Demons achieve profit in 2009

[beelzebub 23,380]

hypocrite.

Could not think of anyone who represents such an entity better than yourself. Take many things out of context.. paint a picture that suits your painfully obvious chip on a shoulder attitude and parade it as such.

Be an apologist for all things mediocre by all means.. some of us are quite frankly sick to death of this sort of rubbish. If you dont like that were a different and better organisation than before...just say so.

hypocrite? you definitely are

[drdrake 3,178]

Hopefully, I'm right in assuming this, next years figures will included the 2009 and 2010 MCG $100,000 per home game a nice 2million. In the written content it is mentioned we will get assistance from the AFL and MCC, assuming this is the same as 2009 and our membership grows we have a very good base for 2010.

[Gooner 9]

The income will be included in the year in which it is earned, therefore the 2009 income is included in the current report, but next year's income is obviously not.

The way principle applies to the prepaid revenue of $900K, that I assume is 2010 memberships. MFC haven't fulfilled a condition to "earn" the income, so they're not included in the profit. For example, if the 2010 season was called off, MFC would be liable to reimburse the members for their membership payments.

[Nasher 33,616]

Congratulations to the MFC for achieving 5 out of 6 years of profit since 2004.

Didn't think you'd be far away when this thread turned up.

[Craig Drinker 179]

Anyone who has anything to do with accounting knows this figure is most likely "window dressed". The fact it's $20,000 shows how well managed the profit is.

For some reason people seem to think a "profit" is important but it has been achieved at the expense of Dylan Grimes (and perhaps the FD desire to honour contracts to Meesen and Newton).

If we had delisted Newton or Meesen and paid them out that would have put us into a loss situation (on an operational basis). But by doing so we could have had a crack at a youngster who may play AFL footy rather than have two players on our list who most probably won't.

Personally I'd have been happier with a loss and a different player than a profit and both of these players. I hope we made a FD decision here and not a PR one.

No matter what is reported there is always a doomsayer from the "Glass is half empty" set. Good news is good news ,let's leave it at that.

It's okay to feel happiness once in a while.

[Demon Tragic 0]

Alot of assertions based on assumptions in this thread! Claiming the board is manipulating the figures without any evidence is pretty poor form IMO! A couple of things I think need to be pointed out though.

Of course income would be down this year, for those who were on another planet for 2009, we went through a Global Financial Crisis this year folks! This would generally results in lower income due to a massive withdrawl of corporate funds for sponsorship and match day functions.

The good news is, that the board were able to react quickly enough to reduce expenses proportionally and keep our heads above water. This is a great effort considering both the economic environment and the year we had!

When you begin to now factor in the improving economic climate, the extra revenues coming in next year from the improved stadium deal and the game sold to Darwin, the future is starting to look extremely bright.

In regards to Dylan Grimes, I'll trust BP's opinion that he wasn't worth persuing. I'm all for the romance of two brothers playing in the team, but you still need to be a good enough footballer (ref - Donald Cockatoo-Collins). We had plently of opportunities to draft him and passed on every single one of them. Ever think there might be a reason for that and it has nothing to do with finances?????

[Keyser Söze 0]

(ref - Donald Cockatoo-Collins)

Ottens was a good choice too.

Such a good choice I can't even remember his first name.

[Gooner 9]

Alot of assertions based on assumptions in this thread! Claiming the board is manipulating the figures without any evidence is pretty poor form IMO! A couple of things I think need to be pointed out though.

Of course income would be down this year, for those who were on another planet for 2009, we went through a Global Financial Crisis this year folks! This would generally results in lower income due to a massive withdrawl of corporate funds for sponsorship and match day functions.

The good news is, that the board were able to react quickly enough to reduce expenses proportionally and keep our heads above water. This is a great effort considering both the economic environment and the year we had!

When you begin to now factor in the improving economic climate, the extra revenues coming in next year from the improved stadium deal and the game sold to Darwin, the future is starting to look extremely bright.

In regards to Dylan Grimes, I'll trust BP's opinion that he wasn't worth persuing. I'm all for the romance of two brothers playing in the team, but you still need to be a good enough footballer (ref - Donald Cockatoo-Collins). We had plently of opportunities to draft him and passed on every single one of them. Ever think there might be a reason for that and it has nothing to do with finances?????

