No Oppo Supporters Hawks and Pokies

[TazHawk15]

A fair point.

An even fairer point is how many people have no concept of "taking responibilty for their own actions"

I mean to say anyone with at least a fraction of intelligence knows the things are rigged, just wise up.

I get the whole "addiction" thing I really do, but FFS you cant help some people who refuse to hear the "Penny Drop" even though that penny drops over and over again.

As soon as they are outlawed I will be the first one to say "Thank fu** for that".
Until then anyone stupid enough to donate to Hawks bottom line this way, are ok by me.

I have more compassion for those brain washed morons who donate money to the Catholic Church, I mean they seriously need help.

What about social responsibility, corporate responsibility, government responsibility?

Why is it always the guy at the end that has to take all the responsibility?

Why to the billionaires say we should cut back our emissions while swanning around in private jets?

Why doesn't everyone have to take responsibility? Who looks after those who can't take responsibility for themselves?

This is one case where the little guy at the end can say “heck you” to the Big guy when it comes to helping him buy his new Jet, “I am not going to put money into a rigged machine”

 

[TazHawk15]

Nope, pokies are deliberately designed to be addictive and the bulk of profits comes from problem gamblers.

Correct.

However the one tool the problem gamblers have surely is the ability to see the difference between a gamble and something that’s rigged.

I laugh when people say “gambling on pokies” it’s not a gamble, it’s a predetermining loss.

I have more sympathy for the addiction and sickness of the morons who donate money to the most evil and corrupt organisation the world have ever known (Catholics church) than I do with idiots that play the pokies.

 

[Cyril says]

it kind of is a little hard when you have a new training facility to be built.

There are many other ways of making money.

To illustrate the point:
- The biggest company in Australia is not in pokies
- The richest person in Australia is not in pokies
- The fastest growing sector in the economy is not ‘pokies’

There is nothing magic about putting our money in to pokies. In fact it’s risky over-weighting any one investment in our portfolio.

Let’s put our money somewhere else.

 

[Cyril says]

As I asked earlier in the thread what are you prepared to give up to get out of pokies ?

It’s a hollow argument. We don’t have to give up anything to get out of pokies. They just aren’t a great investment - we can do same or better elsewhere.

Hopefully Radek’s report comes in soon.

 

[Rushed_Behind]

S

There are many other ways of making money.

To illustrate the point:
- The biggest company in Australia is not in pokies
- The richest person in Australia is not in pokies
- The fastest growing sector in the economy is not ‘pokies’

There is nothing magic about putting our money in to pokies. In fact it’s risky over-weighting any one investment in our portfolio.

Let’s put our money somewhere else.

so you’re saying we should open up a chain of various retail operations, a bank or get into mining?

 

[Rushed_Behind]

It’s a hollow argument. We don’t have to give up anything to get out of pokies. They just aren’t a great investment - we can do same or better elsewhere.

Hopefully Radek’s report comes in soon.

yeah you do. Revenue.

 

[cryptor]

They just aren’t a great investment - we can do same or better elsewhere.

Like what?

 

[Brishawk]

If anyone has any doubts about how much of the industry is built on problem gamblers, I’d encourage you to read this article:

The lie of ‘responsible gambling’

Australia’s world-beating gambling addiction and the deception hiding it

www.themonthly.com.au

TLDR

the prevalence studies used to claim a 1% problem gambler rate are extremely limited and designed not to find any problem gamblers. They define problem gamblers as the kind of people who have completely ruined their lives through gambling. There was about 1300 of these in Victoria in 2016. Loses by people with problem gambling symptoms accounts for a much larger problem and about 63% of all loses on pokies.

ill also point out that the club are wholly aware that problem gamblers are the primary source of the revenue.

 

[Gralin]

This is one case where the little guy at the end can say “fu** you” to the Big guy when it comes to helping him buy his new Jet, “I am not going to put money into a rigged machine”

But they don't believe it's rigged because it paid out big that one time.

Correct.

