Thats fine to ask members/supporters to donate, but at what stage does will the MFC implement a business model which results in not having to ask us for money?

Thus far the club has done a fantastic job at fixing our the financials/debt, but they cant continue to go to the members???

I just received my 100% Melbourne email which I presume will be followed up with a request for money. I will do my bit as I have done previously.

What I did find startling is the chosen pictures of the players down the bottom of the page.

Not one player in the leadership group has their picture on the email.

It's even more puzzling that one of those in the picture is the club's leading goal kicker, but now is playing for Casey. Strange days indeed...

Thats fine to ask members/supporters to donate, but at what stage does will the MFC implement a business model which results in not having to ask us for money?

Thus far the club has done a fantastic job at fixing our the financials/debt, but they cant continue to go to the members???

I can't see the problem; some are able to contribute some are not, it's purely a request to help out I can't understand why some get so indignant.

I have donated in the past but I won't be now. The aim of the debt demolition and such campaigns was too put the Melbourne Football Club in a position free of debt. This has been achieved. It's now time for the club to stand on it's own two feet and banish the reliance on supporter's own hard earned.

I think your constructive point is full of merit..we all have been generous.. but Schwab and his luitenants have been doing what... loosing our two main sponsors , upsetting our main or a major money man..upsetting our football department.. maybe they- for the free China trip-just maybe they should donate 5% of their salaries..it surely is up to them to plan, organise and direct the income and expenses of the club.. they have had years to get it together.. What are they doing??

I feel they need a rocket up them..it is becoming a joke asking for money all the time..

Edited August 16, 201113 yr by jayceebee31

I donated $100 because I love the club. Simple.

I will be donating a $100 too. I love the club and if blokes like Trenners does too then I owe him money that I will just drink at the local this weekend

Edited August 16, 201113 yr by Clanger King

Relying on fan money isn't a sustainable model and can't be continually relied upon. First it was the debt, now the salary budget. What's next?

You're absolutely right Danny..............I have no problem supporting the club, and throwing in extra where I can when the call comes, particularly from Jimmy, but how many times can the club keep going back to the well.

After wiping the debt and having a clean slate, what are the next stages in the business plan to reach ongoing sustainability, because supporter donations are great, but are not sustainable long term.

Club expenses continue to go up, and we are still a long way behind in many areas compared to bigger clubs.

I'll keep giving, but it is an absolutely fair question to ask the club what it is they are doing from a management perspective to sure up the financial viability of the club into the future........donations are only band aids.

I can't see the problem; some are able to contribute some are not, it's purely a request to help out I can't understand why some get so indignant.

It's got nothing at all to do with being indignant, and more to do with commercial reality.

You cannot expect the club to survive solely on the back of supporter donations forever...............that's not a business, it's a charity.

I will give them "tree fiddy". But if this is a trick by that god damn lochness monster I am going to be [censored]!

It's got nothing at all to do with being indignant, and more to do with commercial reality.

You cannot expect the club to survive solely on the back of supporter donations forever...............that's not a business, it's a charity.

To be honest i think all of the Victorian clubs (and probably all of those other swill clubs) will be asking members for $$$ donations.

I don't think the MFC are the only ones doing it.

Footy is an expensive Habit, and we are in financial hard times, regardless of what that drongo Federal treasurer says.

I am sure we have business plans in place, but free agency is going to change a lot of the current perimeters.

I think the club is trying to build a war chest...GOOD PLANNING I SAY.

Edited August 16, 201113 yr by why you little

Not a bad initiative. However, i think it's pretty bad timing. Why now after a disasterous few weeks. Personally, I would have waited until the dust had settled (even towards the start of next season)

I guess I must have completely the wrong idea. I was under the impression that the players were actually paid by the AFL rather than the club. Isn't that why they're all arguing over how much of the AFL's revenue goes to the players?

To be honest i think all of the Victorian clubs (and probably all of those other swill clubs) will be asking members for $$$ donations.

I don't think the MFC are the only ones doing it.

Footy is an expensive Habit, and we are in financial hard times, regardless of what that drongo Federal treasurer says.

I am sure we have business plans in place, but free agency is going to change a lot of the current perimeters.

I think the club is trying to build a war chest...GOOD PLANNING I SAY.

I'm not knocking the club for doing it and I am sure they absolutely would have thought long and hard about going back to the supporters again after the contributions made to wipe the debt.

It would be good to know though when the club expects to be able to stand on it's own two feet.........that we cannot pay 100% of the salary cap says we are still some way off that, and that is despite record membership this year.

I can certainly see merit in making sure the funds are available to keep the talent on the list, and have no problem tipping in again, to assist.

