31 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

the way i heard it is that caro believes that the mfc believes that 'the deal' will get done this year

no sods turned tho

Well yeah of course that’s what Melbourne’s going to believe and put out there, would’ve been a lot more exciting if that’s what Caro thinks, but that’s not what was said

2 hours ago, Dannyz said:

Was this on Channel 7 Agenda program?

Yes

1 hour ago, Greg Schneider said:

That's not what was said. She said 'they' believe the deal will get done this year, not herself. Hopefully you're not trying to twist her words and simply misheard

If you are correct then I misheard.

That is actually better for us.

I would rather hear that from the guys involved in negotiations, than Caro.

Edited April 8Apr 8 by Redleg

It's now the 20th April and moving to Waverley has not happened and all comment has dropped off the radar. It would appear we are sticking to our guns and not moving until Caulfield has been approved. Don't give up Goshes, it is the only bit of leverage we have.

My mail is that the club is hoping to have it agreed to by the end of the year.

The club wasn’t/isn’t prepared to give up Gosch’s before anything concrete regarding Caulfield is put in place, hence the reluctance to move to Waverley. Also that the election could potentially throw a curve ball at the project concerning government funding.

The battle for Waverley: Two Vic clubs still chasing facility - https://www.afl.com.au/news/1502719

Should we change the header back to something like...

"If Wishes were Horses"

“A move to the racetrack remains many years away”

So does a change to a right wing Government that will hand over hundreds of millions of dollars, the closure of the track for twelve months to undertake major works to build a massive tunnel.

Isn’t it about time we moved on, or the very least hold an extra ordinary meeting to find a new way forward.

Caulfield Racecourse Reserve Update,

Posted by Friends of the reserve..

@everyone — This is a critical update regarding the Caulfield Racecourse Reserve. It appears the Melbourne Racing Club (MRC) has secured the stables in the south-east corner.

Here is the breakdown of why this matters:

Public Land for Private Lease: The MRC is selling its own private stables to Mount Scopus. In turn, they plan to lease the stables located on our public land. Historically, they paid only about $40,000 per annum for this. This specific area was previously earmarked for an extension to Glenhuntly Park or a new indoor sports centre.

Melbourne FC (Dees) Headquarters: Two possible locations are now possible for the Dees' HQ:

The "Wedge" (Western Stables): This is public land. Access may require carving into Pawfield Park. The site is geographically awkward and complicated by its proximity to the new Mount Scopus campus.

The Guineas Car Park: This is the alternative option, but the site's narrow dimensions make it a difficult fit for a major sporting facility.

The Bottom Line: Despite the grand promises of open space and community access, we are at risk of ending up with nothing while public land is locked away for private elite sports and racing .

The above, if correct, seems to suggest that we would have to be now looking at the North East corner, which incidentally has an existing tunnel into the inside of the track, where the ovals would be constructed.

This area is also closer to the train station.

This area would allow some possible sharing of existing MRC office facilities.

Despite what is written in the Friends of the Reserve update, that the Guineas carpark area is a difficult fit for a major sporting facility, it appears they are confused about where the ovals will go. There would be no problems in building club facilities in the car park area, with the ovals going inside the track.

BTW, the MRC would not be unhappy with this outcome.

I wonder if this is now the discussion.

I always thought the north east corner was the best. The south east, too far away from many rail lines while the north east its about 100m. and half of the trains in melb go through there. A little exageration ! That there is a tunnel already is good, If you can widen it or make it more suitable but the tunnel was never an engineering problem.

Getting older by the day, so I would like a result. Go Dees

2 hours ago, Redleg said:

The above, if correct, seems to suggest that we would have to be now looking at the North East corner, which incidentally has an existing tunnel into the inside of the track, where the ovals would be constructed.

This area is also closer to the train station.

This area would allow some possible sharing of existing MRC office facilities.

Despite what is written in the Friends of the Reserve update, that the Guineas carpark area is a difficult fit for a major sporting facility, it appears they are confused about where the ovals will go. There would be no problems in building club facilities in the car park area, with the ovals going inside the track.

BTW, the MRC would not be unhappy with this outcome.

I wonder if this is now the discussion.

re “This area would allow some possible sharing of existing MRC office facilities” isn’t this what we were trying to avoid? or is it, in your opinion, manageable?

1 hour ago, Wells 11 said:

re “This area would allow some possible sharing of existing MRC office facilities” isn’t this what we were trying to avoid? or is it, in your opinion, manageable?

It would be manageable.

Say you had one membership office where staff could work for both clubs, saving on salaries and office space, just as one example.

26 minutes ago, Redleg said:

It would be manageable.

Say you had one membership office where staff could work for both clubs, saving on salaries and office space, just as one example.

I think you might get into privacy issues there 'Red'...

If it proceeds, a dual membership is obvious.

Sharing facilities .

A win for both sides, entry to the footy, entry to the races.

Melbourne members would have access to Caulfield, Sandown and Mornington.

44 minutes ago, Redleg said:

It would be manageable.

Say you had one membership office where staff could work for both clubs, saving on salaries and office space, just as one example.

MFC members get $10 MRC memberships and access to caulfield cup.... MRC members get $10 3 game MFC memberships boosting our membership numbers

Win win

5 hours ago, bluey said:

Melbourne FC (Dees) Headquarters: Two possible locations are now possible for the Dees' HQ:

The "Wedge" (Western Stables): This is public land. Access may require carving into Pawfield Park. The site is geographically awkward and complicated by its proximity to the new Mount Scopus campus.

The Guineas Car Park: This is the alternative option, but the site's narrow dimensions make it a difficult fit for a major sporting facility.

they seem to have missed the part that the ovals are going inside the track

the area we require is for administration and gym facilities - those two parcels of land should be more than sufficient

It’s 23rd April and still silence!

7 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

they seem to have missed the part that the ovals are going inside the track

the area we require is for administration and gym facilities - those two parcels of land should be more than sufficient

And swimming pool, and recovery facilities, and a board room and retail/promotional area/displays etc

It's not just an office and a gym.

10 hours ago, bluey said:

If it proceeds, a dual membership is obvious.

Sharing facilities .

A win for both sides, entry to the footy, entry to the races.

Melbourne members would have access to Caulfield, Sandown and Mornington.

I suggested this type of alignment a while ago and MRC are happy to explore it.

MELBOURNE Racing Club and MELBOURNE Football Club at the same location.

The synergy can be created and may help to see a swell in membership numbers just as one benefit with more to create.

All we need now is for an announcement, but still we wait.

9 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

they seem to have missed the part that the ovals are going inside the track

the area we require is for administration and gym facilities - those two parcels of land should be more than sufficient

Yes, see my post 7 before yours where I touched on it.

This is a community group newsletter where they are guessing at a lot of what is happening.

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

And swimming pool, and recovery facilities, and a board room and retail/promotional area/displays etc

It's not just an office and a gym.

Plenty of room.

If you live nearby you can walk around the area and it goes around the corner into Queens Parade.

Edited 9 hours ago9 hr by Redleg

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

And swimming pool, and recovery facilities, and a board room and retail/promotional area/displays etc

It's not just an office and a gym.

the swimming pool and recovery facilities are obviously part of the gym facilities

the board room is clearly part of the office area

retail / promos / display is not a huge part of the area, and the areas that we are likely to have are more than sufficient in terms of fitting all of these elements in

This just shows the B.S. we were fed about a "feasibility study" which took a year.

We don't even know where the facility could be built today!!!