The_Wookie wrote:
tap in 79 wrote:
robertbb wrote:
So the AFL throws money into Kardinia Park... but not into Princes Park.
So the AFL grants Hawthorn the use of Waverly for $1 a year... and flowers us with a shit deal at Etihad.
Pretty clear what's going on.
And yet you can bet your bottom dollar the AFL won't have the money to put into redeveloping Princes Park...yet Hawthorn is about 30 million the richer.
Just about everything you've written here is not supported by the evidence or historical fact.
.
"Just about everything you've written here is not supported by the evidence or historical fact." ditto kid. Straight back at you.
You would be good as a politician as if I say white, you would say I said black.
Regarding Glenferrie - I was referring to the social club. Don't know if you have ever been there, but it was across the road from the club..or to be more precise for your pedantic nature...across the road from the oval.
"When the club opted to sell the social club building at Glenferrie for more than $2 million, it did so in the knowledge that its future was fortified with bricks and mortar at Waverley." It was the club building they were selling. To save time, when I referred to "Glenferrie" I was referring to their assets at Glenferrie. Or are you trying to deny they had any assets at Glenferrie?
Good try son, but incorrect.
The AFL has every right to alter the dividend/extra payments it gives to clubs. Now you will probably come back and say "it isn't caused a dividend, it is called...." etc.
However, I suggest you look at this document below for further information. Refer to the future fund section. In 2013, for example, Hawthorn received $575.000, Melbourne received $3,885,000.
ie clubs receive a disequal amount based on their needs...another "equalising measure". My argument is that Hawthorn should be receiving nothing. Not even $575,000. If you have benefitted manifestly, significantly, intensely, profoundly etc from an AFL policy then there is no reason why this club should receive funding on top of that. If you want me to spell out what AFL policies Hawthorn has benefitted from then you obviously expect me to write out a 10 page document. I have other things to do.
p.s while I am on the topic North Melbourne should not be receiving 3.045 million out of the future fund either. I don't care if they are building a replica of the Taj Mahal at Arden Street (oh sorry, across the road from Arden Street) there is no grounds for this club to be receiving so much money.
http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20 ... Report.pdfI am not a big fan of politicians playing tricks with facts. If you are talking about 2004 and superimposing that information in 2012 etc or vica verca that is deception.(Those years are used as examples not specific dates). Playing semantics with words such as "Glenferrie" is also deceptive. Good tricks, but not exactly fair.