AFL Handout.

[Ned_Flanders]

So should we continue to sell home games then? (congrats to Swan as i type this).

We are contracted for one more in Darwin and two more in cairns.

 

[Tzatziki_Man]

So should we continue to sell home games then? (congrats to Swan as i type this).

I'd say the right decision was made at the time, but we should use these additional funds to create a platform for the future.

The dream is to build success, our club will build phenomenal momentum with success and the money will flow like wine, stronger fixtures, more lucrative sponsorships, higher attendances, larger membership sales and insane merchandise sales.

Good on the club for gathering these additional funds, they deserve huge praise, I probably wouldn't continue to sell home games if we had onfield success.

 

[RFC_Official]

Yep, there was a standard issue $3.25mill to all clubs, then some fared better than others on additional payments. It seems we are still happy to be selling games etc, etc.

"Still happy to be selling games"

Darwin deal was signed in 2009 and Cairns deal was signed last year, all before FTF was launched and before we were allocated any money, we cant retrospectively judge those decisions I don't think.

You don't have to contribute to the FTF if you don't want to, it's not a problem, you're a valued member with your family and we love that.

 

[captain blood 17]

I'd say the right decision was made at the time, but we should use these additional funds to create a platform for the future.

The dream is to build success, our club will build phenomenal momentum with success and the money will flow like wine, stronger fixtures, more lucrative sponsorships, higher attendances, larger membership sales and insane merchandise sales.

Good on the club for gathering these additional funds, they deserve huge praise, I probably wouldn't continue to sell home games if we had onfield success.

Absolutely, but already the balance has shifted in how we were going to allocate our FTF. It concerns me that if we start moving goal posts, money will get wasted through beaurocracy and pipe dreams.
If we can achieve onfield success, the rest will take care of itself. Greed i guess isn't always a good thing. You can fool some of the people some of the time, you can't fool the people all of the time.

 

[Tzatziki_Man]

"Still happy to be selling games"

Darwin deal was signed in 2009 and Cairns deal was signed last year, all before FTF was launched and before we were allocated any money, we cant retrospectively judge those decisions I don't think.

You don't have to contribute to the FTF if you don't want to, it's not a problem, you're a valued member with your family and we love that.

Not many would be complaining stig, more money to our great club basically means it can afford to employ fantastic people like you.

It must all lead to success though, or else it's not maintainable.

 

[RFC_Official]

Not many would be complaining stig, more money to our great club basically means it can afford to employ fantastic people

That will be one of the benefits of this AFL money, extra staffing to give our fans, members, corporate partners etc a better Richmond off the field as well.

 

[captain blood 17]

"Still happy to be selling games"

Darwin deal was signed in 2009 and Cairns deal was signed last year, all before FTF was launched and before we were allocated any money, we cant retrospectively judge those decisions I don't think.

You don't have to contribute to the FTF if you don't want to, it's not a problem, you're a valued member with your family and we love that.

I'm not knocking anyone who has contributed, and i understand why the club has put the FTF initiative together, but, i contributed to the SOS campaign as a kid, i have given money before to the Tigers over the journey, and i put it to the club to finally do something.
The future is secure, and i hope that the club doesn't take advantage of the regular people who do anything for this club.
Kill the debt. There was a great post in Magic's thread about good and bad debt. The best debt is to have none. It gives you more freedom to make the right decisions and have nothing to hold you back.

 

[TJTIGER]

I for one would prefer it kept going. If u don't want to contribute then don't. Agree with everything u said that if we can get more money and become the richest and most powerful club in the AFL then go for it. More money = more coaches = better players. More money = more recruiters = better players to start with (less errors).

Pretty much agree tigs2010. We need to have sufficient recruiting staff to follow up every lead. Then the development staff to get up to scratch. That's one of the ways we did it in the Hafey days G. Richmond was always on the road. Ya follow up 10 ya might get 1 good player. I will continue to give what I can. Hope others who can will also choose to. No blame or malice toward those who are not in a position to. Go Tiges & Tiges supporters. Moving forward together is the only way we'll do it.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dollars-and-sense-20110926-1ktsz.html

the above article makes one good point, for the "extra" money, the AFL is expecting certain uses for it, and will be monitoring. Ours is debt reduction.

Just speculation, but this may be why the 50:50 rule has been watered down a bit - if the AFL is more eager to reduce debt than invest in PRO development/reserves side/elite training facilities, you use the AFL money for the debt and the FTF for the rest.

As I said, just personal speculation, but this may be more about maximizing our payment from the AFL than any agenda some have speculated on (i.e. golden taps and office chairs)

 

[tigs2010]

If that's the case it makes perfect sense. The AFL wipes our debt and the FTF and sold home games can go to the coaching/recruiting/facilities.

As someone mentioned earlier...we will make about 2.5-3mill from the sold games, 8mill from the AFL and 6 mill from the FTF (fingers crossed). That's 17million. Plus the money saved on the interest we won't have to pay on the loan (roughly 2mill?)

