MCG vs Dome

ScottSaunders · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:34 pm

exactly.

the move has been a failure in every aspect as far as im concerned.

dont forget the loss of revenue that the SC also made for the club that isnt recouped at TD.

you buy a drink at PP Social Club - money goes to club
you buy a drink at TD Social Club - money goes to TD

so many things where wrong with the deal, it was a shame to see there was only a few of us that could see/wanted to see the problems with it.

the move was never an issue, the deal we got was.

the loss is two fold.

loss revenue for the club through sales in the Social Club
loss revenue for the club due to people not being Social Club Members anymore

its a disaster really.

i recall reading that the income from the SC dropped from something like 1.5 million (at PP), to 200k (at TD)

thats terrible, and was either not considered, or wasnt considered proberly.

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:38 pm

The other conveniently forgotten point is the rent we were paying at Princes Park and the revenue we would be generating from it when the AFL were saying they were not going to fixture any games there.

"The Spew" had us over the barrel and there was no "KY" in the vicinity.

camel · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:40 pm

Fact #1: The AFL was not going to fixture any more games at PP. We were moving whether we liked it or not.
Fact #2: The Dome deal was the best we were offered, or were able to negotiate, at that point in time.
Fact #3: News just in, the tooth fairy does not exist.
Fact #4: Life goes on, we now have a better administration and our future is on the up.

ScottSaunders · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:43 pm

AGRO wrote:

The other conveniently forgotten point is the rent we were paying at Princes Park and the revenue we would be generating from it when the AFL were saying they were not going to fixture any games there.

"The Spew" had us over the barrel and there was no "KY" in the vicinity.

thats bullshit.

we had a deal at one stage to play - 30 games a year? then it was lowered to 16? then lowered again.

the feasibility study would have been on 30 games a year etc.. thats what made the stadium feasible.

but the AFL changed their minds and instead invested in TD.

we had a deal, that THEY had to honour otherwise we could have (possibly should have) taken them to the cleaners.

and i ask serious questions about the amout we where told.

we are still there, we are still using the facilities.

how is it all paid for now? or has the rent suddenly got 300% cheaper?

camel · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:44 pm

See if anyone can spot the relevant line in this song. To make it easy for everybody I have made it ORANGE!

The camera pans the cocktail glass,
Behind a blind of plastic plants;
I found the lady with the fat diamond ring.
Then you know I cant remember a damn thing.
I think its one of those de ja vu things,
Or a dream thats tryin to tell me something.
Or will I ever stop thinkin about it.
I dont know, I doubt it.
Subterranean by design,
I wonder what I would find if I met you,
Let my eyes caress you,
Until I meet the thought of missess princess who?
Often wonder what makes her work.
I guess Ill leave that question to the experts,
Assuming that there are some out there.
Theyre probably alone, solitaire.
I can remember when I caught up
With a pastime intimate friend.
She said, bet youre probably gonna say I look lovely,
But you probably dont think nothin of me.
She was right, though, I cant lie.
Shes just one of those corners in my mind,
And I just put her right back with the rest.
Thats the way it goes, I guess.

Baby you send me
Set adrift on memory bliss of you

Careless whisper from a careless man,
A neutron dance for a neutron fan;
Marionette strings are dangerous things,
I thought of all the trouble they bring.
An eye for an eye, a spy for a spy,
Rubber bands expand in a frustrating sigh.
Tell me that shes not dreaming.
Shes got an ace in the hole,
It doesnt have meaning.
Reality used to be a friend of mine,
cause complete control, I dont take too kind.
Christina applegate, you gotta put me on.
Guess whos piece of the cake is jack gone?
She broke her wishbone and wished for a sign.
I told her whispers in my heart were fine.
What did she think she could do?
I feel for her, I really do.
And I stared at the ring finger on her hand,
I wanted her to be a big pm dawn fan,
But I had to put her right back with the rest.
Thats the way it goes, I guess.

Baby you send me...
Set adrift on memory bliss of you

ScottSaunders · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:44 pm

camelboy wrote:

Fact #1: The AFL was not going to fixture any more games at PP. We were moving whether we liked it or not.
Fact #2: The Dome deal was the best we were offered, or were able to negotiate, at that point in time.
Fact #3: News just in, the tooth fairy does not exist.
Fact #4: Life goes on, we now have a better administration and our future is on the up.

dont agree with fact 2 at all.

but fact 4 is sure on the money :wink:

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:48 pm

ScottSaunders wrote:

AGRO wrote:

The other conveniently forgotten point is the rent we were paying at Princes Park and the revenue we would be generating from it when the AFL were saying they were not going to fixture any games there.

