Western Bulldogs: Will they ever win another flag?

[Bojan KantKick]

I don't know anything about economics,

You should have ended your post here rather than draw conclusions based on something you know nothing about

 

[hufus]

I do know quite a lot about demographics, fortunately. Mainly focused on psephology (more or less, elections), but it's easy enough to carry over into other areas.

The crux of my post was this: Where do you get supporters from? At the moment, you don't have enough. So how will you change that? If you really think a couple of games in Hobart every year is the answer, you're delusional. If the hope is that somehow they'll turn up in Melbourne, identify who the valid population groups are - none seem to be open to me - and actively target them. You've also already had a fair bit of recent success, but little bandwagoning, which is unfortunate and unlikely to change with future success.

So, where is your future? What's the plan here?

The Dogs aren't in a great situation, no denying that. But we do have a plan, and it's not a bad one. It'll keep us alive. Trying to bridge the gap to the wealthy clubs to win a flag is a challenge, and one I hope we can meet. But to do that in modern footy you need to invest in your long term future as a club first, and that's what the Dogs are doing. Norf are not, and the ooner you all realise it, the better your chances of not having to move in full are.

 

[NorthernLights]

your club is seriously, seriously in the poo.

Then what's your club in? Because compared to you we are flying.

The crux of my post was this: Where do you get supporters from? At the moment, you don't have enough.

We have more than you.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

I do know quite a lot about demographics, fortunately. Mainly focused on psephology (more or less, elections), but it's easy enough to carry over into other areas.

The crux of my post was this: Where do you get supporters from? At the moment, you don't have enough. So how will you change that? If you really think a couple of games in Hobart every year is the answer, you're delusional. If the hope is that somehow they'll turn up in Melbourne, identify who the valid population groups are - none seem to be open to me - and actively target them. You've also already had a fair bit of recent success, but little bandwagoning, which is unfortunate and unlikely to change with future success.

So, where is your future? What's the plan here?

The Dogs aren't in a great situation, no denying that. But we do have a plan, and it's not a bad one. It'll keep us alive. Trying to bridge the gap to the wealthy clubs to win a flag is a challenge, and one I hope we can meet. But to do that in modern footy you need to invest in your long term future as a club first, and that's what the Dogs are doing. Norf are not, and the ooner you all realise it, the better your chances of not having to move in full are.

Being out west won't help u win supporters, nor will pokies. We stuffed up by not making the most of our success in the 90s. Wont happen again and tv right increases will stop anyone folding. You say you know a lot about elections. Most people are influenced by the party their parents follow if any. My kids will support Norf, etc. I play ammos and there often is auskick before the reserves games. The majority of the kids support Hawf and Norf. We are fine, worry about yourselves.

 

[bombersfan4000]

Nope. It's still true.


You are in more debt than us and have been relocated. Hence, a shit club.

3.1 million from the 35 odd million spent, not a bad effort.


heck all help from the AFL as well. but look at Norf all the way near the top of the list, on the back of selling home games to tassie

 

[womble54]

our success in the 90s. Wont happen again

EFA

Not with your current list anyways

 

[NorthernLights]

3.1 million from the 35 odd million spent, not a bad effort.
View attachment 111361

heck all help from the AFL as well. but look at Norf all the way near the top of the list, on the back of selling home games to tassie

lol. You got kicked out of your suburb by a bowls club.

 

[NorthernLights]

EFA

Not with your current list anyways

Our list > yours.

 

[bombersfan4000]

lol. You got kicked out of your suburb by a bowls club.

nobody knows or cares who the football team is that trains at arden street

 

[Bojan KantKick]

EFA

Not with your current list anyways

Closer to a flag than your mob.

 

[womble54]

Our list > yours.

ok kid. Mines > yours... :s

 

[NorthernLights]

ok kid. Mines > yours... :s

Just going by recent form.

 

[NorthernLights]

nobody knows or cares who the football team is that trains at arden street

90% of your posts are about the team from Arden Street. I'd say they keep you up at night.

