Thanks Denis...Thanks a lot...

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by moomba

No but you are saying I am selfish if I want my club to survive in it 's own right.

Because I (along with many other people - including plenty of Roos supporters) believe that the club can't survive in Melbourne in it's own right.

There is no guarantee that any other location would be a success. Sydney or Brisbane would struggle through with huge amounts of AFL assistance to keep pit alive. Canberra and Tassie have already been assessed as not capable of supporting an AFL team.

There's never any guarantees, but the Roos are beating their head against a brick wall in Melbourne. Sydney or Brisbane would be a safer bet.

Were the Hawthorn supporters who opposed the merger with Melbourne selfish six years ago? Were the Richmond, and Collingwood, and St Kilda supporters selfish putting money to save their clubs into tins in the 80's.

No they weren't selfish - as has been proven. But times have changed. There is more travel. Stadiums cost more. General expenses are rising. 10 of the 16 clubs made a loss last year. It is only in the last few years that the feeling has been that the AFL aren't prepared to put up with clubs who lose money any more. Of course they will protect Freo for the sake of the national comp, but one gets the feeling that they will try to push one or two melbourne team out of the comp (or merger or relocation).

Something has to give, and at the moment the Roos and Dogs are at the bottom of the pile.

 

[moomba]

So what you are basically saying is you don't give a toss about the NMFC supporters, and you are more than prepared to devastate their lives on the off chance that a relocation will be viable.

That's fair enough, but we come from totally different points of view on this issue and I don't see any point discussing it with someone that doesn't appreciate that a footy club is more than profit and loss, and crowd numbers.

Moomba

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Philj


Because Sydney moved into a vacuum. I assume the Sydney people have tried to get as many Sydney people on board as possible. Hell they're relocating within the city in a bid to find more. But you are talking about doubling support. People who know Sydney is there, but are not willing to support them. Why would North Sydeny attract them?

- The swans play at the SCG
- Most of their supporters are eastern suburb yuppie types.
- There's a much bigger market out west in Sydney where people can't be ar$ed going all the way to the SCG.
- The western suburbs of Sydney is much more akin to the shinboner spirit. The 'ol us against the yuppie rivalry.
- Play a team out of homebush every two weeks and they will build up a following

- The Roos went half-hearted at their attempt at the Sydney market. You have to let the people know that you are here to stay - that you are their very own team.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by moomba
So what you are basically saying is you don't give a toss about the NMFC supporters, and you are more than prepared to devastate their lives on the off chance that a relocation will be viable.

That's fair enough, but we come from totally different points of view on this issue and I don't see any point discussing it with someone that doesn't appreciate that a footy club is more than profit and loss, and crowd numbers.

Moomba

You're still avoiding the issue.

How do you expect a club to run if they aren't making money. Your rationale is saying that because tradition and passion are important, a footy club can survive on negative money.

It just doesn't work that way - passion or no passion.

 

[hotpie]

Originally posted by bunsen burner


- The western suburbs of Sydney is much more akin to the shinboner spirit. The 'ol us against the yuppie rivalry.
- Play a team out of homebush every two weeks and they will build up a following

As long as they don't clash with Eels or Bulldogs or Panthers games.... Fair dinkum Parramatta and a 20k radius is the heart of rugby league......it just won't work.

Its too late for the Sydney experiment.... it would require the Swans to co-operate on promotion for one, and its been proven that they will fight for their market share every step of the way.

The Roos are GAWN..... I give them 3 years. Canberra is their only hope and its not musch better an option than Homebush.

 

[Z_K]

Originally posted by hotpie




The Roos are GAWN..... I give them 3 years.

Is that right?

That's it then. May as well give it away.

 

[moomba]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
You're still avoiding the issue.

How do you expect a club to run if they aren't making money. Your rationale is saying that because tradition and passion are important, a footy club can survive on negative money.

It just doesn't work that way - passion or no passion.

Do you know the nature of the debt at North?

Do you know how much revenue we expect to get this year, the year after, five years, ten years.?

Do you what our expenditure is, and which areas will be reigned in.?

Do you know the financial estimates behind the move of our social club to Colonial.?

Do you know the details of the Canberra deal.?

Do you know the demographics of developing North Melbourne
and Kensington areas, as well as the demographics of Docklands?

