Markfs' Board of Directors Watch

[Markfs]

Mate, I can't help think how irrelevant some of your ranting has been.

You need to fully understand the role played by each board member. It all begins with the president, who, unfortunately has to take the blame for what has transpired. Maybe he has been in the role for too long and still running it as an autocrat. Time has moved on and with it the role and operation of the president.

sorry i cant help you with your need for help about my ranting........ it might help you to know that your opinion has no impact on me. i hope that helps

 

[Markfs]

How many of us are CEO of a $1.8 billion company?

Sure, it's not the only measure of success - but how many suitable equivalents would be out there?

I can type 70wpm, I cook a mean spag bol, and I can recite the first 30 elements of the periodic table. I don't think my achievements stack up somehow



Totally agree with your point about having representation on the board of someone who has NFP / community organisation experience. IMO it should be limited to one or two people though.



ColinWood might tick a few boxes for you

you still didnt make a case for ian mcmullin. i think that someone who is a financial speculator which is basically someone making money off the backs of hard working people, has about zero of the attributes that I would think a football board member should have. i'm talking about alex whatshisface....not the blackmores woman...

i said that she's ok but basically irrelevant in so many ways...i would have thought that alisa would have ticked Holgate's boxes.... do we really need to have two irrelevant women on the board?

 

[Markfs]

and continuing on from my previous post, do we really need 3 financial leaches on the board? Isnt one enough? Do we have to have that much expertise about how to get money off people? I know i havent had much impact on life but at least i havent run a company that leaches money off the backs of people who work for a living...

and if you dont know what i mean by that, i'm talking about financial, investment and banking people who skim profits off companies through investments and loans ....anti-capitalism? well maybe to some extent. I just dont worship people who make money from money and that appears to be the only thing that many of the board members do.

its a bit like having 50 lawyers in the parliament. i can put up with a couple but do we really need that many bloodsuckers in our parliaments? another topic i know...

 

[mike123]

Markfs should change his name to Markffs

 

[ColinWood]

How many of us are CEO of a $1.8 billion company?

Sure, it's not the only measure of success - but how many suitable equivalents would be out there?

I can type 70wpm, I cook a mean spag bol, and I can recite the first 30 elements of the periodic table. I don't think my achievements stack up somehow



Totally agree with your point about having representation on the board of someone who has NFP / community organisation experience. IMO it should be limited to one or two people though.



ColinWood might tick a few boxes for you

I think our board is a bit of a closed shop (by invitation only). I reckon they believe Alisa Camplin brings these skills and more to the club (she's an Olympic gold medalist, has limited work experience in corporate sector, and she and her husband Oliver established a NFP to raise $ in honour of their first child who passed away - Finnan's Gift.)

Key thing for me is that she and others seem to have bought into the deal that Eddy runs the show rather than the Board? Perhaps that's not the case but it's hard to see evidence to the contrary?

I think true leaders are willing to be uncomfortable in challenging each other and being challenged.

 

[Markfs]

Markfs should change his name to Markffs

i respect a man who puts his real name in his nickname

 

[Markfs]

I think our board is a bit of a closed shop (by invitation only). I reckon they believe Alisa Camplin brings these skills and more to the club (she's an Olympic gold medalist, has limited work experience in corporate sector, and she and her husband Oliver established a NFP to raise $ in honour of their first child who passed away - Finnan's Gift.)

Key thing for me is that she and others seem to have bought into the deal that Eddy runs the show rather than the Board? Perhaps that's not the case but it's hard to see evidence to the contrary?

I think true leaders are willing to be uncomfortable in challenging each other and being challenged.

i wish i wrote this.... i think i agree with every word

 

[Markfs]

and now something about Paul Leeds

Leeds was elected to the VRC Committee in 2002 and maintains a keen interest in the Thoroughbred Racing and Breeding industry. He has raced a number of winners over the years including Marwong (five wins – Group One winner), Greyfille (four wins – Group 2 winner) and Be Reasonable (eight wins – Group Placed). He has had over 50 winners to date and last year bred and raced a listed winner at Flemington (Magic Bird).

wow.... so is the club going to buy some ponies for pony rides for the kids at half time?

