Moorabbin

[Mr Magic]

There's no need to ask KCC.
According to Loyal it's a done deal that we're staying at Moorabbin.
Michael Nettlefold is an absolute genius to have arranged this in the few weeks he's been in the job.

[Loyal]

There is $500,000 of State money made available for grandstand demolition at Linton Street, and to make good that part of the site. So there would be a good flat area available on which to build a facility.

The Seaford complex is costed at $10.43 million. It wouldn’t cost more at Linton Street, and probably a bit less

There is $6 million available from the State Government & the AFL ($3.45 million from the State Government and $2.55 million from the AFL).


Seaford

$10.43 million
-$6.00 million State Government & AFL
-$3.00 million Frankston Council
$1.43 million St Kilda FC

Linton Street

$10.43 million
-$6.00 million State Government & AFL
$4.43 million

So, on the surface, it would cost more to develop at Linton Street.

However, that does not take into account the views of a substantially different Kingston Council (since the elections last year). It is highly probable that KCC would be prepared to make a substantial contribution to a complex at Linton Street.

After all, we are talking about providing a home for one of the best known sporting clubs in the nation. There are substantial benefits for having such a club domiciled in your local area – the actions of Frankston Council illustrate that. You can also refer to the FCC commissioned REMPLAN economic study which showed an economic benefit of up to $42.743 million accruing to the local economy.

So, assuming that the new look KCC was prepared to be involved (we just have to ask them to see if that would be the case), the $4.43 million cost of the Linton Street development could drop significantly.

Now comes the interesting part. At Linton Street:

• we already have a 30 year lease of a very large reserve at Linton Street (ie we totally control the site)
• it already has a top quality playing surface
• our social club is already there (albeit needing a substantial upgrade).

At Seaford:
• we will have a lease over a very small part of the overall Belvedere Park, just covering the development footprint of our building and part of the carpark
• we will have only a licence over the oval, which must be shared with the community and other users
• our social club cannot fit on the leased area.

In terms of maintenance, we maintain the Linton Street oval (about $150,000/year) whereas at Seaford Frankston Council will maintain the oval). That is a saving, for sure, but balance it against having absolute control over one of the key assets which our club needs – an oval for training. In a $30 million budget, allocating $150,000 (ie about ½% of expenditure) to control your destiny seems like a smart use of funds. Particularly as it provides the opportunity for the club to run closed training sessions (which might end up being a bit difficult at the Belvedere Park oval).

The final issue is our social club – if we stay at Moorabbin so does the social club. If we move away, there will be a battle over whether the club is honouring the terms of its lease by not operating a football club from the premises. If we don’t have a leg to stand on, and lose the lease, then we also lose the social club.

On balance, there are very real benefits in a Linton Street location. A prudent person would ask the question of KCC.

notwithstanding the fact that there are also substancial administrative savings and conveniences to be made by staying at moorabbin in a recession.

great post CS.

[saint66au]

OK Loyal..

Are you now willing to admit that your "we will stay at Moorabbin" stance is wishful thinking on your part rather than fact? That you would like it to happen (which is fine) rather than having evidence that it will actually happen?

If you persist with your roundabout vague answers to this question you will be warned for trolling. Having an opinion on this subject is fine..stating things as fact without any correborating evidence is NOT fine and doing it continually as you do will get you a warning

Ball's in your court

[GrumpyOne]

Time to lock this thread IMHO.

Only redeeming feature is the number of different ways posters can find to spell Moorabbin.

Bloody Koorie names.... anybody would think they were here first.

Least there's no problem with Seaford.

Easy... Sea ..... and Ford...

Don't have to be smarter than a 5th grader.

Even Loyal should be able to manage that.

[ausfatcat]

notwithstanding the fact that there are also substancial administrative savings and conveniences to be made by staying at moorabbin in a recession.

great post CS.

Rubbish like what 10 grand in moving fees?

[Sainter_Dad]

In terms of maintenance, we maintain the Linton Street oval (about $150,000/year) whereas at Seaford Frankston Council will maintain the oval). That is a saving, for sure, but balance it against having absolute control over one of the key assets which our club needs – an oval for training. In a $30 million budget, allocating $150,000 (ie about ½% of expenditure) to control your destiny seems like a smart use of funds. Particularly as it provides the opportunity for the club to run closed training sessions (which might end up being a bit difficult at the Belvedere Park oval).

So what you are actually saying here is $150K per annum or $4.5million in todays money over the next 30 years. that does not seem to be 1/2% but more like 13.043% of the budget - scratches head and thinks stats can say anything if you torture them too much!

[FortiusQuoFidelius]

Seaford

$10.43 million
-$6.00 million State Government & AFL
-$3.00 million Frankston Council
$1.43 million St Kilda FC

Linton Street

$10.43 million
-$6.00 million State Government & AFL
$4.43 million

The original proposal to develop Linton street was $16.5 million.

$2.55 million AFL
$3.45 million State Government
$2.5 million KCC
$8 million St Kilda FC

The press release can be viewed here.

http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/domin ... 87007ed91e

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but when I went to school 8 million was a bigger number than 1.43 million.

Also dont forget that the Linton Street redevelopment included relocating the bowling club, brass band and several other community groups to new locations in order to make land available for the redeveloped facilities. Also, part of the funding by KCC was reliant on the sale of excess council land in Ewar St and Nepean Highway Moorabbin (involving relocation of the Scout Group, Youth Centre, Senior Citizens and Kindergarten. Only the land where the Scout hall was is now being sold so there was a MASSIVE funding shortfall which contributed to the scrapping of the Linton Street redevelopment.