We should be in a very very strong position for the future and with our ME Bank Centre, AP partnership for off-season training, a huge increase in coaching department, in particular development, increase in recruiting. We still have less than many of the big clubs. Imagine having a recruiter in every state and 2 in the big states!! It means the late picks will be better players and once we are near the top we will bring quality kids in and they will be developed properly and our success will be sustainable for longer.

Also, what if Malthouse decides in a couple of years that despite his head-coaching days being over he wants to come help out at Tigerland as an assistant? Then it turns out we can't afford him...what would everyone's reaction be?

 

[THE_GUN]

1. I want my team to be a top 4 team both on and off the field financally and withe the correct administration.

2. I want my team to win flags
3. I dont want my team to become the kangaroo's or Bulldogs's of the afl & constantly struggle.

This year i contributed 2 lots of $500 to the FTF and purchased 4 memberships along with winning a bet with a friend and making him also purchase 4 memberships.

I also got in the ear of a few other not so crazy tiger supporters to both buy memberships & donate to the FTF.


I WILL DO THE SAME IN 2012 - Because there can never be too much money for my club to invest into development & recruiting.

I want good players to want to come to richmond, not leave to go elswhere.

If tom scully becomes the next judd/ablett and at 26 wants to come back to melbourne.

I want him to say .............. RICHMOND

 

[dwwaino]

Another reason to keep contributing is to help the club pick up its football department spending. The AFL recommends clubs spend a minimum of $28million on football and we're spending less. Also if the government get their way with gaming and pokies and all that poop then it would be another revenue loss we would need to keep contributing for.

 

[Bojangles17]

Righto, there's a 3.25mill handout plus a discretionary $4+mill. All given to the club over the years of 2012 to 2016.

If the business model and plan is sound, should the FTF be scrapped? As supporters, we've given them alot over the last 30 years of ineptness and mismanagement (except when Daphne had the reigns profitablity wise).

I say to Tigers buy your memberships (upgrade if you want), but no more. The club should now stand on it's feet and deliver something to us and put the hand away.

Discuss.

what a ridiculous contention cb, its fine to buy membership only if thats how you see it..whats the motive in discouraging others. ultimately the club is striving to be ahead of the pack not just bridge the gap, every bit will count

 

[Mr Magic]

Another reason to keep contributing is to help the club pick up its football department spending. The AFL recommends clubs spend a minimum of $28million on football and we're spending less. Also if the government get their way with gaming and pokies and all that poop then it would be another revenue loss we would need to keep contributing for.

With respect , the first opportunity to go under is to serve a monopolistic regulator immune from competitive pressures and threats to drive performance.

We are in a competition, we are here to beat the others by doing things the best way most competently, including being sustainable and maintaining a balance sheet which promotes longevity and confidence for sponsors and supporters alike. Expenditure spend has nothing to do with it.

Expenditure levels is a by product, it is not a driver of performance, the last thing our club as a competititor should do is observe a regulators instruction regarding operations where it is not to do with compliance despite the fact HQ has two heads with its involvement in GC, GWS etc... You can follow HQ directions in the regulated markets like draft pick allocations/policies like with GC/GWS but finance is in the sea of world and how you sail your ship with supporters, sponsors, suppliers etc... has little to do with the regulator!!


Collingwood, is not necessarily the best model. If you ask me Hawthorn are the best operators at face value, and the environment can change big time in these uncertain times over the next 5 years.

Certain TV revenue is not guaranteed as a given, so I wouldn't treat certain inflows as permanent!!!.. The fact we were finding it tough to get a major sponsor, SOS campaign etc.. are examples. Most people here have not lived through a depression I would hesitate to guess!!!

 

[tigs2010]

With respect , the first opportunity to go under is to serve a monopolistic regulator immune from competitive pressures and threats to drive performance.

We are in a competition, we are here to beat the others by doing things the best way most competently, including being sustainable and maintaining a balance sheet which promotes longevity and confidence for sponsors and supporters alike. Expenditure spend has nothing to do with it.

Expenditure levels is a by product, it is not a driver of performance, the last thing our club as a competititor should do is observe a regulators instruction regarding operations where it is not to do with compliance despite the fact HQ has two heads with its involvement in GC, GWS etc... You can follow HQ directions in the regulated markets like draft pick allocations/policies like with GC/GWS but finance is in the sea of world and how you sail your ship with supporters, sponsors, suppliers etc... has little to do with the regulator!!


Collingwood, is not necessarily the best model. If you ask me Hawthorn are the best operators at face value, and the environment can change big time in these uncertain times over the next 5 years.

Certain TV revenue is not guaranteed as a given, so I wouldn't treat certain inflows as permanent!!!.. The fact we were finding it tough to get a major sponsor, SOS campaign etc.. are examples. Most people here have not lived through a depression I would hesitate to guess!!!

lol what?

 

[dwwaino]

lol what?

Lol I was thinking "cool story bro."

