't that money go towards match payments, wages, travel costs, etc. for playing extra weeks?