Blues to receive financial assistance

[WinningBlues]

Blues meet on finances

No word on what kind of assistance the club will receive but it does sound good for the club.
Thoughts on receiving assistance? I don't see why they shouldn't give some sort of help if they need it. The Carlton Football Club has helped alot in making the competition what it is today and other clubs have also benefitted from the AFL's help.
The argument that it was all the clubs own fault, to me, doesn't stick. It is true, but then whose fault is it for other clubs who receive assistance? Just because we were a stronger club with more supporters doesn't mean we should be treated differently if we need help. Also people will go on about the cheating. Thats all done and buried. We have copped the punishment and now we move on.
Another good argument for the Club to receive assistance from the AFL is the use of MC Labour Park (Princes Park). Why should the club take care of all the upkeep expenses when it is also used for AFL practice matches, TAC matches, VFL matches. Surely the AFL should help or provide the money for the upkeep of the ground as it would be putting back into the game by allowing those lower levels to play there. Why do Carlton have to pay for the all the costs when lower level aussie rules matches which do not involve them are played.
If no assistance for the ground is given they should stop all matches from any level being played there. They can go and try hire Telstra Dome and see how they like that. Like it or not, the oval has one of the best surfaces to play footy in Australia. It makes good sense to keep the place in good condition. If I was Carlton I'd also be arguing for help in renovating the whole place to make it even more attractive.
In the end Carlton will be given assistance as they are an important part of the greater Victorian scheme of the AFL. Its the smaller supporter based Victorian clubs that have to worry.

 

[Silvagnis]

Good for the game.

 

[morgoth]

In the end Carlton will get assistance cos they are a basket case and without it, they will fold.

The other clubs owe them nothing but pity for letting themselves get into this position.

If the AFL had any balls it would not help them and then either:

a) they would raise the funds themselves, or

b) sit back, let them go broke, in which case the licence reverts to the AFL, sell the licence to Soutport, then once everything is wound up, offer to lease the oval at commercial price, after all it is simply not needed.

 

[mightymax]

Carlton wants help paying the costs at optus oval....

can i ask two questions ?

1. Does calton receive any rental payments for games played at the ground ? ie. VFL Grand Final, Practice matches.

2. Who gets the money for all that sponsorship all over the ground. ie boundary fence, stands, scoreboard ?

Surely Carlton wouldnt want assistance from the AFL to pay expenses AND ALSO keep the ground's revenue ???

If they want want help, fine, but they cant keep the revenue.

 

[Adrian1]

nobody told them to build that stupid stand at Princess Park.

If they get the same deal as the other struggling Vic clubs then fair enough as long as they also have to tow the line on the "conditions" of taking the package like having low football operating expenses etc. Also like to see the AFL maybe schedule them for a game or two at Carrara or Canberra instead of forcing other clubs up there all the time.

The only thing that will get me riled is if the AFL wipe their debt out. That would be unfair given that other clubs have had to do it on their own including Geelong who manage their own stadium

 

[MarkT]

The AFL should tell them to F.OFF. They have the resources to dig themselves out. If push came to shove they could raise what they need when they need it. If they failed the AFL could always withdraw the licence, let the club be liquidated and issue a new licence to a new Carlton. The reality though is that the clubs are underwritten and Carlton will get whatever money it needs regardless of why they got into this mess and regardless of what they do get out of it.

Hope all the supporters of other clubs that defended this ridiculous underwriting hate this.

 

[Teagson]

This certainly is a surprise, considering AD was so close to his ultimate goal of obliterating the Carlton Football Club single-handedly...

 

[andypie]

nobody told them to build that stupid stand at Princess Park.

If they get the same deal as the other struggling Vic clubs then fair enough as long as they also have to tow the line on the "conditions" of taking the package like having low football operating expenses etc.

would that include not having the highest paid captain and coach in the game?

 

[JeffDunne]

Was there ever any doubt?

Firstly to those that claim the AFL almost killed your club - if you were half the club you claim to be then a fine and draft penalties would have held you back not almost killed you. Don't forget you had become a rabble BEFORE the penalties were applied. It's a nonsensical argument to claim penalties for systematic rorting of the competition shouldn't have been harsh or should have some how been reduced because of the final position the club was in after paying over the cap for such a long time.

