Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

[Guido]

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.

Collingwood lost millions in clubs and hotels, some businesses go bankrupt with major investments, and we've had our own experience with unsuccessful business ventures in the past.

I'm as hopeful that they succeed as anybody, but until they prove to produce the on-going revenue streams that the club hopes for, they can't be put in the "great move" basket.

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.

Well, you can argue taking one avenue against the other, the only fact we know is that the avenue that the club did ultimately choose to take has us, right at this moment, not independently viable, and at the mercy of an organisation who have a proven track record of having tried to merge/kill us.

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, .

We have received $20million from the AFL in the last 10-11 years... do you think that's also helped contribute towards us surviving, just a little bit? Or the only reason this club still exists is -single handedly- because of David Smorgon?

claim to be supporters

Seriously? Would anyone spend hours discussing this if they weren't a supporter, or if it the discussion wasn't incredibly important to them?

[LongWait]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

@ Guido: what you fail to appreciate is that no club is necessarily viable without the AFL. All clubs receive revenue from the AFL in different ways, some of which comes in the form of equalisation payments to compensate for fixture inequalities, poor stadium deals which were negotiated by the AFL etc.

You also fail to note that 'powerhouse' clubs, including among others Carlton, Collingwood and Hawthorn, have all received various forms of AFL assistance in the past decade and still do so.

[Mitcha]

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. 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.

Been a bit quiet on this one lately, have they even started this project?

[Guido]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

@ Guido: what you fail to appreciate is that no club is necessarily viable without the AFL. All clubs receive revenue from the AFL in different ways, some of which comes in the form of equalisation payments to compensate for fixture inequalities, poor stadium deals which were negotiated by the AFL etc.

You also fail to note that 'powerhouse' clubs, including amoung others Carlton, Collingwood and Hawthorn, have all received various forms of AFL assistance in the past decade and still do so.

I'm talking about discretionary assistance over and above the standard dividend.

This is the payment that, with, say 12/24 months notice, the AFL could pull from under our feet and leave us completely vulnerable to bankruptcy or forced merger/relocation.

The club, the AFL or supporters can justify the discretionary funding in any way that they like, and in most cases it is probably legitimate, but it doesn't change the fact that it is in no way guaranteed to be ongoing into the longer term.

It is completely and utterly at the AFL's discretion, and if, for whatever reason they wanted us gone, they'd simply pull the funding and do whatever the hell THEY wanted with us - in our current financial position, we would have no say in our own future.

This isn't a personal vendetta against Smorgon, no matter the people/personalities involved, if, after 10 years they couldn't get things to a point where the club at least has control over it's own future, I'd be just as disappointed/scathing.

[SonofScray]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

I lean towards Guido's argument. We're still battling away financially, the real saving grace has been the AFL's change in perception of our Club and what they require to maximise the potential earnings of their competition. To me, that appears to have been the key to our survival, beyond many of the efforts of our President and Board. Rose had quite a bit to do with highlighting our worth to the AFL I believe, so credit where it is due.

Full respect for David Smorgon who has given his best over a long time, he stepped up at a crucial time for our Club but I won't hold him above feedback or as untouchable on the back of it. One thing I've found interesting is the discrepancy between the "I'm happy to step aside" comments and the reactions to discussion about contenders "good on him- been there, done that." Seems a little bit too defensive and dismissive to me.

[LongWait]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

I'm talking about discretionary assistance over and above the standard dividend.

This is the payment that, with, say 12/24 months notice, the AFL could pull from under our feet and leave us completely vulnerable to bankruptcy or forced merger/relocation.

The club, the AFL or supporters can justify the discretionary funding in any way that they like, and in most cases it is probably legitimate, but it doesn't change the fact that it is in no way guaranteed to be ongoing into the longer term.

It is completely and utterly at the AFL's discretion, and if, for whatever reason they wanted us gone, they'd simply pull the funding and do whatever the hell THEY wanted with us - in our current financial position, we would have no say in our own future.

This isn't a personal vendetta against Smorgon, no matter the people/personalities involved, if, after 16/17 years they couldn't get things to a point where the club at least has control over it's own future, I'd be just as disappointed/scathing.

Please do some homework and look at the same kinds of financial assistance that the AFL has provided to other clubs now and over the past couple of decades - I'm talking about provision of Bank Guarantees for nominated amounts to help secure funds for capital purchases and even for working capital. Carlton, Collingwood, Hawthorn, North Melbourne, Geelong and St.Kilda have all availed themselves of this kind of assistance. There are probably other clubs as well.

The survival in this competition of every single club has been in the hands of the AFL always. This will never change. What this club has done is forge a good relationship with both the AFL and with the other clubs, who afterall own the AFL.

Your scare mongering is unhelpful and ill-informed.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

I lean towards Guido's argument. We're still battling away financially, the real saving grace has been the AFL's change in perception of our Club and what they require to maximise the potential earnings of their competition. To me, that appears to have been the key to our survival, beyond many of the efforts of our President and Board. Rose had quite a bit to do with highlighting our worth to the AFL I believe, so credit where it is due.

Full respect for David Smorgon who has given his best over a long time, he stepped up at a crucial time for our Club but I won't hold him above feedback or as untouchable on the back of it. One thing I've found interesting is the discrepancy between the "I'm happy to step aside" comments and the reactions to discussion about contenders "good on him- been there, done that." Seems a little bit too defensive and dismissive to me.

I think Smorgon would just rather the transition be a peaceful one conducted in the best interests of the club.

