Gaming - we are out!

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,534]

17 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Sorry but I can't let this slide. This kind of BS gets trotted out out all the time. What does it mean exactly?

Did you know that in 2000 the UN set a goal to eradicate global poverty by 2030. And the amount of poverty in the world has reduced by 50% since 2000? By any measure this is an unbelievable achievement in history.

But no, the doomsayers claim that inequality is rising and the gap between wealthy and poor is rising....I dispute that but even if it was the case, poverty is being eradicated which is actually a better outcome.

And I'll give you a tip for free, this has been done through capitalism.

Celebrate some good in the world.

 

 

I agree. In fact, apart from jealousy, why do people care if the rich get richer? Surely what really matters is that the poor get richer. It doesn't have to be a zero sum game. 

 

[beelzebub 22,349]

Football...or more accurately, various nuff nuffs at AFL have allowed the Trojan Horse into the mix. 

Horse racing has really only ever existed for the bet. Football has and can exist without betting. 

Ihave no real problem with betting , each to their own but go have it incessantly ramed down your throat is obnoxious.

Im sure there must be more to the MFC decision ( i hope ) and look forward to hearing what it is.

[old dee 22,983]

1 minute ago, beelzebub said:

Football...or more accurately, various nuff nuffs at AFL have allowed the Trojan Horse into the mix. 

Horse racing has really only ever existed for the bet. Football has and can exist without betting. 

Ihave no real problem with betting , each to their own but go have it incessantly ramed down your throat is obnoxious.

Im sure there must be more to the MFC decision ( i hope ) and look forward to hearing what it is.

They want the money to build the  Training/ supporter complex near Goschs and now is probably the right time to sell.

The rest is just bonus good will stuff bb.

[sisso 2,402]

Apparently Geelong and Collingwood are close to selling off all their pokies too...I assume there is a strong business reason for this, and it's more than just for the "optics"?

I'm not particularly happy or unhappy we've made the decision to exit the gaming industry,  I'm not much of a gambler myself and see the machines as a complete waste of time, but hey it's legal, if that's how you choose to spend your time and money go for it. 

You'd trust the finance guys have done the sums and agreed that this is the best way forward and the benefits of selling off the pokies venue will far outweigh the costs. 

[Sir Why You Little 34,941]

$11 million could become alot more if used wisely. The $5 mill debt is not a major problem if the investment is the right one. 

Yes it is a risk, but what isn’t in life. What becomes of the $11mill will ultimately give us the legacy of PJ. If he oversees a successful investment that generates funds and increases in value, then this could be the biggest decision the MFC makes. 

To become self reliant and a Major Force within the AFL Comp, where we once were. 

[binman 39,096]

43 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I agree. In fact, apart from jealousy, why do people care if the rich get richer? Surely what really matters is that the poor get richer. It doesn't have to be a zero sum game. 

 

A interesting quote from this fascinating article:

“The capitalist system we know is dominated by huge, unaccountable, global banks and corporations”
For centuries now, capitalism’s appeal has rested in its promise of control. Unlike with societies of the past, in capitalism no one is supposed to be stuck in a rank given at birth. Instead, we all make our own choices – how hard to work, what to work at, how to balance our working lives and our private lives – and shape our own futures.

The problem for capitalism is that it doesn’t feel like that any more. The capitalist system we know is dominated by huge, unaccountable, global banks and corporations. Add to that eye-watering and ever-increasing inequalities of wealth, and the suggestion that capitalism empowers us, rather than enslaves us, becomes an ugly joke.

So, yes, capitalism is at a crossroads. Its advocates must either find an entirely new argument to defend it, or work out what it is in the system that needs to change for the promise of real control to be delivered.

When anyone properly reflects on that choice, I believe they will realise that an economy that provides people with the sense that they really matter in the world remains the right ambition. But they will also note that building that economy demands radical and far-reaching action. Such action should start by limiting the power of unaccountable vested interests, from banks to tech companies, strengthening the hand of those whose work creates the wealth, and protecting our ever more fragile environment. It can be done – capitalism has adapted in the past – but time is running out.
Marc Stears
Chief executive, New Economics Foundation

 

[beelzebub 22,349]

1 hour ago, old dee said:

They want the money to build the  Training/ supporter complex near Goschs and now is probably the right time to sell.

The rest is just bonus good will stuff bb.

I thought we were getting the moula from Gil to do the new digs ?