Secondly, what a p***weak excuse for giving them a monumental handout - since when did the AFL need a third ground in Melbourne? If ever we were to need a third ground it would have been this year with the Commonwealth games. The only possible thing that could cause the newly renovated MCG or relatively new Telstra Dome to be out of action at the same time for an extended period, would be if Melbourne hosted either the Olympics or World Cup. In the unlikely event that Melbourne would host either of these events in the foreseeable future then the AFL would be absolutely nuts to play AFL at the same time. If the ground is to be used for TAC competitions, draft camps, etc., then surely there are less expensive options that don't require the maintenance of grandstands and the like. It's farcical that the AFL would pick the most expensive option for a ground they want for just secondary purposes. The excuse for funding it is a joke and the other 15 clubs, especially the non-Victorian clubs, should be livid at the prospect of pouring so much money into a venture for so little gain.

By all means give the club access to the special assistance while it gets it's house in order, but this farcical and costly excuse to bail them out without any effort on their part is a complete and utter joke.

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

The irony of the Thread ,s poster,s name.

 

[Stig O'Hara]

Was there ever any doubt?

Firstly to those that claim the AFL almost killed your club - if you were half the club you claim to be then a fine and draft penalties would have held you back not almost killed you. Don't forget you had become a rabble BEFORE the penalties were applied. It's a nonsensical argument to claim penalties for systematic rorting of the competition shouldn't have been harsh or should have some how been reduced because of the final position the club was in after paying over the cap for such a long time.

Secondly, what a p***weak excuse for giving them a monumental handout - since when did the AFL need a third ground in Melbourne? If ever we were to need a third ground it would have been this year with the Commonwealth games. The only possible thing that could cause the newly renovated MCG or relatively new Telstra Dome to be out of action at the same time for an extended period, would be if Melbourne hosted either the Olympics or World Cup. In the unlikely event that Melbourne would host either of these events in the foreseeable future then the AFL would be absolutely nuts to play AFL at the same time. If the ground is to be used for TAC competitions, draft camps, etc., then surely there are less expensive options that don't require the maintenance of grandstands and the like. It's farcical that the AFL would pick the most expensive option for a ground they want for just secondary purposes. The excuse for funding it is a joke and the other 15 clubs, especially the non-Victorian clubs, should be livid at the prospect of pouring so much money into a venture for so little gain.

By all means give the club access to the special assistance while it gets it's house in order, but this farcical and costly excuse to bail them out without any effort on their part is a complete and utter joke.

Tend to agree a bit.

This has gone on a long time before 2002,

But, after 20 years of being threatened with Supreme Court action, legal bills, treated with utter arrogance, scorn, contempt and ridicule,
by a president and complicant board,
it pains me to say it but the AFL finally has Carlton in its pocket.

 

[DG-Man]

Great result for footy IMO. This 3rd ground will become very handy in years to come. Just mark my words.
The money clubs like Carlton have brought into this competition over the years is why teams like the Saints still exist. They should be thankful to Carlton for more than just Ken Sheldon and Alex Jesalenko!
And what's with JD continually stealing the word Rabble and using it on Carlton. That was Carltons word for you. Imagine if i walked up to Arnie and said "i'll be back". I doubt that would be an original thought.

Good luck to you Blues, AFL remem,bers those that made them so strong. It looks like your 17th flag is a lot closer than some may think!

 

[Hawkk]

IMO I think its a disgrace Carlton are getting handouts.

Carlton have a HUGE supporter base (easily in the top 3 supported clubs in Victoria and probably top 5-6 in Australia) and growth potential.

If the AFL gave them nought, I'm sure a swarm of white collared Blue Bloods would chip in and clear the debt.

Carlton got in this mess, they should get out of it, by it's own accord.

 

[MarkT]

Instead of this farce with their ground why doesn’t the AFL just schedule all Carlton’s home games there and let them recoup some of the costs. Surely TD wouldn’t sure Carlton for breach of contract? It would be an interesting case if they did. Particularly when Collo testifies for both sides. Anyway, even if they did sue the AFL wouldn’t care would they? They didn’t when they shafted our Vic Park contract with Spotless.

