Westaway out Nettlefold in????

[WayneJudson42]

I have a very healty sense of humour as people who know me will testify to.

However, that wasn't particularly funny. In fact, if I heard it in a bar I'd be calling the speaker a 'wanker' and wouldn't waste my time on him.

Oh and one other thing....describing GT as 'sacked St Kilda coach' is just stupid.

It was over 2 years ago. I was sacked as an apple picker back in 1985 (my thumbs got bruised)....do I describe myself as "sacked apple picker SEN"?

If you are going to try and take the piss....at least make it funny and clever.

I still reckon it was funny...

Did GT resign? The great man manager himself even stated on the presser that he didn't resing.

All the other stuff is generalisation. Gee the guy only speaks what the rest of the world thinks of us.

Seriously, who cares? If you want to get twisted up about a cheap attempt at humour, then I'd question your sense of humour. If you didn't think it was funny, then ok. But why do people get fired up about this shyte?

On the one hand, we'd prefer not to see these things written... on the other hand, we react in a oublic forum. So the journo has succeeded in his objective to get a response.

In effect, our reactionary response only feeds the beast with fuel to do it again.

It's ironic, really.

It' reminds me (in theory) about Princess Di's funeral.

You had thousands of people lining the streets and crying. Yet it was those same people who bought the magazines... which created the demand for the papparazzi... which ultimately led to her death.

Ok, that's off topic, I know.

[SENsei]

I'm not fired up. Quite the contrary.

Just making a passing comment more than anything.

Couldn't give a fig about Cameron Noakes or his opinion. I place more weight on the opinions of the people around here than Cam Noakes.

[Solar]

just has no facts to back up his joke. Would have been funny if written in the 80's or 90's but as has already been posted our presidents of late have stayed on perhaps longer then needed.

It is also important to understand that the president (plus the board positions) are non paid positions. Business people are putting time into the club which could effect their own personal job and family. So there is a big difference between a president standing down because of work or family issues and getting kicked out by a rival. This seems to be the former (if true... is all rumour at this stage).

To those who pot the board, play the issues and not the man.

[joffaboy]

Give it a rest jb..you're like a broken record..

dont like it - dont read it

Sometimes these hard decisions have to be made by the club for its own betterment.

Are they?

We have seats on level 1 and have to be sc members with the victory room on the opposite side of the ground and its too hard to meet up with friends at half time etc....not perfect but to bellyache for so long...

Well good for you. I had L2 seats with a SC membership that I never used. I could afford 5 memberships and SC memberships if I wished.

thats not the issue and as usual you completely miss the point. It was the heavy handed cash grab at a time where the country is going into a recession and people who cant afford it - unlike myself - were forced to pay $125 extra for their seat for one game less than last year.

It is nothing more than extortion and a slap in the face to long time supporters by an admin obviously out of its depth - put in by a bunch of fools who suffer the messiah complex.

I preached caution last year but was howled down.

Since then we have had a significant trading loss - the first in years, the debacle over the new home of the Saints, the extortion of long time financial members, and now this talk about another president.

The instability of the place is becoming a real worry and back to the old days pre Butterss.

Worrying signs

Do you think they personally pocket the funds ffs. They have their reasons

I dont know - do they?

What reason apart from money grabbing off loyal supporters?????

[Solar]

put in by a bunch of fools who suffer the messiah complex.

Messiah? Wrong on two levels. First the former president and coach had bigger ego's we have seen for a very long time. Westaway is actually a very low profile president. By the sound of some they actually want Westaway to fix every problem in the world, take on the AFL and frankston council.... for mine that is more a messiah complex.

When I was one of the "fools" who voted in the new board, I wanted a less ego driven, board who focused on building a club to win a flag. The last president spent most of his time in the media having fights with the ex coach which lead to a terrible year (9th and a few steps backwards). I think some people forget how bad that year really was. The board lost the plot.

Interesting to note that those who are up in arms were those upset about the boards decision over BC. IMO the obsession with BC was more a messiah complex then the thoughtful decision members made to kick out the lst board.

