Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

[LostDoggy]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

Cos we need a change. We are going nowhere at the moment.
Dimma might not be the best candidate but we if continue down the same path we will lose more members, stangnate on field and make it harder to challenge again.

Im interested your money view. Saying Dimma didn't put his money where his mouth is but 17 years of Smorgon hasn't really secured our financials either.

That's just my point though. Just because Dimma has cash and “wealthy businessmen backers” doesn't mean the club will see a red cent. If anything, I find it very cynical. Show the poor club some dollars and watch them fall over themselves.

I guess I don't trust him. And that's a bad start, from a personal perspective.

I don't believe Smorgon put much money in personally (I can't prove that, just what I have been told) and he was touted as having lots of business connections but we still have a debt of $4 million.

My point exactly. Ta!

Yeah, that's why our debt reduction money went straight towards funding the Peninsula Club to generate revenue

Classic if true.

[Guido]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

Yeah, that's why our debt reduction money went straight towards funding the Peninsula Club to generate revenue

Then by definition it didn't go towards reducing the club's historical debt, did it?

This is the verbatim statement from last year's financial report:

As part of the company's collaborative partnership with RSL Victoria, the company acquired the Dromana-Red Hill RSL in December 2010. This venue has been refurbished and rebranded to The Peninsula Club. The acquisition was funded through additional borrowings

[Guido]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

There is debt and then there are liabilities. The two are very different. I haven't seen the balance sheet, but I would hasten to suggest that the Debt which Garlo is referring to is Core Borrowings (Debt) with one or more financial institutions. Why it is so important to reduce this is that this type of debt rolls periodically (matures and reborrowed). The lender however is under no obligation to re-lend, which puts the club at risk.

I'm not going to give a capital finance lesson, suffice to say that there is good debt and bad debt. Bad debt is borrowings taken out 20 years ago to fun player purchases. Good debt is something like the debt around the Edgewater Investment, provided that investment is returning at or above the level expected.

Studied accounting at uni, so although I may not have your experience in business finance, I don't think I need a Debt 101 lesson

These are the facts. Whatever makes up the club's liabilities, whether it be trade creditors, a bank facility, good debt, bad debt, indifferent debt, the fact is that after 16 years under this board, the club still cannot stand on it's own two feet.

If the AFL withdrew discretionary assistance tomorrow, we would not be able to meet our debt obligations. Take away the AFL bank guarantee and annual discretionary funding, and this organisation is not a going concern and could go into administration within weeks.

If you count the Waverly money and this year's AFL funding, we have received close to $20mil in assistance from the AFL, and still haven't managed to balance the books to a point where we are independently viable.

Other clubs such as Melbourne, with less exposure, less members, less on field success, are in a stronger financial position. Having had a 16/17 year shot at it, as a shareholder of the club (for even longer than Smorgon has been president) am I within my rights to expect/want better?

Is not as simple to say that we have $14m of liabilities on the balance sheet therefore it is bad.

Auditors’ Report from the 2011 Financial Report
(b) Going concern
As at 31 October 2011, the Western Bulldogs has a current asset deficiency of $10,160,620. This gives rise to significant uncertainty about the ability of the company to continue to operate as a going concern.

Am I ok to assume that that is bad?

[Bornadog]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

Then by definition it didn't go towards reducing the club's historical debt, did it?

This is the verbatim statement from last year's financial report:

As part of the company's collaborative partnership with RSL Victoria, the company acquired the Dromana-Red Hill RSL in December 2010. This venue has been refurbished and rebranded to The Peninsula Club. The acquisition was funded through additional borrowings

The balance sheet shows this as an additional $1.6 million and is separate to the historical debt showing $4.25 million. I pointed this out in my initial response to your post.

[LongWait]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

Studied accounting at uni, so although I may not have your experience in business finance, I don't think I need a Debt 101 lesson

These are the facts. Whatever makes up the club's liabilities, whether it be trade creditors, a bank facility, good debt, bad debt, indifferent debt, the fact is that after 16 years under this board, the club still cannot stand on it's own two feet.

