We have got plenty of material so far from SFF (letter, website, text messages etc) but are yet to receive anything from OUR Board. I know that SFF had the inside running on this and it takes time to put this sort of stuff together but RB and the Board must have known something at least a week -10 days ago.
Have they arrogantly sat on their hands or are they planning a considered campaign?
After all is said & done; They are still the Board of StKILDA FOOTBALL CLUB and last time I looked we are still a members club !!
When will we get something from OUR Board? !!
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
JeffDunne
I think FF have been smart and launched this ticket just when all members of all boards are having a spell so to speak after a LONG season.
I'm sure RB and Co. will not just roll over after all this time and effort it will be interesting to see what they come up with.
I reckon they will need to give into the public and spend some money on places where he probably does not think it is really needed for success but others do so will toe the line to get the votes.
All in all the players will benifit out of all this but i just hope it is not at a cost to the bottom line to much.
The injuries is the main concern for me but have confidence in RL's ability to address this but this is really out of RB's control IMO.
I just cant beleive this new ticket can come out and say we need this and we need that but not give us anything to look at at the same time yet when our prez says put it on the table and if its good enough come and have a crack at it and he still gets the shyte thrown at him for having the BEST intrests of the club in mind.
I would be very dissapionted if i was him in the way some of them around him have gone about it and i think he will come out swinging soon.
Alot of things that have happened this year have been out of his control and in hindsight he probably should of done things better but i truly think that he has had a gutfull of the other issues and come out with frustration and let his own opinions of GT and others infuence his resonse.
I think he is a very good operator and i'm sure we will get more than the fancy ties and nice smiles in his replies to the current ticket.
I'm sure RB and Co. will not just roll over after all this time and effort it will be interesting to see what they come up with.
I reckon they will need to give into the public and spend some money on places where he probably does not think it is really needed for success but others do so will toe the line to get the votes.
All in all the players will benifit out of all this but i just hope it is not at a cost to the bottom line to much.
The injuries is the main concern for me but have confidence in RL's ability to address this but this is really out of RB's control IMO.
I just cant beleive this new ticket can come out and say we need this and we need that but not give us anything to look at at the same time yet when our prez says put it on the table and if its good enough come and have a crack at it and he still gets the shyte thrown at him for having the BEST intrests of the club in mind.
I would be very dissapionted if i was him in the way some of them around him have gone about it and i think he will come out swinging soon.
Alot of things that have happened this year have been out of his control and in hindsight he probably should of done things better but i truly think that he has had a gutfull of the other issues and come out with frustration and let his own opinions of GT and others infuence his resonse.
I think he is a very good operator and i'm sure we will get more than the fancy ties and nice smiles in his replies to the current ticket.
Forget the past, Saints footy, One better in 2010
-
Juggernaut
- Club Player
- Posts: 87
- Joined: Sat 07 Jul 2007 8:02pm
- Location: Latrobe Valley
At the moment I'm very much undecided as to who is best for the club.
As a member I want to make a considered choice as to who I am going to support.
If we don't get anything from the current board as to their plans for the future very soon it looks highly likely that they will surrender to SFF which leaves me with having to make no choice whatsoever but as a member I want to make a choice in what is best for the the StFC
Has anybody writen to Butterss to get his views on plans for the future ?
As a member I want to make a considered choice as to who I am going to support.
If we don't get anything from the current board as to their plans for the future very soon it looks highly likely that they will surrender to SFF which leaves me with having to make no choice whatsoever but as a member I want to make a choice in what is best for the the StFC
Has anybody writen to Butterss to get his views on plans for the future ?
The strength behind you is always greater than the challenge in front of you
-
n1ck
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9869
- Joined: Sun 08 Aug 2004 2:28am
- Location: Clarinda
- Has thanked: 77 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Or take it as truth.chook23 wrote:Take this as the cheap shot it isJeffDunne wrote:I believe they'd prefer to speak to their lawyers and the AFL than the members.
