WHo's going to the pre AGM damage control meeting on Monday?

[RUBIKS]

Sorry for being slow/late to the party... or both, however I think I need something explained.

We are now going to sell the retail component instead of the 99 year lease?

Then, to do up the club, we are going to borrow money from another financial institution based on the increased value of land... that we have sold?

I'm sure there's some Chinese whispers going on and that some info isn't being passed down correctly. However I'm just lost with all this.

Really, selling the retail component? The fact that we kept ownership of that part of the development was what I was happiest about. Can I get confirmation that we are now going to be selling it?
Can't say I know why, I mean if we are getting 10mil up front when the development is approved and the land value goes up when the development is approved, we should be well in the clear as far as the bank is concerned? Or whoever this new lender is can pay off St. George and go us the whole hog for development of the club. Makes more sense to me than hocking the extra bit of land.

Also I agree with Reefy, $13mil is nothing. Sure, I can't pay it off however in a commercial stance it's a mere pittance. I thought the original deal was upon approval of the 3A, the consortium would absorb the debt and get to work. Are they not doing that any more or did I misinterpret that part?

I want to vote yes and probably will, however it doesn't mean I like the new direction. It looks like it's the Sharks last hope and I'm actually excited to have a nice retail complex closer to Cronulla, however for the long term outlook of the Sharks it seems like a wet bandaid.

 

[spider]

unfortunately they have to do what is requried to satisfy the bank

as for the development, the only vote is yes

anything else is non-negotiable

it will roar across the line, only capsis and his possie will protest

having said that, there is plenty of work to do once approval is granted

 

[taipan]

bit more than 'doing ok' - the club has almost $10m in cash at bank and since renovating the entire interior again all that is left to do is gold plate the stools

they have achieved growth to the point they are trading above pre July 07 figures when smoking was prohibited

pre-committment wont come in, if it does it will be a watered dow version whereby the punter will have the choice to enter the scheme voluntarily as opposed to the federal govt jamming it down peoples throats becasue one independant used it as leverage




they took $9m net revenue from poker machines last year - what do you suggest will bump this revenue stream 'well down the pecking order'?

Ok and you believe if the new poker machine regulations come in,Tradies will be laughing,because they won't.
If their(the Sharks) debt is reduced to $3.5m so will the corresponding interest committments.The bank is obviously allowing for that fact,by including the blowout from $10.5m to $13.5m and the clear reduction inpokie revenue.
The retail development is first cab off the rank,and the bottom two floors of the licensed club wil form part of the retail development.
The bank,developer and club can see the long term benefits.they may have some idea.
The club is aiming long term not tomorrow, to reduce dramatically the dependency on poker machines.That is one of the reasons for the development family friendly design and inclusions.They can see the long term problem relyoing on poker machine monies,Doust of st George can<and I would suggest Tradies should if they have a clue.

 

[Megalodon]

... i dont require clarification, as i said, i understand the statements and accompanying notes to the accounts

Yep, I read the Annual Report too and understood that the business challenges facing the Club are huge.

Yes, I think it's bad. You're not Robinson Crusoe there mate - I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone to dispute that.

The point that I was trying to make is that you're evidently a very vocal critic of the Club and its financial situation but there is in place correct and appropriate protocols and forums for those discussions... and it's not on some anonymous unofficial web forum.

That's the great thing about being a Member of a Club - you're entitled to a legitimate say in the direction and future of your Club. However, this is not a Member's forum. It's just a bunch of anonymous screennames chipping in their 2 cents here and there.

By all means 'discuss' away but your modus operndi just seems to be:

"Things are bad"

"Yes, we know."

"No, you don't understand... Things are bad"

"Yes, we know."

"No, you don't understand... Things are really bad"

"Yes, we know."

"No, no, no you don't understand... Things are really, really bad"

"Yes, we know."

... and so it goes ad infinitum.

It's all a pretty pointless waste of energy when you think about it. Energy that could be better used in solving problems than just highlighting them.

Unless you're going to put forth some well thought out and reasoned solutions to resolve the problems then you might as well just be pissing on your own boots.

Do you have any solutions in mind?