Do you know the number of kids that started supporting the club in the 90's, our most successful period of all time?

Do you know what marketing and corporate opportunities are available to the club in future years, particularly in Canberra?

You are basing your assessment on a couple of years worth of losses (much of which is unrelated to football operations), together with a debt that is no worse than several clubs. In the past ten years we have increased our revenue by a huge amount, but it seems that the costs of running football have increased as well. I am confident the club will be exploring every opportunity to increase our revenue over the term of the business plan and beyond and I hope the AFL will start to realise that the cost of running footy at the moment is not viable for many clubs. If we all gave up when things looked bad Richmond would be dead, St Kilda would be dead, North would be dead, the Footscray Lions and the Melbourne Hawks may well be the power teams of the moment and hundreds of thousands of footy fans wouldn't give a toss.

Moomba

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by moomba


Do you know the nature of the debt at North?

No I don't. What I do know is that they have been behind the 8-ball for 77 years now. I don't believe that anything will change if they stay in Melbourne in their own right.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by hotpie

As long as they don't clash with Eels or Bulldogs or Panthers games.... Fair dinkum Parramatta and a 20k radius is the heart of rugby league......it just won't work.

Where they regularly get 8,000 people to games. Show them a better product and people will tune in.

Its too late for the Sydney experiment....

I have mentioned that I thought they Roos should have gone full tilt at the Sydney market a few years ago.

The Roos are GAWN..... I give them 3 years. Canberra is their only hope and its not musch better an option than Homebush.

I don't think canberra can support an AFL team.

 

[mighty mick]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by moomba


Do you know the nature of the debt at North?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

im not sure what it is either moomba but at the moment not too many footy clubs this yr can claim to be making money.

if carlton cant make money from any of there 3 block buster games this year then we know the afl is in trouble.

this is when they played essendon , richmond, and collingwood.

 

[moomba]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
No I don't. What I do know is that they have been behind the 8-ball for 77 years now. I don't believe that anything will change if they stay in Melbourne in their own right.

4 premierships in the last 77 years is what we should be judged on, or would you prefer that the AFL become a popularity contest, or a beaty pageant, or a ten richest companies column.

Moomba

 

[hotpie]

Its always been a popularity contest.

 

[jerry springer]

Roos arent going to die as easily as many people on this board seem to think.Hawthorn didnt have a great supporter base like North Melbourne either but because of their sucess in the 80's they attracted a following of young supporters that have now grown up to being paid-up adult members of which they now have the 3rd or 4th highest membership in Victoria.They went thru a bit of trouble with the demons merger but are now a succesful and viable club.

Kids are attracted to successful teams and champion players and North Melbourne have had a successful team in the 90's with one of the best players in history leading them in Wayne Carey.The next few years could be tough but there is no reason that in 4-5 years north melbourne cant be a viable club

 

[windyhill]

North will never die.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by moomba


4 premierships in the last 77 years is what we should be judged on, or would you prefer that the AFL become a popularity contest, or a beaty pageant, or a ten richest companies column.

Moomba

You're still shirking the issue. Are you scared of the truth?

It has nothing to do with judging. A team can have 20 flags, but the fact remains that if they can't stay afloat as a business, then they will find it hard to stay in the AFL.

Who do you propose pay for the Kangaroos to stay afloat? Can you stop beating around the bush and answer the question?

 

[Z_K]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
You're still shirking the issue. Are you scared of the truth?

It has nothing to do with judging. A team can have 20 flags, but the fact remains that if they can't stay afloat as a business, then they will find it hard to stay in the AFL.

Who do you propose pay for the Kangaroos to stay afloat? Can you stop beating around the bush and answer the question?

WTF is your malfunction?

Why do you care so bloody much?

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by NorthBhoy


WTF is your malfunction?

Why do you care so bloody much?

As I thought - too scared to answer the question because in your heart you know that a football club can't stay afloat if it loses money year after year.

Sorry that I burst your little cosy bubble.

 

[Z_K]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
As I thought - too scared to answer the question because in your heart you know that a football club can't stay afloat if it loses money year after year.

Sorry that I burst your little cosy bubble.

Nothing cosy about my bubble mate.