Why would they speak to us - they want the AFL to decide.
Why else would RB ask the AFL to get involved?
Why take the decisions away from the members?
It looks to me like RB knows his time is up, and if given the choice, the members will have their say - and he will be gone.
Thats why he doesnt want an EGM or any sort of vote. THATS why he asked the AFL to be arbiter. Thankfully they've said no it seems.
-
chook23
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7226
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 9:31am
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 134 times
That's rubbishn1ck wrote:Or take it as truth.chook23 wrote:Take this as the cheap shot it isJeffDunne wrote:I believe they'd prefer to speak to their lawyers and the AFL than the members.
Why would they speak to us - they want the AFL to decide.
Why else would RB ask the AFL to get involved?
Why take the decisions away from the members?
It looks to me like RB knows his time is up, and if given the choice, the members will have their say - and he will be gone.
Thats why he doesnt want an EGM or any sort of vote. THATS why he asked the AFL to be arbiter. Thankfully they've said no it seems.
You honestly believe they would prefer to talk to lawyers etc
Utter rubbish
saint4life
have you ever looked at the financial statements of the club over the past 5 year?
There is something from the club.
What have we got apart from hype from Westaway? Gutter sniping and spend spend spend.
Yup - I feel real relaxed and comfortable - NOT.
Anyone remember Save Our Saints?
There is something from the club.
What have we got apart from hype from Westaway? Gutter sniping and spend spend spend.
Yup - I feel real relaxed and comfortable - NOT.
Anyone remember Save Our Saints?
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
-
Bernard Shakey
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11216
- Joined: Sun 18 Mar 2007 11:22pm
- Location: Down By The River 1989, 2003, 2009 & 2013
- Has thanked: 112 times
- Been thanked: 130 times
-
redwhite&blackblood
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2246
- Joined: Thu 18 Mar 2004 5:14pm
- Location: Level 1 Aisle 37 Row G Telstra Dome
-
n1ck
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9869
- Joined: Sun 08 Aug 2004 2:28am
- Location: Clarinda
- Has thanked: 77 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Bringing out the $1m profits again?joffaboy wrote:have you ever looked at the financial statements of the club over the past 5 year?
There is something from the club.
What have we got apart from hype from Westaway? Gutter sniping and spend spend spend.
Yup - I feel real relaxed and comfortable - NOT.
Anyone remember Save Our Saints?
How many times does it have to be said, we only have that tick because we havent spent anything ffs.
Nick, I would rather have a 1million profit with the results we have had onfeild with a bright future for our club than a 1million loss with F*** knows what the results are going to be with the spending they are going to bring upon the club in the future.
Are you not concerned about the lack of information to back up the big spend that the new ticket are on about.
Are you not concerned about the lack of information to back up the big spend that the new ticket are on about.
Forget the past, Saints footy, One better in 2010
-
n1ck
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9869
- Joined: Sun 08 Aug 2004 2:28am
- Location: Clarinda
- Has thanked: 77 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Why say a 1m loss?
Do you have any reason to believe that GW would lead us to a 1m loss?
Fact is, St.KFC dont have a major sponsor. We dont even have too many minor sponsors left.
Which begs the question - why not?!
Tell me how you think a new ticket - a board challenge, is supposed to present a proper, solid financial plan, when the incumbents keep pissing off all our sponsors?
Without sponsorship - AKA INCOME - how can anyone present a financial plan?
Do you have any reason to believe that GW would lead us to a 1m loss?
Fact is, St.KFC dont have a major sponsor. We dont even have too many minor sponsors left.
Which begs the question - why not?!
Tell me how you think a new ticket - a board challenge, is supposed to present a proper, solid financial plan, when the incumbents keep pissing off all our sponsors?
Without sponsorship - AKA INCOME - how can anyone present a financial plan?
-
Eastern
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 14357
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 1:46pm
- Location: 3132
- Been thanked: 1 time
I think we need to be FAIR here !!
