dibo
Well-Known Member
From the thread on the Sharks moving, I had a poke around at a few things - in the Daily Errorgraph there's the following:
The important bit is in bold.
What the f**k is Bluetongue doing offering $100k to people hosting matches at the stadium? Why aren't we getting that cash? If in fact, we are getting $100k guaranteed per game, where is it? That would be $1.1 million per season. In addition to our sponsorship (two years ago that came to over $3 million per season, though I'm sure this has fallen in light of the GFC) you'd think we'd be more than self-sufficient...
My suspicion is that we're not getting anything of the sort, given that previous forum discussions hinted at games costing us about $60k a pop and that we don't break even til we hit crowds of about 13k (which we don't get, hence taking games elsewhere this year to cut losses).
While some may say that this is a payment to entice new tenants and increase total use (in terms of match days that make money for the ground), that money is essentially paid for their by other income source - i.e. us.
How about they *don't* pay $500k to the Sharks and instead reduce the rent to our club or spend more money on improving that joke they call a pitch?
If we're getting screwed, then the club should be going public.
There's no point having a Central Coast club subsidising a part-relocation of a Sydney club.
There's no point in having a Central Coast club moving its games because it can't afford to play at home.
There's also no point having a Central Coast club if the stadium they pay through the nose to use simply cannot provide a surface up to the required standard.
Sharks approve Central Coast move
By Josh Massoud | May 06, 2009 12:00am
A SHOCK move to the Central Coast is now Cronulla's final salvation, with the Shire battlers last night voting to sell off half their home games to survive beyond this season.
Sharks CEO Tony Zappia held urgent talks with NRL boss David Gallop yesterday afternoon about financial incentives to transfer five Toyota Stadium fixtures to Gosford - on addition to one in Adelaide - until 2014.
Zappia then rushed back to Cronulla to address the entire nine-man board, who voted unanimously to endorse the proposal around 8;30pm. Cronulla officials have traditionally opposed any form of relocation, but now have little choice because of the club's dire financial position.
Related Links
Its licensed venue, Sharkies, has been on the edge of insolvency since directors were forced to rely on a $500,000 loan from St George Bank to pay wages over Christmas.
Phil Rothfield's blog: Have Sharks made right move
Management is continuing discussions with the bank about a refinance package to settle some $3 million of debt. But to do so they need liquidity, which is drying up on the back of poor crowds this season.
Zappia budgeted for an average of 13,000 fans a game but has only managed 9000 as the team languishes in outright last place.
Directors have promoted a $110 million residential and business redevelopment adjacent to Sharkies as their saviour, but the plan faces opposition from conservation groups. The board now accepts that even if the long-awaited development is approved by Sutherland Shire Council, the Sharks cannot keep their head above water until its completion.
With the project expected to take several years, a medium-term solution is required to deliver cash flow to stave off creditors and pay wages.
During the past week, that solution has emerged on the Central Coast. Following last night's historic resolution, Cronulla will now host five games over the next five years at Bluetongue Stadium, which offers teams a minimum $100,000 guarantee per match. At their present crowd average, the Sharks are losing about $25,000 a game at Toyota Stadium.
"We need to expand our brand and get into new markets to generate new revenue streams," Zappia said.
"We're landlocked in the Shire at the moment. The fact is we need to create more fans and sponsors, while continuing to service our traditional territory.
"There's an opportunity on the Central Coast for us and we've voted to pursue that."
The NRL is offering Sydney clubs $8 million for wholesale relocation, and Zappia yesterday discussed the possibility of Gallop releasing a portion of that incentive to the Sharks for transferring five matches up the F3. Zappia and Gallop were locked in talks for more than an hour. The pair agreed Zappia would provide a written proposal that Gallop will present to the NRL partnership board at its next meeting.
Gallop said: "We'll consider any proposal but we've always taken the view that relocation only works properly if it's full relocation."
Zappia and Sharks president Barry Pierce discussed the relocation plan last week, before the CEO's visit to NRL headquarters at 4pm yesterday.
Pierce last night accepted that local fans would be upset, but pleaded with them to understand the club's plight.
"We are doing this to ensure the club's survival by broadening our market," Pierce said.
"It's not a merger and it's not a relocation. We'll still be playing big games against the likes of St George Illawarra and the Bulldogs in our traditional area.
The move will be the burning issue in the lead-up to this month's football and leagues club elections, with three candidates challenging the current board over the state of the club.
The important bit is in bold.
What the f**k is Bluetongue doing offering $100k to people hosting matches at the stadium? Why aren't we getting that cash? If in fact, we are getting $100k guaranteed per game, where is it? That would be $1.1 million per season. In addition to our sponsorship (two years ago that came to over $3 million per season, though I'm sure this has fallen in light of the GFC) you'd think we'd be more than self-sufficient...
My suspicion is that we're not getting anything of the sort, given that previous forum discussions hinted at games costing us about $60k a pop and that we don't break even til we hit crowds of about 13k (which we don't get, hence taking games elsewhere this year to cut losses).
While some may say that this is a payment to entice new tenants and increase total use (in terms of match days that make money for the ground), that money is essentially paid for their by other income source - i.e. us.
How about they *don't* pay $500k to the Sharks and instead reduce the rent to our club or spend more money on improving that joke they call a pitch?
If we're getting screwed, then the club should be going public.
There's no point having a Central Coast club subsidising a part-relocation of a Sydney club.
There's no point in having a Central Coast club moving its games because it can't afford to play at home.
There's also no point having a Central Coast club if the stadium they pay through the nose to use simply cannot provide a surface up to the required standard.