On 18/06/2025 at 01:15, Supreme_Demon said:

If that's the case and the Government has tightend the purse strings, then we will need to do another Fund-raising campaign.

The rank-and-file members can only contribute so much. However, the wealthier Melbourne supporters like Chris Barlow (who is a Board member) and others should hopefully be able to contribute significantly.

I think raising $100 million dollars is achievable. But it's certainly tough!

This will be incoming CEO David Guerra's ultimate challenge. Get the Demon's Home Base finally built!

The only reason Barlow would have a seat at the table is if he was willing to put his hand in his pocket big time...

6 hours ago, Damo said:

Having been slightly involved when Elsternwick Golf Course was given back to Council for use as passive open space on 1 July 2018, I believe that all 3 tiers of government will not allow public space to be used exclusively by a sporting club. Although Id have preferred it to be dog friendly(off leash) the outcome was much better than a golf driving range owned by coucil but run as a sperate concern.

Then one half of the rest of the park was being pushed by one (not-so) local club into a having a fenced oval with training rooms, for the sudden creation of AFLW teams which would have impinged dog walkers as well. I watched this one with interest but didnt take a side. Again because it was seen as taking public space away the dog walkers won.

Ive met a few dog walkers who also walk inside caulfield track and they feel assured no sporting ground will be allowed in the middle of the park if it has a fenced oval. I believe they are right unfortunately. I hope they are wrong.

Ex bayside resident here, now northern rivers

Dog owner, runner, cyclist , golfer

The notion you retain elsternwick for dog walkers is beyond me

Same for Caulfield (noting the I think comments by mt scopus head)

Like, seriously

We’ve anthropicised dogs far too much

What I mean by that is the idea you don’t develop a sporting club / fields Because Dog Walking is crazy

So is razing bayside golf clubs for housing (how about just cutting immigration to the pre Howard long term average of 90k pa?!)

Edited June 19Jun 19 by Superunknown

21 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

this is sounding very messy https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/demons-board-blocks-incoming-ceo-on-caulfield-plans-parts-ways-with-pert-20250618-p5m8lc.html

Deary me..

7 hours ago, Damo said:

Having been slightly involved when Elsternwick Golf Course was given back to Council for use as passive open space on 1 July 2018, I believe that all 3 tiers of government will not allow public space to be used exclusively by a sporting club. Although Id have preferred it to be dog friendly(off leash) the outcome was much better than a golf driving range owned by coucil but run as a sperate concern.

Then one half of the rest of the park was being pushed by one (not-so) local club into a having a fenced oval with training rooms, for the sudden creation of AFLW teams which would have impinged dog walkers as well. I watched this one with interest but didnt take a side. Again because it was seen as taking public space away the dog walkers won.

Ive met a few dog walkers who also walk inside caulfield track and they feel assured no sporting ground will be allowed in the middle of the park if it has a fenced oval. I believe they are right unfortunately. I hope they are wrong.

Dog walkers, FFS 🤦

8 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Ok. I am suprised by that, but you are more connected than I

I am sure Scopus prefer the relocation to a different area…

No, we do.

7 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

from the horse's mouth if not from the mouth of the mrc chairman?

john kanga would seem to be a serious thorn in the mfc's side

He seems to be publicly against it, but he is not the person or part of the authorities in charge of the precinct.

7 hours ago, Redleg said:

He seems to be publicly against it, but he is not the person or part of the authorities in charge of the precinct.

What chance do give us?

2 hours ago, Roost it far said:

What chance do give us?

I believe it will happen and am actually happy about the pivot on the site, as I wrote before and have always believed, it is a far better site, giving us a bigger area, with better access, on a corner position, not hemmed in, in an internal sliver of land.

It borders the track, with easy access to the inner area, where ovals etc would be situated.

It also allows any buildings to be built further from the racecourse grandstand and more out of view from them, obviously on the other side of the track and of course, not interfering with the view of the racetrack.

It also allows avoiding shadowing, as it would be on the south side of the racecourse.

I don’t think money will be the issue, as we have a decent percentage already committed and the AFL owes us and there will be some Government contribution at some stage, as Caulfield is still an area a Government would want to have, both State and Federally and there is going to be community benefit as part of the project.

12 hours ago, Superunknown said:

Ex bayside resident here, now northern rivers

Dog owner, runner, cyclist , golfer

The notion you retain elsternwick for dog walkers is beyond me

Same for Caulfield (noting the I think comments by mt scopus head)

Like, seriously

We’ve anthropicised dogs far too much

What I mean by that is the idea you don’t develop a sporting club / fields Because Dog Walking is crazy

So is razing bayside golf clubs for housing (how about just cutting immigration to the pre Howard long term average of 90k pa?!)

With the space they have at Caulfield they could have a god damn petting zoo if they wanted.

13 hours ago, Adam The God said:

The only reason Barlow would have a seat at the table is if he was willing to put his hand in his pocket big time...

Last I checked his family net worth was $1.95b.... he could fund the whole thing and still have a small amount of $1.85b leftover

23 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I believe it will happen and am actually happy about the pivot on the site, as I wrote before and have always believed, it is a far better site, giving us a bigger area, with better access, on a corner position, not hemmed in, in an internal sliver of land.

It borders the track, with easy access to the inner area, where ovals etc would be situated.

It also allows any buildings to be built further from the racecourse grandstand and more out of view from them, obviously on the other side of the track and of course, not interfering with the view of the racetrack.

It also allows avoiding shadowing, as it would be on the south side of the racecourse.

I don’t think money will be the issue, as we have a decent percentage already committed and the AFL owes us and there will be some Government contribution at some stage, as Caulfield is still an area a Government would want to have, both State and Federally and there is going to be community benefit as part of the project.