[old dee 22,983]

11 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

I thought we were getting the moula from Gil to do the new digs ?

Hmm and you still think the eggs came from a rabbit last weekend bb?

[jnrmac 19,327]

51 minutes ago, binman said:

A interesting quote from this fascinating article:

“The capitalist system we know is dominated by huge, unaccountable, global banks and corporations”
For centuries now, capitalism’s appeal has rested in its promise of control. Unlike with societies of the past, in capitalism no one is supposed to be stuck in a rank given at birth. Instead, we all make our own choices – how hard to work, what to work at, how to balance our working lives and our private lives – and shape our own futures.

The problem for capitalism is that it doesn’t feel like that any more. The capitalist system we know is dominated by huge, unaccountable, global banks and corporations. Add to that eye-watering and ever-increasing inequalities of wealth, and the suggestion that capitalism empowers us, rather than enslaves us, becomes an ugly joke.

So, yes, capitalism is at a crossroads. Its advocates must either find an entirely new argument to defend it, or work out what it is in the system that needs to change for the promise of real control to be delivered.

When anyone properly reflects on that choice, I believe they will realise that an economy that provides people with the sense that they really matter in the world remains the right ambition. But they will also note that building that economy demands radical and far-reaching action. Such action should start by limiting the power of unaccountable vested interests, from banks to tech companies, strengthening the hand of those whose work creates the wealth, and protecting our ever more fragile environment. It can be done – capitalism has adapted in the past – but time is running out.
Marc Stears
Chief executive, New Economics Foundation

 

Motherhood garbage. There are so many holes in that statement its not funny. 

Capitalism isn't perfect. But its a far better system of organisation than any other I can think of that has been tried before. All that is happening at the moment is that the education system isn't teaching the young about the good achievements of western civilisation or the reality of socialism and communism and people like bernie Sanders, jeremy Corbyn, Richard di natale come along offering them 'free stuff'. It sounds appealing to the naive and then you end up with China, Cuba, or Venezuela. Beofre you know it 100m people have been slaughtered as happened last century.

 

 

[beelzebub 22,349]

19 minutes ago, old dee said:

Hmm and you still think the eggs came from a rabbit last weekend bb?

Why ought we not getmoney for jam. So many other clubs have hadnew facilities effectively paid for by the AFL ,why not us ?

Oh...Rabbits only provide non edible brown creations

[daisycutter 28,691]

1 hour ago, binman said:

A interesting quote from this fascinating article:

“The capitalist system we know is dominated by huge, unaccountable, global banks and corporations”
For centuries now, capitalism’s appeal has rested in its promise of control. Unlike with societies of the past, in capitalism no one is supposed to be stuck in a rank given at birth. Instead, we all make our own choices – how hard to work, what to work at, how to balance our working lives and our private lives – and shape our own futures.

The problem for capitalism is that it doesn’t feel like that any more. The capitalist system we know is dominated by huge, unaccountable, global banks and corporations. Add to that eye-watering and ever-increasing inequalities of wealth, and the suggestion that capitalism empowers us, rather than enslaves us, becomes an ugly joke.

So, yes, capitalism is at a crossroads. Its advocates must either find an entirely new argument to defend it, or work out what it is in the system that needs to change for the promise of real control to be delivered.

When anyone properly reflects on that choice, I believe they will realise that an economy that provides people with the sense that they really matter in the world remains the right ambition. But they will also note that building that economy demands radical and far-reaching action. Such action should start by limiting the power of unaccountable vested interests, from banks to tech companies, strengthening the hand of those whose work creates the wealth, and protecting our ever more fragile environment. It can be done – capitalism has adapted in the past – but time is running out.
Marc Stears
Chief executive, New Economics Foundation

 

oh ffs.......there is a whole separate forum called the general forum for political proselytising......use it

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,534]

Whether we like it or not, the AFL operates a form of socialism (via the draft, salary cap and distributions from HQ). To do otherwise would see the competition fail with the strongest clubs eventually preventing the weakest clubs from ever improving their position. If that were to occur, the competition would inevitably die. Nevertheless, within this framework clubs need to be accountable for their actions, including financial strength and good governance.

We should not, however, confuse real-world economic practice with the needs of a sport like AFL. 

[Jara 1,149]

6 hours ago, jnrmac said:

You just did it.

Do you feel better telling the world what a virtuous person you are? And not only back-handing everyone that has a different opinion to you? Are you seeking pats on the back from this community?

