Association model makes sense from a financial standpoint . . .in theory.

You have district clubs run their own domestic competition - ala Sturt/Forestville with City South.

Best of these go up to play in the district comp. Ideally, as has been discussed previously - you have only three divisions. Everything else is social ball.

So then you can spoil the elite and charge accordingly, while making a far-more cost-effective sport for the social teams and not over-promising and under-providing. (Currently div 1 kids get best coaches, while div 5 - who still pay the same fees, get someone's (good-intentioned) dad)

District clubs have an income stream with the domestic competition, which helps fund more income-generating endeavours (do NOT put into ABA programs - as happens in Eastern States).

The problem - BSA loses money at the div 4/5 level which will go to the club-run domestic comp. How do they make this money up? Charge more?

The second, more pressing problem, is where exactly are these domestic competitions going to be run? Adelaide has a chronic facility shortage, and any talk of domestic, association-based competitions is simply logistically unrealistic.

So - get more stadia THEN talk about association-based intiatives. We need at least three more courts at every district club - just ask the poor souls at each club in charge of booking training venues!

304, based on what you've said, are we the only mainland state without an association model.

314, my understanding is this. The association model in SA would be that the state comp would be Div 1/2 and the 3/4/5 comp would be more of a zone comp.

IE, The Div 1/2 comp could be made up of any team, both Adelaide teams and country teams, but based on skill. eg the spots could be:
Murray Bridge, Barossa, Sturt, Forestville, Centrals, North Adelaide, Port Pirie, Norwood, Mavs, Willunga

The 3/4 comp would be more of a City South type comp where players don't travel as far. eg you could have City North (West, North, Centrals) where those teams play in the north, City Central (Norwood, Torrens Valley, Woodville, Mavs, Magic) and City South (Sturt, South, Southern Tigers, Forestville)

The 5 comp would be your local basketball rec centre.

How would other sports do it?

So would it be correct in saying that this would actually mean that only the best players would be playing district basketball, not just anyone who can afford the fees and has a spot available to them?

The best teams should be playing at the highest level

There should be no question that an association model would boost participation.

If only a couple of clubs in Adelaide are running competitions that is a travesty.

The structure should be:

National Body
State Body
Association
Clubs

Where the best players from associations play in representative competitions managed by the state.

In other stats virtually no clubs control venues, they are controlled by the associations.

If considering any more than a D1 and D2 playing across venues, then that is interesting. (seniors obviously)

Local basketball venues should be running masses of competitions for their local community.

The measure for success would be that your venue is so full of local competition that on Monday through Friday and all day Saturday your own representative teams should NOT be able to get on the court to train.

#224353...not sure about NSW. but in Vic Eltham and Bulleen like to tell people they are a club...but they are in fact an association. They run competitions, and they participate as clubs in leagues like VJBL and EDJBA... but they have a firm status as an assoc, and they vote as an assoc.

Technically (and enforceably), and here is the governance issue...a club cannot affiliate with Basketball Victoria...which is perhaps where BSA are looking to go. Clubs cannot vote at BV.

In Queensland they have associations but no clubs affiliated with BQ to my knowledge.

#224355.

Sorry and I do npot want to be rude but that is not correct. Yes they call themselves a club, yes they compete as a club. However, running social competitions is EXACTLY what makes them an association in terms of affiliation with BV. Go and check BV's constitution, its on their website. Bulleen can vote at BV's agm, you cannot do that unless you have association status.

(and yes I know Bulleen proudly and adamantly call themselves an club - nothing to do with their affiliated status with BV unfortunately - quite simple there is nothing in BV's constitution that alloows clubs to join)

Sorry 355, but HO is right. Bulleen is most definitely an association.

The kids that play for the bulleen club also play in the association in other clubs.

#224393

There are associations in this ountry that number less than 100 members (tiny country towns) that manage to run their own competitions in single court venues so why can't north, norwood etc.?

What is the problem, are you saying they are incompetent? Do they not have the personnel? Is it venue based?

Can someone list the clubs here in Adelaide and the number of courts each has at their disposal?

HO is right on the money.

