Guys, if all you want to talk about is me then start another thread.

Guys, if all you want to talk about is me then start another thread.

Or re-start an old one...

HSOG - You, sir, are a formidable opponent.

I'm sorry to make light (and well done to anyone who got my reference) but this dance has been done to death.

We know all the moves and nothing ever changes; no-one ever changes their minds.

Let's just leave it at we are fortunate to have a number of benevolent fans who have helped put the club back on the right track.

The previous boards are not to blame, and should be applauded for their selfless, and tireless efforts for the club. The current board has done little more than organise the benevolence and we all hope that their selflessness leads to a lasting solidarity with the fans of the club and the finances of the club.

You will appreciate that my true opponent is not Jim Stynes but "truthiness".

I am usually on the Colbert side.

I am on your side with this also.

You will appreciate that my true opponent is not Jim Stynes but "truthiness".

I appreciate that previous boards have become the FEMA of Melbourne's Katrina - blamed for everything.

But, how do I say this delicately, you could use a tiny bit a tact from time to time...

You're probably right but I'm not here to make friends.

If I truly was an ex-boardmember with some shadowy agenda I probably would care about being tactful.

But I'm not and I don't.

Anyway, enough about me.

You're probably right but I'm not here to make friends.

That does beg the question...

That does beg the question...

Same reason as you mate.

Same reason as you mate.

You're here to keep 45HG16 off the turps?!

I guess he does need as much help as he can get...

Haha. I'm not sure we're having much success...

Haha. I'm not sure we're having much success...

Nah, he's one of the good ones. He'll be fine.

(If he's sober.)

We have gone way off topic and I apologise if this is 'unreadable,' thread was done anyway.

Hey, hey! I'm not as think as you drunk I am

This was written prior to the forecast 1.5m operating loss of 2008 which left the club with a projected $4.5m debt at the end of that year. It provides some details about the finanical situation of the club from 2004-7 (i.e. the last handful of seasons). source

- The Club has recorded four consecutive years of profit, and has reduced debt by over 50% from $5.5m to $2.7m since 2004

- The Club recorded aggregate losses of $8.52 million between 1999-2003 (Average $1.42 million/annum)

Yes...another instance of forecasting/expecting/promising X profit only to realise a Y loss. Im not coming here to bash Harris and Gardner. But in all reality they despite some efforts didnt deliver. Harris in particular seems to have got more wrong...than right. Possibly simply genuinely too optimisitc at times. Irrespective the results were the same. Debt..in large quantities. Not all debt is bad...but this kind most certainly is.

We were leaking like a sieve til 2003 when some arguably successful efforts were made to arrest the slide. Much damage had already been done. Others are prudent to highlight the cashflow in all of this. Yes it all gets intertwined in the end reporting but Cashflow is the blood of your business. If its not flowing hard and fast enough..you die. To continue the analogy...we were getting blood pumped from the outside . They are not true revenue streams as such, they are lifelines. The smallish profits paint a false picture of the real situation.

Paul Gardner is an honourable man. He did much that helped the MFC position itself..however he is still a pr-adman at heart and this still comes though in his take on where we were. I will say it was an admirable attempt to show us ( mfc )in a better light. His version is definitely more sound than those sounding our deathknell in the press. But we were still in the sh!t.

- The Club has invested profits from recent years into both debt reduction and football department spending (increased by $500k in 2007 and again in 2008)

- The Club has increased non-AFL sourced revenue by 35% in last 4 years (Vic club average 29%)

- The Club's annual revenue is approximately $28 million/annum or $538k/week lower than the highest revenue Club (Collingwood). Over time, this seriously compromises the ability of Melbourne to be competitive

- The financial result for 2007 ($96K profit) was adversely impacted by player injuries ($400K), reduced match related revenue ($550K) and gaming performance ($500k).

And yet despite this glossing the reaity is we were still haemoraging badly and sliding back to the huge debt. One whose real shape only cameto light upon the changing of the guard. Nomater how anyone justifies/apologies for the huge sums given to the club by the AFL the actuality of it is that without it....we sink. Yes other clubs canbe similarly quoted but I thought we were looking at us.

