Club Mgmt. Reducing reliance on gaming revenue

[Tassieboy]

Indeed.

It's just the 'vibe' of it for me, I look at that figure and think 'how much of that $8.5m came from the pocket of someone that really couldn't afford to lose it?'.

No one stole it from the aforementioned person and I suspect that the majority of problem gamblers would be stupid enough to blow the money elsewhere. If you are stupid enough to put money into one of those machines I have no sympathy, only for the person's poor family. If you moved pokies out of an area surely someone else will come in to fill the void?

 

[DofA]

Dumb idea in my book. If anything we should be looking to increase our holdings similar to Hawthorn and Richmond. Throw away $8.5M revenue and hamstringing us against aforementioned clubs? You think times were bad when we had bargain basement coaching and facilities? See what happens when we remove a significant revenue stream compared to other clubs and because of that we can't afford the best coaching staff, gym equipment etc.. We are already seeing these issues creeping back into our club - From Bomber to Craig (cheaper option), Goodwin to Neeld etc... this club is seriously testing the faith of supporters in nearly every decision it's made in the last 2.5 years.

People have choices in life. Does anyone seriously think that our club no longer having Pokie Machines will make a difference in problem gambling?

Why are football clubs expected to be the moral police?

 

[Beerfish]

Dumb idea in my book. If anything we should be looking to increase our holdings similar to Hawthorn and Richmond. Throw away $8.5M revenue and hamstringing us against aforementioned clubs? You think times were bad when we had bargain basement coaching and facilities? See what happens when we remove a significant revenue stream compared to other clubs and because of that we can't afford the best coaching staff, gym equipment etc.. We are already seeing these issues creeping back into our club - From Bomber to Craig (cheaper option), Goodwin to Neeld etc... this club is seriously testing the faith of supporters in nearly every decision it's made in the last 2.5 years.

For a start, they're not talking about throwing away $8.5 million with a snap of the fingers. They're talking about being less reliant on them going forward (may take years) and not considering any sponsorship deals with sports betting companies in the future. This is just hyperbole and I have no idea how you can draw parallels between this decision and coaching staff decisions.

People have choices in life. Does anyone seriously think that our club no longer having Pokie Machines will make a difference in problem gambling?

Why are football clubs expected to be the moral police?

That's not the point. The point is the club is taking a moral stand and drawing a line in the sand - something people don't really expect from organisations these days. Not only is it the right decision, it's some good PR for the club which I doubt you could disagree we have sorely missed in recent times.

 

[yaco55]

For a start, they're not talking about throwing away $8.5 million with a snap of the fingers. They're talking about being less reliant on them going forward (may take years) and not considering any sponsorship deals with sports betting companies in the future. This is just hyperbole and I have no idea how you can draw parallels between this decision and coaching staff decisions.

But if you take a consistent moral standard you would avoid some multi national companies who have questionable employment practices.



That's not the point. The point is the club is taking a moral stand and drawing a line in the sand - something people don't really expect from organisations these days. Not only is it the right decision, it's some good PR for the club which I doubt you could disagree we have sorely missed in recent times.

 

[Beerfish]

Indeed. Well said.

 

[Mercurial89]

Great post Yaco

 

[Doss]

Pokies are an insidious, gnawing blight and the sooner we cut ties with the things, the better.

I couldn't care if the revenue goes elsewhere.

They're utter garbage.

 

[windyhill]

I'd rather rely on pokie money than ambrose.

 

[Beerfish]

I'd rather rely on pokie money than ambrose.

But pokie money doesn't apply the same pressure mate. It's all about the pressure!

 

[DofA]

For a start, they're not talking about throwing away $8.5 million with a snap of the fingers. They're talking about being less reliant on them going forward (may take years) and not considering any sponsorship deals with sports betting companies in the future. This is just hyperbole and I have no idea how you can draw parallels between this decision and coaching staff decisions.

I understand they are talking about revenue substitution but we even if we find that substitutional $$ from other means (sponsorship, etc...) it is just that - substitutional. My link to the coaching department is that there are flow on effects to removing/slowing revenue (growth). So whilst expenses continue to increase and revenue growth slows (due to aforementioned substitution rather than growth of revenenue to make up the $8.5m) the only way to maintain balanced books is to cut down on expenditure in other areas. I believe (yes, an opinion but i look forward to this years FIN report) that we have already begun the process of reducing our costs, in particular the coaching department; hence the link.

That's not the point. The point is the club is taking a moral stand and drawing a line in the sand - something people don't really expect from organisations these days. Not only is it the right decision, it's some good PR for the club which I doubt you could disagree we have sorely missed in recent times.

Don't disagree on our need for some positive PR however doing so at the potential long term detriment of the club isn't the way to do it IMHO

 

[DapperDon]

Taking gambling revenue is one step off having dealers outside windy hill selling smack.

 

[Beerfish]

I understand they are talking about revenue substitution but we even if we find that substitutional $$ from other means (sponsorship, etc...) it is just that - substitutional. My link to the coaching department is that there are flow on effects to removing/slowing revenue (growth). So whilst expenses continue to increase and revenue growth slows (due to aforementioned substitution rather than growth of revenenue to make up the $8.5m) the only way to maintain balanced books is to cut down on expenditure in other areas. I believe (yes, an opinion but i look forward to this years FIN report) that we have already begun the process of reducing our costs, in particular the coaching department; hence the link.



Don't disagree on our need for some positive PR however doing so at the potential long term detriment of the club isn't the way to do it IMHO

My point is I don't think they are going to do it if it hamstrings the club in the process. That would be crazy. That is why the article says

The Bombers last month announced they would no longer consider sponsorship deals with sports betting companies.

So that's going forward. And

Any move from Essendon to ween itself from the huge revenues brought in by its 190 machines, split between the Melton Country Club and the Essendon Football and Community Sporting Club, is expected to take years.

meaning exactly what I said.

 

[ManWithNoName]

Even if it takes us years and years, I'm still proud we're making the effort. And the club's given us precious little to be proud of over the last few years.

 

[Maddogm]

Taking gambling revenue is one step off having dealers outside windy hill selling smack.

So that's why he couldn't get a Senior game for so long

 

[Blind Turn]

Will they be coming for us? We are aiming to improve after all...

http://m.theage.com.au/victoria/ant...bs-starting-with-carlton-20151127-gl9vrg.html

 

[Zach Package]

current state of play:

#thefamilyclub

 

[Kettles]

I've always found it troubling that the man responsible for legalizing pokies in our state is now the head of Beyond Blue.

Huge stinking conflict of interest? Or just guilty conscience?

That's not factually correct. They were in operation during Kirner's reign.

"Pokies, poker machines or Electronic Gaming Machines (EGMs) were introduced in Victoria in 1992."

 

[Blind Turn]

That's not factually correct. They were in operation during Kirner's reign.

Hardly absolves him of his part in the entrenchment of gambling venues here though does it? They are all stinking money-grabbers blinded by economic growth at the expense of community welfare.

 

[Kettles]

No doubt, but let's not let something as simple as plain facts get in the way of a good story. They are insidious things we'd be better off without.