Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Fri Jul 18, 2025 11:01 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 167 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:56 am 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:22 pm
Posts: 1499
Location: Sydney
Fevola wrote:
We as members helped kick Elliott out, can we do the same with Pagan. We can do anything as a group of members in support of each other really. Someone with some power in the club needs to be approached, then the members will back that up.


Are you sure you dont support Richmond?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:56 am 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:27 am
Posts: 33188
Location: In the box.
molesy the debate isnt if we should be saving more money for the debt or getting more sponsorships .. its because its very lopsided.

Where are we as a club if were turning over 19 million???
Ill tell you!!The bottom end of the spectrum.

Now .. its ok to fix the debt but how howabout giving the supporters and sponsors *the perception* that the club is going somewhere and has a plan...so it begins to look more attractive for sponsorhips???

We have been woeful in this area and you can tell the club is run by a bunch of bean counters.

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:58 am 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:29 am
Posts: 2209
molsey wrote:
womack a loss is an accounting term, and debt is more about cash and cashflow. We have made substantial losses because we have written off millions from the leasehold improvements (ie stands) over time, to reflect the fact that they now have minimal value (notwithstanding the AFL's comments overnight).

Debt repayment has come from cost cutting and redirection of AFL funding ie cash items. The substantial losses provide for our negative net equity position given the assets (leasehold improvements etc.) are low and the debt is yet to be fully repaid.

Much of the debate in here is about whether we continue to make debt reduction a priority or whether we seek additional sponsorships. i think we are doing both but seemingly not being that successful in the latter.


And Marci, let it go. We were caught red-handed and were bent over big time. There's no point to dredging this up, there will be no reversal. We will be the 'cheats' for many years to come, we just have to live with it.


I'm hearing you molsey - but isn't $4mil of our debt cash that has been redirected from the AFL (a prepayment of dividend if you like)?

I'm going to have to get the financials - to repay so much debt in a short time must mean we made whacking big "cash" profits, while making "accounting" losses. It's the only way that you can reduce debt. How much did we get from moving to Telstra Dome????

_________________
I support Carlton, Fulham and I'm an accountant - my mate calls me a 3 time loser.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:07 am 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:36 pm
Posts: 2960
Location: Oak Park
molsey wrote:
And Marci, let it go. We were caught red-handed and were bent over big time. There's no point to dredging this up, there will be no reversal. We will be the 'cheats' for many years to come, we just have to live with it.


molsey, I have let it go but to hear AD come out and pledge that they will look at supporting us anyway they can is an obvious admission that the AFL Commission have deep concerns about our ongoing non-competitveness. And I would guess that the biggest concern is our continued on field problems. Now that they realise the punishments were indeed too harsh and maybe we aren't as big as predicted and can ride it out on the bottom for 4-5 years, now they pledge help! Give me a break...

The penalties were inconceivable at the time and history now shows that they were remarkably excessive and negligent. I agree we were caught and we need to wear that but what is the point of punishing us if we are pushed to the point of extinction?

Maybe I don't share a majority view on this but AD's words are essentially an admission of guilt that the penalties were wrong and that the end result was not what the AFL wanted. Now they have a "franchise" (sorry to use an American term) that is essentially insolvent, with a list of players barely at AFL standard and a club that is on the nose in the corporate world and unable to generate sufficient revenue. Now that the members' resolve is also starting to wane, the outlook is looking particularly grim.

And my opinion is that if we at least had a team on the up, a team to give the members and supporters some hope of a competitive future then maybe on the back of that we could address these other issues. And I simply strengthen this POV by referring to the players that could be wearing the Navy Blue.

Maybe I am not over it because the whole situation makes me sick! :evil:

_________________
C'mon Blueboys!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:14 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 7:43 am
Posts: 5175
Location: Corner of Queen and Collins
Synbad wrote:
molesy the debate isnt if we should be saving more money for the debt or getting more sponsorships .. its because its very lopsided.

We have been woeful in this area and you can tell the club is run by a bunch of bean counters.


You have continually said we shouldn't be paying off the debt, we should be reinvesting, which is a management decision. Thats all well & good. The Current Board has managed this aspect particularly well - if you focus on d'stemming the bleeding' solely. Clearly the Club needs a much stronger, public focus and to sell itself much better. Some big sponsorships would be more than handy - Synbad none of this you are talking about there is a problem for anyone, its' all good common sense and clearly an area where the current Board is struggling. That doesnt mean that someone else could do better, but the upcoming elections are a chance for people to put their names forward in this regard and I hope there's some improvement or luck in this regard. I sincerely do.

No one will argue against you that $19m is comparatively low but its still $3m higher than the year before! If we're in a shocking position now we were in a horrid position then.