"The Spew" had us over the barrel and there was no "KY" in the vicinity.

thats bullshit.?

Its not bullshit actually.

camel · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:50 pm

ScottSaunders wrote:

camelboy wrote:

Fact #1: The AFL was not going to fixture any more games at PP. We were moving whether we liked it or not.
Fact #2: The Dome deal was the best we were offered, or were able to negotiate, at that point in time.
Fact #3: News just in, the tooth fairy does not exist.
Fact #4: Life goes on, we now have a better administration and our future is on the up.

dont agree with fact 2 at all.

but fact 4 is sure on the money :wink:

Find me the details of the better offer then...

History has proven, if nothing else, that the Collins/Smorgon administrations were good for one thing and one thing only ... the removal of Jack's shit. Ironically, for everythging else that's about what they were good for ... jack shit!

So, if you can come up with some concrete dteails of any deal that was genuinely offered, that had the blessing of the the AFL, I'll believe you. Until then, let's celebrate the new broom and enjoy the fact that we're unlikely to be so incompetent at the board table again for a very long time, if ever.

AGRO is right, Jabba had us over the coals on this move, whether we care to admit it or not.

ScottSaunders · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 3:57 pm

indeed, our move was in the best intrest of the AFL, not in the best interest of the club.

we where told that AFL wasnt able to give the MCG more game, but hold on a minute, a year later, the filth come to the party, being the great supporters of the game they are, and offer to move to the MCG for ALL of their home games if the MCG released the Prelim requirement and the AFL jumps at the chance.

now, either two things happened here.

1. we either didnt entertain the idea of moving to MCG
2. the AFL wouldnt allow us to move to MCG

if its 1, then the board and all on it, should have been sacked on the spot and possibly sued for neglegence.

if its 2, we should have sued the AFL for restraint of trade.

if the deal was acceptable for collingwood it is acceptable for carlton.

what collingwood offered not 12 months later after the TD debarcle, was what a few of us hear was pleading for the club to do.

either we got shafted, or what i personally think, the board at the time had no intentions of anything but the 6/5 split.

and dont give me this shit, that the filth had the foresight to make a deal, a few of us hear where pleading for the same deal to be made, and if we can see a deal like that working, then those on the board must of considered it.

what we are told, was the CFC never made a submission or recieved a submission from the MCG.

if thats the case, the board didnt pursue ALL AVENUES for the best outcome of the club.

kingkerna · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 4:00 pm

Quote:

Fact #2: The Dome deal was the best we were offered, or were able to negotiate, at that point in time

strange comment this - you have left out that 'at that point in time' our president was running the dome. We don't know what we were offered elsewhere or how hard we pushed for a better deal 'elsewhere'.

Pathetic! The sooner Dick can buy us out of this contract the better.

SurreyBlue · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am **Posts:** 10613

ScottSaunders wrote:

love your work surrey

sounds like this other genious i know that was saying the same thing at the time

Don't worry SS. You I'll never forget for being on the right side. :wink:

Couple of others as well but they know who they are. It was a small but passionate and in hindsight intelligent group. :lol:

Steve_C7 · **Joined:** Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:39 pm **Posts:** 1002

Quick question, does anyone think that we made any money yesterday playing at the G? Would we have made more at TD?

AGRO · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 4:04 pm

Seems to be a lot a revisionist bullshit going on around here lately. :roll:

Who is writing the material these the days the "Japanese Board of Education"? :roll:

SurreyBlue · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am **Posts:** 10613

camelboy wrote:

[Find me the details of the better offer then....

This is what I love ... hey camel, find me the proof there wasn't! :lol:

Collo and his fat "AFL" mate made sure there where no trails, especially amongst our directors at the time who voted for .... ?

SurreyBlue · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am **Posts:** 10613

Steve_C7 wrote:

Quick question, does anyone think that we made any money yesterday playing at the G? Would we have made more at TD?

With that crowd, we made more at the G and would have made more again if we where permantely using the G as our home ground, shared with Princes Park ofcourse.

blueboy8 · **Joined:** Fri Mar 04, 2005 1:13 pm **Posts:** 972

Let me see

do we take 3million from the dome deal or do we take nothing from the MCG ??

Steve_C7 · **Joined:** Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:39 pm **Posts:** 1002

SurreyBlue wrote:

Steve_C7 wrote:

Quick question, does anyone think that we made any money yesterday playing at the G? Would we have made more at TD?

