Lucifers Hero

2 hours ago, Curry & Beer said:

Don't need to add to the thread title!

Christmas break December 19 - January 3

Probably Mon Jan 4.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2015-12-22/ill-help-melbourne-any-way-i-can-bugg

A bit more insight there on Bugg.

Some quotes: 

"Bugg said a strong endorsement of Melbourne by former GWS teammates Dom Tyson and Sam Frost helped make his decision a no-brainer."  Good to hear the guys are happy and spreading the word...any other GWS players we want to bring home...

“I’m really competitive and passionate when I play. You can probably see the competitiveness because I get into a few fights – I got into a little fight with Angus Brayshaw in round 23"  We might have to start a 'Thomas Bugg - you made me cry' thread...he looks a good buddy for Viney!

AFL Chairman Mike Fitzpatrick speaks 'glowingly' of outgoing Ess Chairman, Paul Little.  Believe it or not that is what the article says!

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-chairman-mike-fitzpatrick-praises-departed-essendon-chairman-paul-little-20151221-glsoff.html

I find it staggering that Fitzpatrick would endorse anything/anyone at EFC over the last 3/4 years.  I just don't get how the AFL cannot see the damage that has been caused to their code, their 'integrity' and what fools the AFL l look when they come out with endorsements like that.

I would like, just once, for someone at the AFL to come out and strongly condemn the 'pharmacological experiment' (WADA compliant or not) and strongly condemn anyone associated with it. 

2 hours ago, Chris said:

I think both teams should get to keep their captain in the place of their first round pick in the draft. Keeps the identity at the club and nullifies any advantage from doing so. 

Agreed. 

Lets make it keep the Captain and have one pick pre draft...we can't let Taylor Harris play for anyone else. She is also a 'must keep' in my book.

If Melksham is suspended so be it.  The sooner the suspension is served the better and we get it over and done with.  He was a 20 year old kid at the time and probably just 'followed the leader'.  Nonetheless the rules apply to him as well.   

From his recent interview he seems a decent young man and I would hope a year suspension would only make him more motivated to play well and repay the faith to the Dees.    Clearly the club saw him as a long-term investment and not a stop-gap for a year or two.  We will still get many years of football from him.

7 hours ago, Barney Rubble said:

Did anyone get a chance to speak to RDB at the BBQ/ Training.

someone walking past muttered something along the lines of he's losing it.

I am presuming it may have had something to do with his memory.

I'm not sure RDB's state of health is really something for discussion on a forum, except to wish him well.

Respect is the word that comes to mind.

9 hours ago, Elusive Tunbridge said:

Scully would have been well within his rights to refuse to answer, but he was being questioned by a legend of the game, the club president, who was terminally ill.  He shouldn't have lied, but I don't find it hard to understand, or forgive.

Given Jimmy's state of health at the time, I expect he was concerned about the future of the club, and so he asked.  But he shouldn't have.

Scully was invited to Jimmy's home for dinner to discuss his future.  Scully knew he would be asked.  Jimmy had every right to ask it.  If Scully didn't want to answer it he should not have gone to the dinner or should have taken his manager, parent or whoever.  Why is that any different to when someone like Eddie invites a current (eg Cloke) or future player to his home to discuss their future or contract.  It isn't. 

Scully is in the past and I don't care about him but I do care about the aspersions being made of Jim.  Like the rest of us he made mistakes but asking Scully his intentions wasn't one of them.  Scully had been holding out all year, someone had to ask him!

31 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I don't know what's changed but maybe defamation lawyers have been engaged and The Age has had to be more cautious. As, perhaps, should posters here, too.

Not sure which part of my post was problematic, LDvC so perhaps the moderators can make the call on whether to delete.

On the note of The Age lawyers, I would hope for their sake that their army of lawyers review all articles before they get onto the website.