Just don't see your infatutuation with the situation thats all.

 

[moomba]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
You're still shirking the issue. Are you scared of the truth?

It has nothing to do with judging. A team can have 20 flags, but the fact remains that if they can't stay afloat as a business, then they will find it hard to stay in the AFL.

Who do you propose pay for the Kangaroos to stay afloat? Can you stop beating around the bush and answer the question?

Hang on. Yesterday I miade a list of a number of reasons why our current situation is terminal. We are looking at increasing revenue, we are looking at cutting expenses, we are looking for increased opportunities out of things like Canberra and Colonial. We have a lot of kids that started supporting the club in the 90's when were very consistently successful. I have also said that I hope the AFL will soon see that the current situation is not viable for several clubs and perhaps they should be doing something about this.

Seems to me that there is one person shirking the issue and it is not me. You say that North has been behind behind the 8-ball for the last 77 years, I say that we have been a successful footy club, particularly over the last half of that period. Over 77 years we have managed a debt that would probably be eliminated with the sale of an asset we helped build and are entitiled to a percentage of. The majority of this debt is not related to ongoing football issues which to me suggests that if we concentrate on footy the situation is not as bad as people like yourself assume.

Moomba

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by moomba


Over 77 years we have managed a debt that would probably be eliminated with the sale of an asset we helped build and are entitiled to a percentage of.

What 'asset' that you helped build?

If you did get this percentage and pay off the debt, there is no guarantee that it won't build up again.

 

[moomba]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
What 'asset' that you helped build?

If you did get this percentage and pay off the debt, there is no guarantee that it won't build up again.

A little bit of unused land in the South-East, I think they used to call it Waverley Park and the newspaper today rates it as worth $110 million. 1/16th of that gives us $6.875 million, enough to pay off all debt and have money in the bank. At the moment the AFL is stalling on giving us $2 million of it.

As for guarantees there is no guarantee of anything, but the club is working on getting the club profitable again. The fact that we didn't pay more than we could afford to keep Denis Pagan is a fair indication that the current administration is being very responsible with money.

Moomba

 

[hotpie]

Originally posted by moomba


A little bit of unused land in the South-East, I think they used to call it Waverley Park and the newspaper today rates it as worth $110 million. 1/16th of that gives us $6.875 million, enough to pay off all debt and have money in the bank. At the moment the AFL is stalling on giving us $2 million of it.



Moomba

Fair enough that the AFL don't hand out the money yet - Waverley hasn't been sold yet.

You are lucky to get 1/16th in any case....If they were sharing on the basis of which clubs contributed most to the ground since 1972 (ie attendances) you would get squat. Even on the sale of Waverley you are being subsidised by the stronger clubs.

 

[moomba]

Originally posted by hotpie
Fair enough that the AFL don't hand out the money yet - Waverley hasn't been sold yet.

I am not asking for the lot, but Richmond have got a $2 million advance, I think even Collingwood might have got $2 million advance to help with the move to Olympic Park.

You are lucky to get 1/16th in any case....If they were sharing on the basis of which clubs contributed most to the ground since 1972 (ie attendances) you would get squat. Even on the sale of Waverley you are being subsidised by the stronger clubs.

We rarely played there and to be honest attendance paid mostly for the ongoing maintenace and running costs of the stadium. It's all beside the point. North is an equal partner in the AFL with the other 15 clubs and as such owns 1/16th of Waverley Park.

Moomba

 

[bunsen burner]

I'm interested in knowing how the NMFC helped 'build' Waverly?

 

[Danny Chook Fan Club]

What a load of absolute crap hotpie. On that basis, Hawthorn should get half the money, since we were the only people who actually wanted the joint. As for your "It's always been a popularity contest", I'm yet to see a game decided by the number of people in attendance.

moomba's point is entirely relevant. North is being blackmailed by the AFL - through forcing them to go down to 92.5% of the salary cap - so they can get their hands on a share of an asset that is rightfully theirs. Meanwhile, the exact same funding from that asset is available to clubs who did nothing to buy, build, maintain and run the stadium.

As for bunsen burner, I can't see how you can legitimately argue that North fans are being selfish in this instance, yet claim Hawthorn members weren't being selfish in 1996, when that club was faced with very similar problems.