Jump to content

Dr. Gonzo

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Dr. Gonzo

  1. 8 hours ago, Hell Bent said:

    I'm surprised how few on here seem to have opted for digital! Surely this would save the club a fair bit of coin. 

    In saying that my digital membership hasn't arrived and I've been on direct debit for about 10 plus years.

    Any other digital opters received theirs? 

    Because the chances of it working smoothly for every game are almost nil.
    Especially if you're trying to get young kids through the gates at the same time

    • Like 1

  2. 3 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

    Given PJ and the AFL both signed off on the deal I've got a fair bit of trust that there are things in the works to replace that income.

    Maybe there are. But they haven't been implemented or even communicated. So until we are at least told what this might be I will remain sceptical.

  3. 4 hours ago, pitmaster said:

    I share some of your concern, but we have invested the proceeds of the pokies sale so it's not like there is nothing else there. There are income streams. And pokies have a bad smell about them.

    It's interesting that Geelong announced this week they are abandoning pokies, too.

    Maybe go to the AGM and put your question, then you might learn what the financial strategy is.

    It's not the 80s anymore. People shouldn't have to attend the AGM to get an idea of the financial strategy, the club has 50k members now. The communication should be transparent.

    • Like 2

  4. 3 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

    Missed my point mate. I'm talking about the perspective here, people are acting like pokies are the only thing that will see us succeed as a business.

    I dont think I missed it.

    Income from pokies may not be the only thing that sees us succeed as a business but the lack of that income could see us fail.

    • Like 1

  5. On 12/18/2019 at 5:42 PM, Lord Nev said:

    We will still have revenue from the Bentleigh Club, just not from pokies.

    Also, Jackson said at the time: ‘‘If you take the gaming revenue out of the equation, we need to make up 10 per cent of our overall revenue. Over a two- to three-year period, we will be able to readjust and grow, and we have several ideas on how to do that.’’

    So maybe people are overreacting about the impact of the pokies revenue? At least for now.

    10% of our revenue when we're already in the bottom rungs of the financial ladder. 10% just to get back to where we were when we were already behind the pack and have minimal assets, no training base etc

  6. On 12/17/2019 at 10:36 AM, A F said:

    I don't think we could have predicted an onfield fall from grace quite as dramatic as the 2019 season proved. Therefore, any moderate financial projections saw us breaking even or posting a meagre profit. Instead, an onfield disaster, which is clearly unsustainable and needs to be righted immediately in 2020. 

    Across the business world, businesses are moving towards sustainable revenue practices/streams and often this coincides with ethical wins that can be spun as PR and positive brand positioning in the marketplace. It doesn't matter where I or the MFC stand politically on the pokies, it's a dying business, just like mining and it will eventually go the way of the dodo. 

    Have we moved out of the pokies 5 years too early? I'm not sure. Don't we still have this as revenue stream until 2021? I can understand us waiting to exploit it for the next few years, but equally, those clubs signing 20 year deals are tying their wagons to an industry that will eventually see itself legislated into oblivion. Diversifying the revenue streams at this point is a good strategic move, now we just need our [censored] football team to win some games and things will turn.

    Governments rarely give up revenue, what makes you think they'll ban pokies and give up the revenue that flows through from that?

    A financial model that relies on sustained success is doomed to failure. The only way we could operate that way would be to have so many members they are forced into reserve seat packages at the start of the year which would be extremely difficult given our large home ground, large number of MCC members and low supporters base.

    • Like 3

  7. On 12/17/2019 at 8:14 AM, drysdale demon said:

    Having worked with gambling addicts for 4 years between 2006 and 2010 in conjunction with 2 financial advisors of the salvation army along with the then Major in charge of Southern Australia of the Salvo's and members of Gamblers Help I fully support all sporting clubs to pull out of gaming machines, these machines cause at least 80% of all gambling addictions.

    The machines are still there. It's just that instead of the money going toward a football club it is going towards Woolies and Bruce Mathieson.

    • Like 1

  8. On 12/17/2019 at 12:56 AM, Demon17 said:

    It's not a personal choice for gambling addicts who make up most revenue. Its a physiologogical addiction hard to beat.

    More of them will now move to the hawks venues.

