22 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

It's dramatic for many on this Forum who consider the MCG tenancy sacrosanct. Unfortunately it's no longer a discriminator and we very rarely get crowds (50k plus) that make it buzz financially.

It's worthwhile remembering that even Essendon have a shared ground concept with the their army of supporters

We get very good crowds when we play other Vic based clubs.

3 hours ago, jackaub said:

what profit do we earn from poker machines anyhow?

This graphic taken from a Herald Sun article in April - shows clubs revenues from Pokies in yellow...we'd need to find something like 22-25% of $45M in revenues equivalent if we were to drop the pokies. It's a problem - the difference between Nth Melb and Carlton is only the pokie generated revenue.

5 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

We get very good crowds when we play other Vic based clubs.

how many home games do we get that attract more than 50k.

Collingwood and Richmond (recently)

To make money you need to create a rarity factor ... we will not get it at the MCG

Love the MCG myself but financially it is not a good fit for MFC

4 minutes ago, small but forward said:

This graphic taken from a Herald Sun article in April - shows clubs revenues from Pokies in yellow...we'd need to find something like 22-25% of $45M in revenues equivalent if we were to drop the pokies. It's a problem - the difference between Nth Melb and Carlton is only the pokie generated revenue.

Thanks for this. Does anyone know why Adelaide gets so much of its revenues from the AFL? I had always thought that the Crows were an independently wealthy powerhouse club.

Given the amount of Collins St finance gurus that would have to be MFC/MCC supporters, we need to find the most creative ones, and get them working with us.

What do I mean by this?  I'm told the Geelong Football Club have at least one gamin venue that they receive profits from, that is not "on their books" so to speak.  Rightly or wrongly, even if the AFL change to rules with regards to gaming income, there will be clubs that will still make money from them.

The other option is to create additional income streams.  The Richmond Football Club are developing their Richmond Institute of Sports Leadership division.  They are working in partnership with Swinburne University to offer a program that is partly run at the RFC, where they have access to all their facilities.  I'm not sure what sort of financial agreement they have, or what financial benefit they receive from it, but it's becoming more and more popular each year.  I do think we have an alliance of some description with the University of Melbourne, so perhaps there's an income stream there that can be explored.

To raise more money for the club, on top of the dollars we currently give via membership, raffles, game day things, the club needs to offer products/services that we all currently pay for, and have our own option.  But instead of offering its of little things that will make us bugger all, find one thing that we can do bloody well, so that we can build it strongly each year.  We also need to find something that isn't just restrictive to Melbourne supporters.

1 hour ago, DaveyDee said:

Ah - the good old chicken and the egg argument. Not a problem - cheers. 

DaveyDee, you are extremely dedicated to the Dees.  Are you saying that we can't win a flag unless we throw a heap more cash at our Football department?

Didn't we already get a truck load of cash chipped into our club by loyal supporters Foundation Heros?

 

2 hours ago, DaveyDee said:

ok - you have told me the problems (thank-you) - now what is the solution?

Baring in mind suggestions for alternative revenue streams you would pay for? 

Most probably, if the Club went down this path that I have described wherein junior supporter groups were encouraged and developed, I would make a commensurate donation to such a process if it was agreed by other members, including more face contact with juniors that may become 'special' Club members with functions held in their encouragement. 

39 minutes ago, drdrake said:

DaveyDee, you are extremely dedicated to the Dees.  Are you saying that we can't win a flag unless we throw a heap more cash at our Football department?

Didn't we already get a truck load of cash chipped into our club by loyal supporters Foundation Heros?

 

I'm a very positive person I would never, never use the word "can't" - What I would say is all the AFL evidence points towards the more you sustain the spending inside the football department the closer you are to a flag.

So when we lose a revenue stream you have to replace it - if we dont it might take 15-20 years to win our next flag - maybe longer.  

I can wait, time is not a problem. However, we need to be blunt we have many ageing loyal supporters who may not see the day. 

Our Foundation heroes did a very good job. 

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Thanks for this. Does anyone know why Adelaide gets so much of its revenues from the AFL? I had always thought that the Crows were an independently wealthy powerhouse club.

I'm led to believe - dont quote me. Crows AFL licence is owned by the SANFL so this is the way the AFL supports grass-roots/local football in that state and it goes back to the inception of the Crows.  

Not selling games to NT

47 minutes ago, DaveyDee said:

I'm led to believe - dont quote me. Crows AFL licence is owned by the SANFL so this is the way the AFL supports grass-roots/local football in that state and it goes back to the inception of the Crows.  

 

Here's another site that has the same figures but an easier and bigger break out. Adelaide tops or near tops many areas. For example its revenue from games played is 22M against ours of 7M. It's 4th in the sponsorship stakes and doubles us in that area.

http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=2946

The revenue from pokies has the affect of skewing the figures in the sense that the profit margin relative to turn over on pokies is low. It doesn't need to be high as the real measure is return on investment not turnover.

The writing is on the wall about AFL and pokies. Only takes some pressure from the big sponsors and clubs will be forced to give up that little earner. Port Adelaide only gets a small pokie revenue (probably goes to the local Magpies) but other than them no interstate club is on the pokies spiral.

