Remove this Banner Ad

News Home base: Caulfield

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Daemon said:
Maybe we just need to buy Humphreys Ma a new caravan. Surely that will get him over the line
Click to expand...
snatch-periwinkle-blue.gif
 
Penny has just dropped for me boys, no wonder our game plan sucks. Every fools head is jam packed with 73 different locations for different activities on different days...

No wonder they can only remember to kick it long down the line or into the pocket. No bandwidth left for anything else!
 
Lord Nev said:
What? Do you have any understanding of how training is setup? AFL players train with the AFL team.

No it wouldn't.

Sounds fine to me. Casey facilities are very good for AFLW.

What are you even on about? Casey is our VFL team no matter where the training base is.

It's literally 22km closer to Casey, and out of Punt Rd traffic. Thought a trucker would know this.

Hahaha what? If that was the case, why would we even be looking at Caulfield?
Click to expand...
Waverley is still a step backwards and if they're facilities were so good, why are Hawthorn leaving them? because there's only one Oval, and the facilities are over 20 years old they're old and outdated,

We were never going to move to Waverley temporary because unlike us, while punt rd is being upgraded, Richmond have nowhere else to train so they're always going to get Waverley' as a temporary venue, Aami facilities are on par with Waverly facilities, which are both old and outdated, that's the reason why we're going to Caulfield, Melbourne need, one place to have everything, with multiple ovals, and it's the only option left, Caulfield will go ahead!!! and all this talk on the site about it's about to fall over is just utter utter bull, if that had any truth ito it, the media would be all over it, there just ready to pounce on Melbourne, just like MFCSS supporters like you, who are always willing and ready to pounce on the club, and pot it at every opportunity.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Demon trucker1000 said:
Waverley is still a step backwards and if they're facilities were so good, why are Hawthorn leaving them? because there's only one Oval, and the facilities are over 20 years old they're old and outdated,
Click to expand...
Waverley would have been a HUGE step forwards from AAMI. Do you think Hawthorn maybe are leaving because they have TONS of cash and have just moved into a fully purpose built state of the art facility? We're pining our hopes on some skinny land next to a racecourse where the players have to do a big trek through a tunnel to get to the oval that's in the middle of the track...

There's only one oval at Gosch's. Not sure how you can then say Waverley would be a step backwards? You ever been to training when a player is injured? I'd much rather be right next to the facilities than have to get on a golf buggy to travel back to the rooms via a public footpath.
Demon trucker1000 said:
Aami facilities are on par with Waverly facilities
Click to expand...
No they're not. You've clearly never been to either.
Demon trucker1000 said:
Caulfield will go ahead!!! and all this talk on the site about it's about to fall over is just utter utter bull, if that had any truth ito it, the media would be all over it, there just ready to pounce on Melbourne
Click to expand...
Ah yes, the old 'we're the victim of the media' mentality. I think you'll find Caulfield is far from a lock. It's not over, but it's not in a great place currently. Weren't you bashing everyone here because there was a huge update coming at the AGM? How did that pan out?
Demon trucker1000 said:
MFCSS supporters like you, who are always willing and ready to pounce on the club, and pot it at every opportunity.
Click to expand...
Lol, yes, I'm famously super negative on here....
 
Even if the key stakeholders give the green light to the Caulfield plan, let’s not kid ourselves, funding is going to be a massive headache.

The project is estimated to cost $100 million to develop, yet the club is willing to throw in just $25-30 million.

Now, I’m not sure where the other $70 million is supposed to come from, but it’s hard to imagine the broke VIC government coughing up that kind of cash for a project with minimal public utility. Considering what other clubs have received for their training bases, we're probably looking at something in the ballpark of $5-20 million, if we're lucky.

So, what's the alternative? The club will have to charm private investors, likely offering a few too many concessions in the process, or they’ll be taking on a mountain of debt. All for a facility that will unavailable for 2-3 days a week because, you know, horse racing takes priority.

Brilliant.
 
TheBoss said:
Even if the key stakeholders give the green light to the Caulfield plan, let’s not kid ourselves, funding is going to be a massive headache.

The project is estimated to cost $100 million to develop, yet the club is willing to throw in just $25-30 million.

Now, I’m not sure where the other $70 million is supposed to come from, but it’s hard to imagine the broke VIC government coughing up that kind of cash for a project with minimal public utility. Considering what other clubs have received for their training bases, we're probably looking at something in the ballpark of $5-20 million, if we're lucky.

So, what's the alternative? The club will have to charm private investors, likely offering a few too many concessions in the process, or they’ll be taking on a mountain of debt. All for a facility that will unavailable for 2-3 days a week because, you know, horse racing takes priority.

Brilliant.
Click to expand...
From what I've heard; the funding isn't an issue. Not sure on the final amount, but apparently it's all pretty much sorted and won't prevent us from going ahead. It's the stakeholder management that has put the plan in jeopardy. That's the goss I've heard anyways.
 
