On 14/03/2026 at 17:08, whatwhat say what said:

no, it's a pro-racing industry proponent

it has vested interests, to say the least

meanwhile, fisherman's bend was first proposed as a conversion from industrial about 15 years ago - the tram line to / from it is at least 20 years away from being developed, with no business case proposed, as is the same with the bridge connecting it to the city

90% of the land in it is privately owned - good luck getting developers to commit to open space when they can make money on it instead

On 14/03/2026 at 17:08, whatwhat say what said:

You are dead right WWSW. It really needed some vision and forward planning years ago. The body tasked with implementing was ineffective and had no influence. With a destination entertainment business hub I have suggested there may have been support for improved transport. Communication failed previously. I hope it does not fail with Caulfield.

On 14/03/2026 at 17:08, whatwhat say what said:

7news reporting that Richmond have their eye on Goschs paddock for 2027.

Just saw on CH7 Richmond are eyeing Gosch’s paddock due to their oval getting a make over at the end of 2026 season

7NEWS

Richmond zeroing in on nearby oval as new training base

The Tigers will need a new home later this year when Punt Road Oval is torn up.

Another article confirming we are moving to Waverley.

At odds with the clubs public stance but clearly something that is happening.

In terms of the Waverley deal, All i care about is whether the players would prefer to train there or at Casey

9 hours ago, daisycutter said:

rubbish, bluey

the south east tunnel will be part of the community recreational aspect of the mfc proposal to be shared by the mfc and the community.

if you do your homework you will see that the council has long had a tunnel there in their community strategic plan for the area.

He is pulling your leg DC.

3 hours ago, old dee said:

He is pulling your leg DC.

Please tell me it isn't so....

Definitely need a four lane tunnel not to mention the retractable helipad.

We haven't even mentioned the drone lighting that will overcome the need for light towers

On 12/03/2026 at 18:28, Adam The God said:

All federal spending is currency creation. All that spending occurs via the RBA crediting exchange settlement accounts, which create deposits in the private banking system.

The state government is different, however, it is a currency user, it doesn't create new liabilities when it spends, but does have access to cheaper debt, and can afford $20 million dollars.

As former RBA Governor Bernie Fraser once said, "governments have responsibilities that go beyond".

But bang on about debt hysteria as if it's like a business or household.

So in April 2006 we had zero federal debt

on the 20th anniversary federal debt has ballooned to 1 trillion dollars

That is $1000 Billion for the people who dont figure

Sure no problems at all

12 hours ago, david_neitz_is_my_dad said:

Just saw on CH7 Richmond are eyeing Gosch’s paddock due to their oval getting a make over at the end of 2026 season

Dees to announce soon that the last training session at Gosch’s will also be ‘bring your dog to training day’ 😁

1 hour ago, Kent said:

So in April 2006 we had zero federal debt

on the 20th anniversary federal debt has ballooned to 1 trillion dollars

That is $1000 Billion for the people who dont figure

Sure no problems at all

You realise that Commonwealth debt is issued after spending (it doesn't fund the Commonwealth) and is issued voluntarily to manage interest rates. Higher interest rate environments lead to higher bank profitability - multiple central banks have conducted studies on this.

Treasury ran a Debt Management Review in 2002 to end the debt market altogether but because it's corporate welfare to the banks and shadow banks, they complained and government agreed to keep it in operation.

So those trillion dollars are private savings.

If there was no debt issued after government spending, the inrerest rate would fall to zero/nothing or whatever rate the RBA had agreed to pay on Exchange Settlement balances. And private banks would lose profitability.

And of course, then neoliberal politicians would have nothing to scare people like you with.

35 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

You realise that Commonwealth debt is issued after spending (it doesn't fund the Commonwealth) and is issued voluntarily to manage interest rates. Higher interest rate environments lead to higher bank profitability - multiple central banks have conducted studies on this.

Treasury ran a Debt Management Review in 2002 to end the debt market altogether but because it's corporate welfare to the banks and shadow banks, they complained and government agreed to keep it in operation.

So those trillion dollars are private savings.

If there was no debt issued after government spending, the inrerest rate would fall to zero/nothing or whatever rate the RBA had agreed to pay on Exchange Settlement balances. And private banks would lose profitability.

And of course, then neoliberal politicians would have nothing to scare people like you with.

Your claims are simplified and misleading.

Saying that Commonwealth debt is issued after spending isn't accurate in Australia. Spending and borrowing are linked through the budget financing process and the government still needs to maintain enough cash in its account at the RBA to meet payments.

Saying that without debt interest rates would fall to zero is simplistic because even if bonds didn't exist they could still set an interest rate by paying interest on bank reserves. Lastly those trillion dollars cant be private savings. This sounds like a political interpretation.

You have brought up some facts but it sounds like they have been mixed with ideological theory.

1 hour ago, Demon Disciple said:

Dees to announce soon that the last training session at Gosch’s will also be ‘bring your dog to training day’ 😁

Bayley Fritsch doesn't like this post.

With Tennis Australia, the Pies and the Tigers all wanting us off Goschs, I would imagine that body I don't trust one bit, the AFL, would be keen to see us somewhere else in the short term.

If that is the case, for us to release our leverage as the current tenant, we would have to know that our long term base is happening.

To leave without long term security would be impossible to sell to the club members.

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

With Tennis Australia, the Pies and the Tigers all wanting us off Goschs, I would imagine that body I don't trust one bit, the AFL, would be keen to see us somewhere else in the short term.

If that is the case, for us to release our leverage as the current tenant, we would have to know that our long term base is happening.

