At the risk of upsetting 58er. I will believe it when construction starts if I am alive. 

2 hours ago, sue said:

Not much in the survey.    https://www.davidsouthwick.com.au/survey/caulfield-racecourse-funding

and nothing to prevent bogus submissions.

this survey is purely data harvesting

1 minute ago, whatwhat say what said:

this survey is purely data harvesting

all the more reason to give it bogus personal data.

Seeking clarification please.

1. Assuming the facility has no re-sale value,  what would be the attraction to potential investors?

2. Would the MFC be required to pay rent to the MRC?

3. Considering the facility would have an extremely long life span with guaranteed use by the MFC couldn’t the club seek a loan from the AFL?

4. Should the club obtain finance how are they then able to afford to make the repayments otherthan from goodwill donations from charitable supporters or being able to increase their revenue?

4 minutes ago, Abyssal said:

Seeking clarification please.

1. Assuming the facility has no re-sale value,  what would be the attraction to potential investors?

2. Would the MFC be required to pay rent to the MRC?

3. Considering the facility would have an extremely long life span with guaranteed use by the MFC couldn’t the club seek a loan from the AFL?

4. Should the club obtain finance how are they then able to afford to make the repayments otherthan from goodwill donations from charitable supporters or being able to increase their revenue?

what makes you think assumption #1 is correct?

5 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

what makes you think assumption #1 is correct?

Is it on Crown land?

What other large sporting bodies would be interested in taking it over from the MFC?

 

On 20/09/2024 at 13:42, Adam The God said:

The holes are that it might not go ahead, and that's already the murmurs. Meanwhile, the feasibility study now gives way to a business case phase, which surely should have been apart of the last 12 months of [censored] around on the feasibility study...

That’s not how it works Adam and I don’t believe that any of the stakeholders are the ones trying to poke holes in it. Everyone needs to chill and see how the business plan works out, instead of jumping at shadows and supposition.

26 minutes ago, DeeZone said:

That’s not how it works Adam and I don’t believe that any of the stakeholders are the ones trying to poke holes in it. Everyone needs to chill and see how the business plan works out, instead of jumping at shadows and supposition.

that's not very mfcss of you

when things are glum there's worse to come!

28 minutes ago, DeeZone said:

That’s not how it works Adam and I don’t believe that any of the stakeholders are the ones trying to poke holes in it. Everyone needs to chill and see how the business plan works out, instead of jumping at shadows and supposition.

You don't think the initial feasibility study should have covered financials?

5 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

You don't think the initial feasibility study should have covered financials?

I don’t know Adam I’m not privy to any of the discussions that have taken place over the past 6 months.

On 20/09/2024 at 14:58, Neil Crompton said:

Red, I think you’ll find it is actually more stages than 3. Once the feasibility stage is approved, I’d suggest that final design / for-construction plans would then proceed - you don’t expend the cost of detailed design/construction details without the feasibility stage being signed off. Then the Tender is undertaken, reviewed and the Contract awarded. Finally construction commences.

I reckon the business case stage might include a functional design that informs costs and forms the basis for the tender, which could combine the detailed design and construction in the one tender. This would allow civil works to commence immediately upon awarding the tender while undertaking the detailed design for buildings so that construction can start as soon as the site is ready.

3 hours ago, Abyssal said:

Is it on Crown land?

What other large sporting bodies would be interested in taking it over from the MFC?

 

lots of asset, resaleable property in australia is on crown land leasehold.

in fact as mentioned earlier the whole of canberra is

2 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

lots of asset, resaleable property in australia is on crown land leasehold.

in fact as mentioned earlier the whole of canberra is

Who the [censored] would want to buy Cantberra  ?

2 hours ago, Adam The God said:

You don't think the initial feasibility study should have covered financials?

No real point in chasing funding when you don’t have a project.

First stage gives us a project.

Now design and funding.

1 minute ago, Redleg said:

No real point in chasing funding when you don’t have a project.

First stage gives us a project.

Now design and funding.

Again, surely you'd have a finance plan at this stage.

5 hours ago, old dee said:

 I will believe it when construction starts if I am alive. 

That’s what I said about us winning the flag old dee and that happened so keep the faith. 

2 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

Again, surely you'd have a finance plan at this stage.

Not necessarily.

You sell funding on a project, not a possibility.

You need to know what facilities are involved and be able to target finance from Government, AFL, MCC maybe, Donors, Sponsors and supporters.

That is realistically only possible when you know what has been approved and who else might be involved.

No one will commit to a maybe.

 

12 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Not necessarily.

You sell funding on a project, not a possibility.

You need to know what facilities are involved and be able to target finance from Government, AFL, MCC maybe, Donors, Sponsors and supporters.

That is realistically only possible when you know what has been approved and who else might be involved.

No one will commit to a maybe.

 

I'm not suggesting we'd have finance locked in, I'm suggesting we should have a finance plan in place. ie. we think we could get x amount from the AFL, x from MCC, etc etc. And in order to have a good idea of how much, you'd need to have preliminary conversations based on an idea. 

ie, if we get the go ahead with Caulfield, how much support could we hope to get from you, AFL? etc etc

1 hour ago, Adam The God said:

Again, surely you'd have a finance plan at this stage.

i'm sure they do have a rough idea

no point advertising it until they have nailed it down better.  they are not the labor government, you know. 😅

1 hour ago, Adam The God said:

I'm not suggesting we'd have finance locked in, I'm suggesting we should have a finance plan in place. ie. we think we could get x amount from the AFL, x from MCC, etc etc. And in order to have a good idea of how much, you'd need to have preliminary conversations based on an idea. 

ie, if we get the go ahead with Caulfield, how much support could we hope to get from you, AFL? etc etc

I am sure we did that.

An approximation would be known.

I'm not yet convinced a sod will ever be turned at Caulfield. I don't blame the club for this. A project like this is always going to cause controversy in a local community. You only need a couple of well connected local "dog walkers" and it's all over. The fact remains the central area at Caulfield is massively underutilised. As soon as a plan like this pops up every local sporting group will be asking the council "Why not us?" 

3 hours ago, Roost it far said:

I'm not yet convinced a sod will ever be turned at Caulfield. I don't blame the club for this. A project like this is always going to cause controversy in a local community. You only need a couple of well connected local "dog walkers" and it's all over. The fact remains the central area at Caulfield is massively underutilised. As soon as a plan like this pops up every local sporting group will be asking the council "Why not us?" 

i get your point, but the council has very little say in this as it is crown land

15 hours ago, daisycutter said:

lots of asset, resaleable property in australia is on crown land leasehold.

in fact as mentioned earlier the whole of canberra is

Ok, but whilst I admit I’m no expert in Property law or real estate I can’t see much market potential for re-sale of this facility should MFC leave ( highly unlikely ).    
Who would it appeal to?

Also re: Funding, what would be the attraction for Investors, as distinct from Lenders?

24 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i get your point, but the council has very little say in this as it is crown land

That’s fine however why would a state government feel the need to back this project if it’s not what the community want? Especially in a marginal Liberal seat. The MFC need to hope they can hold favour with what is likely an incoming Liberal State Government, even though I’ve no idea when the election is or how many times the Liberals will shoot themselves in the foot before then. 

36 minutes ago, Abyssal said:

Also re: Funding, what would be the attraction for Investors, as distinct from Lenders?

Naming rights - Joseph Gutnick Training Centre - covers a couple of bases that one.