Why don't you just do it rather than telling the world (or in this case Demonland) what a wonderful person you are....

 

Wasn't saying it to show you what a wonderful person I am (alas, I'm not) - I said it to illustrate the fact that, if you behave ethically, there are people in this world who will support you for it. Speaking out is a way of encouraging businesses (and football clubs) to behave with decency (that's why we are members of a super fund noted for its ethical investment)

 

It was the phrase "virtue-signalling" that puzzled me. Like I said, I never heard it until recently, and it doesn't seem to make much sense. From what I can gather, it's an expression that right-wingers have started using to belittle anybody who expresses progressive views. The trouble is,it doesn't mean anything. For example, when I heard Bolt using it, I think he was using it to mock somebody who was in favour of alternative power.  So if you speak out in favour of solar power, you are "virtue signalling". Whereas If you speak in favour of coal-power, you are not. What's the diff? They're all just political opinions.

[Moonshadow 16,411]

Mods, can the political posts be removed that aren't related to the MFC removing gambling revenue? Godwin's Law is creeping out from the general board

[Redleg 38,049]

6 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

3% from a bank if lucky the way interest rates are now.

Won't be putting $11m in the bank long term, it has obviously been earmarked for better use. 

[Redleg 38,049]

7 hours ago, Cards13 said:

Hey mate,

From the Jake Niall article, we will recieve close to $11m from MVRC.. thus the question of what return we'd get if we plonked that into a bank? 

Melbourne will reap close to $11 million this year by selling their gaming venue as part of the club’s decision to take the lead in exiting from poker machines...

..will receive almost $11 million from Moonee Valley in a sale that will take effect on July 31.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/gambling-exit-demons-hit-the-jackpot-with-11m-20180404-p4z7p7.html

The article also says that we will continue to operate the Bentleigh Club without pokies after 2022.

You can back it in that we won't do that for any extended period, if at all. 

 

[Cards13 9,117]

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

The article also says that we will continue to operate the Bentleigh Club without pokies after 2022.

You can back it in that we won't do that for any extended period, if at all. 

 

Yeap agree, I was trying to spark some debate about, if invested wisely, maybe just maybe we could get a larger return with $11m than the $2m we currently do from pokies.

Also it’s not like this has been in the works for a few weeks, both PJ and Bartlett said it’s been in discussion for a couple of years. They know what they are doing. 

[Red and Bluebeard 2,049]

5 hours ago, old dee said:

Hmm and you still think the eggs came from a rabbit last weekend bb?

Don't they, OD? What is unnatural about a huge rabbit producing chocolate eggs?

[jnrmac 19,327]

3 hours ago, Jara said:

Wasn't saying it to show you what a wonderful person I am (alas, I'm not) - I said it to illustrate the fact that, if you behave ethically, there are people in this world who will support you for it. Speaking out is a way of encouraging businesses (and football clubs) to behave with decency (that's why we are members of a super fund noted for its ethical investment)

 

It was the phrase "virtue-signalling" that puzzled me. Like I said, I never heard it until recently, and it doesn't seem to make much sense. From what I can gather, it's an expression that right-wingers have started using to belittle anybody who expresses progressive views. The trouble is,it doesn't mean anything. For example, when I heard Bolt using it, I think he was using it to mock somebody who was in favour of alternative power.  So if you speak out in favour of solar power, you are "virtue signalling". Whereas If you speak in favour of coal-power, you are not. What's the diff? They're all just political opinions.

Nah, its like giving money to charity. You don't do it to have your name put on a building or tell people about it. You do it because its a good thing to do.

[Redleg 38,049]

10 hours ago, Cards13 said:

Yeap agree, I was trying to spark some debate about, if invested wisely, maybe just maybe we could get a larger return with $11m than the $2m we currently do from pokies.

Also it’s not like this has been in the works for a few weeks, both PJ and Bartlett said it’s been in discussion for a couple of years. They know what they are doing. 

It is obviously in part tied to the new facility they are looking at. 

[Lucifers Hero 37,324]

I'm not at all concerned about the loss of the $2.0m profit.  We lose about $1.3m (2/3rds) when Leighoak is sold and $0.7m when we hand back the Bentleigh pokie licenses in a few years. 