If the AFL withdrew discretionary assistance tomorrow, we would not be able to meet our debt obligations. Take away the AFL bank guarantee and annual discretionary funding, and this organisation is not a going concern and could go into administration within weeks.

If you count the Waverly money and this year's AFL funding, we have received close to $20mil in assistance from the AFL, and still haven't managed to balance the books to a point where we are independently viable.

Other clubs such as Melbourne, with less exposure, less members, less on field success, are in a stronger financial position. Having had a 16/17 year shot at it, as a shareholder of the club (for even longer than Smorgon has been president) am I within my rights to expect/want better?
Auditors’ Report from the 2011 Financial Report
(b) Going concern
As at 31 October 2011, the Western Bulldogs has a current asset deficiency of $10,160,620. This gives rise to significant uncertainty about the ability of the company to continue to operate as a going concern.

Am I ok to assume that that is bad?

You are not a shareholder of the club. No-one is. The Footscray Football Club is a membership based organisation.

[Guido]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

You are not a shareholder of the club. No-one is. The Footscray Football Club is a membership based organisation.

All members are shareholders of the Footscray Football Club. I've been a member since 1994, hence a shareholder for the same period.

[SonofScray]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

With all due respect and credit for his work over the journey I'll be glad when Smorgo is gone. He has been a spent force in recent years and to our detriment no one has stepped up. The names getting thrown about could all do the job. If they are primed to go and Smorgo steps down, or is pushed, it is a good result for the Club.

Our Club needs some fresh views, more honesty, and stronger leadership right at the top. Looking forward to someone with a bit of moxie and a combative streak as well as your standard qualities required to lead up an organisation such as ours.

[LongWait]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

All members are shareholders of the Footscray Football Club. I've been a member since 1994, hence a shareholder for the same period.

I'm sorry but this is incorrect - read the club constitution.

You may be a member. Members have very limited entitlements when compared to shareholder's rights. Membership of the Footscray Football Club confers no ownership in any way of the organisiation. Unless you are in a special category (such as Life Members) your membership is only good for as long as you have paid your membership dues.

You have not invested any money into the club, and neither has anyone else. Any financial contributions that you have made are donations; payments for goods or services; or are membership fees. You have not contributed to the shareholder capital (there is none) and have no shareholder rights.

The constitution prevents any distribution of any kind to a member. You get a vote as a paid member but you definitely do not "own" any of the club.

[Guido]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

Ok, happy to admit that I've been completely wrong in my interpretation then.

If the club is 100% owned by the members, I would have thought they would be it's shareholders, but obviously not.

[boydogs]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

Is this true?

As you noted yourself in the thread below, debt went up by $750k in the 2010-11 financial year. We paid back $750k on our existing debt, and took out a new $1.5m loan for the Peninsula Club. We raised $1.125m in just one night during bulldoze the debt, the extra probably went towards the Peninsula Club as well.

My point is Guido saying Smorgo has done nothing to try and help the club become financially sustainable is tripe, the amount of trouble he has gone to to get the Peninsula & Edgewater Clubs over the line has been enormous.

http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=10192

[Guido]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

My point is Guido saying Smorgo has done nothing to try and help the club become financially sustainable is tripe, the amount of trouble he has gone to to get the Peninsula & Edgewater Clubs over the line has been enormous.

I've acknowledged their effort, but whatever their time and effort has gone into, the club is still on the brink, completely reliant on a third party (the AFL) for it's day to day survival.

Disagree with it all you want, but that's the fact of where the club sits at this point in time. If you discount the AFL discretionary funding, the club has not even come close to breaking even in over 10 years.

Whether it was Rose, Smorgon or now Garlick, every single interview/presser on long term viability reinforces the same view - AFL assistance, more AFL assistance, AFL assistance for the longer term.