 

[WinningBlues]

Was there ever any doubt?

Firstly to those that claim the AFL almost killed your club - if you were half the club you claim to be then a fine and draft penalties would have held you back not almost killed you.

What do the supporters thoughts of the club and the position the club have to do with if we receive a handout or not? Just because you (and other haters) would like to see the clubs' supporters get on their knees and beg and apologise before the club gets assistance, doesn't mean it will happen.

Don't forget you had become a rabble BEFORE the penalties were applied. It's a nonsensical argument to claim penalties for systematic rorting of the competition shouldn't have been harsh or should have some how been reduced because of the final position the club was in after paying over the cap for such a long time.

What does being a rabble before or after the penalties have to do with anything? Who argued about the penalties? Its the past, get over it! Are you bringing up this because you have no other point than to have a go at the club?

Secondly, what a p***weak excuse for giving them a monumental handout -

Can you tell us the amount of this monumental handout as you call it? If something is given and taken, such as the the leasing rights to MC Labour Park, then it is not a handout at all but a consensual exchange. Please don't confuse the issue by adding your sensational bull@#$%, which you and other haters of the club love to believe.

since when did the AFL need a third ground in Melbourne? If ever we were to need a third ground it would have been this year with the Commonwealth games. The only possible thing that could cause the newly renovated MCG or relatively new Telstra Dome to be out of action at the same time for an extended period, would be if Melbourne hosted either the Olympics or World Cup. In the unlikely event that Melbourne would host either of these events in the foreseeable future then the AFL would be absolutely nuts to play AFL at the same time. If the ground is to be used for TAC competitions, draft camps, etc., then surely there are less expensive options that don't require the maintenance of grandstands and the like. It's farcical that the AFL would pick the most expensive option for a ground they want for just secondary purposes.

Which other football ground in Melbourne do you suggest is better than MC Labour Park? Who knows when we will need a third ground? Maybe the Telstra Dome surface is declared unfit to play on. A fire or any sort of unforseen circumstance. The AFL now have a TV rights contract they must fullfill. They need a plan B and lucky for Carlton they have something that is worth some money.
Less expensive options, yes. Better ground surface and seating, no. It is the only AFL standard ground left which is not being used by the AFL. If you are talking about the lease expense, then it is not really expensive at all if you take into account of the number of years they will have it for. The AFL have a short memory and I'm sure you will be seeing some small profit making AFL games being played there in the future despite what has been said.

The excuse for funding it is a joke and the other 15 clubs, especially the non-Victorian clubs, should be livid at the prospect of pouring so much money into a venture for so little gain.

Rallying the troops? How about giving lower level footballing leagues an excellent ground where they can play important matches? Doesn't the AFL have a mission statement to help with grassroots footy? I would say having this ground would definitely help. How many TAC games do you think would be allowed to be played at the Telstra Dome?

By all means give the club access to the special assistance while it gets it's house in order, but this farcical and costly excuse to bail them out without any effort on their part is a complete and utter joke.

Lets wait and see what the AFL will be offering and the terms before we jump up and down like little girls. Other clubs were not in the position and timing we are in, to take advantage of selling our ground lease.

 

[MagpieScouser]

my my my how the mighty have fallen,as the other guy said where are your rich supporters like pratt to help you,typical they are there during the good times but when things get tough they wont help their club out

 

[WinningBlues]

The irony of the Thread ,s poster,s name.

Do you have any meaningful input to add?

 

[WinningBlues]

Instead of this farce with their ground why doesn’t the AFL just schedule all Carlton’s home games there and let them recoup some of the costs. Surely TD wouldn’t sure Carlton for breach of contract? It would be an interesting case if they did. Particularly when Collo testifies for both sides. Anyway, even if they did sue the AFL wouldn’t care would they? They didn’t when they shafted our Vic Park contract with Spotless.

AFL wanted Carlton out of Princes Park. They were not going to schedule any more games there once our contract (for number of games played there) with them ran out. They paid us off on the remainder of the contract to move, with Telstra Dome the AFL's preferred choice for us. The club had no real choice but to move. Now the Club has also lost one of its biggest revenue makers in the Social Club.