Our focus - the way we sell ourselves - has been very poor. Resourcing to the website is limited and needs augmentation but that will only come with some improved cashflow - in this regard the PP handover may be a brilliant thing.

Every business needs bean counters Synbad. It's the balance of representation that arguably needs a shake-up. Some more marketing guts and for Collo to learn to talk us up rather than down is a must. steve's post on this was brilliant.

I don't think there's much we disagree on Synbad. We used to have a powerful brand that has copped a flaying and it needs to be supported, nursed and resurrected. I'm all for it. But until we manage that breaktrough for cashflow we have to continue to try to stem the bleeding.

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

Womack, yes $4m is a redirection of AFL funds, so effectively in the past we redirected some of those funds in advance for debt relief or operating cashflow. This year we had $6m improvement in operations cashflow but our financing cashflows went backwards - Collins talks about 'being close to our debt limits' which is abit terrifying.

Not sure about those particular details - they would not be separately disclosed and I bet the AFL wouldnt want them disclosed iether. The 2005 report is on the website, and I've got the 2004 one somewhere around here but just can't locate it at the moment.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:16 am 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:36 pm
Posts: 2960
Location: Oak Park
Just to add, The AFL have no tangible benefit taking over the lease at PP. Yeah, if you are to look at it from un ultra cautious perspective maybe it might be useful but at the intimated costs associated with its upkeep it flies completely against their ethos of ground rationalisation. It is a compromise for the brutal damage they inflicted on our club and an admission of liability

_________________
C'mon Blueboys!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:21 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24660
Location: Kaloyasena
I dont need "The Spew" playing the role of God in all this.

It makes me sick that this lying, corrupt, sycophantic cauliflower can screw the club I love, then make himself feel good by being the white knight and coming to our rescue.

One day "Spew" you will get your just desserts - you will be exposed for the crippled human being you are. :evil:

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:23 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 7:43 am
Posts: 5175
Location: Corner of Queen and Collins
Well said Marciblue. (what does that mean anyway?)

There's a few aspects of the penalties - the fine, the draftpicks, and then the timing of each. A lot of us focus on the first two but the third element is clearly the biggest punishment, as you are basically saying. They hit us hard when we needed picks most, as a result of our woeful recruiting and trading from basically the 1995 Grand Final up to 2002 (perhaps longer). They kicked us right when we needed help. Many posters probably thought at the time that this would hurt but not to the extent that it currently looks like hurting. there's consequential picks as well - imagine if we had those 4 midfielders would we have gone for subsequent picks...

But that has been done. I don't take AD's comments as confirmation that they were too severe. I take it that he realises he has to do something to preserve a valuable brand and retain how ever many fans / supporters Carlton has. That's enough for me really, as long as the AFL can help us out and put us back on an even keel I'm satisfied.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:26 am 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:22 pm
Posts: 1499
Location: Sydney
Synbad given we are looking at handing over PP to the AFL to avoid the expense of upkeep and you do seem to have some inside knowledge from time to time, maybe you could answer a couple of questions.

Firstly youll have to forgive my ingorance of changes to the ground becuase it has been a long time since Ive been there, what shape structually is the stadium in? Could the underneath be refunished for other uses?

Could we have looked to left field and rather than trying to attract tenants in the sporting field we could have attracted businesses in other fields. Surely we could have found businesses that would have found the location fantasitic.

Could we not have condsidered creating our own new business (yes I understand you need to spend a bit here) such as a promotions company and stage events at PP? Concerts, Fights, Exhibitions, Car shows etc, Could be have staged Melbourne Storm Games.

We have lost Optus as a real major sponsor now regardless of whatever the club says, the simply dont give us what they used to now. Could be have presuded them into keeping the naming rights of the gound and deleloped a coprorate training base and meeting centre for them within its confines? Impress upon them the uniqueness of the situation available. The ability to entertain clients at luncheons whilst seeing the boys train, the use of gym facilites etc etc.

You could go on for ever and ever with ideas but it just seems to me that we are looking for a quick fix to our problems not a long term one. We dont appeat to have employed people who can think for themselves and look for innovative ways forward. Handing over the reins to the AFL will see it attract major sponsors etc but what benefit will we see? None I suspect.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:30 am 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:27 am
Posts: 33188
Location: In the box.
molsey wrote:
Synbad wrote:
molesy the debate isnt if we should be saving more money for the debt or getting more sponsorships .. its because its very lopsided.

We have been woeful in this area and you can tell the club is run by a bunch of bean counters.