... tell me megalodon, what is your view on the newly imposed covenants, and how do you feel they will adversely affect the on-going strategic direction of both businesses in the short and long term?

Yes, I have great concerns about the impact that the new conditions will have however I see that we really have no choice about the matter so there isn't a lot to be discussed or debated.

That is why I will be voting YES to the Ordinary Resolution dated 29 July 2011 that was recently circulated with the Information Memorandum.

A thought:

“Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” Plato

 

[spider]

Ok and you believe if the new poker machine regulations come in,Tradies will be laughing,because they won't.

well i wouldnt be crying with $8m in the bank

they will be laughing because no club within 10 km of them will be able to afford the integration required to format pre-committment, therfore decreased revenue will be propped up by extra revenue

The club is aiming long term not tomorrow, to reduce dramatically the dependency on poker machines.That is one of the reasons for the development family friendly design and inclusions.

i agree on incresaing and providing new revenue streams, but to suggest (and you didnt answer) that new streams will 'bump pokie revenue down the order', then they will be repaing tens of millions to do that on alternate streams

They can see the long term problem relyoing on poker machine monies,Doust of st George can<and I would suggest Tradies should if they have a clue.

lol - im sure macaleer could benefit from your advice, he turned that club from a shit heap into a mutli million dollar profitable business

and yes, difference being macaleer is a licensed club ceo - doust is a football ceo

danny robinson isnt veering away from pokie revenue either and i would be surprised if doust is not supporting his every strategy

they said no-smoking would kill the pokie industry - its bigger than before it was introduced

two things will always reap - alcohol and gambling, no matter what regualtions are implemented, who'd of thought they would put machines outside...

 

[spider]

Yep, I read the Annual Report too and understood that the business challenges facing the Club are huge.

Yes, I think it's bad. You're not Robinson Crusoe there mate - I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone to dispute that.

The point that I was trying to make is that you're evidently a very vocal critic of the Club and its financial situation but there is in place correct and appropriate protocols and forums for those discussions... and it's not on some anonymous unofficial web forum.

That's the great thing about being a Member of a Club - you're entitled to a legitimate say in the direction and future of your Club. However, this is not a Member's forum. It's just a bunch of anonymous screennames chipping in their 2 cents here and there.

By all means 'discuss' away but your modus operndi just seems to be:

"Things are bad"

"Yes, we know."

"No, you don't understand... Things are bad"

"Yes, we know."

"No, you don't understand... Things are really bad"

"Yes, we know."

"No, no, no you don't understand... Things are really, really bad"

"Yes, we know."

... and so it goes ad infinitum.

It's all a pretty pointless waste of energy when you think about it. Energy that could be better used in solving problems than just highlighting them.

Unless you're going to put forth some well thought out and reasoned solutions to resolve the problems then you might as well just be pissing on your own boots.

Do you have any solutions in mind?



Yes, I have great concerns about the impact that the new conditions will have however I see that we really have no choice about the matter so there isn't a lot to be discussed or debated.

That is why I will be voting YES to the Ordinary Resolution dated 29 July 2011 that was recently circulated with the Information Memorandum.

A thought:

“Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” Plato

two things from all that -

1) i hit a nerve

2) you still didnt answer the question?

 

[Megalodon]

two things from all that -

1) i hit a nerve

2) you still didnt answer the question?

You did?

Don't flatter yourself sweet cheeks.

two things from all that -

1) i hit a nerve

2) you still didnt answer the question?

Ummm, yes I did.

It may not have been the sort of answer that were trolling to get, but I answered the question.

 

[spider]

At least you were man enough to admit it

 

[Megalodon]

At least you were man enough to admit it

Again with the big assumptions.

 

[spider]

pots and black kettles

Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” Plato

see what i did there

 

[Megalodon]

pots and black kettles... ...see what i did there

Oh, and for the record...

I see that you have chosen not to answer my question:

Do you have any solutions in mind?

Given that you're such a vocal critic, I can only assume that you've got a wealth of well thought and cogent strategies to address the business challenges facing the Club.

I'd love to hear them.

I've got a few good contacts at the Club and I'll see that they get passed on.