     You know - the Family club  

    Talk about hypocrites

    Yet the AFL still comfortable having a "major betting partner"

    Talk about hypocrites

    • Like 2

  9. On 12/16/2019 at 10:55 PM, whatwhatsaywhat said:

    they're not...but the afl commission, led by anti-pokies strongman richard goyder, is STRONGLY against them and will eventually make it that all clubs divest themselves of poker machine licenses

    And what will the commission do to help those clubs who do divest? What consequences are there for those that don't? Goyder won't be around forever but our pokies revenue is now done and dusted. I can't imagine the AFL chipping in a few extra mil per year to cover our lost revenue.

    • Like 3

  10. On 11/26/2019 at 1:12 PM, faultydet said:

    I think people might be placing FAR too much weight on a baby turning around a once (supposedly) poor attitude.

    How many busted [censored] losers have you seen with kids in tow, durry hanging out of their mouth and kids sans shoes? Plenty.

    Depends how poor his attitude was I guess. Was he a genuine no-hoper or a kid in his early 20s on few hundred K a year partying it up with his mates?

    • Like 1

  11. 1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

    Our coaches haven't shown any great ability to train front and centre or pressure. We've trained up ball winning and I think we've trained up a pretty fit squad (up until last year). And rightly or wrongly we've trained a team that can get the ball inside 50.

    Yeah I'd rather use pick 20, and yes I wonder if the mid sized Bergman or the slightly bigger Weightman were better picks but the speed to the drop of the ball, the taps on, the pressure. There's so much to like. 

    He's not just flukey and flashy, he does all the defensive stuff.

    Has goal sense too it seems. You can't teach that and none of our forwards currently have that.

    • Like 2

  12. 10 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

    Wonder what Pruess makes of this pick? We have Gawn, we have Pruess and we have a 19 year old, 203 cm, ex elite basketballer in Bradke, still learning the game but we have spent pick 3 on a 199 cm ex basketballer, turned under 18 AFL ruckman who can go forward occasionally! This kid better have some serious talent  as a key forward and show it early next season to vindicate this decision, because we don’t desperately need a Max replacement for another 3 or 4 years. 

    Who cares what Preuss thinks? If Preuss demands selection he'll get it if not he'll be off to another club or have a short career. Balls in his court.

    Same with Weideman. Positions won't be handed out, you're gonna have to earn it.


    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1

  13. 2 hours ago, DemonOX said:

    Good luck to him and I hope he does really well for us. 

    I am only concerned if we don’t perform he will off to the weagles as he said Peter Sumich is his mentor who he will remain in contact with and that his fav player is Nic Nat. 

    U can bet Sumich will be pushing for him to go to the weagles especially if we are still crap like this season. 

    Just like Gaff and Judd came back to Melbourne and Lukosius and Rankine back to SA. If we overlook players because they might leave us one day we might as well pack it in.

    • Like 1

  14. 23 hours ago, Baghdad Bob said:

    I can understand the concern at taking someone like Pickett at pick 10 but perhaps we are just a bit ahead of the curve.

    Charlie Cameron and Eddie Betts are two of the most influential small X factor forwards of recent times and neither were taken in the National Draft. Small forwards, in a lot of cases, have been taken late because of the reasons mentioned here.  But good ones are match winners.  If the Betts and Cameron drafts were done retrospectively they'd both be in the top 10, perhaps top 5.

    If we take Pickett it's because we believe he can have the same impact as other elite small forwards.  If we are right we've got a bargain, if not we'll be one of many clubs that have a miss with a pick in that vacinity.

    Personally I hope we take him unless someone we really rate slides.  I believe we have a good list, as Mahoney said our list is pretty much set.  We don't want for a lot as long as our (the FD) evaluation of players is correct (Weid and Petty succeeding for example).  The other thing is that many here overrate pick 10.  It can throw up some guns but it can also throw up some duds.  All pick 10's are guns when drafted but there are a lot of duds amoungst them.  

    We have been crying out for X factor for years. Many here have lamented we don't have it and now as we look like getting it many have gone all gun shy.

    How many other potential small forwards were taken with speculative picks and amounted to nothing?

    I'm not saying the club shouldn't take Pickett (as I have no idea), if they think he's good enough you take him. But 1st round/top 10 picks should always be Best Player Available and not a reach based on needs. Taking Jackson and Pickett is fine if they are considered the best players there at those picks, but if we're doing it to try and fill holes in the list it will bite us on the [censored].

    • Like 1
  • Create New...