DT: Daniel Anderson will not replace Michael Hagan

[The Colonel]

That, in itself, is a sad indictment of the way the club is being run.

Suity

Not totally. There is a break even crowd number on home game, which was why the club took games against the Warriors to New Zealand and why it investigated moving games to Stadium Aust. A crowd of 10,000 against the Warriors for example would be much more beneficial than 7,000.

An increase in the sales of tickets by 3,000 would cover the costs involved with staging a home game in terms of staff at a guess. There are other costs of course like the stadium hire, big screen hire etc but a big increase in fans like the one you mention would be beneficial.

At present crowd averages are 14,000. A return to the higher averages of years past and above to 16,500 would be profitable.

 

[Daneel]

Yes. The Board have to listen to the membership as they are our Representatives, If the board feels a mistake has been made, the can more to fix it.

The other thing is that Fitzy is an employee and is also on a contract. So while we can all say sack Fitzy, I would think you all don't want to pay him out and if that is the case, you would have to find cause.

At this time I don't know if his comments in the Telegraph would be considered enough.

I have thought to myself when seeing other ceo's in the corporate world being moved on and the massive payouts they recieve, that it could be a costly procedure to oust DF. A payout that a lot of fans, including myself, would begrudge seeing him receive.

So forget Dennis for the moment, if the members tell the board that they don't want Micheal Hagan as coach next year and want him paid out. Are they obligated to do as asked or just take it on board and weigh up the costs of such a notion and so on and then come up with answer that they believes suits the club, even if it differs from the views of members?

 

[MarkInTheStands]

I stated at the beginning that this was speculative and later on that there are no guarantees in sport.

Having said that, increased crowds was just one area of revenue that might incresae - not the sole area. Your selective reading amuses me.

No No No, I have read all the other possible increases that you mentioned. But again I think they are chump change in comparison to what you want to spend.

Membership (Or STH) wont increase because there is no guarantee of Form at the start of the year when they are on sale. We only sell STH up to Our 3rd Home game.

Revenue for the Club: Has been stated they lose money on Football nights in the order of $30,000 a game compared to not having a game.

Sponsorship is the only area of possible increase and then you have to think that 1, it would not be for the whole year? and 2 what is available to sell? I think the Sleeve sponsor is the only one up for renewal this year. Parklea and Denlo are multiple year deals, Pirtek I think is the end of 09.

Merchandise is something we make money on at about the same rate as a Store, then we get the licensing rights from the NRL on that which is a set part of the cap.

Catering : I don't think that is going to be a huge earner for us even with 20,000 people in the Stadium.

I have already spoken about game day.

In reality a good year will see you maybe cover your bases for next year.

 

[Suitman]

Not totally. There is a break even crowd number on home game, which was why the club took games against the Warriors to New Zealand and why it investigated moving games to Stadium Aust. A crowd of 10,000 against the Warriors for example would be much more beneficial than 7,000.

An increase in the sales of tickets by 3,000 would cover the costs involved with staging a home game in terms of staff at a guess. There are other costs of course like the stadium hire, big screen hire etc but a big increase in fans like the one you mention would be beneficial.

At present crowd averages are 14,000. A return to the higher averages of years past and above to 16,500 would be profitable.

That's what I thought.

I understand that there is a break even point, but this brings back the question once again of the charges we are paying to hire the stadium, and if we are being screwed by the trust.

Any increase in any of the items I mentioned is more money for the club, and surely it would go a way to off-setting the outlay of paying out Hagan. The sure fire way to increase revenue is to be successful, as I'm sure you know.


Suity

 

[MarkInTheStands]

if the members tell the board that they don't want Micheal Hagan as coach next year and want him paid out. Are they obligated to do as asked or just take it on board and weigh up the costs of such a notion and so on and then come up with answer that they believes suits the club, even if it differs from the views of members?

The Members could (and I know I have) asked the board to do just that. But we are not privy to every detail of Hagans Contract or the Clubs complete financial liability. Which they are and will make a call on. Then it is up to them to explain it. If the members don't like it or don't trust that to be the truth, then the members can vote them out and get someone else in.

 

[fish eel]

No No No, I have read all the other possible increases that you mentioned. But again I think they are chump change in comparison to what you want to spend.

Membership (Or STH) wont increase because there is no guarantee of Form at the start of the year when they are on sale. We only sell STH up to Our 3rd Home game.

Revenue for the Club: Has been stated they lose money on Football nights in the order of $30,000 a game compared to not having a game.

Sponsorship is the only area of possible increase and then you have to think that 1, it would not be for the whole year? and 2 what is available to sell? I think the Sleeve sponsor is the only one up for renewal this year. Parklea and Denlo are multiple year deals, Pirtek I think is the end of 09.