But at the same time it would be nice to know the whole picture and longer term plan IMO.

I guess I must have completely the wrong idea. I was under the impression that the players were actually paid by the AFL rather than the club. Isn't that why they're all arguing over how much of the AFL's revenue goes to the players?

No, unfortunately not. MFC's multiple revenue streams, including a large AFL payment, but also sponsorship, membership, etc, go into a fat (we all wish it was fatter!) pot of revenue, which the club needs to pay its outgoings. We can pay 100% of the salary cap if we have sufficient revenue (and sufficiently capable players), but at the end of the day, we must balance the books.

The salary cap will be shaped by the AFLPA negotiations with the AFL.

Edited August 16, 201113 yr by Jock Strap

I'm not knocking the club for doing it and I am sure they absolutely would have thought long and hard about going back to the supporters again after the contributions made to wipe the debt.

It would be good to know though when the club expects to be able to stand on it's own two feet.........that we cannot pay 100% of the salary cap says we are still some way off that, and that is despite record membership this year.

I can certainly see merit in making sure the funds are available to keep the talent on the list, and have no problem tipping in again, to assist.

But at the same time it would be nice to know the whole picture and longer term plan IMO.

I heard on good authority yesterday as part of the new bargaining arrangements that it will be now mandatory to pay 100% of the cap to the players, regardless of who is on the list...AFL directive.

I'm I the only one who didnt like the letter? Bad timing for one. We have been disgusting the last three weeks. Secondly he mentions how he has fought for our future and apart from mentioning the foundation heroes has failed to realise that it was the members and supporters who wiped the debt, not an astute business model. Thirdly he reckons that we are only playing the players 92.5% of the salary cap. Considering that the side consists of no current elite players I find it hard to comprehend how paying 100% of the salary cap is beneficial. It would be good to keep Scully but if we lose him its not the end of the world, we will receive compensation. Geelong can fit their whole list within the salary cap, a list which has earned them two flags with sustained success. It has a stable administration which means that players want to remain at the club and have shown loyalty. Who could blame Scully for leaving? We are a basketcase. I know Jim is currently ill, so I am at pains to criticise him, but surely renewing Schwabs contract for another year is a potential waste of money. Garry Lyon is conducting an investigation which will more then likely show that Schwab has been incapable in which he must sacked, ironically the same verdict the board reached on the Friday before the Geelong massacre. The club spent 80,000 on the Andrew's report that was buried. Therefore before asking members for more money the club needs to show that the administration is in some way functioning. Also the on field performances needs to lift considerably. Why should people invest money in the club other then loyalty?

Edited August 16, 201113 yr by sylvias dukes

Can someone enlighten me.

I don't understand why we would pay the full 100%?

I can understand retaining our young players is vital, but if, for example we pay player x this year $200k, won’t that mean in 2 years time when he wants to re-sign with us that he'll want a pay rise, and if we are already paying 100% how can we do it.....

I'm I the only one who didnt like the letter? Bad timing for one. We have been disgusting the last three weeks. Secondly he mentions how he has fought for our future and apart from mentioning the foundation heroes has failed to realise that it was the members and supporters who wiped the debt, not an astute business model. Thirdly he reckons that we are only playing the players 92.5% of the salary cap. Considering that the side consists of no current elite players I find it hard to comprehend how paying 100% of the salary cap is beneficial. It would be good to keep Scully but if we lose him its not the end of the world, we will receive compensation. Geelong can fit their whole list within the salary cap, a list which has earned them two flags with sustained success. It has a stable administration which means that players want to remain at the club and have shown loyalty. Who could blame Scully for leaving? We are a basketcase. I know Jim is currently ill, so I am at pains to criticise him, but surely renewing Schwabs contract for another year is a potential waste of money. Garry Lyon is conducting an investigation which will more then likely show that Schwab has been incapable in which he must sacked, ironically the same verdict the board reached on the Friday before the Geelong massacre. The club spent 80,000 on the Andrew's report that was buried. Therefore before asking members for more money the club needs to show that the administration is in some way functioning. Also the on field performances needs to lift considerably. Why should people invest money in the club other then loyalty?

All fair points SD, but when Free Agency rips through our list in a couple of years will you still be feeling the same way...I think a lot of our off field problems have occured because of Jimmy's illness, and the nature of such..this is not an excuse but it does make it a little understandable, and not insurmountable to fix...(i hope!)

Edited August 16, 201113 yr by why you little

Can someone enlighten me.

I don't understand why we would pay the full 100%?