A major component of the club's cashflow is the AFL.They are in essence sponsoring us. Speaking of Sposors how ludicrous was it that we were staring down 2009 with nothing on our jumpers. The ball was dropped by the club in this matter....almost laughable but for its conseuences. Save for intervention of some very commendable lateral thinking and what can only be described as a 'love' deal with fortunate commercial benefits we would be even further in the mire. Iwilllet both boards share theblame for this. Forward planning should have seen all of this visited and resecured ( or uderstood to be a major concern ) long before expiry. Yes we were everyones flavour of the month werent we...Couldnt get a Zac from anyone.

The Board considered this result to be unacceptable and took appropriate steps.

Yes...they were vanquished

Obviously the project loss of $1.5m in 2008 was a disappointing development but this does not mean that the club was a basket case from 2004-2008. Also bear in mind that the club acheived these results without appealing for unsustainable donation revenue during this period.

History has shown we were exactly that. We were a club who couldnt hit a nail for trying..Projected revenue streams werent met. Projected profits ( real ones ) werent realised. Cash flows were perilous. I would suggest that given the AFL had to intervene calling it all but a crisis that yes, indeed we were very much in a precarious and wobbly position. Until fences were mended our relationship with our creator ( MCC ) was strained at best..acrimonios at worst. Had not the board fallen there was every chance we were going to be roughshod by the AFL.

I dont think the incoming board really had much better a day of it to start. Possibly until the 'books' were revealed to all and sundry the true nature of the clubs health wasnt known or understood. My calling of the ship turning is very much about what happened from here on in. I really had doubts that this club was going to turn itself around. I was very dubious of any crew that had no plan..but only a vision for how it may or may not be had.

Prior to Jim , Scwab and co taking the reigns you could quite fairly sugest the club was in some form of denial. Yes is was aware of its predicament but I think it was bordering on being delusional if it though it would be able to continue along that path and right itself. The auditors were issuing its warning for good reasons. Yes they were overstated in the media , but they were alarm bells no less.

I think much of the recent success in addressing the clubs public image has been to actually make it more of a club again. The rank and file now have more access to the machinations and indeed direction the club seeks. It ( the club ) not only welcomes participationit actively sought it ( summits). there has be a distinct change in approach.

Until recent times we were all but friendless . Just that poor unfortunate minnow of the league. Our training facilites were greatly under par. Our existance described as nomadic, somewhat ironic for the team that bears the city's monicker !! The SHip has turned. The club now has a plan.. a (red & ) blueprint for its future directions. It has been able to garner partners for this building process.

Its very easy to offer up clinical numbers and suggest we werent in such a bad position, but youcant do that without putting it all incontext. You cant dismiss passion as a factor or contributor to tehbootmline for its that very passion that got the debt reductiongoing, got teh debt reductionmonies coming in, that very passion that has seen enthusiasm and belief in this club and it future successes materialise in record memberships.

Not so long ago other suporters openly ridiculed us mercilessly. The media smelt death . Our own supporters wondering when will we ever see a sunny day late in september again. Thats all changed. Even now the fourth estate writes of us as actually havinga window.. just not al agree when but that would always be the case. Many are writing of our promising list and not our balance shet.

Some may be dismissive of explaining a perception in nonnumerical ways but perceptions are built upon many things. Impressions are more often created by how you go about things. And we go about things differently now. Our focus wil lnow be totally on winning, on the positives as opposed to the grey and shabbines of collecting draft picks.

If you dont think the ship has turned... fine.. I do

Go Dees

Oh, jeez, BB59?!

We had peace in our time!

Peace in our time!

Oh, jeez, BB59?!

We had peace in our time!

Peace in our time!

Hadnt you better be off to Myers mate... theres a huge sale in the GLIB dept.

I offer a commnet..you offer your usual.

btw Tafe are offering advance Pot Calling ..right up your alley

Hadnt you better be off to Myers mate... theres a huge sale in the GLIB dept.

I offer a commnet..you offer your usual.

btw Tafe are offering advance Pot Calling ..right up your alley

Wow.

You have a problem with me don't you?

Everything had been said and you just want to go into extra innings with HSOG.

Believe when I say this, the guy will come back at you again and again and he will never see it your way.

Like you, he is smart and stubborn, and there is enough butting of heads in this thread to illustrate where everyone stands on this issue.

Why continue with a battle that sees no ground won or lost?