Good to hear, I’m not concerned about the money either, wouldn’t surprise if the umpires joined us as well. Really hope we get this up, such a great site.

6 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

Good to hear, I’m not concerned about the money either, wouldn’t surprise if the umpires joined us as well. Really hope we get this up, such a great site.

i reckon the maggots will end up at waverley

8 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

Last I checked his family net worth was $1.95b.... he could fund the whole thing and still have a small amount of $1.85b leftover

We can call it the 7/11 Centre

30 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I believe it will happen and am actually happy about the pivot on the site, as I wrote before and have always believed, it is a far better site, giving us a bigger area, with better access, on a corner position, not hemmed in, in an internal sliver of land.

It borders the track, with easy access to the inner area, where ovals etc would be situated.

It also allows any buildings to be built further from the racecourse grandstand and more out of view from them, obviously on the other side of the track and of course, not interfering with the view of the racetrack.

It also allows avoiding shadowing, as it would be on the south side of the racecourse.

I don’t think money will be the issue, as we have a decent percentage already committed and the AFL owes us and there will be some Government contribution at some stage, as Caulfield is still an area a Government would want to have, both State and Federally and there is going to be community benefit as part of the project.

Thanks Redleg. So much negativity is floating around on this site that its good to hear an informed and positive take. Next to winning a flag I dont think theres anything Ive wanted more as a dee supporter since we left the MCG.

Just now, KozzyCan said:

We can call it the 7/11 Centre

I'm all for it if it helps get the place funded!

We can have a 7-eleven setup right out front.

1 minute ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

I'm all for it if it helps get the place funded!

We can have a 7-eleven setup right out front.

Surely we can get some dodgy Slurpee sponsorships for the players we're keen on trading in.

6 minutes ago, KozzyCan said:

Surely we can get some dodgy Slurpee sponsorships for the players we're keen on trading in.

I can see the newspaper headlines now...

Doping scandal! Dees players hopped up on sugar from under the table 7/11 deal!

Melbourne's season on ice after Slurpee-gate

Edited June 19Jun 19 by DeelightfulPlay

45 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I believe it will happen and am actually happy about the pivot on the site, as I wrote before and have always believed, it is a far better site, giving us a bigger area, with better access, on a corner position, not hemmed in, in an internal sliver of land.

It borders the track, with easy access to the inner area, where ovals etc would be situated.

It also allows any buildings to be built further from the racecourse grandstand and more out of view from them, obviously on the other side of the track and of course, not interfering with the view of the racetrack.

It also allows avoiding shadowing, as it would be on the south side of the racecourse.

I don’t think money will be the issue, as we have a decent percentage already committed and the AFL owes us and there will be some Government contribution at some stage, as Caulfield is still an area a Government would want to have, both State and Federally and there is going to be community benefit as part of the project.

Couldn't agree more on the new site.

The south-eastern corner makes a lot of sense and would have more scope for development. As the son of an architect I had shadowing concepts drummed into me all my life. Sun positioning, time of year, angle of casting relative to building height etc. Almost couldn't get away from these conversations but thankfully it's given me some knowledge and this site would be much less invasive at all times of the year in terms of shadowing as opposed to the south-western corner.

The access is a big part of it too considering this will be one of the most commonly used features. Really hope we get some traction on this.

So hard for our club to secure a home and the only club in the AFL to not have one! I hope they are looking at alternative sites as Port Melbourne vfl ground is so ripe for development along with the whole fisherman bend redevelopment will see an extra 20k of people, the council have also acquired land next door for open parkland etc

2 hours ago, KozzyCan said:

We can call it the 7/11 Centre

Thought you were channeling our kicking there for a moment..

Prefer 11/7 😉

20 minutes ago, Demonsone said:

So hard for our club to secure a home and the only club in the AFL to not have one! I hope they are looking at alternative sites as Port Melbourne vfl ground is so ripe for development along with the whole fisherman bend redevelopment will see an extra 20k of people, the council have also acquired land next door for open parkland etc

To all who suggest P.M.

Ever tried to get to that place.. ??

2 hours ago, Wells 11 said:

Thanks Redleg. So much negativity is floating around on this site that its good to hear an informed and positive take. Next to winning a flag I dont think theres anything Ive wanted more as a dee supporter since we left the MCG.

Agree 100%.

If the South-Eastern corner of the Caulfield Racecourse has more space for development then that's a good thing. We definitely need to have room for a Melbourne Football Club museum to attract supporters. I think Carlton has a museum at Princes Park (Ikon Park) don't they?

As harsh as it sounds, this will be CEO David Guerra's, and the Melbourne Football Club Board's, number 1# priority (besides winning Premierships) in getting the Home Base built at the Caulfield Racecourse. If they cannot do this then they all should be sacked.

16 hours ago, Superunknown said:

......So is razing bayside golf clubs for housing (how about just cutting immigration to the pre Howard long term average of 90k pa?!)

Under Howard the Net Overseas Migration (NOM) was higher then, under Howard and his immigration Minister, Phillip Ruddock, was higher than it is now in real terms. Overseas property investment largely caused the housing crisis.

25 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

To all who suggest P.M.

Ever tried to get to that place.. ??

Im trying to stay out of this debate as I am happy for Caulfield to play out.

But its also why Im more attuned to Fishermans Bend than Port Melbourne.

FB is a greenfield site with redundant building and space which all governments have slated for a huge population centre. Access is acknowledged as appalling. A destination Stadium for retail, accommodation, entertainment, corporate, functions, which would service that population, plus a training administration complex for a high profile AFL club would demand improved access infrastructure and perversely would encourage it being improved .