 

[Vicky Park]

i said that she's ok but basically irrelevant in so many ways...i would have thought that alisa would have ticked Holgate's boxes.... do we really need to have two irrelevant women on the board?

This is an odd choice of word, having read your preceding posts. What specifically makes the two women on our Board irrelevant, or more irrelevant than the men?

 

[BPikkers]

you still didnt make a case for ian mcmullin. i think that someone who is a financial speculator which is basically someone making money off the backs of hard working people, has about zero of the attributes that I would think a football board member should have. i'm talking about alex whatshisface....not the blackmores woman...

i said that she's ok but basically irrelevant in so many ways...i would have thought that alisa would have ticked Holgate's boxes.... do we really need to have two irrelevant women on the board?

You are simply commenting on their wealth or occupations. You have absolutely no idea on the skills they bring to the board.

I'm not saying they are necessarily the right people, however, you are sounding like a Grade 6 kid.

i actually sit on a board and I can tell you the board members are chosen with complimentary skills they can bring. The problem I see is that what Eddie says goes. Eddie probably handpicked the current board and seems to be more concerned about bringing on people he has a close relationship with, rather than casting the net out wide to find who are the best people for specific positions.

 

[BPikkers]

and continuing on from my previous post, do we really need 3 financial leaches on the board? Isnt one enough? Do we have to have that much expertise about how to get money off people? I know i havent had much impact on life but at least i havent run a company that leaches money off the backs of people who work for a living...

and if you dont know what i mean by that, i'm talking about financial, investment and banking people who skim profits off companies through investments and loans ....anti-capitalism? well maybe to some extent. I just dont worship people who make money from money and that appears to be the only thing that many of the board members do.

its a bit like having 50 lawyers in the parliament. i can put up with a couple but do we really need that many bloodsuckers in our parliaments? another topic i know...

I agree you don't need that many people with financial expertise. Can I ask why anyone with a finance background is a leech? If you invested in Alex's fund you would be doing fairly well out of it. At the helm of Thorney Investments, he was generating the Pratt family returns of approx 20%pa over the past 15-20 years investing in companies. How has he been a leech? You sound like a very bitter man.

 

[Markfs]

This is an odd choice of word, having read your preceding posts. What specifically makes the two women on our Board irrelevant, or more irrelevant than the men?

irrelevant to the club... I suppose it's a question of how relevant they are. I could have spoken about the men on gender lines but they aren't being selected for the board because they are male. I think the women have been selected, in part, because they are women. I'm just being honest here. So that means they can be accessed collectively for what do they bring to the board as women.......Collingwood women....well they make the grade as women but I would suggest that there must be other women who are far more relevant to Collingwood than these two.

I've also made the point about financial advice....in a similar vein. There are three people selected for what they bring to the board as financial people...three...You have to question the relevancy of financial advice to have three representatives. I question the relevancy of investment ...speculators... people who make money out of money. I would argue that we need to keep such people away from the club rather than have over-representation at board level.

its appropriate to have women on the board because women are involved in the club...they are members...contribute to the club... but wouldn't it be better to have women who have made a significant contribution to the club.... or even pick a woman who has skills in the financial area...or has strong ties to community services...so they bring more to the board. Surely we can find some Collingwood women who bring other things to the board. It seems to me that these two were picked because of their lack of history with the club. You could argue that with the other board members.... eddie wants to be the one with strongest ties to the club..

These two women just seem to represent women...Holgate is successful in the corporate world but she doesn't have much history in sport. Champion brings knowledge as an athlete but geez... I would suggest that we need some ex Collingwood footballers on the board, not an Olympic athlete so really her background is irrelevant...she has probably gained a bit of relevancy with the advent of women's teams at the club.. at any rate, I would prefer to keep her on the board than someone like mcmullin who is totally irrelevant...or waslitz who seems to be worse than irrelevant...