Since then we have had a significant trading loss - the first in years, the debacle over the new home of the Saints, the extortion of long time financial members, and now this talk about another president.
The instability of the place is becoming a real worry and back to the old days pre Butterss..

Significant loss? The only reports we have had is that it will be a small loss and that is understandable in the face of increased football department spending. It would be a worry if this continued in the next two years. The real importance will be the increase in income in the next few years.

The debacle of the new home is nothing compared to what happened at linto street. We still have the council working with us and the development looks like it will be the training base we need. Not sure how a couple of months is a debacle, think your jumping the gun.

extortion of long term mebers. Yes we have all agreed that the way the club went about letting these members know of this was not very good, but you can also see the value these seats have. If it's true that there is a large waiting list them perhaps those members need to understand the premium there is on their seats. This is not reason to kick out the board, if this was the biggest mistake then they aren't doing too bad.

And finally you have bitten the bait given by a hack gutter journalist. The changing of presidents is only a rumour at present. You and the rest of us have no idea; 1) if this will actually happen 2) the reasons behind it 3)if there is an instability.

As I mentioned in the other thread, passing on the president position for personal or business reasons does not equate to instability. Only someone with an agenda would pull that trick. Or someone who has a slow news day (it's called summer).

[WayneJudson42]

Perhaps, JB, you can convince GT to give back his holiday pay?

Seriously, the stibility of the previous board fell apart at the same time that GT and RB fell apart.

As for making profits... anyone with the slightest modicum of intelligence knows that there's only 2 ways to do that:

1- reign in spending (previous board) or

2- Increase revenues. The jury is out on this one.

Butters profits were built on the back of running a lean footy dept... much to the detriment of the the players.

Butters and Thomas should have fallen on their swords after the Blight fiasco, and if not, then Butters should have fallen after the GT fiasco.

How much money did that little episode cost the club BTW?

[Solar]

Perhaps, JB, you can convince GT to give back his holiday pay?

Seriously, the stibility of the previous board fell apart at the same time that GT and RB fell apart.

As for making profits... anyone with the slightest modicum of intelligence knows that there's only 2 ways to do that:

1- reign in spending (previous board) or

2- Increase revenues. The jury is out on this one.

Butters profits were built on the back of running a lean footy dept... much to the detriment of the the players.

Butters and Thomas should have fallen on their swords after the Blight fiasco, and if not, then Butters should have fallen after the GT fiasco.

How much money did that little episode cost the club BTW?

I would add that they also had the chance to work with an exciting product. In 2004 and 05 we were young and exciting. Everyone wanted to be with us and thus the money came in. Problem happened when the club refused to spend a little extra in the football department and thus the results started to slide.

BTW I would be putting GT's payout into the Butterss years, which has affected our bottom line.

Anyway according to some it will be a massive loss.... hey JB, got the figures with you?

[BallBanger]

Give it a rest jb..you're like a broken record..

dont like it - dont read it

Sometimes these hard decisions have to be made by the club for its own betterment.

Are they?

We have seats on level 1 and have to be sc members with the victory room on the opposite side of the ground and its too hard to meet up with friends at half time etc....not perfect but to bellyache for so long...

Well good for you. I had L2 seats with a SC membership that I never used. I could afford 5 memberships and SC memberships if I wished.

thats not the issue and as usual you completely miss the point. It was the heavy handed cash grab at a time where the country is going into a recession and people who cant afford it - unlike myself - were forced to pay $125 extra for their seat for one game less than last year.

It is nothing more than extortion and a slap in the face to long time supporters by an admin obviously out of its depth - put in by a bunch of fools who suffer the messiah complex.

I preached caution last year but was howled down.

Since then we have had a significant trading loss - the first in years, the debacle over the new home of the Saints, the extortion of long time financial members, and now this talk about another president.

The instability of the place is becoming a real worry and back to the old days pre Butterss.

Worrying signs

Do you think they personally pocket the funds ffs. They have their reasons

I dont know - do they?

What reason apart from money grabbing off loyal supporters?????