 

[cammo78]

lol. You got kicked out of your suburb by a bowls club.

Yep - as expected.

Ignore the evidence and play the man.

Weak as piss, the lot of you.

Poor clubs indeed.

LOL Norf.

 

[_Mike_]

Yes they will.

2025, just after the GWS and St Kilda four peats

Sorry Baldur, this thread isn't about 4peat spoons...

 

[Baldur]

Sorry Baldur, this thread isn't about 4peat spoons...

But that's all I know about

 

[LuvtheKangas]

3.1 million from the 35 odd million spent, not a bad effort.
View attachment 111361

heck all help from the AFL as well. but look at Norf all the way near the top of the list, on the back of selling home games to tassie

I know that on field success is seen to be a ridiculous performance measurement criterion in this thread, but note that if you take out the prize money North received for finishing 4th, then our AFL distribution was less than the Bulldogs'.

The demographics argument is also laughable. It was started by a superw***er Demons supporter about 5 or 6 years ago, and the lesser Bulldogs and Dees supporters spent many weeks stroking each other's tumescent knobs about how they had both opened up vast new areas of support (Casey and the Western corridor), and Norf (teehee) were stuffed as they had no support growth, and were povo, and have shit facilities.

Roll forward that 5-6 years and those vast new areas of support have amounted to a pile of nothing. Superw***er has long since skulked away to the anonymity of the Melbourne board (with the new catch-cry - GAGF! yes, it's that pathetic) and both teams have slid down the ladders - both membership and playing.

And anyone who claims Norf's (teehee) facilities are crap is a moron, plain and simple. Someone willing to listen to the common troll rather than observe reality.

 

[cammo78]

I know that on field success is seen to be a ridiculous performance measurement criterion in this thread, but note that if you take out the prize money North received for finishing 4th, then our AFL distribution was less than the Bulldogs'.

The demographics argument is also laughable. It was started by a super****** Demons supporter about 5 or 6 years ago, and the lesser Bulldogs and Dees supporters spent many weeks stroking each other's tumescent knobs about how they had both opened up vast new areas of support (Casey and the Western corridor), and Norf (teehee) were stuffed as they had no support growth, and were povo, and have shit facilities.

Roll forward that 5-6 years and those vast new areas of support have amounted to a pile of nothing. Super****** has long since skulked away to the anonymity of the Melbourne board (with the new catch-cry - GAGF! yes, it's that pathetic) and both teams have slid down the ladders - both membership and playing.

And anyone who claims Norf's (teehee) facilities are crap is a moron, plain and simple. Someone willing to listen to the common troll rather than observe reality.

Tell us more about the $3m less you earned WITHOUT distributions, and how you plan to bridge that gap sans Hobart and any other revenue generating asset/initiative.

For someone who claims to have a true grasp of all things financial, your approach seems more akin to running a charity than it does a business. Just as well your club's not publicly listed...imagine putting Brayshaw in front of your shareholders every year and having him trot out the same garbage, without a strategy to speak of besides short-term money grabs and absolutely nothing in terms of being self-sustainable. The share price would be belted from pillar to post!

Poor clubs indeed.

LOL Norf.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

Tell us more about the $3m less you earned WITHOUT distributions, and how you plan to bridge that gap sans Hobart and any other revenue generating asset/initiative.

For someone who claims to have a true grasp of all things financial, your approach seems more akin to running a charity than it does a business. Just as well your club's not publicly listed...imagine putting Brayshaw in front of your shareholders every year and having him trot out the same garbage, without a strategy to speak of besides short-term money grabs and absolutely nothing in terms of being self-sustainable. The share price would be belted from pillar to post!

Poor clubs indeed.

LOL Norf.

Keep telling yourself it's short-term and unsustainable, Cammo. You're a Footscray supporter and have little else than your seething jealousy of Norf (teehee) to keep you going.

Hobart has enabled us to go from a negative net assets position to retiring more than half of the debt. The debt will be fully retired whilst we are still playing at Hobart. Most would see this as an excellent strategy for strengthening the asset base of the business. Those blinded by jealousy, perhaps not.