Grimey Sylvia said:
Can someone define for me what "stakeholder management" means in this case? Are we not greasing enough palms? Stroking some fat cats egos? Is it pretty bullshit or some real mismanagement?
Click to expand...
My understanding is that there's A LOT to negotiate in this whole thing. TBH it's not something I know all the fine details about in terms of specifics, but it's complicated and there's multiple 'stakeholders' for us to deal with in terms of the MRC, the government, Glen Eira council, Mount Scopus, club benefactors, maybe even more? You would have heard already our proposed location has already changed 2-3 times. The last goss I had heard going around is that one or more of those stakeholders were blasting the club over being far too difficult and demanding to deal with and we didn't understand our place in the whole thing.
 
Lord Nev said:
From what I've heard; the funding isn't an issue. Not sure on the final amount, but apparently it's all pretty much sorted and won't prevent us from going ahead. It's the stakeholder management that has put the plan in jeopardy. That's the goss I've heard anyways.
Click to expand...

"Caulfield Racecourse Reserve Trust chairman Sam Almaliki said once Melbourne “secure funding and are prepared to actually deliver the project”, they would need to enter into a lease agreement with the trust, who manage the precinct.

Their biggest sticking point isn’t about what is happening with the school or anybody – their biggest sticking point is that they haven’t been able to raise the funding needed to deliver this project,” Almaliki said.

www.smh.com.au

Cash the ‘biggest sticking point’: Paul Guerra’s challenge to build Melbourne a Caulfield home

Melbourne’s new CEO takes control in September. These are the hurdles he has to clear to secure the Demons their new base.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au

This was as at June 2025. As far as I am aware, the club still has not received any firm commitments from the State or Federal Govts, or AFL House.

I am not sure if this was covered during the AGM, I didn't watch it..
 
TheBoss said:
"Caulfield Racecourse Reserve Trust chairman Sam Almaliki said once Melbourne “secure funding and are prepared to actually deliver the project”, they would need to enter into a lease agreement with the trust, who manage the precinct.

Their biggest sticking point isn’t about what is happening with the school or anybody – their biggest sticking point is that they haven’t been able to raise the funding needed to deliver this project,” Almaliki said.

www.smh.com.au

Cash the ‘biggest sticking point’: Paul Guerra’s challenge to build Melbourne a Caulfield home

Melbourne’s new CEO takes control in September. These are the hurdles he has to clear to secure the Demons their new base.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au

This was as at June 2025. As far as I am aware, the club still has not received any firm commitments from the State or Federal Govts, or AFL House.

I am not sure if this was covered during the AGM, I didn't watch it..
Click to expand...
1 month later: "Melbourne insists it will be able to fully fund the project through a combination of government grants, cash and members’ donations."


Just telling you what I've heard. The funding will be sorted, it's not what is holding it up. Even in that article from 6 months ago you'll note it mentions our plans had already had to change once, and I think they changed again since then.

From memory, at the AGM there was a comment made around the way of 'we've had to learn quick about how tricky it is negotiating with government' or something like that.

Keep in mind also, that not long after the article you posted came out we jettisoned Pert from the project, Guerra was 'banned' from doing anything til he started, and Kanga quit. Also not long after this I believe we got put in our place in terms of some of the demands we were making.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Lord Nev said:
1 month later: "Melbourne insists it will be able to fully fund the project through a combination of government grants, cash and members’ donations."
Click to expand...

The club can 'insist' all they want, it just PR spin instead of reality.

The total project cost is a cool $100 million. Of that, the Demons are contributing a total of $30 million ($15m cash, $15m future revenues). That leaves a gaping, chasm-like $70 million funding gap that they are "hoping" to secure from external sources.

"insisting" is a far cry from "funding secured".

The Caulfield Racecourse Reserve Trust chairman himself, has explicitly stated that the "biggest sticking point" is the simple fact that they haven't been able to raise the necessary funding. The business case, which was supposed to lock this down, has been delayed and is still unapproved.

This project is entirely reliant on government and AFL handouts to cover 70% of the cost. To frame that as the club being "able to fully fund" it themselves is disingenuous at best, delusional at worst. It's a house of cards built on the hope of a massive public bail-out. Until that $70 million is actually in the bank, "insisting" doesn't build a single goalpost.


Lord Nev said:
Just telling you what I've heard. The funding will be sorted, it's not what is holding it up. Even in that article from 6 months ago you'll note it mentions our plans had already had to change once, and I think they changed again since then.
Click to expand...

Sorted"? That’s an interesting way to describe a $70 million hole in a $100 million budget.

While you're right that the plans keep changing, the most recent "twist" in June 2025 saw them binning the southwestern wedge plans for the southeastern corner near Neerim Road; those shifts are precisely why the funding isn't sorted. Every time they move the goalposts to a new corner of the racecourse, the costs and complexity go up.

