Hawk the Demon

Jimmy Plunkett keeps missing Max from 15 metres - long time out of the game - Jim that is!

Out at North Adelaide Oval. Max (only) out on the track doing a rehab session with Selwyn. Gentle warm-ups, band work to begin with.

So we're in agreement - last year's 66,000 is NOT 66,000 members. That is what has been established in this thread. And all Clubs inflate that membership number, with the AFL's imprimatur. Not 'toddling' anywhere....

Bit of a stretch there re destabilsiation - you keep repeating inaccuracies - if you sponsor 5 players for example, you are still just one member, but Ticketmaster will count each one of those sponsorships. Doesn't mean 4 other MFC 'friends' have a seat at the footy. Maybe that partially explains why attendances are regularly below the inflated membership number, regularly commented upon on this site. One more time - it's an AFL issue, not just an MFC issue, but repeating the lie incessantly does not make it true.

Apologies, but 58er kicked me backed into life. The truth is that 5 products equals one member. That is why 66,000 becomes 59,000. Just deal with it......and stop repeating the falsehood. You don't have to believe me - ring the Club's Company Secretary.

I think TMac's foot is still an issue - wouldn't be surprised if he misses this week, so the JVR call is a no-brainer with Max out - the bonus being that JVR will have the second ruck duties. He'll be right in the thick of it! Big test.

Sorry 58er, you are incorrect - the Company Secretary's affidavit before the Victorian Supreme Court confirmed that our 66,000 members at the end of last year translates into 59,000 individuals, and just over 42,000 voting members. I understand that one individual member was counted 11 times in the 66,000, because he has multiple Club products (not seats) and not because he has a large family. That is how the Ticketmaster data base lists them. Happy to post the extract from the Affidavit again if you like - all publicly available. I suspect this inflation of numbers is the same for all Clubs (because they all use the same system) so you can compare our 66,000 with other Club's declarations, if that is why we are following this tally. If we are still getting the numbers from that system, then it is an inaccurate member number. Yes, those 11 products represents a lot of money (a lot of chocolate) - my point is simply that the 11 is (or was?) just one person.

Not as good as Jack Ruby from close range......

Lee Harvey Oswald listed on a back flank for the oppo.....

Like it, but with Jordon a lock (he is just such a reliable player) and Van Rooyen as the sub. Reckon it's better to have a tall as the sub (particularly against the tall Dogs) - and it worked well when Lever had to go off in the Saints match: TMac went back and Van Rooyen went on and went forward.

Does this mean she will be re-invited to our Club media breakfast? All is forgiven Caro.....

I thought James Jordon was BOG, controlled most of the game with Munro, but we missed White and Luke Dunstan in the middle. At 3QTime the coach said he didn't care what the scoreboard said - that was the truth. We gave up a 4 goal lead going with the wind. Schache was very good early. Varrell rucked manfully. Hibberd had a lot of the ball, but seems now behind Bowey and McVee. Disco Turner, as usual did some nice things. Kye Turner tried in a different role this week, a bit more forward - shows promise. Sestan quiet in that high half-forward role. Van Rooyen always competes hard, but Schache showed how he (Schache) is a bit cleaner around goals.

Of course!

Logged in - no problem. Membership, then enter email, password then details of Membership number and barcodes are provided on the next page....

Thanks Demon 17. Yes, I noticed preservation of the capital base as being key, so I was interested to see that a new line appeared re the Future Fund objectives at the AGM, when the CEO said something like "allowing the Club to take advantage of any strategic opportunities that arise" - and then said "don't ask me what they are". In my experience strategic investments are the ones to be wary of....

Could be. If you're right, the plan is in place, and the plan was to wait? The Financial Report words were '......the implementation of the Future Fund investment strategy will be completed by mid-2023.....' Would be great to have more insight from the Club - it's pretty much our only asset (other than our great list of course).

Quote from Company Secretary's affidavit: 'MFC has access to the Archtics platform through proprietary software that connects to the AFL's server. Only the AFL, MFC and the other clubs can access the Archtics platform'

The AFL holds all MFC membership information on something called the Archtics platform which is owned by Ticketmaster. When an MCC member is also an MFC member the member's details are passed on to to the AFL which then updates Archtics. MFC membership staff are looking at this platform as they deal with members. Re the non-receipt of your voting papers, when the MFC wants to send an email communication to members it runs a query over the Archtics database to generate the required mailing list. Then an email is sent through a platform called TM Engage. It sounds like something has fallen through re your voting papers during this process. The bottom line is that the entire process is very clunky and it is not simply a case of the MFC having everything it needs at its fingertips to deal with members. The mechanics of all this stuff was revealed when the issue of the register of members came up in Court and the Company Secretary had to explain the process.