Whilst the GFC definitely had an impact on some aspects of our finances, most noticeably sponsorship income and interest expenses, sport is one area that actually does well during a downturn, as more people spend less time going shopping etc and focus more on the simple things, like going to the footy.

However, you're right in that the extra revenues from the stadium deal, in addition to (hopefully) increasing membership means things are looking promising.

I would've liked to pick up Grimes or Ah Chee or someone like that, however, I guess the FD must've realised that there was a better outcome from picking up a proven performer in McDonald rather than a unknown quantity in Grimes or someone similar.

[Nasher 33,616]

I'd be stunned if the bean counters were making footy decisions. Profit would not have made one iota of difference as to whether or not we took certain players. If it did, we may as well close the doors now.

[Demon Tragic 0]

Whilst the GFC definitely had an impact on some aspects of our finances, most noticeably sponsorship income and interest expenses, sport is one area that actually does well during a downturn, as more people spend less time going shopping etc and focus more on the simple things, like going to the footy.

However, you're right in that the extra revenues from the stadium deal, in addition to (hopefully) increasing membership means things are looking promising.

I would've liked to pick up Grimes or Ah Chee or someone like that, however, I guess the FD must've realised that there was a better outcome from picking up a proven performer in McDonald rather than a unknown quantity in Grimes or someone similar.

Agree that people revert to the simple things, but think the point about corporate dollars remains. This is eveidenced by both the fight we had with the Bulldogs over Mission Foods (where the Doggies dropped thier dacks like a drunken schoolie) and the fact we had to get two co-sponsors on board and could only get the deal across the line late in the pre-season due to some impressive persuasion from Demons alumni to thier business contacts. Future is bright on and off the field.

[H_T 3,049]

I can cut and paste too. :D

Congratulations to the MFC for achieving... profit.

AFL CEO Andrew Demetriou said of the result, “This result is a great credit to Jim Stynes, his board and CEO Cameron Schwab and the enormous amount of work they have done to turn the club around by reducing debt, attracting corporate sponsorship and re-igniting the passion of so many Melbourne supporters.”

We're all in agreeance at Demonland. Hooray. Merry Christmas !

The ship has turned.

[Roost It 1,434]

Congratulations to the MFC for achieving 5 out of 6 years of profit since 2004.

Congratulations to the current board for

1. finally looking long term with regard to the FD.

2. for reducing the massive debt left to the club by the previous admin.

3. for helping to unite a terribly divided and disallusioned supporter base.

4. For returning the passion to our once proud club, you are the first board in my lifetime that has succeeded in doing this.

[Gooner 9]

Congratulations to the current board for

1. finally looking long term with regard to the FD.

2. for reducing the massive debt left to the club by the previous admin.

3. for helping to unite a terribly divided and disallusioned supporter base.

4. For returning the passion to our once proud club, you are the first board in my lifetime that has succeeded in doing this.

Well said!

There's still a long way to go, and we shouldn't be complacent, but we're on the right path to improving both on and off the field.

[Sir Why You Little 37,049]

Congratulations to the MFC for achieving 5 out of 6 years of profit since 2004.

Ahh Hazy, knew you would pop in. Does your above statement take into account that by mid 2008 (including Interest Payments) our debt was spiralling toward $ 8 Million??

In the words of Pauline Hansen " Please Explain??"

Just shows how much our new board has REALLY done-doesn't it.

[hoopla 418]

The club has done very well to contain expenses during a tough year for corporate hospitality etc. Virtually every expense line is down.

Expenses are almost certain to increase as we take advantage of our new facilities and confront increasing salary demands etc. . Increased AFL and the MCC contributions will help - but our financial position will remain marginal until and unless we substantially lift our own recurring income I am delighted to see the club concentrate on building our supporter base and converting our supporters into members .This is the key to establishing the sort of revenue streams we will need to remain competitive in the long-term. We really have to start winning matches to help get more bums on seats.

A great start to a long hard climb!

Edited December 22, 2009 by hoopla

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

......