However the one tool the problem gamblers have surely is the ability to see the difference between a gamble and something that’s rigged.

I laugh when people say “gambling on pokies” it’s not a gamble, it’s a predetermining loss.

I have more sympathy for the addiction and sickness of the morons who donate money to the most evil and corrupt organisation the world have ever known (Catholics church) than I do with idiots that play the pokies.

People are idiots they think a good thing with a lower probability is more likely to happen to them than a bad thing with a higher probability.

 

[hfc70]

People are idiots...

Super Moderator Gralin saying it like he believes. Not ‘some’ people are idiots...or those that gamble are idiots...just simply ‘People are idiots...’

Ok, I know you believe Pokies are evil....that’s your opinion and you are entitled to it but others have differing views who shouldn’t feel ‘idiotic’ for that.

 

[Gralin]

Super Moderator Gralin saying it like he believes. Not ‘some’ people are idiots...or those that gamble are idiots...just simply ‘People are idiots...’

Ok, I know you believe Pokies are evil....that’s your opinion and you are entitled to it but others have differing views who shouldn’t feel ‘idiotic’ for that.

And yet....

 

[hfc70]

And yet....

We still have Pokies despite what you think. Glad we have smarter people in the clubs’ decision making than reading how insignificant others make themselves out to be spokesman for the masses

 

[Gralin]

We still have Pokies despite what you think. Glad we have smarter people in the clubs’ decision making than reading how insignificant others make themselves out to be spokesman for the masses

That's not quite a coherent sentence but I assume it was meant to be insulting.

 

[Brant]

Like what?

so you’re saying we should open up a chain of various retail operations, a bank or get into mining?

This answer never seems to come.

For a year (that I care to recall), Cyril says has been posting the same thing. Pokies aren't special etc.

Obviously, we should just invent a Wesfarmers or Woodside Energy or Commonwealth Bank et al. & just smash the profits from inventing one of Australia's largest companies without the knowledge, resources or time to do so.




Again, I do want us out of pokies, for the moral reasons. I don't think it's the right fit for our values etc., but that's my personal opinion, to which anyone/everyone else is welcome to share or not. As for not being a 'special' business or investment - I'm still waiting for Cyril says to tell us some better options.

 

[Hawk Hawkins]

Preventive policing. Stop everyone because some abuse it.

Antagonistic commenting. Make broad statements to divert attention.

 

[Randy Campbell]

There are many other ways of making money.

To illustrate the point:
- The biggest company in Australia is not in pokies
- The richest person in Australia is not in pokies
- The fastest growing sector in the economy is not ‘pokies’

There is nothing magic about putting our money in to pokies. In fact it’s risky over-weighting any one investment in our portfolio.

Let’s put our money somewhere else.

And again.
Do they make their profits by not harming something or someone?

 

[Brishawk]

This answer never seems to come.

For a year (that I care to recall), Cyril says has been posting the same thing. Pokies aren't special etc.

Obviously, we should just invent a Wesfarmers or Woodside Energy or Commonwealth Bank et al. & just smash the profits from inventing one of Australia's largest companies workout the knowledge, resources or time to do so.




Again, I do want us out of pokies, for the moral reasons. I don't think it's the right fit for our values etc., but that's my personal opinion, to which anyone/everyone else is welcome to share or not. As for not being a 'special' business or investment - I'm still waiting for Cyril says to tell us some better options.

Assuming we are competent financial managers, pokies presents the highest return for the lowest risk given the incredibly low amount of regulation and relatively low tax take. This is why 18% of the world’s pokies are in Australia. Think about how ****ed up that statistic is. Our state governments have completely sold us out.

no one is going to nominate a low risk investment that is going to return the same or more. It’s a ridiculous demand to make on people who are unlikely to be cfos. You either have to take on more risk (we could take it to the casino...) or get a lower return. I’m in favour of lower return and I’ll leave the specific to the club.

 

[Hawk Hawkins]

A fair point.

An even fairer point is how many people have no concept of "taking responibilty for their own actions"

I mean to say anyone with at least a fraction of intelligence knows the things are rigged, just wise up.

