Apologies if this has been discussed elsewhere, but I saw in the age today that Melbourne have got the licences for approx. 100 pokie machines for the next decade.

Whilst I find the whole idea of the pokies morally bankrupt, I'd be interested if anyone knows whether this means we will have more/less/the same income stream from them as we have had previously.

Apologies if this has been discussed elsewhere, but I saw in the age today that Melbourne have got the licences for approx. 100 pokie machines for the next decade.

Whilst I find the whole idea of the pokies morally bankrupt, I'd be interested if anyone knows whether this means we will have more/less/the same income stream from them as we have had previously.

Yeah, this was posted a week or so ago and I can't understand why the Age ran with a story that we already knew and they had already reported.

Strange.

But a lot of this has been covered.

Yeah, this was posted a week or so ago and I can't understand why the Age ran with a story that we already knew and they had already reported.

Strange.

But a lot of this has been covered.

Only difference is that in the Age it said we paid $2m instead of $400K, a significant difference.

Only difference is that in the Age it said we paid $2m instead of $400K, a significant difference.

Technically both articles would be correct -

Think you will find you could secure your machines two ways ...

1/ Pre ballot where we would have secured x amount of machines at a pre-determined price - which makes perfect business sense. Because with zero machines you would have zero income.

2/ During the ballot - which we would have allocated funds to buy the "balance of our machines" However, this is where the State government made an error and was a huge win-fall for the club. Hence where the 370K figure comes in.

So in total would would have allocated close on 4 million to buy "all" our machines but have only been forced to pay marginally under 2 million.

It would have been a very "risky" strategy to try and secure all of your machines in the ballot due to the "un-know" price you would have had to pay. However, with the value of hindsight this "strategy" would have been even more profitable due to governments error in setting too low a minimum price during the "ballot".

The only compensation for the government is that it gets the funds up-front for the 10 year lease. However, this is MASSIVELY offset ... because the club benefits long-term by a reduced pay-out to the government via "no government take." Hence making the machines very, very profitable.

Long-term we are a huge winner as is any other poker machine venues who purchased machines via the ballot.

Edited May 22, 201015 yr by hangon007

Technically both articles would be correct -

Think you will find you could secure your machines two ways ...

1/ Pre ballot where we would have secured x amount of machines at a pre-determined price - which makes perfect business sense. Because with zero machines you would have zero income.

2/ During the ballot - which we would have allocated funds to buy the "balance of our machines" However, this is where the State government made an error and was a huge win-fall for the club. Hence where the 370K figure comes in.

So in total would would have allocated close on 4 million to buy "all" our machines but have only been forced to pay marginally under 2 million.

It would have been a very "risky" strategy to try and secure all of your machines in the ballot due to the "un-know" price you would have had to pay. However, with the value of hindsight this "strategy" would have been even more profitable due to governments error in setting too low a minimum price during the "ballot".

The only compensation for the government is that it gets the funds up-front for the 10 year lease. However, this is MASSIVELY offset ... because the club benefits long-term by a reduced pay-out to the government via "no government take." Hence making the machines very, very profitable.

Long-term we are a huge winner as is any other poker machine venues who purchased machines via the ballot.

And what makes me want to puke is that Carlscum got 260 of them at $5.5k each. They paid $1.4m for 260 and we paid $2m for 92. They will not struggle financially anymore and that really upsets me.

I suppose that's the upside of having a Pokies magnate as one of the club's biggest supporters... Would be nice for the MFC to get an armchair ride like that once in a while though...

I suppose that's the upside of having a Pokies magnate as one of the club's biggest supporters... Would be nice for the MFC to get an armchair ride like that once in a while though...

Joe Gutnik says hello

And what makes me want to puke is that Carlscum got 260 of them at $5.5k each. They paid $1.4m for 260 and we paid $2m for 92. They will not struggle financially anymore and that really upsets me.

Yip ... well ... they rolled the dice and won big-time.

Yip ... well ... they rolled the dice and won big-time.

Not exactly sure they rolled the dice.

I have a feeling they had a bit of help...

Not exactly sure they rolled the dice.

I have a feeling they had a bit of help...

"feeling" ... but I wont disagree with you. However some would say .. "But thats business! Who you know not what you know"

Now ... that assuming I'm correct with what you are alleging.