Merchandise is something we make money on at about the same rate as a Store, then we get the licensing rights from the NRL on that which is a set part of the cap.

Catering : I don't think that is going to be a huge earner for us even with 20,000 people in the Stadium.

I have already spoken about game day.

In reality a good year will see you maybe cover your bases for next year.

and will that stay the same on the new lease signed?

 

[MarkInTheStands]

and will that stay the same on the new lease signed?

Again I am not sure what you mean.

The Leagues club suffers a drop in income of up to $30,000 on a football night compared with the same night of the week when there is no football game on at the Stadium.

 

[Stagger eel]

Who, Firepower? :lol:

Suity

no NAB...

 

[The Colonel]

Membership and STH won't increase the club coffers like good crowds in any given season - good games attract bg crowds as we have seen in the past. STH's are discounted tickets - people paying through the gate will increase when the team is performing well will always mak a club's bottom line much better. The "bandwagon" will always make good money rather than the people that stick solid.

Unless you put a different spin on it.

 

[Suitman]

no NAB...

I know. Just joking.

Suity

 

[MarkInTheStands]

Membership and STH won't increase the club coffers like good crowds in any given season - good games attract bg crowds as we have seen in the past. STH's are discounted tickets - people paying through the gate will increase when the team is performing well will always mak a club's bottom line much better. The "bandwagon" will always make good money rather than the people that stick solid.

Unless you put a different spin on it.

Agreed, I just cant see them making an extra $600,000 next year.

 

[Daneel]

The Members could (and I know I have) asked the board to do just that. But we are not privy to every detail of Hagans Contract or the Clubs complete financial liability. Which they are and will make a call on. Then it is up to them to explain it. If the members don't like it or don't trust that to be the truth, then the members can vote them out and get someone else in.

Interesting. Thanks Mits you have been most helpful. If only my membership application hadn't been turned down a couple of years ago, i could get really interested in the workings and try to play a small part. Alas it was not to be. To be honest though i didn't try becoming a member to nesscasarily vote at the agm, i just thought the financial support allbeit tiny would help the club in some small way.

 

[Suitman]

Agreed, I just cant see them making an extra $600,000 next year.

I can't either with the current mob we've got running the joint.

Finally, we agree.

Suity

 

[fish eel]

Membership and STH won't increase the club coffers like good crowds in any given season - good games attract bg crowds as we have seen in the past. STH's are discounted tickets - people paying through the gate will increase when the team is performing well will always mak a club's bottom line much better. The "bandwagon" will always make good money rather than the people that stick solid.

Unless you put a different spin on it.

some will tell you we can do without the bandwagons though.....

the flow on effect though, from big crowds is intangible,there is a good feel about the joint, you're perceived as successful, your brand goes up etc

 

[Suitman]

some will tell you we can do without the bandwagons though.....

the flow on effect though, from big crowds is intangible,there is a good feel about the joint, you're perceived as successful, your brand goes up etc

Of course Fishy, but that's not what it's about, or there's always an obstacle etc......

Suity

 

[The Colonel]

Agreed, I just cant see them making an extra $600,000 next year.

An average crowd increase of 2,500 per game based on 10 games.

25000 tickets x average price of around $25.00 = $625,000.00. Lets say $550,000 for arguments sake considering discounted/concession tickets etc.

This doesn't include the two games we will take away to Telstra next year or the next three where we are guaranteed a profit, nor does it include an increase in food or beverage sales which even at $10 per head is quite considerable and would again reduce the costs involved with the overheads of staff.

It may be a little simplistic view on things but effectively a crowd of over 10,000 would effectively be break even probably even a bit less.

A successful year would start to cover those costs and can effectively flow on into the year after in terms of merchandise, memberships and season tickets.

 

[Suitman]

It may be a little simplistic view on things

It may be simplistic Colonel, but it doesn't take Einstein to put a bit of simple maths together to see that it's a possibility. I think you're spot on, and you haven't even included several other factors.

Suity

 

[MarkInTheStands]

Interesting. Thanks Mits you have been most helpful. If only my membership application hadn't been turned down a couple of years ago, i could get really interested in the workings and try to play a small part. Alas it was not to be. To be honest though i didn't try becoming a member to nesscasarily vote at the agm, i just thought the financial support allbeit tiny would help the club in some small way.

I would be interested to hear why you application was rejected if you are willing to share.

 

[Belly in Brisvegas]

As a member of the footy club, I would be prepared to pay, say, $500 a year (spread out or up front) as another method to increase revenue stream.

 

[MarkInTheStands]

Alight then cools. So we can afford it if we are successful. Well here is to hoping the board sees it that way and give it the green light.