If you have known for twelve months that you will have $24 million in the bank by early November and that you are going to establish a Future Fund with it, why is it that your investment strategy will be completed by mid-2023, and you first full year earnings will come only in 2024? Shouldn't that all have been sorted and the funds so deployed in November?

Re the 4th - it seems the primary purpose of the Future Fund, clearly stated, was to preserve and grow the capital base, but then at the AGM a new element was introduced, i.e. that it was possible that the Fund could be used for an unspecified strategic opportunity that might arise - and that did not seem to include a training facility. Found that curious.

I am looking for help from financially astute Demonlanders. Pretty much our entire asset base is now represented by our new Future Fund. At the AGM, the CEO reported that our Future Fund would start off with $23.7 million. Extracts from our Financial Report are oultlined below: As outlined previously, the sale of Bentleigh Club settled just after the financial year end. The Board have established a Future Fund with the proceeds of the sale, with the purpose of the Future Fund to underpin the long-term financial sustainability of the Club. The Future Fund will achieve this by: • Preserving and growing the capital base of the Club. A significant capital base is an important protection mechanism for the Club if there are any unexpected shocks to the football industry or Club environment in the future; • Providing an annual income stream that supports the football activities of the Club. This will replace, and is planned to exceed, the previous gaming income of the Club. It is important to note that it is not intended that the Future Fund be utilised for the following activities: • Investment into Club Capital Expenditure projects, including but not limited to Training & Administration Facilities; • Funding the day-to-day operating activities of the Club, including but not limited to Football Operations costs; • Repaying debt incurred as a result of operating losses of the Club, or the activities outlined above. The Future Fund will be overseen by the Club’s Investment Committee. The Investment Committee is comprised of representatives of the Board, Executive and independent members with significant experience in financial markets and investment activities. The Board has appointed Morgan Stanley as Fund Manager for the Future Fund. It is expected that the implementation of the Future Fund investment strategy will be completed by mid-2023, with the first full year earnings from the Fund expected in 2024. Questions: 1. Why did we choose Morgan Stanley and what is their mandate? 2. What about the other $10 million in cash we had at 31 Oct 2022 - why is it, or a part of it, not also in the Future Fund? (We sold Leighoak for $10.7 million) 3. Given we have known for 12 months that the Bentleigh proceeds were coming in early November 2022, why will we only have our investment strategy completed by mid -2023? 4. Given the list of things the Future Fund is not for, I was interested to hear the CEO say that we may also use the Future Fund 'to take advantage of any strategic opportunities that arise'. He then said don't ask me what they might be....

I agree that it's a small thing - but it goes to openness and transparency. We are often told by the President that it's our Club. Maybe only 10-15% of members are interested in the off-field stuff, but a note on the Governance page outlining the Board meeting dates - the agenda items discussed (presumably with the home base on that agenda every meeting!) would be a start. And the AGM minutes should be more comprehensive and available - after all it is the only time members meet formally in the year, with the Board in attendance, and many members are unable to attend, or as was the case last week, were not able to see the entire meeting. The minutes, for example would include the slides that were used in the President's and the CEO's reports. It's not hard and would make members feel more valued.

All noted but I was talking about the AGM minutes, not the regular Board meeting minutes. I don't see any harm in having reasonably deatiled AGM minutes including, for example, the slides that were presented during the meeting and a summary of the Q&A. The minutes prepared for the MCC AGMs are an excellent example of quality minutes. Re Board meetings why not have a summary of what the Board deals with at their regular meetings on the Governance page, whilst retaining confidentiality around any sensitive, or commercial-in-confidence matters.

Your considered contribution to this thread is to close it down? I guess you were quite pleased that the live stream stopped as Question Time commenced? You probably didn't want to hear from those pesky members daring to ask questions. 45.7% of members who voted on the Members' Resolution want open, fair and transparent elections - not enough though - BDA says let's just move right along..... The Company Secretary just announced the result - no comment or reaction from the Chair or the Board?

I suggest you ask the MFC Company Secretary to produce minutes of the meeting - something comparable to what the MCC produces would be nice - which would then include a summary of the Q&A. Minutes of last year's meeting were not available at the registration desk, and the Chair cited a resolution of an AGM in 1980 at item 2 to take the minutes of the previous year's meeting as read. My understanding is that the Company Secretary is required to produce minutes within 30 days of the meeting. Let's hope they will be placed on the Club's website under the Governance tab. There were around 6 or 7 questions, with the last question being from Jo McCoy, suggesting that the Club provide some type of members' forum or platform for respectful debate around the Board election. My recollection was that the President suggested that she would have a coffee with Jo.....or something like that?