Tommykins Posted April 18, 2013 Report Share Posted April 18, 2013 Good to see Walker finally getting some international recognition, kid should kill it at that level if he continues his senior form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommykins Posted April 26, 2013 Report Share Posted April 26, 2013 This is a damn good video. Not really Heart in the headlines, but none the less, it makes me want Football back already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommykins Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/news/1149826/Takeover-bid-for-Melbourne-Heart-tabled Well then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biancorosso7 Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/news/1149826/Takeover-bid-for-Melbourne-Heart-tabled Well then. Well then indeed. Wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadete Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/news/1149826/Takeover-bid-for-Melbourne-Heart-tabled Well then. Well then indeed. Wow. Slightly worried TBH. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biancorosso7 Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 (edited) So $3.5 million buys you 14 players, an A-League licence and some staff? CORRECTION - It doesn't get you that. It gets you a rejection. Edited May 1, 2013 by biancorosso7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommykins Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 Tweet back from Scott Munn, article factually incorrect. Have received offer and rejected outright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biancorosso7 Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 From Scott Munn on Twitter Scott Munn @scott_munn 1m @Tommyatthedoor article factually incorrect. Have received offer and rejected outright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeCee Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 So we've been sold then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSK_47 Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 So we've been sold then. Read above. The offer has been rejected outright. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeartMillsy29 Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 Fuck off South, you're not getting back in the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damiano Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 F*ck off south Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 Since when were we struggling? We were one of three clubs to break even this year and at the forum sidwell said that it costs 9.5 mil to run the club a year. So how is 3.5 a take over offer? The world game should just stick to what it always does, write puff pieces about the Sydney clubs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeCee Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 So we've been sold then. Read above. The offer has been rejected outright. Every time he tweets the opposite of what he says seems to happen. Was simply making a joke about the reliability of his messages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Young Polak Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 Internal warfare b/w yarraside and hellas fans if this merge occurs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semper Cor Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 (edited) If this report is true, and according to Scott Munn's tweet it is, the fact that an offer has been made disturbs me. Strong communication needs to come from Heart HQ on what its' intentions are, because for the club and its' fans, I don't think we need an off-season of takeover bids and speculation. Especially, when we should be focussing our energy on re-developing the squad, and putting into place a system, where we don't have a season like the previous one. Edited May 1, 2013 by Semper Cor 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommykins Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 Internal warfare b/w yarraside and hellas fans if this merge occurs? Would they even accept the Imp as their pub?!?!? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofhearts Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 Internal warfare b/w yarraside and hellas fans if this merge occurs? Lol was funny last season when we had a pre season friendly against them and there were fisty cuffs with them. You would think David Gallop would block this anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Young Polak Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 Internal warfare b/w yarraside and hellas fans if this merge occurs? Would they even accept the Imp as their pub?!?!? My only concern is Do they appreciate subbuteo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bannon Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 would they know what time the march starts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Libero Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 or where to get stickers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadete Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 (edited) Internal warfare b/w yarraside and hellas fans if this merge occurs? Lol was funny last season when we had a pre season friendly against them and there were fisty cuffs with them. You would think David Gallop would block this anyway. Hellas is South Melbourne When did we play South Melbourne in a Preseason Match last season that included "fisty cuffs"? Edited May 1, 2013 by cadete 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biancorosso7 Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 (edited) http://www.footballaustralia.com.au/melbourneheart/news-display/Melbourne-Heart-FC-Statement/66386 Melbourne Heart FC can confirm it has received an offer from a consortium representing Victorian Premier League outfit South Melbourne FC for a portion of the Club’s shares. Melbourne Heart FC can confirm this is the second time the Club has received an offer from this consortium and can confirm that it is the second time that the Club has rejected the offer. The Club will announce a small profit at the end of this financial year. The Club will look forward to investing in the football department, on and off the field, and competing for a finals position in the 2013-14 Hyundai A-League season. Edited May 1, 2013 by biancorosso7 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofhearts Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 Internal warfare b/w yarraside and hellas fans if this merge occurs? Lol was funny last season when we had a pre season friendly against them and there were fisty cuffs with them. You would think David Gallop would block this anyway. Hellas is South Melbourne When did we play South Melbourne in a Preseason Match last season that included "fisty cuffs"? Ah apologies was Melbourne Knights. Carry on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semper Cor Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 Hopefully this article puts more water over this little fire... http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/football/melbourne-heart-knock-back-takeover-bid-from-south-melbourne/story-fndmchp2-1226633331242 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 Interesting how people have rubbished the 'breaking even' objective, but that we have knocked back a total of four offers from investors wanting to take a share in, or take over, MHFC. So suddenly our sustainability objective becomes attractive to outsiders. Good to know that Sidwell & Co. have no intention of relinquishing control. We're here to stay. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red or Dead Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 Hopefully this article puts more water over this little fire... http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/football/melbourne-heart-knock-back-takeover-bid-from-south-melbourne/story-fndmchp2-1226633331242 ""We've been approached this year a couple of times, from the Middle East and a Eurpopean consortium." I wonder where the European consortium was from? Italy maybe!?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HEARTinator Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 (edited) Hopefully this article puts more water over this little fire...http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/football/melbourne-heart-knock-back-takeover-bid-from-south-melbourne/story-fndmchp2-1226633331242JA and Foxe OS on a scouting mission. And here I thought JA went over to learn how to coach and he's really there chasing crumpet. Edited May 1, 2013 by HEARTinator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semper Cor Posted May 1, 2013 Report Share Posted May 1, 2013 (edited) Credit where credit is due, Scott Munn came out within a few hours and made a strong positive statement that the current Heart board have no intention of merging or relinquishing control. This, to me at least, shows a sense of stability and belief in the club and its’ business model at the top level, which is good because I can't recall many successful sporting clubs with instability at board or C-level management. With respect to consortium bids from the ME and Europe, it’s interesting to note that Heart are attracting interest from around the globe. As mentioned in the article, this is more so due to their business model rather than on field performances, which is a bit surprising because I would’ve thought it to be the other way around. This just demonstrates that being successful off the pitch may be just as important as on the pitch, in relation to attracting further investments. The challenge of course is finding the right balance between a successful business model and a football team that can win matches/trophies and play attractive football. It looks like we have one, now let’s focus on getting the other. Edited May 1, 2013 by Semper Cor 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millm103 Posted May 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/news/1149912/More-Glory-time-for-McGarry Although it is about McGarry, Edwards gets a mention in there. Good to see him getting another opportunity somewhere else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadete Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/news/1149912/More-Glory-time-for-McGarry Although it is about McGarry, Edwards gets a mention in there. Good to see him getting another opportunity somewhere else. TBH its hard for me to care and form an attachment to a guy only saw play twice for the NYL team and who looked to timid to win the ball against other Youth Teams. Then there is fact that if he was any good he still would have left us at the season's end. I wish we could have just signed a player like what his father was like in his prime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/news/1149912/More-Glory-time-for-McGarry Although it is about McGarry, Edwards gets a mention in there. Good to see him getting another opportunity somewhere else. Gets a mention but the article glosses over the fact that he spent 6 months with us and didn't make any progress whatsoever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melburnian Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 Interesting how people have rubbished the 'breaking even' objective, but that we have knocked back a total of four offers from investors wanting to take a share in, or take over, MHFC. So suddenly our sustainability objective becomes attractive to outsiders. Good to know that Sidwell & Co. have no intention of relinquishing control. We're here to stay. It wouldn't be because it's cheap and thinking that these owners have failed? Also do you think new owners would continue on with the philosophy of buying young and selling to generate income and sacrifice success? Sorry but I'm not convinced investors are flocking because of the way the club is run! It's a cheaper license and one that looks obtainable due to failure! Whilst I definitely don't support South Melbourne taking over, I'm not against new ownership who believe they can obtain excellence and make this club a success. I know there are some big names looking at the possibility of obtaining ownership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
belaguttman Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 The problem is that the combination of prioritising profitability (financial stability) over on-field performance coupled with a season that offered so little on the field has created an impression that the current franchise holders either have no understanding of football or limited interest in on-field success. The sharks start circling. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melburnian Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 The problem is that the combination of prioritising profitability (financial stability) over on-field performance coupled with a season that offered so little on the field has created an impression that the current franchise holders either have no understanding of football or limited interest in on-field success. The sharks start circling. I am intrigued by this notion of sustainable club. Now is the current board members ideals actually sustainable? Will the way the club is run, mean people will attend games and join up as members? Will we have sponsors spilling over to throw money our way? Will lack of silverware or want of winning indent us into the Melbourne market that doesn't suffer fools? We broke even (even made a small profit) the club will cry from the rooftops. This would not have been achieved without selling our assets. This is not sustainable nor is it attractive to market for new fans/members/sponsors. If the club breaks even by having large gate receipts, membership base, sponsorship dollars and on field success, then applaud. The talk of sustainability and breaking even in this respect is null and void in my opinion. As I have stated, South Melbourne can piss off. But I welcome new investors who have better ideals and business plans in place than our current owners. