-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
AGM
- Thread starter Ellyse
- Start date
I'm glad that people have some opinions re our board and the AGM!, firstly let's clear up a few issues with some facts:
The downturn in pokies revenue was highlighted in numerous media articles shortly after the no smoking legislation came in effect in 2001. I asked at our AGM in Jan 2002 how this would affect our revenues and was basically told "don't worry about it" by our board.
There was a pokie revenue downturn that was used in our previous financial year as a reason for some financial problems, and yet we tried to use the lack of anticipated revenue AGAIN this year as a reason for our loss!
How could any competent financial management anticipate revenue when the trend of the previous 12 months was downward with no reason whatsoever to believe that it would magically fix itself?
Anyone who was looking at regular monthly financial figures in 2002 would have seen the impact of the no smoking ban and have planned the 2003 revenues accordingly - if our board (full of "businessmen" that supposedly should know better) didn't do this then the question must be asked as to how competent they are as financial managers.
To highlight the financial performance of these people, in the full four years that this administration has been in control, the club has made a nett loss of $694,688, in the previous 4 years of the "Leon Daphne" administration, the club made a nett profit of $1,908,537 (this period did not include the 1995 finals participation).
As far as the Adult Away ticket issues goes, I am SICK of our club ripping off the people who are the most loyal - the ones who want to go to EVERY game in Melbourne.
Some people at our club may think that it's smart to overcharge these people and play on the fact the some Richmond supporters won't notice (or don't care), but I think that it is simply not good enough and the Richmond people who do figure it out just think that the club are a pack of p%$^ks for doing it to them.
One would imagine that our % of members who take up the "Away" game option is less than other clubs, and with every other Melbourne based club giving value in this area compared to Richmond costing extra, it wouldn't be hard to imagine that it is costing us members as well as revenue.
By purchasing an Adult "Away" game ticket from Richmond you will be paying $16.70 more than if you purchased an 11 game ticket and paid cash at the other matches. A Hawthorn member doing the same thing will save $22.30 this season, a Geelong member will save $23.40.
Big difference, isn't it?
Now as far as asking questions to somehow boost my "profile", I have been asking questions at AGM's for the last 15 years so I suppose I must have a pretty good profile by now (but not good enough to get me elected to the board.......).
The AGM is the forum for ANY issues which the members of the club have and want to have answered publicly, if anyone thinks differently then perhaps they'd like to explain what their concept of a companies Annual General Meeting is?
The downturn in pokies revenue was highlighted in numerous media articles shortly after the no smoking legislation came in effect in 2001. I asked at our AGM in Jan 2002 how this would affect our revenues and was basically told "don't worry about it" by our board.
There was a pokie revenue downturn that was used in our previous financial year as a reason for some financial problems, and yet we tried to use the lack of anticipated revenue AGAIN this year as a reason for our loss!
How could any competent financial management anticipate revenue when the trend of the previous 12 months was downward with no reason whatsoever to believe that it would magically fix itself?
Anyone who was looking at regular monthly financial figures in 2002 would have seen the impact of the no smoking ban and have planned the 2003 revenues accordingly - if our board (full of "businessmen" that supposedly should know better) didn't do this then the question must be asked as to how competent they are as financial managers.
To highlight the financial performance of these people, in the full four years that this administration has been in control, the club has made a nett loss of $694,688, in the previous 4 years of the "Leon Daphne" administration, the club made a nett profit of $1,908,537 (this period did not include the 1995 finals participation).
As far as the Adult Away ticket issues goes, I am SICK of our club ripping off the people who are the most loyal - the ones who want to go to EVERY game in Melbourne.
Some people at our club may think that it's smart to overcharge these people and play on the fact the some Richmond supporters won't notice (or don't care), but I think that it is simply not good enough and the Richmond people who do figure it out just think that the club are a pack of p%$^ks for doing it to them.
One would imagine that our % of members who take up the "Away" game option is less than other clubs, and with every other Melbourne based club giving value in this area compared to Richmond costing extra, it wouldn't be hard to imagine that it is costing us members as well as revenue.
By purchasing an Adult "Away" game ticket from Richmond you will be paying $16.70 more than if you purchased an 11 game ticket and paid cash at the other matches. A Hawthorn member doing the same thing will save $22.30 this season, a Geelong member will save $23.40.
Big difference, isn't it?