Our Vodafone sponsorship was white anted by Visy Industries on behalf of Carlton. Part of that deal is that Visy transfer ALL of their communication over to Vodafone. In a roundabout way Visy Industries (Dick Pratt) is sponsoring Carlton and using Vodafone's name for it.
I very much doubt that either RB or GW have that sort of financial clout !!
Our Vodafone sponsorship was white anted by Visy Industries on behalf of Carlton. Part of that deal is that Visy transfer ALL of their communication over to Vodafone. In a roundabout way Visy Industries (Dick Pratt) is sponsoring Carlton and using Vodafone's name for it.
I very much doubt that either RB or GW have that sort of financial clout !!
-
The Peanut
- Club Player
- Posts: 1058
- Joined: Tue 08 Feb 2005 1:18pm
- Location: Malvern East
- Has thanked: 86 times
- Been thanked: 34 times
Don't let this detract from the current conversation . . . but from the title of this thread it may be of use to some.
PRESS RELEASE
By the current board yesterday after their media conference:
St Kilda board statement
The board of St Kilda issued the following statement on Tuesday in response to comments by the rebel Footy First group:
We have received a notice calling for the removal of five of the seven members of the current board. As directors of a public company, we must treat this as the equivalent of a takeover bid. It is our job to do what is in the best interests of the Club and its members. The performance of the current Board is on the record.
Over the last seven years the financial position of the Club has been turned around from an asset deficiency of $3.7m to one of surplus. This surplus was only achieved in February this year, and has finally put the St Kilda Football Club in a position to increase its investment in the future of the club in a financially viable way. This additional investment commenced immediately.
The existing Board has significantly increased spending on football over time. All the following statistics are available on the official AFL 2006 Club comparisons.
In terms of fitness and conditioning, the Saints spend more than all Melbourne Clubs, with the exception of Geelong and Collingwood. With regard to Total Player Payments, the Saints spend more than Geelong, Hawthorn, Kangaroos, Adelaide and Port Adelaide.
In recruitment our spend last year was not dissimilar to Geelong – the premiership favourites.
The increase in our footy spend from 2006 to 2007 is a further $1.4m. This includes a substantial increase in rookies, recruitment and player development including the appointment Tony Elshaugh, Danny Sexton and John Peake. The biggest issue facing the Football department in 2007 was soft tissue injuries and player conditioning. Dr Ross Smith was first consulted in September 2006 to set up an innovations committee, which includes leading figures from the AIS and VIS. The positive results of this work have already resulted with soft tissue injuries in the second half of the season being below the AFL average. This is a first for many years.
The Football department has already prepared a request to increase spending again in 2008 in the specific areas of medical, physiotherapy and strength & conditioning.
It is the job of the current Board to evaluate any takeover bid and to make a recommendation to the members. We will request the AFL to assist us to provide an independent evaluation of the plans of the rebel group.
No evaluation process is possible unless and until the rebel group provides details of their plans, which should include:
WHERE the additional spend on football will occur?
HOW much extra will be spent?
THE rationale behind the spend
THE specific role of the Football Sub Committee and its proposed interaction with the Football department (which boasts 10 premierships)
WHERE the increased revenue is coming from (including what sponsors have been identified)
WHAT revenue increases are expected? What cash support will be brought via the rebel group?)
WHAT is the basis for the increased spend on Membership and what is the expected benefit?
WHAT is the intended future for key personnel in the business and what is the basis for this early assessment?
MOST importantly, how will these increases be funded? Will the rebel group put the Club back into debt to fund these initiatives? Once the rebel group’s plan is received, as a Board and with the assistance of the AFL’s evaluation, we will make a recommendation to our members. If it is our recommendation that the proposal be accepted, then it is the sincere intention of the current Board, who are under challenge, to resign in order to ensure a smooth transition. Whether or not the two current members of the Board, who are acting in concert with the rebel group, should remain on the Board in these circumstances, this will be a matter for their conscience and ultimately our members.
