The link I provided perhaps didn't work for you. If not, this is what the article said in respect to your question about whether a deal has been signed:
[quote="Cranbourne Leader"]
MELBOURNE Football Club is poised to finally end 12 months of discussions and sign a 30-year deal with the City of Casey, ensuring Cranbourne becomes a home to the AFL’s oldest club.
Melbourne has also agreed to terms to align with VFL club Casey.
Neither deal has been formalised, but Melbourne general manager of football operations Chris Connolly said all parties were happy with negotiations.
“I’m as confident as you can ever be on both arrangements,â€
Saints and Kingston City Council reach agreement
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
casey scorp
- Club Player
- Posts: 1617
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005 1:40am
- Location: Hampton/Gold Coast
- Been thanked: 7 times
-
Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12694
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 707 times
- Been thanked: 398 times
[quote="casey scorp"]The link I provided perhaps didn't work for you. If not, this is what the article said in respect to your question about whether a deal has been signed:
[quote="Cranbourne Leader"]
MELBOURNE Football Club is poised to finally end 12 months of discussions and sign a 30-year deal with the City of Casey, ensuring Cranbourne becomes a home to the AFL’s oldest club.
Melbourne has also agreed to terms to align with VFL club Casey.
Neither deal has been formalised, but Melbourne general manager of football operations Chris Connolly said all parties were happy with negotiations.
“I’m as confident as you can ever be on both arrangements,â€
[quote="Cranbourne Leader"]
MELBOURNE Football Club is poised to finally end 12 months of discussions and sign a 30-year deal with the City of Casey, ensuring Cranbourne becomes a home to the AFL’s oldest club.
Melbourne has also agreed to terms to align with VFL club Casey.
Neither deal has been formalised, but Melbourne general manager of football operations Chris Connolly said all parties were happy with negotiations.
“I’m as confident as you can ever be on both arrangements,â€
-
casey scorp
- Club Player
- Posts: 1617
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005 1:40am
- Location: Hampton/Gold Coast
- Been thanked: 7 times
I agree with you that AFL clubs are extremely self-serving, and will do whatever they believe is in their best interests. However, they are also beginning to appreciate that long term planning is essential to their best interests (just look at Hawthorn’s long term financial strategy and asset accumulation).
MFC realises that a strong supporter base is an essential component of long term viability, and a Casey arrangement, with an aggressive community partnership, is a way to fast-track it.
The MCG arrangement is not a replacement for Casey – it’s not either/or. The two are complementary. MFC has been talking to Casey Council for many months it appears from all of the media reports, and its seems odd that there is such a delay reaching any agreement. However, MFC have had 4 CEOs this year, and 2 Boards. That sort of disruption will stall almost anything. I’m sure that finalising a deal at Casey hasn’t been the highest priority for MFC, so long as the opportunity remained available.
My criticism of St KFC has been in relation to the string of announcements:
• Moorabbin redevelopment
• Frankston Park development
• Belvedere Park development
with the lack of research and due diligence underpinning those announcements, and the lack of reality in relation to announced timing of project commencement/completion. It was, in the past, based on a preference that St KFC establish its base at Casey Fields but that is no longer an issue. St KFC still makes announcements about development that aren’t grounded in reality.
MFC realises that a strong supporter base is an essential component of long term viability, and a Casey arrangement, with an aggressive community partnership, is a way to fast-track it.
The MCG arrangement is not a replacement for Casey – it’s not either/or. The two are complementary. MFC has been talking to Casey Council for many months it appears from all of the media reports, and its seems odd that there is such a delay reaching any agreement. However, MFC have had 4 CEOs this year, and 2 Boards. That sort of disruption will stall almost anything. I’m sure that finalising a deal at Casey hasn’t been the highest priority for MFC, so long as the opportunity remained available.
My criticism of St KFC has been in relation to the string of announcements:
• Moorabbin redevelopment
• Frankston Park development
• Belvedere Park development
with the lack of research and due diligence underpinning those announcements, and the lack of reality in relation to announced timing of project commencement/completion. It was, in the past, based on a preference that St KFC establish its base at Casey Fields but that is no longer an issue. St KFC still makes announcements about development that aren’t grounded in reality.
-
Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12694
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 707 times
- Been thanked: 398 times
CaseyScorp, I think we'll be debating this issue for a few more years yet! 
I just hope that you're not disillusioned when (not if) MFC renege on their deal (whether signed contracts exist or not) with Casey.
The mere fact that they've had so much turmoil within their Board and administration should be ringing alarm bells at their ability to actually 'see through' any deal you think you've got with them. Administratively they are the biggest 'basket-case' of all the AFL Clubs (other maybe than Freo?) and the fact that they now have a CEO and a public spruiker both from Freo should fill you with aprehension rather than elation.
On the other hand, maybe you should just enjoy whatever benefits you get from the deal with MFC for however long it lasts.
I just hope that you're not disillusioned when (not if) MFC renege on their deal (whether signed contracts exist or not) with Casey.
The mere fact that they've had so much turmoil within their Board and administration should be ringing alarm bells at their ability to actually 'see through' any deal you think you've got with them. Administratively they are the biggest 'basket-case' of all the AFL Clubs (other maybe than Freo?) and the fact that they now have a CEO and a public spruiker both from Freo should fill you with aprehension rather than elation.
On the other hand, maybe you should just enjoy whatever benefits you get from the deal with MFC for however long it lasts.
-
casey scorp
- Club Player
- Posts: 1617
- Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005 1:40am
- Location: Hampton/Gold Coast
- Been thanked: 7 times
I'm sure, and look forward to it.Mr Magic wrote:CaseyScorp, I think we'll be debating this issue for a few more years yet!
I would be, but we'll just have to wait and see.Mr Magic wrote:I just hope that you're not disillusioned when (not if) MFC renege on their deal (whether signed contracts exist or not) with Casey.
I agree that MFC is a basketcase. But it has an opportunity to (slowly) right the ship. If it makes the right decisions.Mr Magic wrote:The mere fact that they've had so much turmoil within their Board and administration should be ringing alarm bells at their ability to actually 'see through' any deal you think you've got with them. Administratively they are the biggest 'basket-case' of all the AFL Clubs (other maybe than Freo?) and the fact that they now have a CEO and a public spruiker both from Freo should fill you with aprehension rather than elation.
Remember Hawthorn was a basketcase 12 years ago when it contemplated merging with MFC. Don Scott was the spark, but Ian Dicker was the man who steered HFC back from the brink. The right people and the right decisions can make for a recovery.
You may be correct that MFC doesn't have the right people, but one thing I will say about the public spruiker is that he has been associated with the Hawthorn and Freo resurrections. Maybe it's a coincidence, or maybe he has been instrumental.