 

[WinningBlues]

my my my how the mighty have fallen,as the other guy said where are your rich supporters like pratt to help you,typical they are there during the good times but when things get tough they wont help their club out

Probably waiting until after the outcome of the AFL decision. Why put in $$$ when you know the AFL will.
Thats not the point though. They do not have an obligation to help!

 

[MagpieScouser]

{Removed due to more than the usual stupidity}

 

[Jumpin' Jimmy]

The AFL obviously has to assist Carlton but there must be strings attached. In days gone by Carlton led the pack screaming blue murder when other clubs got into trouble. They cannot now expect a Dire Straits "money for nothing, cheques for free" handout.

Personally I would like to see the AFL steering Melbourne-based clubs towards possible mergers or relocations, basically along the lines of previous ground rationalisation/Sydney Swans/Brisbane Lions moves. Not overnight but over time. One such possible merger is Carlton/Hawthorn. I'm not saying it should happen, only that it is a better contingency than one of them(e.g. currently Carlton) going belly-up.

As a suggestion then the AFL should take equity in Carlton as security for the assistance given. If they need $5 million then take security over 25% of the Carlton Footbal Club licence. If CFC recover financially and repay the money in say 5 years then all is fine. But if they continue to go down the gurgler then the AFL(and indirectly the other 15 clubs) have some control over what happens next. If more funds, say another $5 million, is needed then the AFL can say "OK Carlton, if you dont get it right in the next 5 years we will then take control of the Club and its future". The AFL could then do something like offer another Melbourne-based club the opportunity to takeover Carlton's licence/playing list etc. or sell it as a new franchise say in Brisbane or Sydney.

Carlton happens to be the club now in trouble but what I'm saying above applies to other clubs currently receiving AFL support or any others who might need it in future. If a club like the Western Bulldogs becomes very strong again then their future in Melbourne becomes assured. Conversely, if a club like the Kangaroos is unable to recover then the pressure mounts even more. You can argue that this in effect is what happens now. All I'm saying is that the AFL should take an equity share in a club's licence from now on as a means of ensuring things dont get out of hand.

 

[XXX KINGS]

{Removed}

Isn't that terrific genius. Clearly you are so wise, your knowledge of all things Carlton just shines through.

You have no idea how much Richard Pratt has done for the Carlton Football Club. I fail to see how anyone should be obligated to pyss 7 million dollars against the wall. 7 million dollars is an absolute load of money. No matter how wealthy you are, that is still a hell of a lot of money. Pratt also donates an enormous amount of his money to charity. If Richard Pratt wants to donate some of his money it would be a terrific offer, however, even if he doesn't, people cant ignore the fact that he has put a lot into the club. Leave him alone.

BTW - WTF does his religious persuasion have to do with anything?

 

[Vandenbergfan]

Do you have any meaningful input to add?

Firstly, I thought this had to go before all the other AFL presidents before approval could be granted for such a substantial outlay. Fine if Carlton gets their $10 million handout but the other 15 clubs should now be asking for a similar handout to maintain matters on an even keel.

 

[WinningBlues]

The AFL obviously has to assist Carlton but there must be strings attached. In days gone by Carlton led the pack screaming blue murder when other clubs got into trouble. They cannot now expect a Dire Straits "money for nothing, cheques for free" handout.

If the only thing the AFL are doing is buying out the lease to MC Labour Park then no strings should be attached as that is really a separate issue to actual monetary assistance.
What do you expect Carlton to say in regards to getting assistance? Of course if they needed/wanted money, then they would ask for it with no strings attached. Its up to the AFL to decide.

Personally I would like to see the AFL steering Melbourne-based clubs towards possible mergers or relocations, basically along the lines of previous ground rationalisation/Sydney Swans/Brisbane Lions moves. Not overnight but over time. One such possible merger is Carlton/Hawthorn. I'm not saying it should happen, only that it is a better contingency than one of them(e.g. currently Carlton) going belly-up.

I think merging and relocations are definitely on the cards for some Victorian clubs but I don't think Carlton are on the AFL's radar. Like other posters have said, Carlton are one of the big Victorian Clubs (history, many supporters, rivalries) and the AFL would rather keep them as they are as they have more potential to grow than the other struggling clubs. Once Carlton are back on their feet they will be able to be self sustainable.

