On 12/18/2019 at 7:04 PM, Lucifer's Hero said:

'lynch mob'.  'outrage'.  A bit over the-top-comments for what was a reasonably put post. 

I repeat my doubts are about the revenue loss of the timing of exiting pokies not the decision.

Our home base will be the game changer - how else would we get the 10 mil to put in and get govt AFL to match it? Also didn’t we get a much better stadium deal that more than offsets the pokies revenue loss? 2019 seems like a one off on the back of 6 successive profits? Huge injury payments, not having QB and Anzac Eve and crowd drop off for the replacement games Rich Coll Syd at the end.  The Darwin game was necessary but 2 NT games not sustainable if we are serious! Opportunity to build another blockbuster e.g. v Carlton for Blues Free footy or the Barassi Cup? Talk of lynch mobs or rattling tins shows no respect or understanding of where we have come from over the last 5 years, where we are really at and what is possible!

 

 

 

6 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

The machines are still there. It's just that instead of the money going toward a football club it is going towards Woolies and Bruce Mathieson.

I realize that and you can't get get much lower than who you mentioned.

As others have said, it appears our only pathway to profitability at present relies on a combination of us finishing top 4, hosting two home finals and screwing over existing members. This is completely unsustainable for any club, let alone one that plays finals once every 13 years.

It is astonishing that we would drop lucrative sources of revenue without replacements ready to go, but that is the mentality of the powers-that-be. It is more important to be seen to be doing good rather than actually doing good.

As much as a training venue would be nice, our main priority has to be to acquire a social club in our heartland area which can be a meeting point for supporters. Done properly it would replicate the investments of clubs such as Hawthorn and Collingwood which have been incredibly lucrative. Bentleigh Club offers nothing for supporters and is only accessible by car - we can and must do better.

18 minutes ago, poita said:

As others have said, it appears our only pathway to profitability at present relies on a combination of us finishing top 4, hosting two home finals and screwing over existing members. This is completely unsustainable for any club, let alone one that plays finals once every 13 years.

It is astonishing that we would drop lucrative sources of revenue without replacements ready to go, but that is the mentality of the powers-that-be. It is more important to be seen to be doing good rather than actually doing good.

As much as a training venue would be nice, our main priority has to be to acquire a social club in our heartland area which can be a meeting point for supporters. Done properly it would replicate the investments of clubs such as Hawthorn and Collingwood which have been incredibly lucrative. Bentleigh Club offers nothing for supporters and is only accessible by car - we can and must do better.

Sorry for being painful poita but re your last paragraph WHERE?

24 minutes ago, poita said:

As others have said, it appears our only pathway to profitability at present relies on a combination of us finishing top 4, hosting two home finals and screwing over existing members. This is completely unsustainable for any club, let alone one that plays finals once every 13 years.

It is astonishing that we would drop lucrative sources of revenue without replacements ready to go, but that is the mentality of the powers-that-be. It is more important to be seen to be doing good rather than actually doing good.

As much as a training venue would be nice, our main priority has to be to acquire a social club in our heartland area which can be a meeting point for supporters. Done properly it would replicate the investments of clubs such as Hawthorn and Collingwood which have been incredibly lucrative. Bentleigh Club offers nothing for supporters and is only accessible by car - we can and must do better.

Which other club has a social club?  They don't make money and fans don't live in 1 suburb any more like the 1960's.

WE need a training base.  Gosch's was unusable for 6 weeks last year. 

But you are right about a financial plan of being successful outcomes on the field.  Half the sides in the competition fail every year!  You need off-field income for those times.....

Edited December 20, 20195 yr by george_on_the_outer

Does anyone know why the afl distribution was less (although practically the same) than last year?

the men’s team cost $600k whilst the women’s was up 20% or $200k  

the business model needs to change if their distribution doesn’t increase but our costs do  

 

On 12/18/2019 at 5:42 PM, Lord Nev said:

We will still have revenue from the Bentleigh Club, just not from pokies.

Also, Jackson said at the time: ‘‘If you take the gaming revenue out of the equation, we need to make up 10 per cent of our overall revenue. Over a two- to three-year period, we will be able to readjust and grow, and we have several ideas on how to do that.’’

So maybe people are overreacting about the impact of the pokies revenue? At least for now.

10% of our revenue when we're already in the bottom rungs of the financial ladder. 10% just to get back to where we were when we were already behind the pack and have minimal assets, no training base etc

1 hour ago, Gunna’s said:

Does anyone know why the afl distribution was less (although practically the same) than last year?

the men’s team cost $600k whilst the women’s was up 20% or $200k  

the business model needs to change if their distribution doesn’t increase but our costs do  

 

cannot answer your question but here is a great article on the afl payments

http://www.hpnfooty.com/?p=31622

32 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

10% of our revenue when we're already in the bottom rungs of the financial ladder. 10% just to get back to where we were when we were already behind the pack and have minimal assets, no training base etc

Missed my point mate. I'm talking about the perspective here, people are acting like pokies are the only thing that will see us succeed as a business.