I get the whole "addiction" thing I really do, but FFS you cant help some people who refuse to hear the "Penny Drop" even though that penny drops over and over again.

As soon as they are outlawed I will be the first one to say "Thank fu** for that".
Until then anyone stupid enough to donate to Hawks bottom line this way, are ok by me.

I have more compassion for those brain washed morons who donate money to the Catholic Church, I mean they seriously need help.

Cool, if you’re using the comparative form let me take the superlative.

The fairest point is that pokies are s**t and anyone who makes a broad statement about others based on a single attribute is also s**t.

Gambling addiction is linked to mental illness, depression and intellectual disability. Loads of people make bad decisions every day (take me for example, I’m arguing with campaigners on the internet about the morals of gambling), as a society we all have a responsibility to help those that have made bad decisions.

And to everyone who is arguing that because it’s not illegal we should keep doing it, I hope that you get stuck behind a bunch of slow walkers next time you’re running late for a meeting.

 

[Brant]

Assuming we are competent financial managers, pokies presents the highest return for the lowest risk given the incredibly low amount of regulation and relatively low tax take. This is why 18% of the world’s pokies are in Australia. Think about how f’ed up that statistic is. Our state governments have completely sold us out.

no one is going to nominate a low risk investment that is going to return the same or more. It’s a ridiculous demand to make on people who are unlikely to be cfos. You either have to take on more risk (we could take it to the casino...) or get a lower return. I’m in favour of lower return and I’ll leave the specific to the club.

I agree. As f’ed up as it is, I can’t think of a low-risk/high-return like it. My point has always been that we should gradually remove ourselves from them as an income source, but I don’t know how to effectively replace that income without increasing the risk.

But apparently, there is/are revenue streams at least as (if not more) special than pokies!! I’ve been waiting a year for Cyril says to share with us what that is, but for now at least s/he has just been teasing.

 

[Gralin]

Radek is probably a little busy right now dealing with Korda Mentha, didn’t he tip in $2M to the restaurant chain run by George Columbaris just before Christmas? At best he would be third in the queue after employees and the bank.

It is all well and good to have a moral stance on pokies but they are legal and a widely accepted part of our society.

When a fully worked proposal is put forward on how we replace around $24M in revenue with a similar level of risk we can all vote on it as members. Until then we should accept that the people the members voted in as our board are running the club and not a social media campaign with no viable alternative plan.

Legal yes. Widely accepted, debatable.
Legal is a very strange benchmark in general.
Laws a way behind the the times and often have bothingyto do with morals or ethics.

I agree. As f’ed up as it is, I can’t think of a low-risk/high-return like it. My point has always been that we should gradually remove ourselves from them as an income source, but I don’t know how to effectively replace that income without increasing the risk.

But apparently, there is/are revenue streams at least as (if not more) special than pokies!! I’ve been waiting a year for Cyril says to share with us what that is, but for now at least s/he has just been teasing.

The whole revenue stream argument is the same used by deniers of climate change.
Find me something better than coal!


It's not up to us to replace coal so why should it be up to us to replace pokies?

We do we need to have an alternative to oppose something?

Why does it have to be as good financially to replace something that is morally poor.

There is no perfect solution, everything is a trade off.

You want to be more ethical and socially responsible you make less money. We've been sucked in by the good old American Dream that everyone can be rich and successful and we are all in charge of our own success

Reality doesn't agree with that and we need to accept that and not smash the people that point it out.

 

[Furn2]

There are many other ways of making money.

To illustrate the point:
- The biggest company in Australia is not in pokies
- The richest person in Australia is not in pokies
- The fastest growing sector in the economy is not ‘pokies’

There is nothing magic about putting our money in to pokies. In fact it’s risky over-weighting any one investment in our portfolio.

Let’s put our money somewhere else.

We're not the biggest company in anything, we're barely bigger than what is considered a small business. The pokies arm makes money and has done so consistently for a long time.