As a suggestion then the AFL should take equity in Carlton as security for the assistance given. If they need $5 million then take security over 25% of the Carlton Footbal Club licence. If CFC recover financially and repay the money in say 5 years then all is fine. But if they continue to go down the gurgler then the AFL(and indirectly the other 15 clubs) have some control over what happens next. If more funds, say another $5 million, is needed then the AFL can say "OK Carlton, if you dont get it right in the next 5 years we will then take control of the Club and its future". The AFL could then do something like offer another Melbourne-based club the opportunity to takeover Carlton's licence/playing list etc. or sell it as a new franchise say in Brisbane or Sydney.

Carlton happens to be the club now in trouble but what I'm saying above applies to other clubs currently receiving AFL support or any others who might need it in future. If a club like the Western Bulldogs becomes very strong again then their future in Melbourne becomes assured. Conversely, if a club like the Kangaroos is unable to recover then the pressure mounts even more. You can argue that this in effect is what happens now. All I'm saying is that the AFL should take an equity share in a club's licence from now on as a means of ensuring things dont get out of hand.

That idea sounds feasible and gives clubs the chance to get out of their financial mess or face the consequences. But I'm saying that with my Carlton hat on, as I'm pretty confident that once the club gets out of its current financial plight and things on the field start improving then it will be more than just a viable club.
Other struggling clubs will always continue to struggle and be sustainable due to their smaller supporter base, so even with the $$$ carrot dangling in front it would still be a merger or relocation on the cards.
The 5 years to pay back the loan is also too short and would probably need to be doubled.

 

[JeffDunne]

What do the supporters thoughts of the club and the position the club have to do with if we receive a handout or not? Just because you (and other haters) would like to see the clubs' supporters get on their knees and beg and apologise before the club gets assistance, doesn't mean it will happen.

It has nothing to do with it & I didn't say it did. My comment was simply in relation to the popular myth that the AFL are the source of your troubles.

What does being a rabble before or after the penalties have to do with anything? Who argued about the penalties? Its the past, get over it! Are you bringing up this because you have no other point than to have a go at the club?

It was a comment in reply to comments in this thread on that popular myth. Maybe you should try reading ALL the posts in this thread again.

Can you tell us the amount of this monumental handout as you call it? If something is given and taken, such as the the leasing rights to MC Labour Park, then it is not a handout at all but a consensual exchange. Please don't confuse the issue by adding your sensational bull@#$%, which you and other haters of the club love to believe.

$10m over the next 3 years (for a start).

If the AFL take on the lease then it will be a damn sight more long term. It will be interesting to see if the AFL allow you to keep the 2 bob naming rights contract if they take over the ground.

Which other football ground in Melbourne do you suggest is better than MC Labour Park? Who knows when we will need a third ground? Maybe the Telstra Dome surface is declared unfit to play on. A fire or any sort of unforseen circumstance. The AFL now have a TV rights contract they must fullfill. They need a plan B and lucky for Carlton they have something that is worth some money.

Since when? They clearly didn't need it this year.

Less expensive options, yes. Better ground surface and seating, no. It is the only AFL standard ground left which is not being used by the AFL. If you are talking about the lease expense, then it is not really expensive at all if you take into account of the number of years they will have it for. The AFL have a short memory and I'm sure you will be seeing some small profit making AFL games being played there in the future despite what has been said.

Ground surface is a non-issue. What do you want seating for? Seagulls?

Most of the stands at Princes Park are in that poor a state you may as well bulldoze and start again. The one stand that is in good nick has proven to be a poor option for spectators at the ground.

If you think the AFL will EVER play games at Princes Park again you are dreaming.

Rallying the troops? How about giving lower level footballing leagues an excellent ground where they can play important matches? Doesn't the AFL have a mission statement to help with grassroots footy? I would say having this ground would definitely help. How many TAC games do you think would be allowed to be played at the Telstra Dome?

Nothing wrong with that, but there are far better options around that would be far cheaper. Princes Park cannot support lights and cannot expand its car parking facilities. It is the most expensive option and least practical option for this sort of purpose.