Raise your Victory Gin to .... 'AFL, Roos discuss takeover bid'

[Z_K]

Thats their own $30M in the bank to start off with. Add to that the profits from their already thriving ventures, add the $200M the AFL will be putting in to develop football on the Gold Coast.

As for our 11 game membership generating an extra $4M in the next 3 years, where are these 65,000 members per year going to come from?

Would you support the Southport Roos?

 

[Handsome.B.Wonderful]

Would you support the Southport Roos?

No.

I used Southport as the obvious example of the AFL being able to sell a licence to another club tomorrow.

 

[Lidge]

Fcuk. I'm ready to take one for the team.

I'd be prepared to borrow a few million and buy every single share off the shareholders and distribute them back the member base.

Wouldn't repay a cent back to the bank and would happily bankrupt myself to keep the club at Arden St, and return power to the members.

If you're a shareholder, name your price.

 

[gokangas]

I continue with the premise that any move, relocation, co-location, increased games, call it what you like, will be AFL driven and the club will be placed in a godfather situation - made the offer they can't refuse.
We need to collectively think about how we as supporters start the lobby to protect our Melbourne based interests. I'm not sure yet what the answer is to this but the AFL need a message from us.

 

[Lidge]

and the club will be placed in a godfather situation - .

My version of the godfather situation involves horses heads, mass assassinations and torture.

 

[Tas]

Got it, but if the major shareholders really wanted to influence the vote, they would be better off selling some of their shares to the AFL, but not all. If one retained 400,000 (as in your example) he could then vote with the AFL and effectively give the AFL two votes.

If all 8 at the meeting had over 400,000 and sold their excess to the AFL and that then totalled more than 400,000 - there is 9 maximum votes - led by the AFL - working together, probably in exchange for a whole lot of trade offs for moving to the GC.

Well, if enough people had the desire to sell out and they would push to get the constitution ammended in an emergency AGM to dismantle the safeguards.

It was a foolish move to ever get the club incorporated in the manner it was. The shares should have been non-transferrable. It has created a number of issues with people able to abuse loopholes like giving shares to friends to boost the number of votes they actually have in elections.

Given how little some have paid for their shares, it is ridiculous for them to have the kind of influence with the club. They are prepared to sell out on a tens of thousands of members and hundreds of thousands of supporters for money and no guarantees our club will ever be better off. Selfish and short-sighted people that are going to trash our generations of history and culture that they have no right to bring to ruin.

 

[gokangas]

My version of the godfather situation involves horses heads, mass assassinations and torture.

I think the AFL has the power to make us have a bigger presence on the GC - we only survive on their benevolence and they can change the rules when they like.

 

[Tas]

Thats their own $30M in the bank to start off with. Add to that the profits from their already thriving ventures, add the $200M the AFL will be putting in to develop football on the Gold Coast.

That is money from pokies over a long period of time. Clubs would want to see Southport pay $20 million plus for the license.

The $200 million the AFL is talking about is for stadium improvements and grass level support. They would need to open the floodgates to support a team on the Gold Coast.

As for our 11 game membership generating an extra $4M in the next 3 years, where are these 65,000 members per year going to come from?

I take it 10 games at Carrara is generated gross revenue of $4 million for 10 games.

Well, Assuming we can sustain a 25k average membership in Melbourne then 10 games based on current membership price x 10 games x 25,000 members = $4,375,000.

It is why the AFL is on the negative news campaign here, they don't want out membership here to grow and want to drive off supporters with the news of death because it makes their job easier.

If we can rally support to save the club and push the membership up to 30k with huge public driven rallies to save our club that would generate $5.25 million in revenue from membership sales alone for those 10 games.

The target is well within reach, the club just needs to get off their collective fat arses and get a freaking business plan put together and start planning for the future as a Melbourne club rather than sit around for freaking years like a bunch of useless puppets.

 

[Tas]

I think the AFL has the power to make us have a bigger presence on the GC - we only survive on their benevolence and they can change the rules when they like.

We are only struggling because it suits their agenda. You want to ask yourself why the AFL has $200 million it can just urinate on the gold coast, it is because they are not returning money generated by the 16 clubs back to the 16 clubs.

Why should we have to accept that the AFL has to waste hundres of millions of dollars saturating a market that is not AFL friendly.

If the AFL gave that money back to the clubs that would be $12.5 million to each club, that would make a world of difference to the existing clubs, allow them to invest in their future rather than let the AFL run 3 or 4 clubs into the ground with their peanut distribution.

 

[Handsome.B.Wonderful]

I take it 10 games at Carrara is generated gross revenue of $4 million for 10 games.

Well, Assuming we can sustain a 25k average membership in Melbourne then 10 games based on current membership price x 10 games x 25,000 members = $4,375,000.

We already have 22,000(?) members and the $4M from the Gold Coast is added on top of this. Also isn't your $4,375,000 the gross figure?

 

[gokangas]

We are only struggling because it suits their agenda. You want to ask yourself why the AFL has $200 million it can just urinate on the gold coast, it is because they are not returning money generated by the 16 clubs back to the 16 clubs.

Why should we have to accept that the AFL has to waste hundres of millions of dollars saturating a market that is not AFL friendly.

If the AFL gave that money back to the clubs that would be $12.5 million to each club, that would make a world of difference to the existing clubs, allow them to invest in their future rather than let the AFL run 3 or 4 clubs into the ground with their peanut distribution.

Absolutely right - no argument from me. But thats not the way it works and it will never work that way. The AFL control the purse strings and they will use that power as they see fit to deliver their agendas.

 

[conwaynmfc]

When we get the relocation money, we'll relocate to melbourne. done

 

[Handsome.B.Wonderful]

We are only struggling because it suits their agenda. You want to ask yourself why the AFL has $200 million it can just urinate on the gold coast, it is because they are not returning money generated by the 16 clubs back to the 16 clubs.

Why should we have to accept that the AFL has to waste hundres of millions of dollars saturating a market that is not AFL friendly.

If the AFL gave that money back to the clubs that would be $12.5 million to each club, that would make a world of difference to the existing clubs, allow them to invest in their future rather than let the AFL run 3 or 4 clubs into the ground with their peanut distribution.

If the VFL didn't put this money into the untapped areas 20 years ago we would have no Brisbane and no Sydney hence no true national game which means no huge TV rights deals and (you guessed it) no huge profit.

You need money to make money.

 

[moomba]

If the VFL didn't put this money into the untapped areas 20 years ago we would have no Brisbane and no Sydney hence no true national game which means no huge TV rights deals and (you guessed it) no huge profit.

You need money to make money.

And what benefits are we seeing from these profits? The supporters are certainly seeing very little of it, just more money in the bank to waste on another untapped area that doesn't want the game.

When does it end?

 

[Michele]

Because Joseph doesn't own shares?

*chuckle*

Read Bob Ansett's take on the AFL meeting with some shareholders without the board's permission.

*chuckle, chuckle*

I would be very surprised if Ron Joseph didn't also own any shares.

 

[trevagreene]

im pretty sure Ron Joseph owns shares. he had the choice to go into the shareholders vote for the election.