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 Interesting how people have rubbished the 'breaking even' objective, but that we have knocked back a total of four offers from investors wanting to take a share in, or take over, MHFC. So suddenly our sustainability objective becomes attractive to outsiders. Good to know that Sidwell & Co. have no intention of relinquishing control. We're here to stay. It wouldn't be because it's cheap and thinking that these owners have failed? Also do you think new owners would continue on with the philosophy of buying young and selling to generate income and sacrifice success? Sorry but I'm not convinced investors are flocking because of the way the club is run! It's a cheaper license and one that looks obtainable due to failure! Whilst I definitely don't support South Melbourne taking over, I'm not against new ownership who believe they can obtain excellence and make this club a success. I know there are some big names looking at the possibility of obtaining ownership. First of all I don't think anyone can come in and just 'buy a licence' to operate a team in the A-League. AFAIK the licences are approved by and issued by FFA and can be revoked if FFA so desires. Secondly, IMO you are quite wrong to infer that MHFC is deliberately selling young players to to generate income. AFAIK the players who have left the club for overseas all had release clauses in their contracts such that if the criteria in the clause were triggered then the player could move overseas if he wished to do so. With footballers having such a short career span these days it is only natural that if a player has the chance to go to Europe then he is likely to take it. I regard the transfer fees received by MHFC as 'windfall income' rather than an income stream. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melburnian Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 Interesting how people have rubbished the 'breaking even' objective, but that we have knocked back a total of four offers from investors wanting to take a share in, or take over, MHFC. So suddenly our sustainability objective becomes attractive to outsiders. Good to know that Sidwell & Co. have no intention of relinquishing control. We're here to stay. It wouldn't be because it's cheap and thinking that these owners have failed? Also do you think new owners would continue on with the philosophy of buying young and selling to generate income and sacrifice success? Sorry but I'm not convinced investors are flocking because of the way the club is run! It's a cheaper license and one that looks obtainable due to failure! Whilst I definitely don't support South Melbourne taking over, I'm not against new ownership who believe they can obtain excellence and make this club a success. I know there are some big names looking at the possibility of obtaining ownership. First of all I don't think anyone can come in and just 'buy a licence' to operate a team in the A-League. AFAIK the licences are approved by and issued by FFA and can be revoked if FFA so desires. Secondly, IMO you are quite wrong to infer that MHFC is deliberately selling young players to to generate income. AFAIK the players who have left the club for overseas all had release clauses in their contracts such that if the criteria in the clause were triggered then the player could move overseas if he wished to do so. With footballers having such a short career span these days it is only natural that if a player has the chance to go to Europe then he is likely to take it. I regard the transfer fees received by MHFC as 'windfall income' rather than an income stream. Ok. If we didn't sell these players we would have run at a loss therefore making the club unsustainable? Is that correct? Not breaking even, low attendance, low membership base etc etc? Why cry out we broke even and our business model is sustainable and something revolutional when the basic fact is we broke even due to windfalls from selling our assets. Take away that, what is this fabulous business model? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
belaguttman Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 Melburnian there are several ways to be sustainable, sell your club to a rich patron who can lose $million a year but it's sustainable because it's pocket change, run at a loss and count on the largesse of the banks (the way that most clubs run) or have an ongoing boom bust cycle of good years followed by belt tightening or alternatively the way that our club is running. It's easy for us to criticise as it isn't our money but if we were asked to stump up a couple of hundred thousand every year then we might also reconsider our strategy. our problem is that we are trying to trade profitably when many other clubs aren't, or have deeper pockets or special assistance from FFA at a time when we started the season with an unbalanced squad made worse by selling our complete forst choice back 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 Melburnian, I'm not seeking to distort the facts at all. IMO it is fairly clear that without the windfall income MHFC would have made a loss, as it appears all the other clubs also did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melburnian Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 (edited) Melburnian there are several ways to be sustainable, sell your club to a rich patron who can lose $million a year but it's sustainable because it's pocket change, run at a loss and count on the largesse of the banks (the way that most clubs run) or have an ongoing boom bust cycle of good years followed by belt tightening or alternatively the way that our club is running. It's easy for us to criticise as it isn't our money but if we were asked to stump up a couple of hundred thousand every year then we might also reconsider our strategy. our problem is that we are trying to trade profitably when many other clubs aren't, or have deeper pockets or special assistance from FFA at a time when we started the season with an unbalanced squad made worse by selling our complete forst choice back 4. I understand there are several ways to be sustainable, but growth of key areas seems to me to be the best and I believe it is the area where the club have neglected and where the club have failed. There needs to be more emphasis in growing the club. Not sacrificing success on the field to balance the books. This will knock on deaths doors despite what the club say. This year, make no mistake, the club has gone backwards and the brand has suffered. The blame is solely on the board and management at the club. No it's not my money, but as I have stated several times Bella, the people who initially invested into the license either didn't think long term about what was required and just wanted the ego trip of telling people they own a football club. I don't care if that statement seems fair or not, I cannot understand after 3 years has the emphasis been to close the wallet. Surely pre planning your business model would have shown what is required. Let's deal with facts, we had 6,500 members. Not sustainable. Average crowd of 7,500 or so? Not sustainable. We finished second last. Not sustainable.Melburnian, I'm not seeking to distort the facts at all. IMO it is fairly clear that without the windfall income MHFC would have made a loss, as it appears all the other clubs also did. Not saying you were mate, actually just pointing out, the model is flawed. Where is the focus in the key areas? How is this club going to average 10,000 people attending games and a membership base of a mere 9,000 people? From what I can gather, these people running the club do not have the slightest clue. These were YEAR ONE GOALS! All I am saying is I would welcome people with a better understanding on what is required. I have heard about the overseas interest in the club, but keep an eye out for prominent MELBOURNE business men who may be tempted. I would welcome these guys over the ones currently stuffing it up. Edited May 2, 2013 by Melburnian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.