It is as if they think it will exist perpetually. We cannot rely on it. We simply cannot. The AFL are snaky, untrustworthy and will pull the pin on us the second it suits them.

Not once, NOT ONCE, in the last ten years has Smorgon said that he aims to have club being self sustainable without AFL assistance. Everything is geared towards "the AFL must help us".

If the Peninsula club and Edgewater development are -finally- the silver bullets which push the club into being self-sustainable in the long term, fantastic, I will applaud Smorgon's (and his board's) business acumen and effort as much as anyone, whether he's still president or stepped down.

But until the investments do equate into success stories (and there are no guarantees in business), I can only pass judgement on the president's and board's financial performance over the past 16/17 years, and IMO it hasn't been up to par.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

I've acknowledged their effort, but whatever their time and effort has gone into, the club is still on the brink, completely reliant on a third party (the AFL) for it's day to day survival.

Disagree with it all you want, but that's the fact of where the club sits at this point in time.

His every single interview/presser on long term viability reinforces the same view - AFL assistance, more AFL assistance, AFL assistance for the longer term.

It is as if he thinks it will exist perpetually. We cannot rely on it. We simply cannot. The AFL are snaky, untrustworthy and will pull the pin on us the second it suits them.

Not once, NOT ONCE, in the last ten years has Smorgon said that he aims to have club being self sustainable without AFL assistance. Everything is geared towards "the AFL must help us".

If the Peninsula club and Edgewater development are -finally- the silver bullets which push the club into being self-sustainable in the long term, fantastic, I will applaud Smorgon's (and his board's) business acumen and effort as much as anyone, whether he's still president or stepped down.

But until the investments do equate into success stories, I can only go on the president's and board's financial performance over the past 16/17 years, and IMO it hasn't been up to par.

The Edgewater investment and to a lesser extent the Peninsula club are precisely what you crave; sustainable revenue earning investments able to deliver long into the future. Surely given the financial nous you claim to posess, you can see this and also recognise that, as a long term investment, there has been a long lead-in to get this established.

Thoughout the 17 years, I dare say the Board could have slashed spenting in a move to create a better Balance Sheet. But, that would have come at a cost that would have sent us to the wall through slashing football department spending, community and promotional spend and player payments etc. Life has had to go on and members wishes for sustained success followed.

Anybody jumping on this forum to critise Davis Smorgon ought to wake up to themselves for without him, we would no longer have a club, a fact acknowledged by every other club in the AFL but sadly not by some who claim to be supporters.

[Bulldog4life]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

The Edgewater investment and to a lesser extent the Peninsula club are precisely what you crave; sustainable revenue earning investments able to deliver long into the future. Surely given the financial nous you claim to posess, you can see this and also recognise that, as a long term investment, there has been a long lead-in to get this established.

Thoughout the 17 years, I dare say the Board could have slashed spenting in a move to create a better Balance Sheet. But, that would have come at a cost that would have sent us to the wall through slashing football department spending, community and promotional spend and player payments etc. Life has had to go on and members wishes for sustained success followed.

Anybody jumping on this forum to critise Davis Smorgon ought to wake up to themselves for without him, we would no longer have a club, a fact acknowledged by every other club in the AFL but sadly not by some who claim to be supporters.

Well said EJ.

[Bornadog]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

Anybody jumping on this forum to critise Davis Smorgon ought to wake up to themselves for without him, we would no longer have a club, a fact acknowledged by every other club in the AFL but sadly not by some who claim to be supporters.

I don't think anyone is criticizing Smorgon. He has done a great job for us. What we need now is to go to the next level and David has run his race. He himself has acknowledged he is prepared to stand down for the right person to take over.

[LongWait]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

I don't think anyone is criticizing Smorgon. He has done a great job for us. What we need now is to go to the next level and David has run his race. He himself has acknowledged he is prepared to stand down for the right person to take over.

Sorry BAD but there was some pretty strident criticism of the club and of Smorgon in particular (not by you.)