Club Mgmt. Reducing reliance on gaming revenue

[Jade]

http://www.news.com.au/national/ess...ines-for-revenue/story-e6frfkp9-1227459088163

It's an aspirational goal IMO, but one well worth pursuing. If the club can slowly reduce it's reliance on what is in my humble opinion a rather seedy revenue source I am all for it.

Not an easy thing to do mind you, we like a lot of clubs generate a significant chunk of our revenue this way.

The conspicuous 'other' indicating we probably took in over $8.5m in gaming revenue in 2014.

What do you think? Are you happy for the club to look at reducing of even eliminating gaming as a revenue source?

 

[ManWithNoName]

190 machines. ****ing christ.

 

[Dave]

Absolutely. When you see the damage caused by problem gambling it's a no-brainer IMHO.

 

[Jade]

Absolutely. When you see the damage caused by problem gambling it's a no-brainer IMHO.

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?'.

 

[I Remember Bluey]

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?'.

Don't disagree with you, but the reality is that they will just go somewhere to lose it.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Interesting how it could work.

We're talking about two venues - Melton Club and the social club at Windy Hill.

How you could run a venue like that without pokies is beyond me...

 

[carnthedons]

Good move by the club to head away from this.

In general, pokie machines are programmed to give back 88c in the dollar on average. Gambling on sports/occasional lotto I can understand but these I can not. Sure I've thrown a fiver in from time to time but people who get sucked into these by the flashing lights and catchy tunes are probably not the people who have the cash to spare.

The fact that these are often in lower socio-economic areas makes it even worse. These people are already disadvantaged and it's not helpful to society as a whole to push them further down.

 

[Pweter]

Don't disagree with you, but the reality is that they will just go somewhere to lose it.

Yet it's a reality that needs to change (easier said than done). Clubs reducing their gambling revenue is one thing, governments capping then reducing the number of machines is another. The means to mindlessly blow money against a machine that is programmed to make you lose needs to be significantly reduced.

 

[Jade]

Interesting how it could work.

We're talking about two venues - Melton Club and the social club at Windy Hill.

How you could run a venue like that without pokies is beyond me...

I'm reading it one of two ways:

1) Increase other revenue streams, thus not as reliant

-or-

2) Spin those businesses off

 

[ManWithNoName]

Don't disagree with you, but the reality is that they will just go somewhere to lose it.

Good luck to them. But we, as a football club, shouldn't be associated with it.

If us getting rid of pokies makes even 5 people stop going to pokies altogether, it's worth it.

 

[Mercurial89]

admirable and something that is worth pursuing.

In saying that, unfortunately the people that would be losing money would probably just go elsewhere so the problem isn't fixed, just moved.

Maybe as part of the phasing out for the whole competition the AFL could somehow slowly bring in a cap on the money you can take into the club as revenue. So for example-

we make 10mil from pokies. for the first year of the agreement 10% of that money we make is put back heavily into Gambling help and awareness projects. This figure would rise each year until 100% of any revenue from pokies is put back into the community. Once this point is reached the Pokies are sold/removed/destroyed whatever needs to happen.

This would help the club ween itself off the revenue stream without hurting us, money taken would be put back into actually helping gambling addiction instead of just giving the profits to another entity.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I'm reading it one of two ways:

1) Increase other revenue streams, thus not as reliant

-or-

2) Spin those businesses off

The issue is that the pokies in these businesses - clubs and pubs - subsidise the whole operation. Have done for years.

They pay for the cheap meals, the cheap entertainment, cheap drinks, bowling greens, tennis courts, everything.

You rip them out and the place dies overnight. You can put the price of everything else up to compensate and then nobody comes and the joint closes anyway.

In many communities and towns these clubs (quite apart from the pokie room) are an important social hub. Not to mention the huge employment that hospitality provides.

I say this every time the issue comes up - it's not just gamblers who are addicted to them - it's the whole community. We're reliant on them.

How many people do our venues employ? Are we ready to boot them out of a job (directly or indirectly)?

If we decide its dirty money and they have to go - and I'm ok with that sentiment - then it needs to be properly planned and the transition, which will take years, done properly. There'll be fallout.

Often people just say "shut them" or severely limit them, or whatever. Doing that overnight would be disastrous. Nobody I've seen has a proper plan to wean the community off them.

And if we're just saying we'll sell the businesses then it's not social responsibility, is it. It still remains exactly the same, we're just washing our hands of it. Taking care of our brand, not the community.