[Guido]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

Please do some homework and look at the same kinds of financial assistance that the AFL has provided to other clubs now and over the past couple of decades - I'm talking about provision of Bank Guarantees for nominated amounts to help secure funds for capital purchases and even for working capital. Carlton, Collingwood, Hawthorn, North Melbourne, Geelong and St.Kilda have all availed themselves of this kind of assistance. There are probably other clubs as well.

I am only quoting special, discretionary distributions, that we have effectively become reliant on to keep our day to day operations in the black.

Every single year from 2002 onwards, we received discretionary assistance of between $1.2mil-$1.8mil OVER AND ABOVE the standard dividend.

This year, and for the rest of this broadcast agreement, we will receive $2.5mil more in funding - annually - than most other AFL clubs.

You somehow think that this discretionary assistance is guaranteed perpetually? That we should bank on "special distributions" being available and forthcoming for the next 5, 10, 20 years? That we should risk our future on it? Well excuse me if I'd prefer someone to come up with a solution/strategy that doesn't have us dependent on us going to the AFL cap in hand year in year out for a couple of million just to make ends meet.

[Greystache]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

Every single year from 2002 onwards, we received discretionary assistance of between $1.5mil-$1.8mil OVER AND ABOVE the standard dividend.

This year, and for the rest of this broadcast agreement, we will receive $2.5mil more in funding - annually - than your typical AFL club.

You somehow think that this discretionary assistance is guaranteed perpetually? That we should bank on "special distributions" being available and forthcoming for the next 5, 10, 20 years? Risk our future on it? Well excuse me if I'd prefer someone to come up with a solution/strategy that doesn't have us dependent on us going to the AFL cap in hand year in year out for a couple of million just to make ends meet.

It'll continue until we and a couple of other clubs have paid off Etihad stadium for the AFL through our pain and suffering from shocking stadium deals.


I have read your posts and I can't follow what you want.

- You don't want us reliant on AFL handouts, you want us to develop our own revenue generating interests.

- You're aggrieved that we accrued additional debt by investing in two businesses to produce additional revenue so we're not reliant on AFL handouts.

- Setting up businesses isn't guaranteed to succeed.

So to summarise, you want us to create investments with no chance of failure, that produce huge amounts of profit, that cost nothing to set up.

If someone can hit on the formula that makes this possible can someone pass me their daughter's phone number.

[Bornadog]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

Every single year from 2002 onwards, we received discretionary assistance of between $1.2mil-$1.8mil OVER AND ABOVE the standard dividend. .

We receive these payments as compensation for a number of reasons:

* The crap Eithad Stadium deal that the AFL negotiated for us.

* The lack of TV exposure

* Zero Block busters

* Playing lots of interstate games

* and basically not having an opportunity to receive big sponsorship dollars due to the lack of the above exposure.

The Club is trying very hard to not be reliant on the AFL and two areas where they are now receiving regular income is from the rental of offices to various businesses, in particular to Victoria University and the revenue received from the sporting complex built next to the John Gent Stand. On top of this is the Dromana and Edgewater developments.

There is certainly a long way to go, but at the end of the day if we don't have supporters including new, who also stick by the club we will fail.

[LongWait]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

We receive these payments as compensation for a number of reasons:

* The crap Eithad Stadium deal that the AFL negotiated for us.

* The lack of TV exposure

* Zero Block busters

* Playing lots of interstate games

* and basically not having an opportunity to receive big sponsorship dollars due to the lack of the above exposure.

The Club is trying very hard to not be reliant on the AFL and two areas where they are now receiving regular income is from the rental of offices to various businesses, in particular to Victoria University and the revenue received from the sporting complex built next to the John Gent Stand. On top of this is the Dromana and Edgewater developments.

There is certainly a long way to go, but at the end of the day if we don't have supporters including new, who also stick by the club we will fail.

Exactly!

[jeemak]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

It'll continue until we and a couple of other clubs have paid off Etihad stadium for the AFL through our pain and suffering from shocking stadium deals.

This is the perverse and sickening part of it all as far as I'm concerned.

Our club and supporters are being ground to the bone by the horrible stadium deals negotiated for us and by our club when we had no alternative home venue, all the while not getting any exposure or favourable fixturing, and when the AFL buys the stadium for $1.00 we're likely to be relocated or extinguished!

I appreciate where Guido is coming from, though I'm not sure he appreciates just how hard Smorgon and Co. have had to work to turn the ship around to get us to a point where we can seek and invest in alternative revenue streams.

We have been a club that has throughout history continually proven itself to be poor financial managers, and I think some credit needs to go to those at the helm over the recent decade who worked hard to make us a club worthy of lending to, and backing.

[Eastdog]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

Do you reckon it would be good if we somehow strike a deal where we play half of our home matches at the MCG and the other half at Etihad Stadium. It probably won't happen but it is just an idea. Even if we don't play half at the G at least play a few more matches than 2 per year.

[jeemak]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

Do you reckon it would be good if we somehow strike a deal where we play half of our home matches at the MCG and the other half at Etihad Stadium. It probably won't happen but it is just an idea. Even if we don't play half at the G at least play a few more matches than 2 per year.

There's no incentive for the MCG to have us play there ED. Plus, somebody would need to take our place at Docklands to help pay that stadium off, and I can't see too many clubs putting their hands up for that job.

[Eastdog]

Re: Smorgon Leadership Challenge update

There's no incentive for the MCG to have us play there ED. Plus, somebody would need to take our place at Docklands to help pay that stadium off, and I can't see too many clubs putting their hands up for that job.

How about jeemak like our "blockbuster" type of games to be played at the G.