Why bring up a public company, Cam? To make you look informed? LOL. Football clubs have more public scrutiny than 90% of listed companies. Brayshaw is under a far greater magnifying glass than any president or CEO of a non-Top 20 company. Carl Dilena, our CEO, was managing partner of KPMG before taking the role, so he knows how to run a business. You do realise that our membership numbers (analogous to share price in your example) has been on the up for the last few years, and is now above 40,000?

I know you won't stop sooking, Cam. But try and do it in a less ignorant manner.

 

[cammo78]

Keep telling yourself it's short-term and unsustainable, Cammo. You're a Footscray supporter and have little else than your seething jealousy of Norf (teehee) to keep you going.

Hobart has enabled us to go from a negative net assets position to retiring more than half of the debt. The debt will be fully retired whilst we are still playing at Hobart. Most would see this as an excellent strategy for strengthening the asset base of the business. Those blinded by jealousy, perhaps not.

Why bring up a public company, Cam? To make you look informed? LOL. Football clubs have more public scrutiny than 90% of listed companies. Brayshaw is under a far greater magnifying glass than any president or CEO of a non-Top 20 company. Carl Dilena, our CEO, was managing partner of KPMG before taking the role, so he knows how to run a business. You do realise that our membership numbers (analogous to share price in your example) has been on the up for the last few years, and is now above 40,000?

I know you won't stop sooking, Cam. But try and do it in a less ignorant manner.

I'll ask again. In terms you may understand.

It's all well and good to "retire your debt while still in Hobart"...what happens post that? It's blindingly obvious how reliant you are on that money, and yet even with it you STILL can't generate as much revenue as a club you claim to be in a far better financial position than.

Meanwhile, salary caps rise, footy departments become more expensive, yada yada...and Norf aren't getting any revenue from ANYWHERE. Bar the AFL's kindness.

So - the "retired debt" again begins to mount, the club gets desperate and looks for ANOTHER sucker to bleed dry.

Spare me your pompous, condescending garbage, champ.

It's clear you have very little idea at all.

LOL Norf.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

Aaah, Cam, even you realise that World Vision isn't our only sponsor. So, how do you possibly justify saying "Norf aren't getting any revenue from ANYWHERE".

It's sad how jealous you are. It makes you angry and irrational.

 

[cammo78]

Aaah, Cam, even you realise that World Vision isn't our only sponsor. So, how do you possibly justify saying "Norf aren't getting any revenue from ANYWHERE".

It's sad how jealous you are. It makes you angry and irrational.

How did you manage to generate $3m less than us, in a top four year, no less?!

Poor clubs indeed.

LOL Norf.

 

[LuvtheKangas]

How did you manage to generate $3m less than us, in a top four year, no less?!

Poor clubs indeed.

LOL Norf.

This post indicates you wouldn't understand the lag effect of on-field success.

More generally, you don't understand the concept of on-field success.

And it seems that you concede you straight out lied in saying "Norf aren't getting any revenue from ANYWHERE". Even used capitals to emphasise your lie, LOL.

You sad, jealous, angry little man.

 

[cammo78]

This post indicates you wouldn't understand the lag effect of on-field success.

More generally, you don't understand the concept of on-field success.

And it seems that you concede you straight out lied in saying "Norf aren't getting any revenue from ANYWHERE". Even used capitals to emphasise your lie, LOL.

You sad, jealous, angry little man.

Ahhh deflection...that trusted friend of the flog who's got nothing left.

So when does the lag from your '90's premiership era kick into gear financially?

Poor clubs indeed.

LOL Norf.

 

[royals1922]

This post indicates you wouldn't understand the lag effect of on-field success.

More generally, you don't understand the concept of on-field success.

And it seems that you concede you straight out lied in saying "Norf aren't getting any revenue from ANYWHERE". Even used capitals to emphasise your lie, LOL.

You sad, jealous, angry little man.

I disagree. If cammo was born in 1978, he has seen the most sustained era of success for the dogs. Their idea of onfield success however is different to ours.