I dont think the Club is crowing over the profit. They know to well that the bottom line is favoured by things like the debt reduction moneys being taken as revenue in accordance with accounting standards. The reduction in debt results in the reduction of the interest bill going forward and that is a good thing.They know that the the Club has no where near turned the corner. Supporters should not get carried away with this. And the maintaining of Meesen and Newton on the list for 2010 was all about honouring contracts and not fudging a profit.

MFC have yet to develop a sustainable and viable business model and the current board knows that. They are working hard on it just like the previous Board did. However they have yet to formulate and deliver on this.

I would not be popping corks at this stage.

[hoopla 418]

Ahh Hazy, knew you would pop in. Does your above statement take into account that by mid 2008 (including Interest Payments) our debt was spiralling toward $ 8 Million??

In the words of Pauline Hansen " Please Explain??"

Just shows how much our new board has REALLY done-doesn't it.

Actually the previous Board got a lot of this good stuff going - Rectangular Stadium, MCC and Casey - they just had one terrible year financially when the wheels fell off ND's team....

[Sir Why You Little 37,049]

Actually the previous Board got a lot of this good stuff going - Rectangular Stadium, MCC and Casey - they just had one terrible year financially when the wheels fell off ND's team....

Maybe that's correct, but when those wheels fell off, they disintergrated, because by the time Stynesy & Co put up their hand the debt was going up weekly.

Did the PG Board get the MCC/MFC relationship back on track, i thought that was a jimma initiative, but i will be corrected if necessary.

[Gooner 9]

Keeping Meesen and Newton was also about their potential.

Whilst it's great to look forward to the future and consider what every one of the players drafted is capable of, it's no guarantee of success. The chances of us picking a quality rookie that would be massively better than Meesen or Newton is not great, and not worth the risk. They agreed to go on to the rookie list, which we should be appreciative of, as it allowed us to pick up Fitzy and Gawn.

In regards to the two boards. Whilst things were not going well with the previous board, they did set some good foundations, and whilst they made some mistakes, it's likely that this board may make some mistakes. No administration is perfect.

[Sir Why You Little 37,049]

In regards to the two boards. Whilst things were not going well with the previous board, they did set some good foundations, and whilst they made some mistakes, it's likely that this board may make some mistakes. No administration is perfect.

No arguement there, but when the entire debt was revealed i regarded it a little bigger than a small mistake. The Last Board did some good things initially and no doubt worked hard long hours...But something stuffed up badly, whether it was years of Band aids finally letting go or a genuine stuff up we may never know.

But once it started to go down hill the out going board could not stop it.

If Jimma had not come along, i think we might have been interstate by now. We had no home, sponsors were not renewing and a huge debt-no wonder Vlad caned us.

In retrospect i am so glad Demetrio got stuck into this club-He woke us up. No longer was the name MELBOURNE any good to us-we had to earn it.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Maybe that's correct, but when those wheels fell off, they disintergrated, because by the time Stynesy & Co put up their hand the debt was going up weekly.

Never let the facts......

The previous Board agreed to stand aside when Jimmy Stynes lead his ticket to take control of the Board.

By the way Vlad caned us because he did not know what MFC stood for? I dont think that issue has been clearly answered. Its only work in progress at the moment.

[grant 10]

No, my point is anything but flawed because I recognize in my first post that it might have been a FD decision and not an accounting decision.

I think on balance that you're right; I think that it's important to honour contracts, but it doesn't mean the other view is without merit or consideration.

I understand your argument peanuts and likewise hope it was a FD decision.

[Rogue 585]

I think many are excited at a "profit". They like the word, it's certainly better than "loss". But the reality is that a $1 profit is pretty much the same as a $1 loss, the club would be in an identical situation (in an accounting and business sense).

Good point.

[Sir Why You Little 37,049]

Never let the facts......

The previous Board agreed to stand aside when Jimmy Stynes lead his ticket to take control of the Board.

By the way Vlad caned us because he did not know what MFC stood for? I dont think that issue has been clearly answered. Its only work in progress at the moment.

No that issue is a long way from being resolved, But it's in a hell of a better and healthier state than it was 18 months ago.

[Sir Why You Little 37,049]

The previous Board agreed to stand aside when Jimmy Stynes lead his ticket to take control of the Board.

I have total admiration for PG in the way the seamless handover was done. He knew he was licked, & he knew the MFC needed Jim at that moment.I hope he & the previous board gets to many games.