Now as far as asking questions to somehow boost my "profile", I have been asking questions at AGM's for the last 15 years so I suppose I must have a pretty good profile by now (but not good enough to get me elected to the board.......).
The AGM is the forum for ANY issues which the members of the club have and want to have answered publicly, if anyone thinks differently then perhaps they'd like to explain what their concept of a companies Annual General Meeting is?
MCG said:
I'm one of those punters who has a 17 game ticket (as do my kids).
I can add up. I know full well that it costs me extra.
I agree that it would be better that they were more value for
money. However, having said that - I feel like a captive...I find
that I must get the 17 game ticket. It's weighing up the convenience
factor against the cost.
The reason I get such a ticket is that pre game hours are just to
hectic and it makes things so much easier to just waltz in rather
than purchase a ticket. We probably wouldn't have got into the
Mother's day game if we had to queue for a ticket. It also means
that I don't have to suddenly find the cash to purchase tickets at
the games ... cash flow changes for me during year - it's easier
to fork out hundreds in the late previous year.
We have seats at home games. It would be good if they
had 'seats' at away games as well. I thought that was something
that was going to be looked into?
It is extremely difficult for a club to organise seats for "Away" games as they have no control of what seats are available for those games.
You get the same seat printed on your ticket for "Home" games, but for "Away" games there would be a different seat for each game as each club has sold different seats for their own "Home" crowds.
If you want seats for "Away" games you will have to book them yourself each time (and pay the exorbitant fees each time........)
You get the same seat printed on your ticket for "Home" games, but for "Away" games there would be a different seat for each game as each club has sold different seats for their own "Home" crowds.
If you want seats for "Away" games you will have to book them yourself each time (and pay the exorbitant fees each time........)
The "excuse" that clubs have different overheads etc. as a reason for our Away game ticket being overpriced is - and my apologies for any kiddies reading this - weak as *smile*.
All of our other Membership tickets are priced closely to our competitors, and until a few years ago the AFL used to publish the "recommended" price for membership tickets, which some clubs went over using the excuse of sending out expensive glossy publications to the members etc.
It was explained to me a few years ago that when you use a membership at an "Away" game the club has to provide the Home club with the equivalent cash amount as if you had paid at the gate.
For a $16.50 Adult admission (excluding special venue surcharges) this amount should be around $12 (I think, I only remember the figures from a few years ago when is cost less to get in).
If Richmond only have to pay the other clubs ~$12 for each "Away" match, then why are they charging the members almost $20 for each match?
Hawthorn and Geelong look like they charge their members a bit over this cost price, perhaps they have realised that not ripping off their most loyal members will actually boost their membership numbers and attendances by actually giving value to those who want to attend every game possible?
The "stop whingeing" attitude will only see our club deteriorate further as those that are the enemy of our club - those always ready to accept mediocrity - hold sway by having people support them.
All of our other Membership tickets are priced closely to our competitors, and until a few years ago the AFL used to publish the "recommended" price for membership tickets, which some clubs went over using the excuse of sending out expensive glossy publications to the members etc.
It was explained to me a few years ago that when you use a membership at an "Away" game the club has to provide the Home club with the equivalent cash amount as if you had paid at the gate.
For a $16.50 Adult admission (excluding special venue surcharges) this amount should be around $12 (I think, I only remember the figures from a few years ago when is cost less to get in).
If Richmond only have to pay the other clubs ~$12 for each "Away" match, then why are they charging the members almost $20 for each match?
Hawthorn and Geelong look like they charge their members a bit over this cost price, perhaps they have realised that not ripping off their most loyal members will actually boost their membership numbers and attendances by actually giving value to those who want to attend every game possible?
The "stop whingeing" attitude will only see our club deteriorate further as those that are the enemy of our club - those always ready to accept mediocrity - hold sway by having people support them.
This is getting a little stale but I haven't had a chance to post lately so apologies if everyone's moved on.
Big thankyou to Ellyse and others for their description of the event.
om21 and MCG, I'm in my 20s but would have gone if I was in Melbourne. Dammit, I love AGMs, although they all too frequently get hi-jacked by nutcases.
Doesn't sound like that was the case on this occasion. Thanks for those queries David Clayton- I was very surprised you didn't get voted on to the Board. Pls try again & I'm with you on the 17 ticket pricing issue.
IMO. the revenue the club would receive from increased sales of the 17 ticket membership if it were cheaper would exceed the additional revenues they currently make from having it over-priced.