I can understand retaining our young players is vital, but if, for example we pay player x this year $200k, won’t that mean in 2 years time when he wants to re-sign with us that he'll want a pay rise, and if we are already paying 100% how can we do it.....

The payment strategy is to 'front-load' our contracts to select payers as much as posssible in the building phase of our list. For example, this means a higher salary in year 1 compared to year 3. By doing this, we can pay a higher amount now to select players, and then less in times when there is greater pressure on salaries across a large number of elite players. For example, Aaron Davey was paid more in the first year of his 4 year contract, on the presumption that in year 4 of his contract there would be many others demanding a greater slice of the salary cap. By paying more the salary cap now (with front loaded contracts) we effectively get better value in later years (if the players develop and their value goes up as anticipated)

Geelong did this with great effect and great results over the past few years.

I'm I the only one who didnt like the letter? Bad timing for one. We have been disgusting the last three weeks. Secondly he mentions how he has fought for our future and apart from mentioning the foundation heroes has failed to realise that it was the members and supporters who wiped the debt, not an astute business model. Thirdly he reckons that we are only playing the players 92.5% of the salary cap. Considering that the side consists of no current elite players I find it hard to comprehend how paying 100% of the salary cap is beneficial. It would be good to keep Scully but if we lose him its not the end of the world, we will receive compensation. Geelong can fit their whole list within the salary cap, a list which has earned them two flags with sustained success. It has a stable administration which means that players want to remain at the club and have shown loyalty. Who could blame Scully for leaving? We are a basketcase. I know Jim is currently ill, so I am at pains to criticise him, but surely renewing Schwabs contract for another year is a potential waste of money. Garry Lyon is conducting an investigation which will more then likely show that Schwab has been incapable in which he must sacked, ironically the same verdict the board reached on the Friday before the Geelong massacre. The club spent 80,000 on the Andrew's report that was buried. Therefore before asking members for more money the club needs to show that the administration is in some way functioning. Also the on field performances needs to lift considerably. Why should people invest money in the club other then loyalty?

Some very good points there, and certainly the recent news about the FD issues with Schwab really hurt the positive perception around the club.

Supporters are expected to tip in again and show their ongoing passion, but certain individuals can't even keep their egos in check, and get along for the betterment of the club..........it's very frustrating.

Money won't buy a flag HT, but it may get us Mick.

Which may get us....

Some very good points there, and certainly the recent news about the FD issues with Schwab really hurt the positive perception around the club.

Supporters are expected to tip in again and show their ongoing passion, but certain individuals can't even keep their egos in check, and get along for the betterment of the club..........it's very frustrating.

Behind the scenes the club is constantly raising funds and there is a certain number of influential supporters who put in to the Red and Blue foundation and donate money in other ways by say, employing some of the players. It's usually left to a few to put their hand in their kick and the club recognise this hence the call to the supporters overall.

It's only a request and if you don't want to put in you won't be monitored and your membership card won't be marked with a black stamp.

We the supporters will give %100 but weed out the players who don't give %110 week in week out for our Mighty DEE'S. I will give but can't afford as much as most.

It's only a request and if you don't want to put in you won't be monitored and your membership card won't be marked with a black stamp.

What is this rubbish?

I'm well aware it is only a request........read my earlier posts.

Members are entitled to understand the complete picture when the club is coming to the membership base again and asking for further donations.

There's more to the discussion than your simplistic approach of "if you don't want to give, then don't give".

Donations are not a sustainable revenue source for the club, and it would have been a better sell if the club could outline the series of activities it was undertaking in getting the club back to standing on its own feet, as opposed to just requesting more money.

As I always do, I'll contribute, but a little more context to the request is needed from the club in my opinion.

Some very good points there, and certainly the recent news about the FD issues with Schwab really hurt the positive perception around the club.

Supporters are expected to tip in again and show their ongoing passion, but certain individuals can't even keep their egos in check, and get along for the betterment of the club..........it's very frustrating.

Granted, it is. But many I believe must be bold in uncertain times when there is a few issues to be addressed by the club. It's a critical time. Finding the new coach, etc. We've had 3-4 years of turning the list over and getting some new talent in. The club has increased it's membership over this time and just this year posted a ~10% increase in membership. It's been a turbulent year performance wise and off field not everything has been 'hunky-dory'.

This is a time now when in order to advance further we need to keep up with the top clubs if we're going to be any chance of a Premiership in a few years time. If that means keeping our good players by frontloading contracts and going to 100% TPP, so be it. If it's also a demand in order to snag a topline coach, so be it. Our players need the best available.

And it's a time I believe when our supporters and members need to stick fat if they really want what they crave.