Edited November 21, 20177 yr by Diamond_Jim

1 hour ago, Diamond_Jim said:

 

Here's another site that has the same figures but an easier and bigger break out. Adelaide tops or near tops many areas. For example its revenue from games played is 22M against ours of 7M. It's 4th in the sponsorship stakes and doubles us in that area.

http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=2946

The revenue from pokies has the affect of skewing the figures in the sense that the profit margin relative to turn over on pokies is low. It doesn't need to be high as the real measure is return on investment not turnover.

The writing is on the wall about AFL and pokies. Only takes some pressure from the big sponsors and clubs will be forced to give up that little earner. Port Adelaide only gets a small pokie revenue (probably goes to the local Magpies) but other than them no interstate club is on the pokies spiral.

I would be very surprised ifthe AFL didnt continue to support us on this issue -

However, many MFC supporters do hate the AFL and they never stop telling us around this site - so you never know. 

3 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Here's a couple of stories from The Age and The Herald Sun which address this issue. And it's probably also relevant that the President of Geelong, Colin Carter, is also on the Board of World Vision, so he'd be getting plenty of free "advice" from anti-pokies activist, Rev Tim Costello.

"Last month the Andrews government announced the next round of gaming licences in 2022 would be granted for 20 years, double the current agreement, and also moved to allow clubs to double the number of pokies they operated in their group to 840, allowing AFL clubs to increase their market share."

 

That's the only part of the article that is relevant. When the AFL stops accepting money from betting agencies and Crown and stops the incessant gambling talk on its broadcasts and at grounds and when they create a fair and equitable competition then maybe we'll listen. Until then they can get stuffed.

4 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

"Last month the Andrews government announced the next round of gaming licences in 2022 would be granted for 20 years, double the current agreement, and also moved to allow clubs to double the number of pokies they operated in their group to 840, allowing AFL clubs to increase their market share."

 

That's the only part of the article that is relevant. When the AFL stops accepting money from betting agencies and Crown and stops the incessant gambling talk on its broadcasts and at grounds and when they create a fair and equitable competition then maybe we'll listen. Until then they can get stuffed.

I sense some hostility toward gambling, Dr G.

3 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

how many home games do we get that attract more than 50k.

Collingwood and Richmond (recently)

To make money you need to create a rarity factor ... we will not get it at the MCG

Love the MCG myself but financially it is not a good fit for MFC

2017 games against Melbourne-based clubs at the G this year:

85,657 v RIC

46,727 v CAR

38,693 v HAW...most of their supporters had already jumped ship for the season

33,18 v NOR...norf had no ship to jump off

70,926 v COLL

53,114 v STK

51,223 v COLL

And despite having games in Darwin and Alice Springs, we still came in 8th for attendances in 2017. So I think it's a myth that Melbourne cant pull a crowd.

6 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

2017 games against Melbourne-based clubs at the G this year:

85,657 v RIC

46,727 v CAR

38,693 v HAW...most of their supporters had already jumped ship for the season

33,18 v NOR...norf had no ship to jump off

70,926 v COLL

53,114 v STK

51,223 v COLL

And despite having games in Darwin and Alice Springs, we still came in 8th for attendances in 2017. So I think it's a myth that Melbourne cant pull a crowd.

only one of the Collingwood games was a home game... so that makes three games.

50k at the MCG is bare minimum  ... it's not a great payday when the break even factor is around 25k

You need to regularly punch into the near sell out numbers so you can sell the reserved seats

(not sure why "[censored]" was censored. It refers to the punishment commonly inflicted on sailors and others in the 18/19th century)

Edited November 21, 20177 yr by Diamond_Jim

9 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I sense some hostility toward gambling, Dr G.

hahaha - classic well said.

Dr G has a very interesting argument - I wonder what would be the implications for the MFC if the AFL does "stop accepting money from betting agencies and Crown and stops this incessant gambling talk."

Was it not the AFL that was forced to take the Federal Government to court to allow the adds otherwise some AFL clubs would be financially ruined? 

Geez maybe an alternative source of revenues is more important than i even thought. 

To be honest it's the NRL who are absolutely dependent upon pokies.

AFL has a opening to ditch them if it has the stomach for it. Can't see it happening

1 minute ago, Diamond_Jim said:

To be honest it's the NRL who are absolutely dependent upon pokies.

AFL has a opening to ditch them if it has the stomach for it. Can't see it happening

So what is the implication for the MFC if the AFL do ditch the pokies? Dont forget " Until then they can get stuffed."

Better transport infrastructure between the CBD and South-East, as well as linking the different parts of the south east.

2 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I sense some hostility toward gambling, Dr G.

Not at all, moreso hostility towards the hypocrisy of the AFL.

2 hours ago, DaveyDee said:

hahaha - classic well said.

Dr G has a very interesting argument - I wonder what would be the implications for the MFC if the AFL does "stop accepting money from betting agencies and Crown and stops this incessant gambling talk."

Was it not the AFL that was forced to take the Federal Government to court to allow the adds otherwise some AFL clubs would be financially ruined? 

Geez maybe an alternative source of revenues is more important than i even thought. 

It's a moot point because the AFL will never turn their nose up at a dollar.

No! I want to see some value from the money I've already contributed.

I would contribute to a plan to make the MCG  roof into one big self sufficient solar panel roof and reap the ample rewards in return.

Winery in Heathcote.