Yes...another instance of forecasting/expecting/promising X profit only to realise a Y loss. Im not coming here to bash Harris and Gardner. But in all reality they despite some efforts didnt deliver. Harris in particular seems to have got more wrong...than right. Possibly simply genuinely too optimisitc at times. Irrespective the results were the same. Debt..in large quantities. Not all debt is bad...but this kind most certainly is.

We were leaking like a sieve til 2003 when some arguably successful efforts were made to arrest the slide. Much damage had already been done. Others are prudent to highlight the cashflow in all of this. Yes it all gets intertwined in the end reporting but Cashflow is the blood of your business. If its not flowing hard and fast enough..you die. To continue the analogy...we were getting blood pumped from the outside . They are not true revenue streams as such, they are lifelines. The smallish profits paint a false picture of the real situation.

Paul Gardner is an honourable man. He did much that helped the MFC position itself..however he is still a pr-adman at heart and this still comes though in his take on where we were. I will say it was an admirable attempt to show us ( mfc )in a better light. His version is definitely more sound than those sounding our deathknell in the press. But we were still in the sh!t.

And yet despite this glossing the reaity is we were still haemoraging badly and sliding back to the huge debt. One whose real shape only cameto light upon the changing of the guard. Nomater how anyone justifies/apologies for the huge sums given to the club by the AFL the actuality of it is that without it....we sink. Yes other clubs canbe similarly quoted but I thought we were looking at us.

A major component of the club's cashflow is the AFL.They are in essence sponsoring us. Speaking of Sposors how ludicrous was it that we were staring down 2009 with nothing on our jumpers. The ball was dropped by the club in this matter....almost laughable but for its conseuences. Save for intervention of some very commendable lateral thinking and what can only be described as a 'love' deal with fortunate commercial benefits we would be even further in the mire. Iwilllet both boards share theblame for this. Forward planning should have seen all of this visited and resecured ( or uderstood to be a major concern ) long before expiry. Yes we were everyones flavour of the month werent we...Couldnt get a Zac from anyone.

Yes...they were vanquished

History has shown we were exactly that. We were a club who couldnt hit a nail for trying..Projected revenue streams werent met. Projected profits ( real ones ) werent realised. Cash flows were perilous. I would suggest that given the AFL had to intervene calling it all but a crisis that yes, indeed we were very much in a precarious and wobbly position. Until fences were mended our relationship with our creator ( MCC ) was strained at best..acrimonios at worst. Had not the board fallen there was every chance we were going to be roughshod by the AFL.

I dont think the incoming board really had much better a day of it to start. Possibly until the 'books' were revealed to all and sundry the true nature of the clubs health wasnt known or understood. My calling of the ship turning is very much about what happened from here on in. I really had doubts that this club was going to turn itself around. I was very dubious of any crew that had no plan..but only a vision for how it may or may not be had.

Prior to Jim , Scwab and co taking the reigns you could quite fairly sugest the club was in some form of denial. Yes is was aware of its predicament but I think it was bordering on being delusional if it though it would be able to continue along that path and right itself. The auditors were issuing its warning for good reasons. Yes they were overstated in the media , but they were alarm bells no less.

I think much of the recent success in addressing the clubs public image has been to actually make it more of a club again. The rank and file now have more access to the machinations and indeed direction the club seeks. It ( the club ) not only welcomes participationit actively sought it ( summits). there has be a distinct change in approach.

Until recent times we were all but friendless . Just that poor unfortunate minnow of the league. Our training facilites were greatly under par. Our existance described as nomadic, somewhat ironic for the team that bears the city's monicker !! The SHip has turned. The club now has a plan.. a (red & ) blueprint for its future directions. It has been able to garner partners for this building process.

Its very easy to offer up clinical numbers and suggest we werent in such a bad position, but youcant do that without putting it all incontext. You cant dismiss passion as a factor or contributor to tehbootmline for its that very passion that got the debt reductiongoing, got teh debt reductionmonies coming in, that very passion that has seen enthusiasm and belief in this club and it future successes materialise in record memberships.

Not so long ago other suporters openly ridiculed us mercilessly. The media smelt death . Our own supporters wondering when will we ever see a sunny day late in september again. Thats all changed. Even now the fourth estate writes of us as actually havinga window.. just not al agree when but that would always be the case. Many are writing of our promising list and not our balance shet.

Some may be dismissive of explaining a perception in nonnumerical ways but perceptions are built upon many things. Impressions are more often created by how you go about things. And we go about things differently now. Our focus wil lnow be totally on winning, on the positives as opposed to the grey and shabbines of collecting draft picks.