With that crowd, we made more at the G and would have made more again if we where permantely using the G as our home ground, shared with Princes Park ofcourse.

I was under the belief that we need in excess of 27,000 to break even at MCG and only 20,000 at TD so I would have figured that we would have made more money at the TD yesterday.

camel · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 4:19 pm

kingkerna wrote:

Quote:

Fact #2: The Dome deal was the best we were offered, or were able to negotiate, at that point in time

strange comment this - you have left out that 'at that point in time' our president was running the dome. We don't know what we were offered elsewhere or how hard we pushed for a better deal 'elsewhere'.

Pathetic! The sooner Dick can buy us out of this contract the better.

Why is it a strange comment? I've not commented on my thoughts on the situation, just stated the facts as they were presented to us. You will remember that Smorgon was acting on behalf of the club, and Collins was not involved on either side. Of course, I am able to see through that and there was most likely some influence one way or the other.

SurreyBlue wrote:

camelboy wrote:

[Find me the details of the better offer then....

This is what I love ... hey camel, find me the proof there wasn't! :lol:

Collo and his fat "AFL" mate made sure there where no trails, especially amongst our directors at the time who voted for .... ?

The proof is in the fact that we signed the deal with the Dome, ergo that was the only genuine deal on the table. Smorgon may have been a fool, but I strongly doubt he, or any member of the current board, would have knocked back a better deal at the MCG just for the hell of it. Indeed, IIRC, Smorgon was on record as saying his personal preference was more games at the G.

Like I asked earlier, perhaps you can point me in the direction of the Santa Claus Ombudsman so that I can complain I didn't all the things I wished for.

The Duke · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 4:22 pm

I LOVE the G. Went yesterday in the MCC and man, it's such an awesome place to watch your team kick 21 goals.

I'd be happy with the interstate and maybe Kangas games at the Dome but the Dawks, Dogs, Tigers etc should all be at the G.

I could never understand why Melbourne etc cracked the sh1ts so much that they had to play interstate teams at OO when they only get 12,000 to the G, and have to write cheques to the MCC for $40K

Well, I can understand it because the AFL are arseholes, but it doesn't make it right.

In terms of us and the deal with the Dome, Collins had to make a deal due to the AFL [REDACTED] us up by scheduling our games at crap times giving us no sponsorship, FTA or Friday night games. This meant Jack's deal had to be bought out, the MCC wanted us, but the AFL told them it was not possible. They then went and allowed pies to sign basically the same deal in exchange for Prelim finals.

camel · **Posted:** Mon Jun 04, 2007 4:26 pm

ScottSaunders wrote:

indeed, our move was in the best intrest of the AFL, not in the best interest of the club.

we where told that AFL wasnt able to give the MCG more game, but hold on a minute, a year later, the filth come to the party, being the great supporters of the game they are, and offer to move to the MCG for ALL of their home games if the MCG released the Prelim requirement and the AFL jumps at the chance.

now, either two things happened here.

1. we either didnt entertain the idea of moving to MCG
2. the AFL wouldnt allow us to move to MCG

if its 1, then the board and all on it, should have been sacked on the spot and possibly sued for neglegence.

if its 2, we should have sued the AFL for restraint of trade.

if the deal was acceptable for collingwood it is acceptable for carlton.

what collingwood offered not 12 months later after the TD debarcle, was what a few of us hear was pleading for the club to do.

either we got shafted, or what i personally think, the board at the time had no intentions of anything but the 6/5 split.

and dont give me this shit, that the filth had the foresight to make a deal, a few of us hear where pleading for the same deal to be made, and if we can see a deal like that working, then those on the board must of considered it.

what we are told, was the CFC never made a submission or recieved a submission from the MCG.

if thats the case, the board didnt pursue ALL AVENUES for the best outcome of the club.

I agree the Collingwood thing stinks. But jumping up and down afterwards and pretending to ignore the Collingwood foresight line is just living in la la land. We were not a tenant of the MCG at the time, we had no initiative with the MCG at the time. And yes, quite possibly the board did not yield the best possible outcome for the club. That is probably a large reason why the two key protagonists for the club at the time no longer hold an official positions with the Carlton Football Club. I personally believe that with all the constraints in play at the time that our hand was forced and that we had little other choice but to accept the Dome deal and move on with life.

Was it Neale Daniher that said the other day, "sometimes football sucks" well our move away from PP was one of those times.

Wishing for perfection and getting it are poles apart when this thing called reality gets in the way.

MCG vs Dome

Who is online