To leave without long term security would be impossible to sell to the club members.

It’s become the worst kept secret that we have an agreement with the AFL to move to Waverley once we have something solid to announce on Caulfield. The AFL have stepped up their assistance with Caulfield because the opening of Gosch’s will assist them in other commercial ways.

We will retain some office space at the MCG where board meetings will continue to be held.

The club have a clear strategy that they won’t speak publicly on Waverley until it’s formally announced which I believe will be before mid season.

On 16/03/2026 at 09:10, daisycutter said:

rubbish, bluey

the south east tunnel will be part of the community recreational aspect of the mfc proposal to be shared by the mfc and the community.

if you do your homework you will see that the council has long had a tunnel there in their community strategic plan for the area.

Interesting, so I imagine the entry and exit points to the South East tunnel to the training ground would be from outside the racing course reserve.

41 minutes ago, Bowserpower said:

Your claims are simplified and misleading.

Saying that Commonwealth debt is issued after spending isn't accurate in Australia. Spending and borrowing are linked through the budget financing process and the government still needs to maintain enough cash in its account at the RBA to meet payments.

Michelle Bullock - "we actually have the ability to create money, if you like. We can continue to meet debts and we can continue to pay... ultimately the Reserve Bank is guaranteed by the government".

41 minutes ago, Bowserpower said:

Saying that without debt interest rates would fall to zero is simplistic because even if bonds didn't exist they could still set an interest rate by paying interest on bank reserves.

I don't think you read what I wrote. I said it will fall to zero if debt isn't issued or the RBA doesn't pay an interest rate on Exchange Settlement balances...

41 minutes ago, Bowserpower said:

Lastly those trillion dollars cant be private savings. This sounds like a political interpretation.

Where are these dollars then if they're not private savings? Floating about at the local park, I suppose?

Edited 11 hours ago11 hr by Adam The God

I'm fascinated by the fact that this thread was opened on February 8 2020 with the following words ...

"I know this topic has been done to death but ... "

18 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

Michelle Bullock - "we actually have the ability to create money, if you like. We can continue to meet debts and we can continue to pay... ultimately the Reserve Bank is guaranteed by the government".

I don't think you read what I wrote. I said it will fall to zero if debt isn't issued or the RBA doesn't pay an interest rate on Exchange Settlement balances...

Where are these dollars then if they're not private savings? Floating about at the local park, I suppose?

Quotes like Bullock's are correct but often used out of context. The government can't run out of money like a business can but it doesnt mean debt is meaningless. Inflation, exchange rates and financial stability still impose limits so its not like the debt doesnt matter.

I did probably misread the second point. That is accurate.

Well no, government debt is a financial asset for whoever holds the bonds but that doesnt make it private savings. In fact a large share is held by institutions and foreign investors.

1 hour ago, Dannyz said:

It’s become the worst kept secret that we have an agreement with the AFL to move to Waverley once we have something solid to announce on Caulfield. The AFL have stepped up their assistance with Caulfield because the opening of Gosch’s will assist them in other commercial ways.

We will retain some office space at the MCG where board meetings will continue to be held.

The club have a clear strategy that they won’t speak publicly on Waverley until it’s formally announced which I believe will be before mid season.

Thanks for the update - I'm so confused about this when it seems like the MRC are no longer keen?

1 hour ago, Dannyz said:

It’s become the worst kept secret that we have an agreement with the AFL to move to Waverley once we have something solid to announce on Caulfield. The AFL have stepped up their assistance with Caulfield because the opening of Gosch’s will assist them in other commercial ways.

We will retain some office space at the MCG where board meetings will continue to be held.

The club have a clear strategy that they won’t speak publicly on Waverley until it’s formally announced which I believe will be before mid season.

Appreciate the info. I wonder what “ stepping up their assistance” might mean. But generally speaking is it safe to assume if the AFL wants an outcome it can usually make it happen?

13 minutes ago, deelusions from afar said:

Thanks for the update - I'm so confused about this when it seems like the MRC are no longer keen?

The MRC are the major tenant but the course is owned by a trust controlled by the State Gov't. If the State Gov't wants us out of Yarra Park (Gosch's) the theory is that they will pressure the Trust to in turn pressure the MRC to give us a tenancy.

Will it happen? Who knows but one has the feeling that the MRC has a long list of demands

13 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

The MRC are the major tenant but the course is owned by a trust controlled by the State Gov't. If the State Gov't wants us out of Yarra Park (Gosch's) the theory is that they will pressure the Trust to in turn pressure the MRC to give us a tenancy.

Will it happen? Who knows but one has the feeling that the MRC has a long list of demands

As you suggest, there’s every chance the MRC are trying to leverage some assistance for themselves as part of the deal.

24 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

The MRC are the major tenant but the course is owned by a trust controlled by the State Gov't. If the State Gov't wants us out of Yarra Park (Gosch's) the theory is that they will pressure the Trust to in turn pressure the MRC to give us a tenancy.

Will it happen? Who knows but one has the feeling that the MRC has a long list of demands

Our tenancy wont be with the MRC but with the CRRT.

4 minutes ago, Fritta and Turner said:

Our tenancy wont be with the MRC but with the CRRT.

The Trust will not act without the acceptance of the MRC. The racing club is the reason why the Trust exists

3 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

The Trust will not act without the acceptance of the MRC. The racing club is the reason why the Trust exists

No, the trust exists to manage the racecourse reserve which is crownland. I think the MRC pays $300k pa which wouldnt leave much change after the gate man, dunny and bbq cleaner are paid. And keep the dog poop bags stocked, which from where I have stepped dont get much use.