You have continually said we shouldn't be paying off the debt, we should be reinvesting, which is a management decision. Thats all well & good. The Current Board has managed this aspect particularly well - if you focus on d'stemming the bleeding' solely. Clearly the Club needs a much stronger, public focus and to sell itself much better. Some big sponsorships would be more than handy - Synbad none of this you are talking about there is a problem for anyone, its' all good common sense and clearly an area where the current Board is struggling. That doesnt mean that someone else could do better, but the upcoming elections are a chance for people to put their names forward in this regard and I hope there's some improvement or luck in this regard. I sincerely do.

No one will argue against you that $19m is comparatively low but its still $3m higher than the year before! If we're in a shocking position now we were in a horrid position then.

Our focus - the way we sell ourselves - has been very poor. Resourcing to the website is limited and needs augmentation but that will only come with some improved cashflow - in this regard the PP handover may be a brilliant thing.

Every business needs bean counters Synbad. It's the balance of representation that arguably needs a shake-up. Some more marketing guts and for Collo to learn to talk us up rather than down is a must. steve's post on this was brilliant.

I don't think there's much we disagree on Synbad. We used to have a powerful brand that has copped a flaying and it needs to be supported, nursed and resurrected. I'm all for it. But until we manage that breaktrough for cashflow we have to continue to try to stem the bleeding.

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

Womack, yes $4m is a redirection of AFL funds, so effectively in the past we redirected some of those funds in advance for debt relief or operating cashflow. This year we had $6m improvement in operations cashflow but our financing cashflows went backwards - Collins talks about 'being close to our debt limits' which is abit terrifying.

Not sure about those particular details - they would not be separately disclosed and I bet the AFL wouldnt want them disclosed iether. The 2005 report is on the website, and I've got the 2004 one somewhere around here but just can't locate it at the moment.


If i said we shouldnt pay of debt .. i meant concentrating only on debt because molesy...

at the AGm in 2012 Collo will get up and say "We have no more debt!!!"

but there will be NOONE there!!!!!

Yes there needs to be a balance.. but there is NO balance right now... there are no efforts made to even the cheapest initiatives.. there is only 19 million turnover in this organisation... its a shrinking economy!!!!!!
A shrinking economy means its getting smaller...!!!.. but guess what??? The league is getting bigger and richer!!!!

So there is something wrong at the home of the most unimaginative football club in the biggest league in this country!!!

Number 1 for as long as keeps blaming Elliot.. he keeps this club divided between the camps.
There is nore money in the elliot group than the Collo group.
Elliot brought in more money from his group than Collo can from his.. (privately)...

Now l know Elliot [REDACTED] the club up!!!.. but for as long as TWO EGOs are around.. and the club is weakened at its most fragile time .. were not going anywhere .. no matter how much Collo keeps slashing!!!

Its not about slashing its about BRINGING IN FRESH MONEY!!!!

Cant you see that???

His continual running down of the brand in the media is killing us!!!

He is a bean counter for heaven sake not a visionary!!!

He needs someone to tell him what to do and he is a mister fixit!!!.. someone gives him the vision and says make this happen!!!!.. and he will..

But he cant do the creative!!!.. hes a blue collar busineesman with little imagination!!!!

I can say the board has little imagination cos the most imaginative thing they have done is get Setanta and aisake.. which is great..!!! but are they resting on their laurels after that one???

_________________
Due to recent budget cuts and the rising cost of electricity, gas, and oil....... the Light at the End of the Tunnel has been turned off. We apologize for the inconvenience.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:35 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24660
Location: Kaloyasena
marciblue wrote:
Just to add, The AFL have no tangible benefit taking over the lease at PP. Yeah, if you are to look at it from un ultra cautious perspective maybe it might be useful but at the intimated costs associated with its upkeep it flies completely against their ethos of ground rationalisation. It is a compromise for the brutal damage they inflicted on our club and an admission of liability



The only tangible benefit the AFL and "The Spew" get is ensuring that ultimately they can deliver 8 games a weekend to the Broadcasting consortium they pillaged $780million dollars from.

A breach of contract lawsuit for not providing 8 games a weekend is something that "The Spew" would not want to deal with, he would rather assist Carlton than deal with Media Moguls through the courts. :roll:

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:36 am 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:29 am
Posts: 2209
molsey - I have just downloaded the financial statements. We are a financial BASKETCASE!!!!

Our liabilities exceed assets by $4 million. Our assets include loans to the social club of $3.3 million. Take these away and there is your $7 million hole. We don't have $7 million of debt - we are in debt of $7 million!!!!

The redirection order for $4 million is to the NAB - the NAB have given us a $4 million facility (which is almost fully taken up) - and in return our AFL distributions go directly to the NAB....

This is serious mum - I had no idea of the hole we are in. There is no way we can drag ourselves out of it without AFL help...