I notice that the link in the opening post now goes to a somewhat different article and the para's in "quotes" have been removed from the story and it is much 'softer'.  The first article is no longer available on The Age website...ah, the beauty of the internet...unpleasant things just disappear into the ether!

I also notice that the story has not appeared on the AFL website, which occasionally has stories about AFL 'personalities'.

The cynic in me wonders if powerful forces went to work on The Age and the journalist over the last 24 hours to temper the story!!  Like, 'lets bury it as fast as we can!!  Expecially if 'Acquired Learning' sponsors Carlton and we all know which high ranking AFL Commissioner was premiership captain of. 

Yes, I'm cynical but I just don't trust anyone at or connected with the AFL. 

Given comments elsewhere DL's have varied views about 2 of the 3 (Nathan is universally loved).

Whatever one's view I'm glad the Club can welcome back players that have chosen to leave.

Congratulations to Rivers, Col and Nat!

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2015-12-17/rivers-honoured-to-become-life-member

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2015-12-17/life-membership-for-country-boy-col

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2015-12-17/award-will-sink-in-postcareer-jones

32 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

edit is your friend

Thanks Bub

The thread title was meant to be a bit ironic as to how the tables have turned for AD...but I can see the problem. 

Mods by all means change the title...I would but I don't know how...

8 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I'm not sure where you $900k to $1m figure comes from (and I'm not disputing it) but memberships gives the club much more than just money. It also provides contact details to direct market for the Demon Shop, to promote attendance at games and to push sponsors' products, too. Additional members surely makes sponsorship more attractive and therefore more valuable, to the club.

The $900k to $1m was in response to a question by 'Its Time' as to how much the extra 5,000 memberships (if we reach 40,000) next year are worth.  I guessed the average would be around $180 to $200 per membership.  I think his question related to additional Membership Revenue.

Yes, when merchandising, crowd size, future flow onto to better fixturing, sponsors etc etc are added it means much, much more to the club but I don't know what the multiplier is to calculate the dollar value.

Demetriou company Acquire Learning accused of unconscionable conduct.

An interesting article: "Former AFL chief Andrew Demetriou's vocational education company Acquire Learning has been charged with unconscionable conduct and false or misleading behaviour after it sold tens of thousands of government-funded courses to vulnerable job-seekers...The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has alleged in action before the Federal Court that the company bought the details of unsuccessful job applicants on websites such as CareerOne, then cold-called them to sell expensive diploma courses."

That reads as AD owning the company but the article says he is Executive Director.  It could be both.  Nonetheless, the 'unconscionable conduct and false or misleading behaviour' happened on his watch so has responsibility and accountability.

(BTW, why is a company listed on the stock exchange in Career One doing 'selling the details of unsuccessful applicants' to anyone.  I thought privacy laws made that illegal in this country).

It must be very strange for AD for the shoe to be on the other foot, so to speak and he being with the party that has behaved badly and is off to the Federal Court.  I always had a bit of time for AD but a lot of people are going to have a field day over this.

The more I think about it the more appalling this situation is.  A company taking advantage of vulnerable people to exploit them and profit from their vulnerability.  Doesn't get much worse than that really.

5 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Is the $300,000 the actual fine or is that figure the maximum the court can impose? My recollection (admittedly hazy) is that the court is yet to determine a sentence and the $300k figure is just the maximum which could apply for this particular matter.

You could be right LDVC.  If the fine ends up being less than $300k it makes the dire predictions more of a fizzer.

7 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

not sure

maybe the annual report might list membership income as an item. this could help to estimate an average, though you would need a good understanding of what such an entry actually means. accountants can be tricky

alternatively you could ask the club (ours i mean, which would still be somewhat indicative)

I hadn't seen this post when I put up the post with more membership/revenue details.

I'm not sure about 'accountants can be tricky' but you are quite right, I could not do averages for Collingwood and Melbourne because they bundle other money in with membership fees revenue eg gate takings, fundraising.  The AFL should have a certain format for all clubs to follow, I reckon.