Check the BV website for the governance details. Bulleen is an Association and competes in the VJBL as an Association, with the "Bulleen Boomers" their representative teams and in the senior representative competitions. Their domestic junior feeder club is "Bulleen-Templestowe Boomers" that competes in the EDJBA. Bulleen also run their other social competitions as well. Other Associations such as Eltham, Blackburn, Warrandyte, Doncaster etc are run the same way in the same competitions.

#224393 You make some very intelligent and interesting points; however to point to city south as the reason why this type of model wont work is unfair.

The comp was originally set up under totally different circumstances and has stagnated some what due to lack of new teams which is the number 1 issue amongst players in the comp. They play the same teams week in, week out.

The other major problem is that it is only held on Sunday and normally late afternoon. I have never found any body involved with City South that are thrilled with this aspect of the comp.

The inclusion of one or two more clubs was a long term goal of City South. For one reason or another this has never happened, I believe to the detriment of the competition. It is ironic that the two clubs that it was hoped would join seem to have stagnated and lost a lot of ground in the last few years.The model can work. It just needs more teams than it currently has.

Most importantly, City South needs a strong commitment by both founding clubs to run the competition as was originally tabled.

An association style comp can work; however BA are dreaming if they think they can get this type of model up and running in 6-12 months, as I believe they think they can.

Try 3-4 years of detailed planning, then we may be ready...maybe.

Venuues my friends. Our games is dominated by venues and the massive capital costs to build them. Venues are a stranglehold on our sport in this state. BSA need to help clubs but clubs need to get their own venues. Most clubs spend $50-$60 K per yr in court hire alone.

If clubs get control of the venues, improve social comps and control the canteens its pretty easy to see the massive revenue opportunities. I am thinking that clubs could pull in 300-400 K revenue if they controlled venues. With that income 3-5Million for a stadium does seem more affordable to the clubs.

However the capital cost is the killer. A joint capital funding model needs to be developed by BSA for councils, schools, private investors and clubs to jointly fund the ownership of stadiums and include non-financial (IE social) returns to entice government and councils to invest in the model without demanding significant financial returns. The venues could be majority owned by clubs, in joint venture partnerships with the other parties. Councils and schools are not neccessarily in it for the profit and much of the required capital could be secured from these parties.

THen its just up to the clubs to run the business and cover the ongoing capital costs of the stadium.

Available hours

Monday 4pm - 6pm 9 games
6pm - 11pm 18 games

Tuesday 4pm - 6pm 9 games
6pm - 11pm 18 games

Wednesday 4pm - 6pm 9 games
6pm - 11pm 18 games

Thursday 4pm - 6pm 9 games
6pm - 11pm 18 games

Friday 4pm - 6pm 9 games
6pm - 11pm 18 Games

Saturday 8.30am - 1pm 21 games
1pm - 11pm 36 games

Sunday 8.30am - 1pm 21 Games
1pm - 11pm 36 games


For a 3 court stadium

Senior games
Maximum 72 games per week 72 x $27.67 per game = $1,992.24 per week x 45 weeks p.a. $89,650.08 p.a.

Junior games

Maximum 48 games per week 64 x $19.76 per game = $1,264.64 per week x 40 weeks p.a. $50,585.60 p.a.

Miniball
Maximum 60 games per week 60 x $17.34 per game = $1,040.40 per week x 36 weeks p.a. $37,454.40 p.a.


Miniball $37,454.40

Junior $50,585.60

Senior $89,650.08

Total $177,690.08

That doesn't include player or team registrations/nominations, camps, school holiday events or bar and canteen revenue.

For a 3 court stadium at capacity like Wayville of Pasadena, you would be looking at over $250K.

Ummm:
pa... for a 3-4 court venue with a descent canteen and "cafe" area.

40 - 50 K district training

200K in social comps. 15 players per game on 3 courts, 1 game per hour, 9 bucks to play. 6 hours x 6 days per week. 42 weeks of the yr. Well that comes to $600K but it would be at least $200K

250K in canteen revenue probably closer to 350 K if it was licensed.

Ranting, where do you get the per game figures from. $27 per game, wouldnt it be more???