The floor is all your's...

 

[Russell Crowe's Band]

so basically spidie....

if we survive this clusterf**k...

we need to completly revammp the pokie and club componant so the big gamblers come back. as the tradies have done

as is my limited understanding of the club industry

 

[blacktip-reefy]

I cant quite see megalodons angle here. Spider has some very valid points that need to be raised in a genuine discussion of how things are going.
I am not happy with this outcome for the Sharks or the potential outcomes. The expected revenue just isnt enough.
Once its sold, its sold. Gonski. Never again. What will the club do to replace that capital ownership? Spend on investment in land? Shares? Deveopments? or spend it on football to win a premiership?
Once its gone its gone. Once its spent, its spent. And the total we will beleft with out of this, is about the same that the Broncosspend on footy each year.

 

[spider]

Oh, and for the record...

I see that you have chosen not to answer my question:

nice try, but you took my question and reloaded at me

remember this....a couple of posts before you took aim with my question

tell me megalodon, what is your view on the newly imposed covenants, and how do you feel they will adversely affect the on-going strategic direction of both businesses in the short and long term?

in response you posted whaffle about the right forums for discussion

all in all you didnt answer the question i put to you

to avoid being labelled a liar, why dont you point out your answer to the original question

the floor is yours...

I've got a few good contacts at the Club and I'll see that they get passed on.

oh dear, do you think im surprised

once only has to look at the content of your short posting history to figure association

 

[Russell Crowe's Band]

I cant quite see megalodons angle here. Spider has some very valid points that need to be raised in a genuine discussion of how things are going.
I am not happy with this outcome for the Sharks or the potential outcomes. The expected revenue just isnt enough.
Once its sold, its sold. Gonski. Never again. What will the club do to replace that capital ownership? Spend on investment in land? Shares? Deveopments? or spend it on football to win a premiership?
Once its gone its gone. Once its spent, its spent. And the total we will beleft with out of this, is about the same that the Broncosspend on footy each year.

agreed.

its a shit situation.

but what can they really do. if they dont sell it now its game over. the club's hand has been forced by years of continuous mismanagement.

 

[Ausguy]

Wow it's a lot of effort to piss in the wind.

We can't get anything right.

Maybe capsis is rightthe development won't save us... For long.

 

[carcharias]

They could try winning and people could try going to watch them do so...that'd help.

 

[Megalodon]

nice try, but you took my question and reloaded at me

remember this....a couple of posts before you took aim with my question



in response you posted whaffle about the right forums for discussion

all in all you didnt answer the question i put to you

to avoid being labelled a liar, why dont you point out your answer to the original question

the floor is yours...

Oh poor poppet, I gave you a response to your trolling question. I'll re-post it again for your benefit and edification:

Yes, I have great concerns about the impact that the new conditions will have however I see that we really have no choice about the matter so there isn't a lot to be discussed or debated.

That is why I will be voting YES to the Ordinary Resolution dated 29 July 2011 that was recently circulated with the Information Memorandum.

oh dear, do you think im surprised

once only has to look at the content of your short posting history to figure association

So in your mind, being an active Member of the Club, going to the meetings, voicing concerns and asking questions through appropriate channels is a bad thing?

Hmmmmm, riiiiight...

Am I to assume that by your not taking up the offer to voice your strategies and solutions for the financial recovery of the Club that you have, in fact, "got nothing?"

 

[blacktip-reefy]

agreed.

its a shit situation.

but what can they really do. if they dont sell it now its game over. the club's hand has been forced by years of continuous mismanagement.

We can relocate. Sell the entire stadium. The club & teh ground take up 2/3 of the available land. So if the developers can make 50-75 mil out of 1/3 , well, do the sums.
We go to SFS for a decade & invest wisely.
Set up a deal with Tradies or something in Sutho.
Become the Cronulla Sutherland Sharks , once again. Focus on Sutherland. Stop the land lock. Take over heathcoate, Holdsworthy to liverpool which one day will be all housing. Maybe even in my lifetime.

 

[Russell Crowe's Band]

dosnt seem to be an idea that the board has entertained.

id be pro an sfs move.