Forum topic

50 posts / 0 new
Last post
billythekid

This type of thing should have been done 15 years back and more surprising as well because long time board member Dennis Galamberti was acting as a consultant to other clubs wanting get involved in pokie outlets 

If the business is viable the club should be able to finance the project and maybe with the help of a few backers as well going gaurantors.

Ron Burger
Ron Burger's picture

Borrowing from third party finance in order to buy into and operate a pokies venue? Based in an affluent suburb where surely most people are smart enough NOT to fritter away their life savings on slots! 

Could there be a more insane business proposal to put to a guarantor than this.....? 

Please can you learn from the stupidity of Frankston FC and just roll up your sleeves and get corporate partners on board to increase revenue rather than preying on the vulnerable and depressed. 

digs

Could  St Kilda be footing the bill for this venture. It is their territory !!

We might be from the bush. but we ain't green

billythekid

Unfortunately Ron the moral high ground dosent pay the bills and if people are stupid enough to gamble or piss away their money thats THEIR problem! As I said if the proposal is viable its ok if  not stay away.Another way would be to sell shares/bonds in the venture.I reckon I could scratch up 50k to help save the club 

Take the pokie money away from Port and Willy and see  how they would go

Any means of pissing the St Kilda bludgers off would be well worth the punt as the alternative of being swallowed by them will be the end of the SFC as we know it.Better to go down fighting than meekly giving up.But if the Zebras become St Kilda seconds I wont even buy a membership.

As for Frankston they just made some very poor business decisions and have paid the price.

paul

Can't compare this with Frankston, very different situation. One was hugely overpaying for existing poker machine licences in an underutilised venue, the other is looking to operate an existing business with multiple revenue streams in an area where there is significant disposable income.

The choice is the club dies a slow death as St Kilda's underwear or they take a chance on investing in the future of the club as a stand alone entity. This proposal sounds like a good idea provided the due diligence is done on the viability of the business, because there is a lot riding on that. 

digs

Paul

My mail is that Ian Dicker will have a huge influence on Frankston's renaissance in 2017.

i believe he has employed Gary Buckenara out of his own pocket to set the wheels in motion for a return to the VFL in 2018.

Certainly a very positive step if correct as his  footy credentials are second to none & is not familiar with failure.

We might be from the bush. but we ain't green

Ron Burger
Ron Burger's picture

Buckenara to return to coaching?

TBH thats the first key appointment they need to make if they are to be viable. Players won't sign unless they know there's a VFL team to play in and by whom they will be coached. 

Its a bit of a chicken/egg problem I believe.

The club needs a licence to play, but won't get one until it has presented AFL Victoria with a secure business plan for operating a VFL level football club again.

Sponsorship commitments (at least in principle) will be required to demonstrate cash flow revenues will be sufficient. To get sponsors to indicate they'll back you, they will want to know who the coach is and who the key players committed for the season are. 

Coaches and players won't commit until they know the club has a licence and will be back in the VFL. 

A viscious circle, no?

So which comes first? Licence, coach, players, business plan? 

digs

No mention of any coaching at this stage Ronnie, mainly a managerial role at this stage to get the ball rolling.

If Ian Dicker is running the show his previous track record is anything to go by the future looks bright.

We might be from the bush. but we ain't green

Ron Burger
Ron Burger's picture

I don't disagree with Dicker's previous effort with Hawthorn FC which was remarkable to say the least. 

However, as I may have mentioned in a previous post, he had a few key planks already in place back in 1996 (?) which are not present now re: Frankston. 

Firstly, there was an existing licence / entitlement to play in the AFL competition. 

Secondly, there was a coach. 

Thirdly, there was continuity within the playing list as HFC continued to play in the AFL after the members rejected the merger deal. 

Fourthly, there was a significant latent supporter base which became a more robust membership base when it appeared the club was on its knees.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly there was genuine anger and passion from the likes of Don Scott who drove the Operation Payback campaign which galvanised the Hawks fans. 

I'm not seeing or hearing any of the above re: Frankston and thus feel Ian's job will be a far tougher task than the one held undertook some 20 years ago.

paul

Ron, I think it's pretty simple for the Dolphins. Their core business at the moment is as a function/events centre, that's what will fund a large chunk of the football side of things. It has already been operating quite well without any resources being put into growing the operation, so their first priority should be to appoint an expert in the field to really get that humming.

I would say the coach should be an immediate priority as soon as the licence is reinstated. Appoint a good coach by July/August and there is plenty of time to put together a competitive list, and the year off will actually allow the club not to pay well over the odds as they were last year.

Pages