BUSINESSMAN Richard Garvey has kept a low profile since becoming president of Hawthorn shortly before the start of last season.
But now, with the 'interim' title now removed, he caught up with AFL.com.au senior writer Ashley Browne to discuss some of the major issues facing one of the League's most successful and powerful clubs.
ASHLEY BROWNE: Not everyone knows that you were an Essendon supporter until a few years back. Tell us about your journey from the dark side.
RICHARD GARVEY: I was born and bred an Essendon supporter. But I have two sons, Paul and Anthony, and Paul has always been a Hawk, right from the start. I got involved with Hawthorn through (former president) Ian Dicker after the merger in 1996 when I was at KPMG. In 2010 I joined the board.
AB: Were you a big Essendon fan?
RG: Yes, we went to all the games and they were great games against Hawthorn. I remember the Grand Finals and the 'line in the sand game'. I understood why that happened and as it turned out, it really was a line in the sand game for the club.
AB: Let's talk about Dingley. How will you pay for it?
RG: We're going to have to raise a significant amount of money. The land cost about $8 million and we paid for that out of existing reserves. And that's well within the capacity of our finances so that's not an issue. To build is a big commitment and we have started work on fundraising and we'll talk to the AFL and to government. We'll look at our existing asset portfolio and see what doesn't need to be there in the long term.
AB: Hawthorn is the one club that has never previously sought AFL assistance for its facilities.
RG: That's correct and we feel it's time. A lot of other clubs have had a lot more assistance and the AFL has acknowledged that. We'll have a sensible discussion and it's possible that Waverley Park will be part of that because I don't think the AFL would want to see Waverley lost to football. But let me make clear that raising money is a big issue but we're not going to send ourselves broke in the process. It's a big venue and will take more money to keep its doors open, so we'll have to be very prudent.
AB: Is there more land there than you actually need?
RG: We will look at other ways to generate revenue from the land but it would be nice to keep it intact. It's 28 hectares and we want that for the future. We would like to know that we have room to expand if we need it for the next 50 to 100 years. That's our dream.
AB: There is a perception that the reason it took you a while to appoint a headhunting firm to find a new chief executive is because Mark Evans knocked you back.
RG: I'm not going to provide a running commentary, but that's not the case. We were always going to go to a search firm. Stuart Fox got the MCC job just before Christmas and nothing happens for three weeks during the Christmas holidays. It took a couple of weeks to find a firm, we've now advertised and we think we'll get a quality field of candidates.
AB: Is there any disappointment that you send Stuart off to Stanford University for six weeks for a study course and he leaves the club not long after his return?
RG: No. There are a handful of truly elite positions in Australian sport and the MCC is one of them. It wasn't a complete surprise to us that they came after Stuart; we expected him to be a candidate. And his time at Stanford was honouring a commitment we made to him when he joined the club when Jeff Kennett was president. There's no issue. He has done a great job and he leaves on the best of terms with us.
AB: The AFL has always wanted one team in Tasmania. Is that still the case?
RG: I think they have a better understanding and presence in the state through AFL Tasmania. I think having North play three games in Hobart and us four games in the north provides a quality product to the Tasmanian market at a fraction the cost of having a team down here and I don't think there's a great desire (for a standalone team). I think the AFL has come to understand that and not want to change the landscape. We remain absolutely committed to Tasmania. We have invested so much time and effort into Tasmania and we want it to continue.
AB: Would you ever play a game in Hobart and allow North to play one in Launceston?
RG: We have kicked that idea around. I'm not sure what North would think about that but we have considered the possibility. But we're very pleased to play North in Launceston this year, which will be fantastic.
AB: Would you like to play any more games in Tasmania?
RG: We're very happy with the 7-4 split with the pre-season game as well. We don't want to move beyond that, particularly in the life of the current deal which we're starting this year.
AB: What would happen if there was a change of heart by the Tasmanian government and they pulled the sponsorship deal?
RG: That's not on the radar. What people forget is how many people the opposition club and we bring to the economy of northern Tasmania. It's about 4000 per game. That's a real benefit to Tasmania and the research has shown that the sponsorship is worth every dollar to Tasmania in terms of exposure, leaving aside the fact we play games there.
AB: Hawthorn gains considerable revenue from gaming venues at Waverley Gardens and WestWaters. Can you put a percentage figure on it?