Yes, on the surface you may think Linton Street is/was an easy option, but the politics involved, not just between St Kilda FC and KCC but within the wider community, has always been and will continue to be a stumbling block.

Seaford is cheaper and easier, and therefore a no brainer.

[Bernard Shakey]

My understanding is that we were going to own the new Social Club on the South Road/Linton Street corner.

At Seaford we own nothing.

[FortiusQuoFidelius]

My understanding is that we were going to own the new Social Club on the South Road/Linton Street corner.

At Seaford we own nothing.

At Seaford we OWE nothing!

[Bernard Shakey]

My understanding is that we were going to own the new Social Club on the South Road/Linton Street corner.

At Seaford we own nothing.

At Seaford we OWE nothing!

$1.43 million is nothing?

[evertonfc]

I wonder if Geelong would rather OWN Skilled Stadium or OWE their debts?

Ironically, they had both. They used what they OWN to pay off what they OWE.

Now look at them...

Sure, they play matches there, but with the AFL looking for a third stadium in Melbourne...

[No1_Saint]

My understanding is that we were going to own the new Social Club on the South Road/Linton Street corner.

At Seaford we own nothing.

My understanding was that there was complications with the pokies and the land transfer required to move the band building or something like that. Correct me anyone if I am wrong.

It would not have been an issue but with residents and councillors against it, it became a protracted debate that was delaying the club getting the right facilities in a reasonable timeframe.

[ace]

[quote="FortiusQuoFidelius"]
The original proposal to develop Linton street was $16.5 million.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but when I went to school 8 million was a bigger number than 1.43 million.
[/quote]


APPLES ARE NOT ORANGES

The original proposal to relocate the social club and build new administration and training facitiies at South Road is dead and buried.

The Belvedere Park proposal is only new administration and training facitiies.

If you look at the planning approval drawings at
http://www.frankston.vic.gov.au/library ... 20Info.pdf
especially drawing TP010 at page 56 you should recognise that similar buildings can be built anywhere at similar cost.

The relevant issues between Belvedere and Linton Street (not South Road) are:

Funding - Frankston Council is chipping in $3 million, at present Kingston has publicly offered nothing.

Site preparation - at Linton Street, Kingston Council would likely demand the removal of the mounds (not just the concrete terracing) as part of a deal.

New Drawings and Approvals Costs - a few hundred thousand dollars.

Community Relations - Kingston Council is hostile towards the St Kilda FC.
Frankston Council appears supportive.

Delay - Drawings were submitted to Frankston Council back in December 2008. Drawings would need to be prepared and submitted to the Kingston Council. This means about a one year delay to completion.

Advantage at Linton Street - Social club, training and adminstrative facilities at same location, and in a more accessible location.

Advantage at Belvedere - May attract new local followers, just as the move to Moorabbin gained St Kilda local supporters back then.

Ground Control - At Linton Street, St Kilda controls the ground and associated costs,
At Belvedere Park, Frankston Council controls the ground and associateed costs.

[FortiusQuoFidelius]

My understanding is that we were going to own the new Social Club on the South Road/Linton Street corner.

At Seaford we own nothing.

At Seaford we OWE nothing!

$1.43 million is nothing?

Of course not... I was figuratively speaking... what would you prefer to owe? $1.43m or $8m ???

[ace]

[quote="FortiusQuoFidelius"]
Of course not... I was figuratively speaking... what would you prefer to owe? $1.43m or $8m ???[/quote]

Me, I would prefer to owe $8M conditional upon me investing it profitably, so that servicing the debt were not an issue and conditional on being able to roll over the debt every time it came due.

The problem at the moment is so many good businesses can not roll over their debt or are making insufficient return on investment to service the debt.

Football clubs are not good businesses they try to break even over time.
They do not measure success in terms of profitability but in premierships won.
They would prefer no debt.

[Loyal]

this is not "FACT" but i'd offer to pour the slab for $14,000 an lay the first brick at moorabbin for free.

[GrumpyOne]

this is not "FACT" but i'd offer to pour the slab for $14,000 an lay the first brick at moorabbin for free.

Rather you'd pour the slab for free, bugger the brick.

[casey scorp]

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but when I went to school 8 million was a bigger number than 1.43 million.

Bernard Shakey already has (corrected your incorrect comparison of $1.43 million with $8 million).

You can't compare the original Moorabbin proposal which involved St KFC purchasing the bowling club site and building a new social club on it (and costing the club $8 million) with the Belvedere Park or a recast training/admin complex at Linton Street costing the club $1.43 million (don't forget the "+ any extra" under any of those scenarios!!).

[aussierules0k]

[GrumpyOne]

Time to lock this thread IMHO.

Why?

Because it is going around in circles and is in immediate danger of disappearing up Loyal's anus..... which is where most of it came from anyway.

[Loyal]

enough about my anus.
this was a clean debate until Grumpy decided he would claim it as his own off the back of an April Fools joke.

[ausfatcat]

enough about my anus.
this was a clean debate until Grumpy decided he would claim it as his own off the back of an April Fools joke.

That started on the 15th of april? What calender are you working off.

[aussierules0k]