We do find it difficult to understand how the rebel group would propose including two dissident directors who have been on the current board for a combined period of 12 years. On the basis the rebel group cannot provide a credible plan for the AFL and ourselves, we would expect then to withdraw their challenge and Mr Levin and Mr Gdanski to resign from the current Board to enable harmonious operations going forward. On a more disappointing note, I advise that members of the current Board are deeply offended and outraged by the comments made by Mr Westaway carrying the implication of alcohol and drug abuse by existing directors at Club functions.
Board members are taking legal proceedings in relation to these comments. We would hope that from this time on, all the attention of the rebel group be directed to the formulation of a credible plan rather than on personalities.
Finally, the current Board will facilitate whatever information the rebel group require to enable them the greatest opportunity to present their plan to the AFL and ourselves within the next 14 days.
We will request the support of the AFL immediately based on the acceptance of this offer from the rebel group and I will be seeking an urgent meeting with Mr Westaway to offer him this opportunity. Nothing could be fairer.
[/url]
PRESS RELEASE
By the current board yesterday after their media conference:
St Kilda board statement
The board of St Kilda issued the following statement on Tuesday in response to comments by the rebel Footy First group:
We have received a notice calling for the removal of five of the seven members of the current board. As directors of a public company, we must treat this as the equivalent of a takeover bid. It is our job to do what is in the best interests of the Club and its members. The performance of the current Board is on the record.
Over the last seven years the financial position of the Club has been turned around from an asset deficiency of $3.7m to one of surplus. This surplus was only achieved in February this year, and has finally put the St Kilda Football Club in a position to increase its investment in the future of the club in a financially viable way. This additional investment commenced immediately.
The existing Board has significantly increased spending on football over time. All the following statistics are available on the official AFL 2006 Club comparisons.
In terms of fitness and conditioning, the Saints spend more than all Melbourne Clubs, with the exception of Geelong and Collingwood. With regard to Total Player Payments, the Saints spend more than Geelong, Hawthorn, Kangaroos, Adelaide and Port Adelaide.
In recruitment our spend last year was not dissimilar to Geelong – the premiership favourites.
The increase in our footy spend from 2006 to 2007 is a further $1.4m. This includes a substantial increase in rookies, recruitment and player development including the appointment Tony Elshaugh, Danny Sexton and John Peake. The biggest issue facing the Football department in 2007 was soft tissue injuries and player conditioning. Dr Ross Smith was first consulted in September 2006 to set up an innovations committee, which includes leading figures from the AIS and VIS. The positive results of this work have already resulted with soft tissue injuries in the second half of the season being below the AFL average. This is a first for many years.
The Football department has already prepared a request to increase spending again in 2008 in the specific areas of medical, physiotherapy and strength & conditioning.
It is the job of the current Board to evaluate any takeover bid and to make a recommendation to the members. We will request the AFL to assist us to provide an independent evaluation of the plans of the rebel group.
No evaluation process is possible unless and until the rebel group provides details of their plans, which should include:
WHERE the additional spend on football will occur?
HOW much extra will be spent?
THE rationale behind the spend
THE specific role of the Football Sub Committee and its proposed interaction with the Football department (which boasts 10 premierships)
WHERE the increased revenue is coming from (including what sponsors have been identified)
WHAT revenue increases are expected? What cash support will be brought via the rebel group?)
WHAT is the basis for the increased spend on Membership and what is the expected benefit?
WHAT is the intended future for key personnel in the business and what is the basis for this early assessment?
MOST importantly, how will these increases be funded? Will the rebel group put the Club back into debt to fund these initiatives? Once the rebel group’s plan is received, as a Board and with the assistance of the AFL’s evaluation, we will make a recommendation to our members. If it is our recommendation that the proposal be accepted, then it is the sincere intention of the current Board, who are under challenge, to resign in order to ensure a smooth transition. Whether or not the two current members of the Board, who are acting in concert with the rebel group, should remain on the Board in these circumstances, this will be a matter for their conscience and ultimately our members.