Low side estimation with reasonable priced competiton.

Miniball Income $24 per team = $48 per game

1 court 2 courts3 courts
Cost Refs $14 $14 $14

Door $10 $5 $3.33

UIC $10 $5 $3.33

Total $34.00 $24.00 $20.66

Profit $14.00 $24.00 $27.34

Junior Income $34 per team = $68 per game

Costs Refs $20.00 $20.00 $20.00

Door $10.00 $5.00 $3.33

UIC $15.00 $7.50 $5.00

Total $45.00 $32.50 $28.33

Profit $23.00 $35.50 $39.67

Seniors Income $45 per team = $90 per game

Costs Refs $24.00 $24.00 $24.00

Door $10.00 $5.00 $3.33

UIC $15.00 $7.50 $5.00

Total $49.00 $36.50 $32.33

Profit $41.00 $53.50 $57.67

Zoning!

Well there goes anymore intelligent debate; take it away guys.

the general view is that you can generate 150k + per court per annum provided that court is used for competitions and provided you max out the use of those courts for competitions....so

- you play all day Saturday
- you start play at 4pm not 5pm weekdays
- you run 10pm games
- you run 45 minute slots for juniors not 50 or more
- you only ever run 2 week final series
- in juniors, all teams play finals and classify right so you have play-offs for 11th and 12th eg
- you charge a door entry to EVERYONE and then charge the team a game fee or, players pay on an individual basis to play ($6.00 for juniors/$9.00 for seniors)

Anyone running a 3 court stadium run with a business like approach can turn it into a cash cow.

I know a Melbourne association paying $40 - $50 per hour court hire at all of their courts and they are rolling in cash. (they hire private school gyms in the hawthorn/kew area)

HO quoted the Hawthorn BA in Melbourne, and they do in fact pay for some courts such as Reyton Girls School in Kew and Melbourne Girls College at a rate of more than $40 per hour to hire those courts.

I know of other Associations that may just $18 per hour for some other courts in outer suburban areas as well.

However around $26 to $30 mark is what many Associations in VIC pay for their court hire.

This thread started talking about revenue only, and yes you need to add in expenditure.

The fact is if venue's and/or competitions are run proparly as a business entity, then there is a lot of money there to be made.

There is a current SA club paying $50k per year in court hire at 1 venue.

#224456

I was talking revenue, not profit in refering to the 150k. Of course there is insurance and lighting and referees fees and cleaning and all that stuff. But on the income side i have not factored in player registrations, team registrations, casual court hire etc.

And the 150k+ factors in school holidays etc. Aggressive associations maximise their use of these...they use the first and last saturday for comps, they run camps, senior competitions continue through school holidays etc.

Most associations use their courts at least one long weekend per year for tournaments, and generate extra revenue. the eltham tourney is a classic for that - they use heaps of courts all over melbourne on the Australia Day weekend. I know a medium size country association that last year netted 40k on a tournament.

Depending on the deal some associations do not pay court hire... some pay an annual fee to their council. Some as high as 20-30k per court per annum, such as low as $1.00 per annum per court.

BTW i know of two venues in Vic charging over $50.00 per hour for court hire. They are exceptions but the point about court hire costs is that Hawthorn, even with very significant coirt hire costs in most of their venues, make very good money.

s club 7 rock...

how many courts at the venue? do they control the canteen? are they responsible for cleaning and maintenance?

You can just look at 50K and say thats a lot until you know what that actually means..

It is the cost per year to hire an extra venue apart from their home stadium in which they run their own canteen.

Ranting games till 11pm on Saturday and Sunday?? Come on be serious. Canteens taking 250 000? i don't think so. As prcies go up for everything else canteen spending is the first thing that will go. I think you guys have never run a business or are in fantasy land. Perhaps through the boom of basketball you might have a chance but now days not likely. It is all very well to hope that you will say that you will fill stadiums but i think you unrealistic in what you are saying. i am sure it happens in interstate but it will not happen Adeladie. Population is not big enough.

501, why do you think the WA system it so successful?

Accountant - remind me not to see you when I do my tax.