AGM Thursday 20 March 2014

[sharks2010]

Cheers sf

Question, how the hell is sponsorship revenue up?

 

[Born&bred]

And I still want to know what that Quadzillions Marketing amount was for?

Can that (more important topic than anything that has been discussed here tonight so ****ing far) be explained ffs?????????????????

 

[Art Vandelay]

Cheers SF

 

[egg]

And I still want to know what that Quadzillions Marketing amount was for?

Can that (more important topic than anything that has been discussed here tonight so ****ing far) be explained ffs?????????????????

A trip to South Africa to shoot an add?

 

[SF]

Cheers sf

Question, how the hell is sponsorship revenue up?

I could be wrong on that. Sometimes the reporting dates get confusing too, don't know which year's which.

He did mention they set the corporate team a target of something like $2.5million higher than last year (I believe for all corporate activities including sponsorship), though they haven't reached that. He was using that as an example of the board not being day-to-day, but holding the management team responsible.

Again... maybe some Chinese whispers in what I'm writing.

 

[SF]

Thanks for the update, SF.

Was very interested in hearing (reading) how it went from all the way down here in Melbourne.

No worries. You'll also be glad to know the Kurnell lady asked about her courtesy bus on game days again. Some things never change.

 

[fancyman]

My sponsorship had a price increase of 30%
That may have some Indication

 

[samshark]

If it was there in the first place when the letter got sent out like it should have been, we wouldn't even have been discussing the thought of them asking for it in the first place.

Or how about not getting your knickers in a not and bagging them, assuming they were taking payment when you didn't actually know. As Fitz pointed out that item of note was listed on previous AGM notices as well.

 

[samshark]

Can I say that I am pleased that the board did not attempt to re-introduce honorariums - I give them credit for that.

They never were.

 

[snowman]

This concerns me - I don't rate their thinking...

Craig Douglas raised the issue of how the new leagues club would be funded, saying it was the elephant in the room. Keogh in his reply mentioned that it would likely cost from $7-8 million up, and they were investigating all bridging finance options, until the development money ($40 million +) starts flowing in January 2016. He said they would likely look at a model where the club could have another floor built on top once things improved. He also mentioned that every board has challenging negotiations, noting that the $10 million upfront payment we traded for last year would have probably been worth $20-25 million to the club if done today. Douglas responded that St George gave them no choice. Keogh said worst case they can always get finance via negotiations with Bluestone, but there are likely better finance options.

im of the opposite to you on this one. i rate their thinking.

there were whispers that we would sell off more units to finance the refurb of the leagues club, but as keogh pointed out, when we sold off the units for 10 mil, we low balled ourself, but we had no choice.

credit where it is due, i am glad he is exploring every single option available before selling ourself out of a further 15 mil.

 

[samshark]

Cheers sf

Question, how the hell is sponsorship revenue up?

Remember the financials being reported are on the year 1st November 2012 to 31 October 2013. So yes, the revenue would be up compared to 2012. There were more sponsors last year than the previous year. Another slap in the face for the board haters.

Come this time next year though, we might see a different picture being reported at the AGM re. our sponsorship

 

[fitz]

Or how about not getting your knickers in a not and bagging them, assuming they were taking payment when you didn't actually know. As Fitz pointed out that item of note was listed on previous AGM notices as well.

Indeed I did, however I also pointed out:

• Ordinary Resolutions at AGMs must be distributed, in writing, at the time of Notice. :No: Fail
• Financial Statements are required to be distributed or advertised that they are available, in writing, at time of Notice. :No: Fail
• Notice of AGM must be given, in writing, at least 21 days prior to the date of the AGM. :No: Fail

I don't wish to labour the point but these are some really basic governance issues that need to be addressed.

Keogh admitted they have had some failings with communications to Members and it is something they need to address. I agree with that.

It's also clear that there isn't much of an understanding at all of the approval process for the Development and that is something that they will definitely need to get up to speed with.

I found Keogh's "Well if you don't like us then have an EGM and vote us out." a bit churlish and poor - that's the sort of response I'd get from one of my teenage sons.

Anyhoo ... we roll on.

Biggest challenge yet to come.

 

[samshark]

Indeed I did, however I also pointed out:

• Ordinary Resolutions at AGMs must be distributed, in writing, at the time of Notice. :No: Fail
• Financial Statements are required to be distributed or advertised that they are available, in writing, at time of Notice. :No: Fail
• Notice of AGM must be given, in writing, at least 21 days prior to the date of the AGM. :No: Fail

I don't wish to labour the point but these are some really basic governance issues that need to be addressed.

Keogh admitted they have had some failings with communications to Members and it is something they need to address. I agree with that.

It's also clear that there isn't much of an understanding at all of the approval process for the Development and that is something that they will definitely need to get up to speed with.

I found Keogh's "Well if you don't like us then have an EGM and vote us out." a bit churlish and poor - that's the sort of response I'd get from one of my teenage sons.

Anyhoo ... we roll on.

Biggest challenge yet to come.

don't dispute that Fitz, it's not good enough, but we were just commenting on the remuneration issue.

I have issues with the board as well, but unlike most on here, iam reluctant to crucify them until the ASADA mess clears and they are on a level playing field.

 

[samshark]

So did all you guys go to the AGM last night and give it to the board? Seems a bit quiet here. There was one lady who did I hear.

 

[snowman]

nah mate, went to dinner and then work. did you buy a beer there?

 

[samshark]

No unfortunately I couldn't go, my shift got changed to an arvo and I didn't finish till 10.

 

[snowman]

shift swaps, they are horrendous. rothfielded infact

 

[Sir Chadley]

Sam, not all of us here want to "give it to the board" as you call it. But I'm not here to defend them either. I have to admit, I don't know much about board dealings and all the $$ that are quoted, go in one ear and out the other to me. I'm a big supporter of the club and I love going to watch my footy team play, even though I never played the game. I know I am passionate because I usually get that nervous, excitable feeling when I go to the games.

So all the politics, all the name calling, all the bravado doesn't impress me much. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and entitled to support whichever board they want. I'm just finding it all a bit tiresome.

I just want to watch the footy and cheer on my team.

 

[stevie013]

Or how about not getting your knickers in a not and bagging them, assuming they were taking payment when you didn't actually know. As Fitz pointed out that item of note was listed on previous AGM notices as well.

They never were.

and conclusions wouldnt have been made if you can read properly. its not rocket science. i can bag them as much as i like, its my right as a paying member. i dont think they are doing are a good job. im not going to clap my hands and praise them if i think they are doing a **** job. with all their cloak and dagger approach, if they were more transparent, i wouldnt be so sceptical of them.

if they do something good, i will praise them, as i have with the development seemingly trudging along well.

 

[samshark]

and conclusions wouldnt have been made if you can read properly. its not rocket science. i can bag them as much as i like, its my right as a paying member. i dont think they are doing are a good job. im not going to clap my hands and praise them if i think they are doing a **** job. with all their cloak and dagger approach, if they were more transparent, i wouldnt be so sceptical of them.

if they do something good, i will praise them, as i have with the development seemingly trudging along well.

Did you go last night Stevie and say that or ask a question? I bet you didn't
Have you once ever emailed the CEO or spoke to a board member in person to voice your concern or ask a question. I bet you haven't.

But you keep banging that drum on a nameless forum Stevie on your issues concerning the board if that makes you feel better.