My god JB do u think people listen to a Klutz as yourself.

What am I doing? only fools argue with fools

[jays]

oh well wouldn't make a difference what has westaway done anyways

[Legendary]

St Kilda have had 3 Presidents since 1993. Hardly a revolving door.

Also, a lot of truth in the rumour from what I have heard. The AGM or the end of the football season next year will be time for GW to move on ...

[Solar]

St Kilda have had 3 Presidents since 1993. Hardly a revolving door.

Also, a lot of truth in the rumour from what I have heard. The AGM or the end of the football season next year will be time for GW to move on ...

any idea why he wants to step down. Heart never in it, personal (family) or commercial (business) needs?

[St Fidelius]

St Kilda have had 3 Presidents since 1993. Hardly a revolving door.

Also, a lot of truth in the rumour from what I have heard. The AGM or the end of the football season next year will be time for GW to move on ...

any idea why he wants to step down. Heart never in it, personal (family) or commercial (business) needs?

Who says he actually wants to step down?

Isn't just a rumour, from some gossip journo?

Aren't rumours rife during the off season?

[meher baba]

Gee, why all the fuss about nothing?

This is just one of those flim-flam, bitchy sort of gossip columns that newpapers publish in the hope of grabbing our attention.

Presumably there is some truth in the Westaway-Nettlefold rumour. In front of a camera, Westaway looks like a rabbit caught in a spotlight. I'm sure that he has only ever been motivated by a desire to help the club, and will be happy to hand over to someone who likes the limelight more than he does (which would be almost anybody).

Some people on here seem to think that I am GT's #1 fan (or perhaps even that I am GT). But I thought that the digs at GT were fair comment (albeit that, given that Caro is the senior AFL writer for The Age, perhaps there's a bit of "here's one for the boss").

Anyway, I don't think there's any point in anyone getting too upset about this sort of stuff.

Keep it real.

[joffaboy]

Anyway according to some it will be a massive loss.... hey JB, got the figures with you?

Difference between substantial and your hyperbole of "massive".

Have they been published yet? Dont think so.

All I know is that we are going backwards in finances and in membership.

Care to dispute that?

Oh BTW do you know what a profit or a loss really is? Not being a smartarse, just the actual concept and the significance to the financial health of an organisation as a going concern?

I am more interested in the clubs Balance Sheet and Cash flow than the P&L.

[Mr Magic]

Anyway according to some it will be a massive loss.... hey JB, got the figures with you?

Difference between substantial and your hyperbole of "massive".

Have they been published yet? Dont think so.

All I know is that we are going backwards in finances and in membership.

Care to dispute that?

Oh BTW do you know what a profit or a loss really is? Not being a smartarse, just the actual concept and the significance to the financial health of an organisation as a going concern?

I am more interested in the clubs Balance Sheet and Cash flow than the P&L.

Correct JB.
As I've posted a number of times, until we see all the financial statements we won't actually know what the true and correct picture is. My own belief is that there is some fancy creative accounting going on to minimise the actual results and 'store away' contingencies for a rainy day.

[GrumpyOne]

Anyway according to some it will be a massive loss.... hey JB, got the figures with you?

Difference between substantial and your hyperbole of "massive".

Have they been published yet? Dont think so.

All I know is that we are going backwards in finances and in membership.

Care to dispute that?

Oh BTW do you know what a profit or a loss really is? Not being a smartarse, just the actual concept and the significance to the financial health of an organisation as a going concern?

I am more interested in the clubs Balance Sheet and Cash flow than the P&L.

Large loss, adverse balance sheet....... nothing that the 2009 premiership wont fix.

[sainteronline]

Westaway out

nettlefold in

too little too late imho

[Solar]

Anyway according to some it will be a massive loss.... hey JB, got the figures with you?

Difference between substantial and your hyperbole of "massive".

Have they been published yet? Dont think so.

All I know is that we are going backwards in finances and in membership.

Care to dispute that?

Oh BTW do you know what a profit or a loss really is? Not being a smartarse, just the actual concept and the significance to the financial health of an organisation as a going concern?