There's considerable risk and cost to moving into another area especially when it's not our core business and unlike companies like Woolies we dont have billions backing us to cover any losses.

 

[Gralin]

We're not the biggest company in anything, we're barely bigger than what is considered a small business. The pokies arm makes money and has done so consistently for a long time.

There's considerable risk and cost to moving into another area especially when it's not our core business and unlike companies like Woolies we dont have billions backing us to cover any losses.

Pokies aren't our core business either. And we are classed as a Not For Profit unlike Woolies.

Do you think charities or churches should profit from Pokies because that's how we are taxed

 

[Gralin]

We're not the biggest company in anything, we're barely bigger than what is considered a small business. The pokies arm makes money and has done so consistently for a long time.

There's considerable risk and cost to moving into another area especially when it's not our core business and unlike companies like Woolies we dont have billions backing us to cover any losses.

Oh and Woolies is the biggest Pokies operator in the country.

 

[Brant]

The whole revenue stream argument is the same used by deniers of climate change.
Find me something better than coal!


It's not up to us to replace coal so why should it be up to us to replace pokies?

We do we need to have an alternative to oppose something?

Why does it have to be as good financially to replace something that is morally poor.

There is no perfect solution, everything is a trade off.

You want to be more ethical and socially responsible you make less money. We've been sucked in by the good old American Dream that everyone can be rich and successful and we are all in charge of our own success

Reality doesn't agree with that and we need to accept that and not smash the people that point it out.

Same as climate change deniers? Silly statement. I didn’t deny anything - I agreed that it was not (IMO) in accordance with what I believe our values to be. No denying there.

Why do we need an alternative to the current revenue stream? Ummm... Like bills & stuff. A bit Dingley. Because rightly or wrongly, we got ourselves into this mess & going broke walking away from it doesn’t make it better. I don’t want to be Norf - sitting on a moral high-horse & spruiking about how they don’t profit from pokies, as they put both hands out to AFL for anything they can get. Committing to an exit plan & bloody-well sticking to it - that makes it better.

It doesn’t have to be as good financially - from a risk & effort perspective - I don’t think there is too many options that are as good. But Cyril says does & that’s what I was asking for - for like a year. The best I can get is “that’s the board’s job” or similar. We have to make up the revenue (& a bunch more) but it can be diversified & doesn’t have to be ‘as good’ as pokies (from a financial perspective).

As for smashing people that don’t agree with it... I AGREE WITH IT... I’ve posted that I want out of pokies, numerous times. Read stuff.

 

[Gralin]

Same as climate change deniers? Silly statement. I didn’t deny anything - I agreed that it was not (IMO) in accordance with what I believe our values to be. No denying there.

Why do we need an alternative to the current revenue stream? Ummm... Like bills & stuff. A bit Dingley. Because rightly or wrongly, we got ourselves into this mess & going broke walking away from it doesn’t make it better. I don’t want to be Norf - sitting on a moral high-horse & spruiking about how they don’t profit from pokies, as they put both hands out to AFL for anything they can get. Committing to an exit plan & bloody-well sticking to it - that makes it better.

It doesn’t have to be as good financially - from a risk & effort perspective - I don’t think there is too many options that are as good. But Cyril says does & that’s what I was asking for - for like a year. The best I can get is “that’s the board’s job” or similar. We have to make up the revenue (& a bunch more) but it can be diversified & doesn’t have to be ‘as good’ as pokies (from a financial perspective).

As for smashing people that don’t agree with it... I AGREE WITH IT... I’ve posted that I want out of pokies, numerous times. Read stuff.

First off stop targeting one posters argument like it's the whole argument.
Secondly again it's not up to people on this board to work out how the Hawks should get out of pokies.
They can propose ideas but at the end of the day wanting them in or out and the how valid the view is has nothing to do with finance.

The how do we get out of pokies is the same as how do we get out of coal argument.

Knowing we should had nothing to do with understanding the best way to do it.


The idea that everyone can come up with the answer is bullshit..