We do find it difficult to understand how the rebel group would propose including two dissident directors who have been on the current board for a combined period of 12 years. On the basis the rebel group cannot provide a credible plan for the AFL and ourselves, we would expect then to withdraw their challenge and Mr Levin and Mr Gdanski to resign from the current Board to enable harmonious operations going forward. On a more disappointing note, I advise that members of the current Board are deeply offended and outraged by the comments made by Mr Westaway carrying the implication of alcohol and drug abuse by existing directors at Club functions.
Board members are taking legal proceedings in relation to these comments. We would hope that from this time on, all the attention of the rebel group be directed to the formulation of a credible plan rather than on personalities.
Finally, the current Board will facilitate whatever information the rebel group require to enable them the greatest opportunity to present their plan to the AFL and ourselves within the next 14 days.
We will request the support of the AFL immediately based on the acceptance of this offer from the rebel group and I will be seeking an urgent meeting with Mr Westaway to offer him this opportunity. Nothing could be fairer.
[/url]
Last edited by The Peanut on Fri 14 Sep 2007 4:06pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12694
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 706 times
- Been thanked: 398 times
Nick,n1ck wrote:Why say a 1m loss?
Do you have any reason to believe that GW would lead us to a 1m loss?
Fact is, St.KFC dont have a major sponsor. We dont even have too many minor sponsors left.
Which begs the question - why not?!
Tell me how you think a new ticket - a board challenge, is supposed to present a proper, solid financial plan, when the incumbents keep pissing off all our sponsors?
Without sponsorship - AKA INCOME - how can anyone present a financial plan?
I would have thought that anybody challenging to overthrow an incumbent Board would have to have a plan?
If they don't have a 'proper, solid financial plan' how can they claim they are going to spend more on the 'football dept' and 'increase revenue'.
Surely they have sat down and worked out what revenue they will have, what they won't etc.
You don't seriously think they expect to not have a major sponsor or sufficient medium/minor sponsors to suffice.
Surely you're not suggesting that they have made these statements about increased spending and revenue without having a plan.
If they don't have a plan we should be running away from them as fast as we can, because they would be an inept disaster.
No, of course they have a plan - they're just choosing not to share it with us at this point of time.
-
Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12694
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 706 times
- Been thanked: 398 times
You may be correct Eastern which is why I would caution any member to hold off sending their proxy to either side until you know what their plans are.Eastern wrote:I think that by Law the current Board will have to open up the books to the challengers within 21 or 28 days of receiving notice of a challenge.
I expect that it will be around then that things really start to heat up !!
Unless of course you have already made up your mind.
-
n1ck
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9869
- Joined: Sun 08 Aug 2004 2:28am
- Location: Clarinda
- Has thanked: 77 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
No, but i would have thought that to propose a detailed financial plan with numbers on it, we would need a major sponsor at least, or at least some sort of PLAN with a sponsor.Mr Magic wrote:Nick,n1ck wrote:Why say a 1m loss?
Do you have any reason to believe that GW would lead us to a 1m loss?
Fact is, St.KFC dont have a major sponsor. We dont even have too many minor sponsors left.
Which begs the question - why not?!
Tell me how you think a new ticket - a board challenge, is supposed to present a proper, solid financial plan, when the incumbents keep pissing off all our sponsors?
Without sponsorship - AKA INCOME - how can anyone present a financial plan?
I would have thought that anybody challenging to overthrow an incumbent Board would have to have a plan?
If they don't have a 'proper, solid financial plan' how can they claim they are going to spend more on the 'football dept' and 'increase revenue'.
Surely they have sat down and worked out what revenue they will have, what they won't etc.
You don't seriously think they expect to not have a major sponsor or sufficient medium/minor sponsors to suffice.