22 minutes ago, Chris said:

I based the $300 on the cost of their full memberships which start at $275 and go up over $750. You are right about the juniors, 3 game, country etc. Would be interesting to see the split and compare to other clubs. Do Collingwood really only have 20,000 full members and 50,000 other members? How does this compare to us for instance?

Did some digging around and 2014 EFC published annual accounts show revenue from memberships was $10.880mil.  AFL published records show their membership in 2014 was 60,646 members; average of $180 each. 

What you and 'daisycutter' have highlighted is how misleading the raw membership numbers are eg with EFC start point of $275, a high of $750 and an average of $180 there is a lot of dilution happening by lower value memberships.

Maybe EFC count pets as members!!!

I can't compare the mix of members across clubs as the AFL does not publish the breakdown.

7 hours ago, Dees2014 said:

1 hour ago, binman said:

Correct me if i'm wrong but haven't your 'sources' indicated the book will be thrown at them, that WADA will go after Hird and other high ups and that the players will get long sentences (two years IIRC)?

You seem to be softening your predictions.

 

I also recall Dees2014 predicting that all sorts of nasty things would happen to EFC officials and Directors, even jail terms, from the Worksafe investigation.  That was a fizzer - just a $300,000 fine, end of story!!

50 minutes ago, scarlett said:

this sounds so much like everyone on here back in 2010, "but if we pay scully x amount how will we afford strauss, tapscot, morton and gys?" please stop.

So you think Brayshaw, Hogan, Petracca, Viney, Salem etc etc are going to turn out like those guys?  I don't think so.  The guys you mention couldn't even get regular games let alone command a high salary.  

As I said, I prefer to look after our own home grown talent than chase that from other clubs.  Just my preference.

'It was a pretty serious injury': Jaeger no certainty for round one 

It seems that O'Meara won't be playing round - still recovering from knee injuries.

They seem optimistic Prestia will play round 1.

TBH, I think I prefer our own home-grown talent than chase that from other clubs.  Setting aside injuries and their trade value, I'm not sure how we would fit them into the salary cap and still keep our gung-ho, young talent who will not be cheap to keep. 

Still climbing:  25,497 last Friday, 25,856 today!

The closest comparison to last year that I can find is 23,572 on Dec 27 which is still a week away.  Would have to assume a lot of the extra 2,000+ members to date are newbies rather than members who have renewed earlier. 

1 hour ago, Dees2014 said:

Oh I think they all should have accepted the 2013 settlement. I think it would have been the most satisfactory outcome all round. It was supported by ASADA, the AFL, the Federal Government, the ASC, Essendon (under Evans) and was strongly pushed by the league's crisis management consultants at the time under their current PR Director Liz Lukin who was responsible for most of it anyway. The only problem was that Hird had to admit guilt and resign, but his sociopathic personality and that of his wife could not bring themselves to do that. 

The fault lies with both Essendon and the AFL, who simply were too weak to force him out - a monumental deficiency in corporate leadership and competence which does  no-one any credit.

 

It may be correct to say they should have accepted the 2013 settlement!  But rjay's post which you are quoting, was about your claim that Evans "... still is the only honest one amongst the whole sorry and unprincipled bunch" and you seem to have side-stepped his question.  Was Evans honest?

BTW, I think binman's question to you last week is still unanswered. 

1 hour ago, Gorgoroth said:

Maybe I should sit next to my letterbox and cry until they feel sorry for me.

What date did you sign up, 'G'.  I think they promised pre Xmas delivery if mbrship bought prior to Oct 31. 

Daisy "will front an AFL-driven campaign designed to poach talented female athletes from other sports".

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-12-15/afl-looks-to-poach-talented-female-athletes-from-other-sports?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=RSS+feed%3A+AFL+Latest+News

They could not have chosen a better player nor better person to help recruit women from other sports!