15 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Missed my point mate. I'm talking about the perspective here, people are acting like pokies are the only thing that will see us succeed as a business.

And they won't, so get over it folks

3 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

Missed my point mate. I'm talking about the perspective here, people are acting like pokies are the only thing that will see us succeed as a business.

I dont think I missed it.

Income from pokies may not be the only thing that sees us succeed as a business but the lack of that income could see us fail.

I see we are not the only club hyper-sensitive to an onfield downturn. The Swans with just one finals miss manage to head into the red. From their website...

"The Sydney Swans have reported a net operating loss of $509,625 for the year ending October 31, 2019. Net assets were $2,201,819.

The operating loss is the first in nine years and reflects several factors including increased operating costs and the impact of not qualifying for the AFL finals."

 

On 12/18/2019 at 3:45 PM, ding said:

I still havent heard a compelling reason for us to have sold them (or not renewed, whatever it was) in the first place.

Huge revenue stream gone. Replaced with what? Thats another $Mil or so a year we have to go cap in hand to find. If the club has to hit the phones begging again to stitch up a self inflicted wound, thats gonna be a very very hard sell.

Cant pay your creditors with "feelings" or whatever it is we gain from dropping pokies.

I share some of your concern, but we have invested the proceeds of the pokies sale so it's not like there is nothing else there. There are income streams. And pokies have a bad smell about them.

It's interesting that Geelong announced this week they are abandoning pokies, too.

Maybe go to the AGM and put your question, then you might learn what the financial strategy is.

Poker machine income is inconsistent with sport and soon the AFL will be forced to ditch the betting income. Cricket faced the same problem years ago with tobacco and then alcohol sponsorship.

If we have to rely on income from poker machines the model is wrong.

The problem is obvious... stadium size... MCG is too big and we all hate Docklands.

There's not a bag of magic beans sitting out there and everyone has known for years that ten teams in Melbourne (plus the Hawks and North coming back to Melbourne when Tasmania gets a team) means that the dollar is stretched. Extra AFL money will go to the expansion clubs for the next ten plus years at least so don't expect much from that source.

TV revenue is at its maximum in real terms. Unless a broadcaster/streamer is prepared to use the AFL as a loss leader the sums don't make sense. Foxtel have made it clear that it's time to make money and that means it won't always be the cash cow that it has been. The sweet spot for the streamers (Netflix, Amazon, Disney etc) is around $15 per month which leaves no room to pay billions for sporting rights in a small market.

The only saving grace is population growth but attendances while having grown do not seem to have matched the rate of population growth.

On field success is just a bandaid unless it is sustained for ten plus years and we haven't manged that in the last fifty years.

Finally there's the issue of operating costs. The football industry has a high level of human input at so many levels. Future productivity gains will come largely from automation. While there are some areas that might benefit (security perhaps) it won't be  a game changer.

PS... there are published costs of building stadiums around the world. One measure of cost is the cost per seat. Stadiums of around 50,000 are the most common. The new stadium in Perth has the highest cost per seat by a very big margin. These costs need to be paid for by advertisers, admission prices etc leaving less for the game itself.

Go Dees.

11 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I dont think I missed it.

Income from pokies may not be the only thing that sees us succeed as a business but the lack of that income could see us fail.

Given PJ and the AFL both signed off on the deal I've got a fair bit of trust that there are things in the works to replace that income.

7 hours ago, pitmaster said:

I share some of your concern, but we have invested the proceeds of the pokies sale so it's not like there is nothing else there. There are income streams. And pokies have a bad smell about them.

It's interesting that Geelong announced this week they are abandoning pokies, too.

Maybe go to the AGM and put your question, then you might learn what the financial strategy is.

It would cost me $500 to go to the AGM. Simply not worth the sacrifice to ask a question , especially when the pre-prepared answer would probably be spin and waffle. Reckon i will just see what the future brings. Regardless, the revenue will be sorely missed by a club that already relies too heavily on handouts. Now if, for some reason, the AFL made its future financial support of a home base contingent on us dumping pokies, i would have put a sledgehammer through the things myself.

Pokies are bloody horrible and i always shake my head when i see the local Grannies blowing their pension on the damn things, but as long a the AFL takes money from gambling "Partnerships" we should have little hesitation making a quid the same way. 

Edited December 21, 20195 yr by ding

4 hours ago, pitmaster said:

I share some of your concern, but we have invested the proceeds of the pokies sale so it's not like there is nothing else there. There are income streams. And pokies have a bad smell about them.

It's interesting that Geelong announced this week they are abandoning pokies, too.

Maybe go to the AGM and put your question, then you might learn what the financial strategy is.

It's not the 80s anymore. People shouldn't have to attend the AGM to get an idea of the financial strategy, the club has 50k members now. The communication should be transparent.

3 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

Given PJ and the AFL both signed off on the deal I've got a fair bit of trust that there are things in the works to replace that income.