Surely you're not suggesting that they have made these statements about increased spending and revenue without having a plan.
If they don't have a plan we should be running away from them as fast as we can, because they would be an inept disaster.
No, of course they have a plan - they're just choosing not to share it with us at this point of time.
Relax, its only been a week since the challenge was announced, and theres 7 weeks to go before the EGM. There is no need to rush, or become emotionally attached to either camp at this point.
Like Eastern said, im sure that during the next few weeks to a month we will be hearing alot more about specific plans.
Since when have we not gone into a season without a major sponsor nick.
You seem to be able to give the new ticket plenty of time to get there shyte together but will not give the current board the time of day even though they have the runs on the board when it comes to running the club and putting the club in its BEST position in the history of the joint.
You cant say that they wont make a million dollar loss with decisions made look at the Blues position after some great calls by a so called board with the best intrests of the club in mind.
Do we have a Pratt in the background to bail us out if it goes pear shaped after a few years and i ask again WHY take the risk and is it really worth the change.
You cant say our future is all that bad compared to a few years ago
You make it sound as though its easy to make 1million profits but other clubs are going backwards on the feild and off so what makes you think it cant happen to us again and be back to where we were before the board in charge now got us out of the shyte.
Do you really think that the current board is not in a position to take us forward c'mon get fair dinkcom and look at the results.
You seem to be able to give the new ticket plenty of time to get there shyte together but will not give the current board the time of day even though they have the runs on the board when it comes to running the club and putting the club in its BEST position in the history of the joint.
You cant say that they wont make a million dollar loss with decisions made look at the Blues position after some great calls by a so called board with the best intrests of the club in mind.
Do we have a Pratt in the background to bail us out if it goes pear shaped after a few years and i ask again WHY take the risk and is it really worth the change.
You cant say our future is all that bad compared to a few years ago
You make it sound as though its easy to make 1million profits but other clubs are going backwards on the feild and off so what makes you think it cant happen to us again and be back to where we were before the board in charge now got us out of the shyte.
Do you really think that the current board is not in a position to take us forward c'mon get fair dinkcom and look at the results.
Forget the past, Saints footy, One better in 2010
-
Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12694
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 706 times
- Been thanked: 398 times
Nick, what you and Eastern have just said is spot on.n1ck wrote:Relax, its only been a week since the challenge was announced, and theres 7 weeks to go before the EGM. There is no need to rush, or become emotionally attached to either camp at this point.Mr Magic wrote:Nick,n1ck wrote:Why say a 1m loss?
Do you have any reason to believe that GW would lead us to a 1m loss?
Fact is, St.KFC dont have a major sponsor. We dont even have too many minor sponsors left.
Which begs the question - why not?!
Tell me how you think a new ticket - a board challenge, is supposed to present a proper, solid financial plan, when the incumbents keep pissing off all our sponsors?
Without sponsorship - AKA INCOME - how can anyone present a financial plan?
I would have thought that anybody challenging to overthrow an incumbent Board would have to have a plan?
If they don't have a 'proper, solid financial plan' how can they claim they are going to spend more on the 'football dept' and 'increase revenue'.
Surely they have sat down and worked out what revenue they will have, what they won't etc.
You don't seriously think they expect to not have a major sponsor or sufficient medium/minor sponsors to suffice.
Surely you're not suggesting that they have made these statements about increased spending and revenue without having a plan.
If they don't have a plan we should be running away from them as fast as we can, because they would be an inept disaster.
No, of course they have a plan - they're just choosing not to share it with us at this point of time.
Like Eastern said, im sure that during the next few weeks to a month we will be hearing alot more about specific plans.
My problem is this 'rush' to send in proxies when people sending them in don't really know what the SFF plans are, other than generic, general statements.
We are all complaining that we have an incumbent Board that is not accountable to we members and yet, from the general feeling on here, we are rushing headlong to elect another group who have given us little detail and want us to give them the mandate to run our Club.