 

[Dave]

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?'.

IIRC, there was a study that showed most gambling revenue comes from those that can't afford it.

Don't disagree with you, but the reality is that they will just go somewhere to lose it.

That doesn't mean we should facilitate it, or be a party to it. It's immoral IMO and we should have nothing to do with it.

Good luck to them. But we, as a football club, shouldn't be associated with it.

If us getting rid of pokies makes even 5 people stop going to pokies altogether, it's worth it.

Even if it doesn't, us doing what I consider to be the right thing makes it worth it.

 

[daffo]

It's an ideal goal but I hope the club doesn't lose revenue from this.
For footy clubs it's easy money.

If the club isn't putting pokies in these areas someone else will.

 

[Despair]

Would rather pokie money going to our club than to some rich flog.

 

[Howard Moon]

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?

 

[mike14]

would love to see the club move away from gambling revenue but not really sure how they'd go about making up a $8.5m 'shortfall', especially as it wouldn't be extreme to think that if we don't start seeing some on-field results in the next 24 months as well as having the WADA/ASADA saga finish we will likely see a drop in membership and game-day revenue

 

[Howard Moon]

would love to see the club move away from gambling revenue but not really sure how they'd go about making up a $8.5m 'shortfall', especially as it wouldn't be extreme to think that if we don't start seeing some on-field results in the next 24 months as well as having the WADA/ASADA saga finish we will likely see a drop in membership and game-day revenue

It's what we wrestle with every day on climate issues. Brave governments forgo economic benefits for the greater good. Cowards slash environmental issues and aid to make our books look better.

We are a brave club, you try to be the best club you can be even if it may cause short term pain.

 

[mike14]

It's what we wrestle with every day on climate issues. Brave governments forgo economic benefits for the greater good. Cowards slash environmental issues and aid to make our books look better.

We are a brave club, you try to be the best club you can be even if it may cause short term pain.

Are we a brave club? I'd like to think so but nothing I've seen in the last decade suggests that we are anything more than a club who is content to rest on its laurels and remind everyone of the times when we were awesome. To me we've become a club that is more about the 'business' side than anything else; very much to our detriment.

If they are serious about this then I am very supportive (and would be far more likely to donate to things such as the Flight Plan) and maybe it means that the club has changed what I perceive its focus to be and is once again starting to move in a good direction

 

[Mercurial89]

Are we a brave club? I'd like to think so but nothing I've seen in the last decade suggests that we are anything more than a club who is content to rest on its laurels and remind everyone of the times when we were awesome. To me we've become a club that is more about the 'business' side than anything else; very much to our detriment.

If they are serious about this then I am very supportive (and would be far more likely to donate to things such as the Flight Plan) and maybe it means that the club has changed what I perceive its focus to be and is once again starting to move in a good direction

Our pharmaceutically experimental environment proves we are brave

 

[Howard Moon]

Are we a brave club? I'd like to think so but nothing I've seen in the last decade suggests that we are anything more than a club who is content to rest on its laurels and remind everyone of the times when we were awesome. To me we've become a club that is more about the 'business' side than anything else; very much to our detriment.

If they are serious about this then I am very supportive (and would be far more likely to donate to things such as the Flight Plan) and maybe it means that the club has changed what I perceive its focus to be and is once again starting to move in a good direction

I reckon it's because of the rubbish of the past few years they are choosing the path of good, possibly a moral pay back to balance the scales and win the supporter base back with a solid philosophical decision.

Gotta,start from somewhere!

 

[Blind Turn]

I'd like the club to be pioneers in establishing cannabis bars to replace our revenue shortfall - a truly socially responsible initiative. Instead of having zombies staring at lights and bells and spending the family savings you'd have people chilling out, giggling, talking deeply about existence and buying excessive amounts of munchie food.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

Pokies are a ****ing blight.

 

[Beerfish]

would love to see the club move away from gambling revenue but not really sure how they'd go about making up a $8.5m 'shortfall', especially as it wouldn't be extreme to think that if we don't start seeing some on-field results in the next 24 months as well as having the WADA/ASADA saga finish we will likely see a drop in membership and game-day revenue

Maybe try the old 'please tick this box if you don't want to contribute x dollars to help cover the losses incurred by our moral stance against gambling on the membership renewal form' trick.

 

[yaco55]

Bunk and Mercurial made good arguments. Strange there are no complaints about sponsors and the like who have dodgy employment practices.

Be pure and there are few sponsorships available.