Still, I don't live in Melbourne and would never consider purchasing such a membership at present so really don't know all the pluses and minuses surrounding the issue.
Big thankyou to Ellyse and others for their description of the event.
om21 and MCG, I'm in my 20s but would have gone if I was in Melbourne. Dammit, I love AGMs, although they all too frequently get hi-jacked by nutcases.
Doesn't sound like that was the case on this occasion. Thanks for those queries David Clayton- I was very surprised you didn't get voted on to the Board. Pls try again & I'm with you on the 17 ticket pricing issue.
IMO. the revenue the club would receive from increased sales of the 17 ticket membership if it were cheaper would exceed the additional revenues they currently make from having it over-priced.
Still, I don't live in Melbourne and would never consider purchasing such a membership at present so really don't know all the pluses and minuses surrounding the issue.
David C said:
David - The 'no smoking' regulations in gaming venues came into effect on 1 September 2002. Hence for 8 months up until 1/9/02, any decline in gaming revenue cannot be attributable to the change in smoking regulations because the no smoking regulations were not in force yet.
Leading up to this date, the advice from Tabcorp, Tattersalls and the State Govt was to assume a nil growth position as a result of the no smoking changes. That is unlike the previous 10 years it was expected that there would not be any growth in gaming machine revenue.
No one that I know in the Industry was predicting a 15% decline as a result of the changes.
If you take a look at any organisation with a major interest in poker machine revenue - eg Tabcorp, Racing Clubs (Thoroughbreds, Harness and Greyhounds) as well as many sporting clubs (including AFL Football clubs) - you will find that their gaming profits in 2003 have dropped considerably. In most instances this has caused their entire bottom line profit (loss) to drop substantially as well. Simply put, no one in the Gaming Industry was expecting such a rapid downturn and the drop in profitability across organisations with a major interest in gaming venues is proof that RFC wasn't the only club not to predict the downturn.
The aspect that is probably disappointing as far as the RFC goes is that it would have (should have) known in January/February 2003 that it was facing a significant decline in gaming revenue relative to budget and this would have given the club some 8 to 9 months to take action to try and reduce the expected loss to a more reasonable level. Despite the lengthy notice period, the RFC still recorded a loss of some $750,000.
Hopefully the recent changes put in place by Ian Campbell will improve the profitability of the RFC significantly in 2004 and beyond because the current financial state of the club does not look all that healthy.
jackstar said:
I don't understand what you mean jackstar. Surely it's reasonable to discuss our ticketing prices especially if they cost over market value price.
The overheads should be budgeted for in different ways but not by making a membership category not be value for money. The people who want 17 game membership tickets shouldn't be penalised with promotion costs when other categories aren't.
Or have I misunderstood what you are saying?
I have only just caught up with this topic, and I must admit to being one of those 'blind fools' who didn't even look at the price of the ticket. I just bought it because that's what I do.
The 17 game ticket is a higher level of committment than the standard one - I'd have thought members shouldn't be penalised for spending extra money.
Silly me :-\
The 17 game ticket is a higher level of committment than the standard one - I'd have thought members shouldn't be penalised for spending extra money.
Silly me :-\
Young Tiger said:
The fact that the club was run from late 2002 (when Mark Brawshaw left) to the time we finally got a replacement, by an acting C.E.O. in Clinton Casey probably has something to do with this problem.
The stories I heard from people at the club at this time last year about the management process - or rather the lack of it - were a point of concern, a concern that eventually manifested itself into the big loss.
Also, don't forget that Mark Brawshaw was appointed by the Casey board after they eventually got rid of Jim Malone (who was seen as too close to the previous Leon Daphne board).
I would contend that if Ian Campbell had been at the club a year earlier then we wouldn't have had nearly as bad a financial performance as we did in 2003.
Btw, we should congratulate Rosy on creating a thread entirely devoted to the AGM and Election - and keeping those fans right around Australia up to date with the latest news, opinions.
I think that the AGM thread brought a huge awareness to alot of Richmond supporters and members about those running for the board and the inconsistencies and positives they brought to the table.
Well done Rosy
Cheers
Rhett Bartlett
I think that the AGM thread brought a huge awareness to alot of Richmond supporters and members about those running for the board and the inconsistencies and positives they brought to the table.
Well done Rosy
Cheers
Rhett Bartlett