The CRRT has explicitly stated they won't sign a lease agreement until the club has "secured funding and are prepared to actually deliver the project". You can't start a build without a lease, and you can't get a lease without the money.

The article I posted mentioned a mid-2025 completion date for the Business Case. We are now heading into 2026 and the Business Case, the very document that is supposed to "sort" the funding model, has been repeatedly delayed. It was pushed back specifically so the new CEO could try to fix it after he started in September.

If the funding for Caulfield were truly 'sorted,' the club wouldn't be publicly touring Waverley Park as a 'live option.' You can argue that Waverley is just a stop-gap until you’re blue in the face, but the math for a temporary move simply doesn't add up.

For a move to Waverley to make sense as a five-year bridge, the business case has to survive a massive reality check. The club would likely have to write off approximately $21 million in upgrades made to Casey Fields between 2019 and 2023. Even if we generously assume that break-lease fees at our current facilities are minimal, there is no world where 'operational savings' over a 60-month construction window would offset a $21 million hit to the balance sheet.

We just posted a $4.5 million statutory loss for 2025. The club’s balance sheet is in no position to absorb a massive asset write-off while simultaneously trying to find the $70 million still missing for the Caulfield build. Touring Waverley isn't a sign of 'sorting things out'; it’s a sign that the primary plan is in such deep trouble that they are looking for an escape hatch.
 
TheBoss said:
(Long Post)
Click to expand...
Mate. You can write as many novels as you like. I'm simply telling you what I've heard.

Some points though:

You're getting all upset about some pretty snarky comments made 6 months ago by someone who would have no clue about it. Have a breath.
Safe to assume the club has a funding plan ready, but until there's an actual proposal it can't be locked in.
Casey would still be used if we moved to Caulfield. It would be more the home of the VFL and women's programs though.
There have been more changes since June. That's not the most recent change. Have a look into it.
Waverley was toured as even if Caulfield went ahead it would still be at least 2029 before it could be trained on.
You're aware of why the financial result for this year was that figure yeah?

Also, not sure where you're pulling the $21m Casey figure from? Have you actually looked up how much was spent, and where the money actually came from? Here's a clue - Nearly $10m was spent a few years back and the MFC contributed literally 0.

Happy 2026!
 
Happy 2026 to you, Nev!

You can lament the length of my posts all you like, but I actually enjoy discussing the club’s future in depth. Unfortunately, the complexity of this project seems to have outpaced your understanding. Your recent contributions have devolved into a 'trust me, bro' defense—which is a hilarious bit of irony considering you were bashing other posters for that exact same conduct earlier this week.

I guess the mods can just close the thread now. Clearly, we’ve reached the peak of discourse when we’re expected to ignore multiple media reports, audited financial statements, direct quotes from the CRRT Chairman, and a stalled Business Case just because you want a circlejerk about what you’ve 'heard.'

;)
 
TheBoss said:
Happy 2026 to you, Nev!

You can lament the length of my posts all you like, but I actually enjoy discussing the club’s future in depth. Unfortunately, the complexity of this project seems to have outpaced your understanding. Your recent contributions have devolved into a 'trust me, bro' defense—which is a hilarious bit of irony considering you were bashing other posters for that exact same conduct earlier this week.

I guess the mods can just close the thread now. Clearly, we’ve reached the peak of discourse when we’re expected to ignore multiple media reports, audited financial statements, direct quotes from the CRRT Chairman, and a stalled Business Case just because you want a circlejerk about what you’ve 'heard.'

;)
Click to expand...
I'll say it again - Just passing on rumours I have heard. Thought that would clarify enough that it's 'talk' and completely up to you if you take any notice or not. I don't mind either way. Of course, then there's also you misrepresenting quotes, articles, reports, figures etc, but that's your prerogative I suppose. Enjoy that.
 
TheBoss said:
Even if the key stakeholders give the green light to the Caulfield plan, let’s not kid ourselves, funding is going to be a massive headache.

The project is estimated to cost $100 million to develop, yet the club is willing to throw in just $25-30 million.

Now, I’m not sure where the other $70 million is supposed to come from, but it’s hard to imagine the broke VIC government coughing up that kind of cash for a project with minimal public utility. Considering what other clubs have received for their training bases, we're probably looking at something in the ballpark of $5-20 million, if we're lucky.

So, what's the alternative? The club will have to charm private investors, likely offering a few too many concessions in the process, or they’ll be taking on a mountain of debt. All for a facility that will unavailable for 2-3 days a week because, you know, horse racing takes priority.

Brilliant.
Click to expand...

what is it that they need at a high performance facility? I honestly couldn't tell you. Atm, we don't even have toilets at Gosch's so anything is an upgrade from that.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Remove this Banner Ad

News Home base: Caulfield

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top