_________________
I support Carlton, Fulham and I'm an accountant - my mate calls me a 3 time loser.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:38 am 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:27 pm
Posts: 4129
Quote:
He needs someone to tell him what to do and he is a mister fixit!!!.. someone gives him the vision and says make this happen!!!!.. and he will..

But he cant do the creative!!!.. hes a blue collar busineesman with little imagination!!!!

I can say the board has little imagination cos the most imaginative thing they have done is get Setanta and aisake.. which is great..!!! but are they resting on their laurels after that one???


Completely agree with you on this one. We have good business operators on the Board but no marketers and creative people. I like to see an addition of 2-3 marketing / creative people to the Board.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:41 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24660
Location: Kaloyasena
Synbad wrote:
If i said we shouldnt pay of debt .. i meant concentrating only on debt because molesy...

at the AGm in 2012 Collo will get up and say "We have no more debt!!!"

but there will be NOONE there!!!!!?



As I said elsewhere reducing our debt of $7million by $1million dollars only improves our cash flow marginally (about $80000 per year).

Synbad is right we need to increase our revenue - the debt burden will take care of itself.

The ALP got thrown out of office in 1975 because Rex Connor wanted to borrow $4billion dollars - 12 years later Robert Holmes a Court was going to borrow that much to buy BHP and another 12 years later - the 4 big banks are making that much in Net Profit.

The size of our debt is a media beat up because its what the smallest common denominator understand and the Herald-Sun and Age can sell more newspapers to dumbarse Collingwood supporters with $200,000 mortgages.

Synbad is right we have to increase our revenue that is the key to growth.

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:43 am 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:04 am
Posts: 28377
Location: *Currently banned*
What's the deal with the loan to the Social Club? Is the Social Club a completely separate entity? ie., are the Social Club's net assets incorporated into the financials?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:43 am 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:29 am
Posts: 2209
AGRO wrote:
Synbad wrote:
If i said we shouldnt pay of debt .. i meant concentrating only on debt because molesy...

at the AGm in 2012 Collo will get up and say "We have no more debt!!!"

but there will be NOONE there!!!!!?



As I said elsewhere reducing our debt of $7million by $1million dollars only improves our cash flow marginally (about $80000 per year).

Synbad is right we need to increase our revenue - the debt burden will take care of itself.

The ALP got thrown out of office in 1975 because Rex Connor wanted to borrow $4billion dollars - 12 years later Robert Holmes a Court was going to borrow that much to buy BHP and another 12 years later - the 4 big banks are making that much in Net Profit.

The size of our debt is a media beat up because its what the smallest common denominator understand and the Herald-Sun and Age can sell more newspapers to dumbarse Collingwood supporters with $200,000 mortgages.

Synbad is right we have to increase our revenue that is the key to growth.


mate it is no media beat up - have a look at the financial statements... :(

_________________
I support Carlton, Fulham and I'm an accountant - my mate calls me a 3 time loser.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:45 am 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:29 am
Posts: 2209
verbs wrote:
What's the deal with the loan to the Social Club? Is the Social Club a completely separate entity? ie., are the Social Club's net assets incorporated into the financials?


no they're not - they are shown as loans to a related party. I'm not sure what assets the social club would have anymore....

_________________
I support Carlton, Fulham and I'm an accountant - my mate calls me a 3 time loser.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:47 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 7:43 am
Posts: 5175
Location: Corner of Queen and Collins
As I said Synbad, there is very little you & I disagree on. You just have a very different way of espressing it - mainly with exclamation marks!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:49 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24660
Location: Kaloyasena
womack wrote:
mate it is no media beat up - have a look at the financial statements... :(



Its not the size of the debt I am disputing but the media beat up on its focus.

If you looked at my thread, the difference in cash flow on servicing a $7million dollar debt to a $6million dollar debt is negligible.

Yet the media and some of the more ignorant types are saying we are looking for a $1million dollar handout from the AFL Competitive Assistance Fund to assist with debt.

Small biscuits my friend.

We need to increase revenue - Greg Lee may be the man to do it - plus he took my Heroes Stand idea an ran with it. :P

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:49 am 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 6:27 pm
Posts: 4129
womack wrote:
verbs wrote:
What's the deal with the loan to the Social Club? Is the Social Club a completely separate entity? ie., are the Social Club's net assets incorporated into the financials?


no they're not - they are shown as loans to a related party. I'm not sure what assets the social club would have anymore....


The SC financials are only available as a paper copy - I have one. Liabilities exceed Assets by 3.5 Mill. Most assets are the stands - valued at 2.97 Million. Total non-current assets are 3.95 Mill and current Assets 500 K.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 167 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 9  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Traveller86 and 41 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group