CEO payment bleatings from the HUN...

[SaintPM]

Oh Me Oh My, cant remember any other club President or CEO uttering such rubbbish during an interview.

Except maybe Eddie during last years Didak fiasco, or perhaps Nisbett during the Cousins drugs issue, maybe even Pratt during the Visy saga, or Kennett any time he has opened his mouth in the last ten years.

Put into context, anything our President has or hasn't said puts us in a better light than any of these clubs. I could continue with Brayshaw, Colless., etc, etc

[kosifantutti23]

I'd love to be a journo.

Sheahan "How much are you paying Nettlefold?"
Westaway "None of your business"

There's an article in that.

I wonder how much Sheahan gets paid.

[plugger66]

I'd love to be a journo.

Sheahan "How much are you paying Nettlefold?"
Westaway "None of your business"

There's an article in that.

I wonder how much Sheahan gets paid.

The problem was he didnt say that. Why blame the journo. He obviously had inside info that payment hadnt been discussed which is the Saints problem not the journo.

[evertonfc]

I'd love to be a journo.

Knock yourself out:

http://www.seek.com.au/jobsearch/index. ... from=quick

Sheahan "How much are you paying Nettlefold?"
Westaway "None of your business"

There's an article in that.

I wonder how much Sheahan gets paid.

The problem was he didnt say that. Why blame the journo. He obviously had inside info that payment hadnt been discussed which is the Saints problem not the journo.

Sheahan does us a service by asking a tough question - and gets a revealing answer = hang him!

[kosifantutti23]

Sheahan does us a service by asking a tough question - and gets a revealing answer = hang him!

Revealing answer. I missed that bit.

He may have revealed that Westaway doesn't handle the media well. But that shouldn't be news to anyone here.

He asked the President what the CEO gets paid, and he didn't get an answer. That's all there was to the story. Maybe he rang all 16 Presidents and asked the same question and didn't get an answer from any of them, but Westaway was the worst at not saying anything.

[evertonfc]

Sheahan does us a service by asking a tough question - and gets a revealing answer = hang him!

Revealing answer. I missed that bit.

We've made perhaps the most important appointment at the footy club (outside of coach?) - and haven't figured out how much we'll pay him...?

Didn't we make a financial loss last year? You'd have thought these things would have been given a reasonable priority.



It's not the end of the world - they'll sort out a figure and hopefully it won't cripple us - but it's very much a worthwhile question being asked, and I can't say I was expecting that answer from Westaway.

[Teflon]

It doesnt look good which ever way we cut this and I do at least get the feel that Westaways an honest guy..not media savvy...from a time where you just "spoke your mind/the truth" and that didnt get you crucified.

Welcome to media in 2009 Greg.

They will work out a figure - that in itself doesnt bother me.

One concern I do have though is that Nettlefold(?) has numerous companies and seems a busy man....500k is a lot for a part time CEO......so what commitment have we got on his time to do the job??????

[Shaggy]

It doesnt look good which ever way we cut this and I do at least get the feel that Westaways an honest guy..not media savvy...from a time where you just "spoke your mind/the truth" and that didnt get you crucified.

Welcome to media in 2009 Greg.

They will work out a figure - that in itself doesnt bother me.

One concern I do have though is that Nettlefold(?) has numerous companies and seems a busy man....500k is a lot for a part time CEO......so what commitment have we got on his time to do the job??????

MN will bring to the Saints more value in the relationships than what we pay him which Westaway knows even if the newspapers don't understand or do but it doesn't sell papers so they present it otherwise.

Regardless MN has to be committed to being a proper CEO which I assume was the 3 day think about.

I am amazed MN took the job but good on him.

MN's commitment is the most important thing which I think will bite him but lets see. Its good for the Saints regardless.

[rodgerfox]

Does it matter?

[bigred]

not any more no.

But you gotta admit.....Pretty average performance.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/ ... 42,00.html


Basically, our brilliant prez amd board have hired our new CEO without even discussing remuneration...

Well that sure is a great way to run a business.


By the way, I'd do it for half what Arch was getting paid...And by god the AFL would hate me.

Would you provide half the value? If the AFL hated you, the answer would likely be no, unless you brought exceptional skills to another area of the job.

Personally, I think it far more interesting that the new CEO accepts the position without talking remuneration. Unusual at the exec level of business. Not that unusual for a company to identify their ideal candidate before negotating... though it's an unusual negotiating tactic to open in the media telling everyone he's the guy you want

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Any fool can manage the purse strings through an economic boom however has Nettlefold had experience with successfully managing businesses during a recession?

From where do people get the idea that being a CEO/MD/GM is easy in any economic environment?

Your CEO is an investment, not just another salary - you'd hope he was hired based on ability and vision to handle the road ahead, regardless of salary.

I'm curious what people think would qualify as experience "leading business through a recession" - there's really never been an economic climate quite like this one, and the last time recession did hit, the AFL was a very different beast. I'd be hiring based on an ability to weigh up the current factors and climate and offer a reasonable vision through it, with a proven track record of effective delegation and leadership, with AFL experience a wonderful attribute.

The job is the success of St Kilda football club.

[rodgerfox]

not any more no.

But you gotta admit.....Pretty average performance.

I think Bigred, that in a real business it would be a complete debacle.

But footy clubs these days aren't real businesses. They're departments within a big business.

The runnings of a club don't really even matter. The AFL will look after clubs that they want to keep, and make life difficult for those they don't want.

Whether we negotiate a salary for the CEO or not, I just don't think it matters. It's all a big game.
You can only lose if you stop bringing people through the turnstiles or stop people from watching on TV. That's all the AFL care about.

Clubs who don't = $$ will be assessed regalarly to determine whether or not they are viable as a revenue stream. If they are, the AFL will assist. If not, they'll make life difficult for them with the intent that they either disappear or they start bringing in $$ for the AFL.

[plugger66]

not any more no.

But you gotta admit.....Pretty average performance.

I think Bigred, that in a real business it would be a complete debacle.

But footy clubs these days aren't real businesses. They're departments within a big business.

The runnings of a club don't really even matter. The AFL will look after clubs that they want to keep, and make life difficult for those they don't want.

Whether we negotiate a salary for the CEO or not, I just don't think it matters. It's all a big game.
You can only lose if you stop bringing people through the turnstiles or stop people from watching on TV. That's all the AFL care about.

Clubs who don't = $$ will be assessed regalarly to determine whether or not they are viable as a revenue stream. If they are, the AFL will assist. If not, they'll make life difficult for them with the intent that they either disappear or they start bringing in $$ for the AFL.

What do you base that on? Every club who is struggling for money has been helped so far in the last 10 years. I think the AFL have made much more attempt to keep clubs in the last 10 years than they did in the preceding 10 years and there are some facts to back that. Your opinion is based on your lack of passion for footy at the moment.

[iwantmeseats]

Essentially clubs are safer now than ever. While there is 100's of millions in a broadcast agreement, the AFL has to have x amount of games every week. Its in THEIR interests to keep the clubs afloat, or perhaps more accurately help them keep afloat.

Re location however....

[rodgerfox]

Essentially clubs are safer now than ever. While there is 100's of millions in a broadcast agreement, the AFL has to have x amount of games every week. Its in THEIR interests to keep the clubs afloat, or perhaps more accurately help them keep afloat.

Re location however....

Exactly.

As long as they're viable, then the AFL will protect them. Viable in a sense that they will continue to bring people to the footy.

This is why this 'scandal' is irrelevant. Just doesn't matter these days.