If you dont think the ship has turned... fine.. I do

Go Dees

Bloody Heel BB!! You writing a book mate. Nice sermation though i like it, We The MFC are becoming a club again & importantly i think we are becoming proud to be part of this club again.

May the Hard Work conyinue...

Wow.

You have a problem with me don't you?

rpfc...youre better than the glib-bites you offer. I was actually answering to something.. If you have nothing to add.. do just that... however..VVVVV

Everything had been said and you just want to go into extra innings with HSOG.

Believe when I say this, the guy will come back at you again and again and he will never see it your way.

Like you, he is smart and stubborn, and there is enough butting of heads in this thread to illustrate where everyone stands on this issue.

Why continue with a battle that sees no ground won or lost?

Ive said my fill on this.. he can go at it all he likes.

He wanted more explanation.. I gave it.. finis

I am happy to be swayed.. indeed this whole account shows it. Was sceptical.. now am not.

I only see discussion.. no battle

rpfc...youre better than the glib-bites you offer. I was actually answering to something.. If you have nothing to add.. do just that... however..VVVVV

Ive said my fill on this.. he can go at it all he likes.

He wanted more explanation.. I gave it.. finis

I am happy to be swayed.. indeed this whole account shows it. Was sceptical.. now am not.

I only see discussion.. no battle

I added my fill a long time ago.

No need to dig up a fresh grave.

I have tried to wade through your hyperbole to try and find an argument to oppose. This is the best that I could come up with:

“You are not here to bash Harris and Gardner”

This is incorrect, you stated that the club has been a basket case of the last few years. That is bashing and it is unsubstantiated.

“We were leaking like a sieve til 2003”

This is true. We lost $8.52 million between 1999-2003 (Average $1.42 million/annum). It would be fair to say that Gardner inherited a basket case, Jim did not.

“arguably successful efforts were made to arrest the slide.”

There is not argument that the club made profits between 2004 and 2007. Elsewhere you call these profits “dubious”. Clearly you cannot bring yourself to acknowledge the success of the MFC board between 2004-2007 but the facts are there.

“The smallish profits paint a false picture of the real situation.”

No, the reality of the situation is that we made profits every year between 2004-2007. I know this gets in the way of your Jim Stynes fairytale but those are the facts. We reduced our debt during this period by $2.8million without asking our supporters for unsustainable charity.

“the reaity is we were still haemoraging badly and sliding back to the huge debt.”

No, the reality is that before Jim took over in 2008, the club was expecting to make a loss of around $1.5m. Obviously this is a significant sum and it was a disappointing development for the club. However, this one bad year does not equate to the club “still haemorrhaging.” It does not meant that the club was a "basketcase" for a "handful of seasons" before JIm stepped in. Even in you take this $1.5m into account, the club debt would have been reduced over the term of the Gardner board. Jim inherited a club with less debt that the one Gardner inherited.

”One whose real shape only cameto light upon the changing of the guard.”

There was no secret debt. The club’s accounting was of a high standard and the situation was made clear to Jim as soon as he took over. He did not “uncover” anything.

“A major component of the club's cashflow is the AFL. They are in essence sponsoring us.”

No club can function without AFL money, this is because, in essence, the clubs are sponsoring the AFL. Surely you do not critcise Gardner (or Jim for that matter) for trying to secure as much AFL funding as possible.

“Speaking of Sposors how ludicrous was it that we were staring down 2009 with nothing on our jumpers…. I will let both boards share the blame for this.”

I agree that is was ludicrous. However it was solely the doing of the current board. McNamee was sacking during the most sensitive period of renegotiation for our major sponsor (8 days before the deadline for renewal). The club was prevented from approaching other possible sponsors until the results of this renegotiation were made clear. I have heard some pretty crazy excuses for why Jim couldn’t secure a major sponsor for so long (one poster said that we were waiting for the Australian Open to finish so we could announce it!) Trying to blame the previous board for Jim’s poor performance on sponsorship (poor performance according to you I might add) is the most ridiculous thing I have heard so far.

“Projected profits ( real ones ) werent realised.”

Please give an example? Are you referring to 2008? Because that would be a project profit (singular) and in any case, it was a project loss.