I am more interested in the clubs Balance Sheet and Cash flow than the P&L.

I am also more interested in the balance sheet and cash flow. ABC learning centres show that you can make the figures say whatever you want. But you have kept suggesting the loss is substanial. Any proof on this? I can't dispute it apart from saying that archie announced a "small" loss.

[Solar]

Westaway out

nettlefold in

too little too late imho

you sure you are not patrick smith......

[Mr Magic]

Westaway out

nettlefold in

too little too late imho

Once again you are posting absolute rubbish.
Westawy has not resigned his Board position
Nettlefold is a current Board Member.

[sainteronline]

Westaway out

nettlefold in

too little too late imho

Once again you are posting absolute rubbish.
Westawy has not resigned his Board position
Nettlefold is a current Board Member.

yes when 1 (waway leaves somebody,hopefully with some nads )

will replace him

1 down 6 2 go

[joffaboy]

I am also more interested in the balance sheet and cash flow. ABC learning centres show that you can make the figures say whatever you want. But you have kept suggesting the loss is substanial. Any proof on this? I can't dispute it apart from saying that archie announced a "small" loss.

Correct, a Profit or a Loss is only an accounting concept. I have worked with these concepts for years. Anyone with any nous financially will look at the Balance Sheet and Statements of Cash Flows, and Price to earnings etc before investing. The STKFC is not a listed co so investment is not the issue, however BS and CF certainly is.

And what the CEO considers small, can be considered substantial by others, now we get to Accounting 101's second concept topic - the Concept of Materiality.

[sainteronline]

and if westaway hasnt resigned

he should

imho

[Solar]

I am also more interested in the balance sheet and cash flow. ABC learning centres show that you can make the figures say whatever you want. But you have kept suggesting the loss is substanial. Any proof on this? I can't dispute it apart from saying that archie announced a "small" loss.

Correct, a Profit or a Loss is only an accounting concept. I have worked with these concepts for years. Anyone with any nous financially will look at the Balance Sheet and Statements of Cash Flows, and Price to earnings etc before investing. The STKFC is not a listed co so investment is not the issue, however BS and CF certainly is.

And what the CEO considers small, can be considered substantial by others, now we get to Accounting 101's second concept topic - the Concept of Materiality.

my issue was with you using a figure you did not know of (as you have not seen the books) as ammunition. Totally agree with what you say about the books and would not be suprised if it was not a bigger loss. But until we are able to see the BS and CF then I don't like people using these arguments as fact. Kind of similar to another poster who posts rumours as facts.

sainteronline.....

ask barks how well spamming untruths get you with posters on here....

MM don't bother, the guy is either talking out his arse or trying to get a rise out of us.

[Mr Magic]

I am also more interested in the balance sheet and cash flow. ABC learning centres show that you can make the figures say whatever you want. But you have kept suggesting the loss is substanial. Any proof on this? I can't dispute it apart from saying that archie announced a "small" loss.

Correct, a Profit or a Loss is only an accounting concept. I have worked with these concepts for years. Anyone with any nous financially will look at the Balance Sheet and Statements of Cash Flows, and Price to earnings etc before investing. The STKFC is not a listed co so investment is not the issue, however BS and CF certainly is.

And what the CEO considers small, can be considered substantial by others, now we get to Accounting 101's second concept topic - the Concept of Materiality.

my issue was with you using a figure you did not know of (as you have not seen the books) as ammunition. Totally agree with what you say about the books and would not be suprised if it was not a bigger loss. But until we are able to see the BS and CF then I don't like people using these arguments as fact. Kind of similar to another poster who posts rumours as facts.

sainteronline.....

ask barks how well spamming untruths get you with posters on here....

MM don't bother, the guy is either talking out his arse or trying to get a rise out of us.

I had already come to a similar conclusion but was having second thoughts that maybe I and everyone else could learn someting from him. Afterall it's not everyday you get the benefit of the wisdom of a certifiable genius (140+ IQ)!

Oops, that should read 'certified genius'.

Nope, maybe I was correct the first time?