As PJ said there is plenty of time to get that $2.0m profit back elsewhere (without using the $11.0m capital from the Leighoak sale to pay back our debt).  He mentioned things like:

• grow the fan base,
• increased game attendances,
• earnings from reinvesting the $11.0m (I don't think he meant interest)

We also have more sponsorship income now with Zurich and Infiniti on board.  And potentially more sponsors in the pipeline.

Sure, those revenues might happen anyway but this is part of a strategy to reposition our club 'for the next generation of fans' (Barlett's words). 

We have never, ever had any long-term thinking let alone planning as we are generally chasing our tail.  It is refreshing to have the building blocks in place for a solid financial and football future.

I'm rapt with this decision and the commercial thinking behind it.  I applaud PJ, the management team and the Board. 

I am excited to see what they have in store as the strategy unfolds.

Edited April 5, 2018 by Lucifer's Hero

[Lucifers Hero 37,324]

Somewhere in the interview PJ mentioned a new facility with a commercial return.  That could be things like:

• naming rights for a facility sponsor,
• using the fitness facility to generate income.   In practice pools, gyms etc are used for only a small % of the week so they lie idle for most of 24/7.  Not a very efficient use of resources.
• the facility having other commercial functionality which might attract a paying public.

What I really liked about the strategy is the club is getting back to our 'core business' ie football.  This is a different direction some other AFL club's expanding into esport (Adel, Ess), other sporting codes (Coll), management of sporting facilities (Rich)etc.  (They can afford to as they facilities in place and have huge incomes).  All well and good but it is yet to be shown whether these add anything to the AFL clubs or just become a management distraction, as they are not 'core business'.

 

On a side note, PJ's contract is up in Oct.  I reckon he will stay until at least we have 'the spot' for the new facility wrapped up.  In the interview he hinted we might have 'the spot' this year.  I am confident he wouldn't move on without a person  in place that he believes can build on his fantastic work.  But I really hope he renews his contract for at least another year.

Where would we be without this guy:

[DaveyDee 421]

4 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I'm not at all concerned about the loss of the $2.0m profit.  We lose about $1.3m (2/3rds) when Leighoak is sold and $0.7m when we hand back the Bentleigh pokie licenses in a few years. 

As PJ said there is plenty of time to get that $2.0m profit back elsewhere (without using the $11.0m capital from the Leighoak sale to pay back our debt).  He mentioned things like:

• grow the fan base,
• increased game attendances,
• earnings from reinvesting the $11.0m (I don't think he meant interest)

We also have more sponsorship income now with Zurich and Infiniti on board.  And potentially more sponsors in the pipeline.

Sure, those revenues might happen anyway but this is part of a strategy to reposition our club 'for the next generation of fans' (Barlett's words). 

We have never, ever had any long-term thinking let alone planning as we are generally chasing our tail.  It is refreshing to have the building blocks in place for a solid financial and football future.

I'm rapt with this decision and the commercial thinking behind it.  I applaud PJ, the management team and the Board. 

I am excited to see what they have in store as the strategy unfolds.

Omg who would have thought these are our strategic goals

• grow the fan base,
• increased game attendances

strategy to reposition our club 'for the next generation of fans' (Barlett's words). 

Sounds like the “old boys” club is gone, gone, gone

Go Dees

 

[Lucifers Hero 37,324]

4 minutes ago, DaveyDee said:

Omg who would have thought these are our strategic goals

• grow the fan base,
• increased game attendances

strategy to reposition our club 'for the next generation of fans' (Barlett's words). 

Sounds like the “old boys” club is gone, gone, gone

Go Dees

I suspect we have always had similar goals but they have been more like pipe dreams, with wishy washy thinking on how to get there.  ie no idea!

This feels like a smaller version of what Hawthorn did to set themselves up as a strong club.  Different scale, different ideas but really solid planning and delivery of said plans.

What we need now is for the coaches and players to deliver on field!!!

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,534]

11 hours ago, Cards13 said:

Yeap agree, I was trying to spark some debate about, if invested wisely, maybe just maybe we could get a larger return with $11m than the $2m we currently do from pokies.

Also it’s not like this has been in the works for a few weeks, both PJ and Bartlett said it’s been in discussion for a couple of years. They know what they are doing. 

In the last year or so we've seen clubs such as Collingwood, Geelong and Hawthorn talk about poker machines, some for and others against. Yet I don't recall our club engaging in the debate publicly. We've become the first (since North Melbourne quite some time ago now) to take an active step to remove them. I like that we've become a club of action rather than words.