“Until fences were mended our relationship with our creator ( MCC ) was strained at best..acrimonios at worst.”

I mentioned earlier that one of the more promising things to come out of the new administration was this announcement. But, on reflection, it didn’t seem to be anything more than a PR exercise. The club continues to receive money from the MCC, just as it has for a number of years now. The MCC are not obligated to help us in any way. Your unsubstantiated claim the the club had an acrimonious relationship with the MCC continues your trend of trying to make the past look wose so that the present looks better.

“Had not the board fallen there was every chance we were going to be roughshod by the AFL.”

What are you talking about?

“Our training facilites were greatly under par.”

The Casey deal was put together by the previous board. Jim’s board obviously liked it enough to go ahead with it. Having said that, this is about as close as you come to backing up your assertion that the club has been a basket case for the "last handful of seasons" (but it's not very close).

“Its very easy to offer up clinical numbers and suggest we werent in such a bad position, but youcant do that without putting it all incontext.”

And it’s very hard to suggest that we were in such a bad position when all you have is hyperbole and no facts.

“Even now the fourth estate writes of us as actually havinga window.. just not al agree when but that would always be the case. Many are writing of our promising list”

If credit is due to any board here then surely it is the previous board who appointed our current coach and our current football operations manager?

“passion that has seen enthusiasm and belief in this club and it future successes materialise in record memberships.”

The club recorded record membership in 2007 and was poised to do so again in 2008 before Jim took over.

"The rank and file now have more access to the machinations and indeed direction the club seeks. It ( the club ) not only welcomes participationit actively sought it ( summits). there has be a distinct change in approach."

I'm not sure that this is an argument for the club being a "basketcase" for the "last handful of seasons". If anything it is merely a nod to one of Jim's modest acheivments (the summits). TO be honest I think the summit was an ok idea but I don't think it changed much - I'm not really into "perceptions" as much as you are. I wasn't really convinced by Kevin Rudd's summit either. At least the "Heartland" intitiative came out of the demons one (although there is argument about that on this site so I'm not really sure). Jim can justifiably feel proud about starting "Heartland". As a member I don't feel like I have any more control over the club than I did a few years ago.

“You cant dismiss passion as a factor or contributor to tehbootmline for its that very passion that got the debt reductiongoing, got teh debt reductionmonies coming in”

Once again I thank the supporters of the MFC for their passion and their financial support of the club during the donation drive. Of course I doubt that we would have donated so much money this time if the previous board asked held their cap out as well. For what it is worth, I think Jim has managed the donation drive well. Certainly his profile and fantastic history with the club has helped in this regard, although he could have lent his image to any donation drive we had irrespective of whether he was the club chairman or not. I do find it a little rich to call what is essentially a tin-rattle a "debt reduction strategy". I am worried about what will happen when this non-sustainable revenue dries up.

“Some may be dismissive of explaining a perception in nonnumerical ways but perceptions are built upon many things”

I am dismissive on explanaing thing in non-factual ways. Your perceptions are clearly based on fantasy and you don’t want the facts to get in the way of your fairytale. You obviously feel the need to crap on the club’s last few years in order to make Jim look better. Why is this?

"Prior to Jim , Scwab and co taking the reigns you could quite fairly sugest the club was in some form of denial. "

You're the one in denial here pal.

Extra innings it is.

Yeah, yeah...glib. I couldn't give a .... .

Keep going at it you two.

Dollars to donuts - neither of you gets anything out of it.

We can argue the toss as much as we like, but I suspect most supporters are more than satisfied with the job the current administration is doing.

Conflicting recollections and "points of order" do not advance this debate.

Let's just be solid now, behind the footy club.

I have always been behind the football club and I remain behind the football club today.

This is one of the reasons why the preservation of our football club's history is important to me.

This is not a matter of differing recollections. It is about truth.

I have always been behind the football club and I remain behind the football club today.

This is one of the reasons why the preservation of our football club's history is important to me.

This is not a matter of differing recollections. It is about truth.

The club recorded record membership in 2007 and was poised to do so again in 2008 before Jim took over.

Poised to do so again, before Jim took over ?

I recall a late rally of memberships after Jim took over, surpassing the previous record, thanks to Jim's passionate plea.

Do you recall ?

Happy to be corrected on this one.

Yes, the last few hundred or so members signed up after Jim took over. The first 28,000 or so signed up beforehand.

Your point?