RG: Not off the top of my head, but it is significant. But without those venues we would struggle to make a profit and we're no different to any other Victorian team who are dependent on them to supplement their income. The AFL doesn't give us enough income particularly while they're redistributing money to the expansion clubs and the more needy clubs, which is fine. WestWaters is about to go from 60 to 100 rooms; it is a significant venue and without it we wouldn't be profitable.
AB: There is talk about football's ties to gambling.
RG: The football world has to come to terms with what it would look like if we didn't have that revenue. There's talk about betting and gaming, but if you take a significant amount of income away from the clubs then you start to look at what programs will suffer. I know there's a lot of commentary about this, but those profits go back into our football club and our community programs and we're no different to other clubs.
AB: Do you get a much pushback from members?
RG: No, but when we get asked we're always happy to walk through how it works. But one thing our club is really strong on is financial independence and governance. It has underpinned the success of this club since 1996 when we were almost out the door. We don't want to go back there.
AB: How is the club's relationship with the AFL?
RG: We're good with the AFL. We didn't like the luxury tax and (former president) Andrew Newbold quite rightly spoke out against it when it was a bit indiscriminate and haphazard, but the model is better and the relationship with the AFL is extremely good. The leadership is excellent and is well aware of the challenge the game faces and how it needs to run its own operations. We just don't want them to interfere or tax us unduly or take away the incentives for clubs that are wealthy, independent and well run, and they don't do that. That's the last thing they want to do.
AB: Alastair Clarkson is the best coach in the AFL but he can be headstrong. In the past you've had Jason Dunstall, Mark Evans and Chris Fagan who can keep him calm in a crisis. Who's that person now?
RG: He gets challenged a lot more by those around him than people might think. And that's happened for a very long time. What you've seen is people with more profile in that role in certain situations. There are a lot of people working to help him keep his cool in what is an enormously pressurised job. It's not something we worry about and what's important is that he knows that he can be challenged. Team leaders, coaches and others can challenge him if they have an issue and that's the attribute of as highly successful coach.
AB: A hallmark of Hawthorn and what it does better than many clubs is its succession planning. Are you planning yet for life after Clarko?
RG: It's still a long way off, but what you saw when he was crook (in 2014) is that people step up into the role. That applies to the president, the CEO, the coach and everyone at the club.
AB: Are you concerned that so much Hawthorn intellectual property leaves the club every year?
RG: No. It happens to be an attribute of our club. It's one thing to know what we do. It's another to implement it at another club with a different group of people. It's a fact of life and to worry about it is a waste of time.
AB: What sort of president are you? Jeff was Jeff and Andrew Newbold would speak out when required. What's your style?
RG: I'm more hands-off in the sense I want people to do their jobs. I believe strongly in letting management run the club, football guys run the team and the board members to know their role and place. But we can challenge and ask questions and we do that all the time. When it's appropriate I will speak out but that doesn't mean I'll have a high profile. When the club's brand needs to be promoted and supported I'll be out there doing that.
AB: Were you consulted on the Sam Mitchell and Jordan Lewis trades?
RG: I was, but I'm glad the footy is starting because that story will soon pass on. I understood why we did it and you back your leaders who have a great track record. Both boys were going to really good opportunities at other clubs, so that was OK.
AB: Any regrets at not pushing harder earlier at establishing a women's team?
RG: Not especially because we weren't advanced as some other clubs. We didn't have as much experience in the space but having said that, placing a Box Hill team this year into the VWFL will be a fantastic springboard. We will pick up some players from AFLW when that season finishes and we will learn from that. When we do launch it, we want to do it really well and what also needs to happen is for the talent pool to be deeper. We have strong relationships with Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Eastern Football League so we're pretty confident we'll quickly have a powerful VWFL team.
AB: Why do you think Hawthorn is so successful on and off the field?
RG: We have always had strong and good people and a strong culture underpinned by a good commercial model. That goes back to a good sense of governance of how it is run and what is scorched into the DNA of the footy club is 1996. Twenty years ago this club was going to be very much the junior partner of a merger, so we have had to fight very hard for our survival. And having got to where we are, we don't want to give that up very easily. It drives a lot of our behaviours. We also have great engagement with our fans who have been fantastic since the days of 'Proud, Passionate and Paid Up'. I also think we were far-sighted when we moved to Waverley and when we started what we're doing with Tasmania.
AB: What's your expectation for the year?
RG: I'm really hopeful we'll do well with some really talented new blood we've brought to the club, but every club says the same thing at this time of year. We need a number of players to improve but I'm quite confident. We haven't taken our eyes off a top-four finish.