 

[Bojangles17]

he's half ****en crazy but you know he makes a bit of sense, indeed hawthorn are an excellant example of a club that has invested heavily in creating revenue streams to finance increases in expenditure

 

[captain blood 17]

what a ridiculous contention cb, its fine to buy membership only if thats how you see it..whats the motive in discouraging others. ultimately the club is striving to be ahead of the pack not just bridge the gap, every bit will count

It wasn't so much as discouraging supporters, but more the club needs to put the hand away. A silent FTF? I reckon if it was any other club other than the Tigers with it's passionate supporter base (and note to everyone i have enjoyed evryone's pov and not taken anything personal), we would have re located by now or been put down by the afl.

 

[captain blood 17]

With respect , the first opportunity to go under is to serve a monopolistic regulator immune from competitive pressures and threats to drive performance.

We are in a competition, we are here to beat the others by doing things the best way most competently, including being sustainable and maintaining a balance sheet which promotes longevity and confidence for sponsors and supporters alike. Expenditure spend has nothing to do with it.

Expenditure levels is a by product, it is not a driver of performance, the last thing our club as a competititor should do is observe a regulators instruction regarding operations where it is not to do with compliance despite the fact HQ has two heads with its involvement in GC, GWS etc... You can follow HQ directions in the regulated markets like draft pick allocations/policies like with GC/GWS but finance is in the sea of world and how you sail your ship with supporters, sponsors, suppliers etc... has little to do with the regulator!!


Collingwood, is not necessarily the best model. If you ask me Hawthorn are the best operators at face value, and the environment can change big time in these uncertain times over the next 5 years.

Certain TV revenue is not guaranteed as a given, so I wouldn't treat certain inflows as permanent!!!.. The fact we were finding it tough to get a major sponsor, SOS campaign etc.. are examples. Most people here have not lived through a depression I would hesitate to guess!!!

Magic possibly your best post ever. Hawthorn is the model to follow, not the pies. And Clarkson was the coach of the year in my eyes. What he achieved with his personel was outstanding. The hawks shot themselves in the foot on Friday night. If they hadn't of choked, the pies would have spent 20 mill on a prelim.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Collingwood, is not necessarily the best model. If you ask me Hawthorn are the best operators at face value, and the environment can change big time in these uncertain times over the next 5 years.

Sorry dude, but the Hawks model IS THE SAME as the Pies model.

This was published in the Australian the year after the Hawks won their flag:

PREMIERSHIPS may come ahead of schedule, as Hawthorn's did last year, but they rarely come cheaply.
By their own admission, the Hawks' 2008 flag was not in their initial five-year planning set almost two years earlier, but the premiership was set up by a $3million boost in football department spending.
Hawthorn, which also made a record $4 million profit last year, was by far the leader in increased football department expenditure.
It spent $12.3million in 2007 before adding another $2.9million to its main football department resources last year, according to confidential AFL figures obtained by The Australian.
The Hawks spent $10.9million on their football department in 2006 - $1.2million below the league average - when they won nine games.
The following year, spending increased by $1.4million and the result was 14 wins and the club's first finals appearance since 2001.


I couldn't find their 2011 spending figure, but it is above the AFL average of $16.4m (or $2.2m above Richmond).

So in other words, following the Hawthorn model means increasing our footy dept spend by at least $2.2m a year

 

[santa claws]

That will be one of the benefits of this AFL money, extra staffing to give our fans, members, corporate partners etc a better Richmond off the field as well.

as far as im concerned the debt should be the no1 priority it always has. the only area that must be maintained and improved while we pay the debt is recruiting.

seems to me we have fantastic facilities and now a great surface to train on.

sorry to say this stig but people like you are superfluous until the debt is paid.

i think you would find if you did a proper survey most of us are fed up with debt and it is the no1 priority for us.

while we are still in list rebuild and i have no doubt we are we should be getting our priorities right.

just my view on it.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

as far as im concerned the debt should be the no1 priority it always has. the only area that must be maintained and improved while we pay the debt is recruiting.

seems to me we have fantastic facilities and now a great surface to train on.

sorry to say this stig but people like you are superfluous until the debt is paid.

i think you would find if you did a proper survey most of us are fed up with debt and it is the no1 priority for us.

while we are still in list rebuild and i have no doubt we are we should be getting our priorities right.

just my view on it.

as Stig posted yesterday, the ground improvement works have not started yet

Also if you read the article in the Age from yesterday, the AFL has mandated these funds for specific uses which it will be monitoring. Ours is debt, so I'd imagine the bulk of the $4.7m will be used to sell down the debt as we receive it over the next three years.

 

[RFC_Official]

Brendon Gale has his say on the matter
[YOUTUBE]zeStzYkMvuk[/YOUTUBE]

 

[RFC_Official]

as far as im concerned the debt should be the no1 priority it always has. the only area that must be maintained and improved while we pay the debt is recruiting.

seems to me we have fantastic facilities and now a great surface to train on.

sorry to say this stig but people like you are superfluous until the debt is paid.

Fair enough, in my opinion you've taken a simplistic view - pay off debt everything will be hunky dory. I think you'll find people like me can actually help the club reduce the debt.

The surface hasn't been re-done yet, AFL money will help us do this. And finally we're not getting $8m in a lump sum, it's $8m over 5 years so we can't just pay off debt in one hit.

 

[TJTIGER]

Hey RFCO is that Tony Jewell in the photo above with Brenden???