Maybe there are. But they haven't been implemented or even communicated. So until we are at least told what this might be I will remain sceptical.

46 minutes ago, ding said:

It would cost me $500 to go to the AGM. Simply not worth the sacrifice to ask a question , especially when the pre-prepared answer would probably be spin and waffle.

I didn't suggest it as a dare. I was trying to be constructive.

Tell ya what...I'll go and ask for you. Assuming nothing unforeseen intervenes, I'll come back to you. (I was intending to raise the topic anyway, but if someone else put the question first I wasn't going to grandstand.)

Edited December 21, 20195 yr by pitmaster

Looking at the current membership tally, last year's debacle has set us back 4 years  by comparison with numbers down 15-20% on this time last year. 

The tribe has spoken. The club as a whole have a massive job on their hands to restore faith. 

 

43 minutes ago, Hell Bent said:

Looking at the current membership tally, last year's debacle has set us back 4 years  by comparison with numbers down 15-20% on this time last year. 

The tribe has spoken. The club as a whole have a massive job on their hands to restore faith. 

 

My experience has been that its very hard to shift the 'membership' needle within a season even if a team gets off to a flyer. So there won't be any membership records next season whether we make finals or not. Brace yourselves for another tough season financially.

All going to plan the cash will start rolling in during season 2021, after we make finals and acquit ourselves well in 2020.

Edited December 21, 20195 yr by Demons1858

21 minutes ago, Demons1858 said:

My experience has been that its very hard to shift the 'membership' needle within a season even if a team gets off to a flyer. So there won't be any membership records next season whether we make finals or not. Brace yourselves for another tough season financially.

All going to plan the cash will start rolling in during season 2021, after we make finals and acquit ourselves well in 2020.

membership figures are so flaky with the endless categories. The only club that you can trust on membership figures are the Crows simply because they are closed as is WC but even those two would have a small number of interstate memberships.

Add in the contra deals with sponsors. No doubt the NT government paid a fair share of its sponsorship dollar in the form of 3 game memberships that it used to encourage local attendance. (Smart idea but it fudges the figures.)

The one thing the figures show are trends. An early trend we could look for is whether the GF guaranteed membership category is fully subscribed. Given 2019 that will be a good job done by the club if it can retain those numbers.

My worry is that the 2019 loss is on the back of increased membership numbers and two NT games. While we have the two blockbusters that could deliver crowds of between 55 and 80k we will not in 2020 have the buffer of increased membership or the NT's Darwin contribution. In short 2020 could easily be worse and with a bad on field performance in 2020, 2021 could be a sea of red figures.

Edited December 21, 20195 yr by Diamond_Jim

2 hours ago, pitmaster said:

I didn't suggest it as a dare. I was trying to be constructive.

Tell ya what...I'll go and ask for you. Assuming nothing unforeseen intervenes, I'll come back to you. (I was intending to raise the topic anyway, but if someone else put the question first I wasn't going to grandstand.)

Never thought you meant it as a dare, and your post did not come across as anything other than genuine.

I was just explaining why it wouldnt be worth my time.

Merry Christmas

 

On 12/17/2019 at 10:36 AM, A F said:

I don't think we could have predicted an onfield fall from grace quite as dramatic as the 2019 season proved. Therefore, any moderate financial projections saw us breaking even or posting a meagre profit. Instead, an onfield disaster, which is clearly unsustainable and needs to be righted immediately in 2020. 

Across the business world, businesses are moving towards sustainable revenue practices/streams and often this coincides with ethical wins that can be spun as PR and positive brand positioning in the marketplace. It doesn't matter where I or the MFC stand politically on the pokies, it's a dying business, just like mining and it will eventually go the way of the dodo. 

Have we moved out of the pokies 5 years too early? I'm not sure. Don't we still have this as revenue stream until 2021? I can understand us waiting to exploit it for the next few years, but equally, those clubs signing 20 year deals are tying their wagons to an industry that will eventually see itself legislated into oblivion. Diversifying the revenue streams at this point is a good strategic move, now we just need our [censored] football team to win some games and things will turn.

Where did you get that from AF?

I'm up in Queensland working in the mines, and we are dealing with accommodation problems brought about by new and very large coal mines opening. Just got a huge pay increase because they are worried about staff retention. That does not happen when mining is in trouble.

Simply wishing it to be true does not make it so.

Geelong are considering arguing for a minimum of nine home games at Kardinia and only two at the MCG.

The stadium if finished will have a maximum crowd of 40k.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/what-s-best-fit-cats-mount-case-for-more-home-games-20191221-p53m2y.html

Stadium economics are the new growth area. Unlike most stadium deals it is Geelong that get the ground advertising, the pouring rights money, the super box proceeds etc etc (with the ground's capital costs largely funded by taxpayer dollars)

If the AFL redevelops Docklands and gives North, Bulldogs and Saints a good stadium deal (a big "if) we could end up in a classic squeeze play.