I wasn't questioning the relevancy of having women on the board. As I said before, women play a significant role in the club and families are important to the club, so we need people on the board who are men and women and have families etc. diversity.... but I think we could do better

 

[Markfs]

I agree you don't need that many people with financial expertise. Can I ask why anyone with a finance background is a leech? If you invested in Alex's fund you would be doing fairly well out of it. At the helm of Thorney Investments, he was generating the Pratt family returns of approx 20%pa over the past 15-20 years investing in companies. How has he been a leech? You sound like a very bitter man.

I am bitter. bitter and twisted... so I suppose you could argue that the board is excellent...

He operates a company that doesn't pay tax. He previously worked for Pratt and they don't pay tax. That means something to me and investment returns don't. You might have a different attitude so its a free world. I call these investment types leeches because there are people out there in this world that actually work for a living. They work in shops...they cut hair... they work on the land... and there are people who skim the profits and live off the workers... I call em leeches. I do it in part because society worship these people because they're rich, so it's a bit of over-compensation on my behalf..

but I would still argue that having 3 or 4 people on a football club board who spend their life looking for easy money, is a recipe for disaster.

 

[Markfs]

You are simply commenting on their wealth or occupations. You have absolutely no idea on the skills they bring to the board.

I'm not saying they are necessarily the right people, however, you are sounding like a Grade 6 kid.

i actually sit on a board and I can tell you the board members are chosen with complimentary skills they can bring. The problem I see is that what Eddie says goes. Eddie probably handpicked the current board and seems to be more concerned about bringing on people he has a close relationship with, rather than casting the net out wide to find who are the best people for specific positions.

You say that board members are chosen for their complimentary skills and then say that they are chosen for having a close relationship with Eddie...and you accuse me of sounding like a grade 6 kid. They must teach logic in grade 6

 

[jmac70]

So spots on the board are bought now are they Jmac? They don't go to the best most competent people.. just given out to the filthy rich who can afford a $10mil donation... Great basis for board selection there.

He has made a massive contribution to the club, that is beyond question.

 

[76woodenspooners]

I am bitter. bitter and twisted... so I suppose you could argue that the board is excellent...

He operates a company that doesn't pay tax. He previously worked for Pratt and they don't pay tax. That means something to me and investment returns don't.

You're referring to tax on profits, and CFC doesn't pay those either.

By your own reckoning, wouldn't that be a relevant qualification?

 

[BPikkers]

You say that board members are chosen for their complimentary skills and then say that they are chosen for having a close relationship with Eddie...and you accuse me of sounding like a grade 6 kid. They must teach logic in grade 6

i am saying board members are chosen with complimentary skills. Are the Collingwood board members? I don't know as I don't exactly know what McMullen brings. Alex Waislitz I suppose brings investment expertise. This is different from being an accountant and I think the chap from KordaMentha may bring a corporate governance or audit skill which is imperative for the board.

Remember, the board is there for not just a footy team. It is to run an organisation today and ensure the organise grows and remains sustainable. Obviously there is responsibility on their shoulders to have a competitive team or at least make those responsible accountable. That's why I think Eddie is the problem. He seems to do what he wants and the board just follows. This may not be the case, but who knows?

Out of interest, you have obviously done a lot of research on the Pratts. I'd love to know which entities you are reviewing and ascertained they haven't paid any tax. Also, how far back have you gone and what have they expensed?

 

[76woodenspooners]

"In 2016 the Australian Taxation Office revealed that the company had paid no tax in 2013-14, despite revenue of $430 million."
That gives a fair reflection of his attitude to the community

Not necessarily - revenue is not much of a measure of anything.

If I buy a loaf of bread for $4.30 and then sell it on to you for $4.30, should I pay tax on the $4.30 I get from you? Of course not. Add a bunch of zeros to those numbers and the same principles still apply.

 

[Anzacday]

Not necessarily - revenue is not much of a measure of anything.

If I buy a loaf of bread for $4.30 and then sell it on to you for $4.30, should I pay tax on the $4.30 I get from you? Of course not. Add a bunch of zeros to those numbers and the same principles still apply.

If that's your only source of income you'll go broke and be hungry

 

[Scodog10]

It surprises that the executive member of the board and biggest cancer at the club was not mentioned to kick off this amazing thread.

Gary Pert can seriously EAD. He has his dirty ****ing fingers in every goddamn pie at our once great club as an executive member of the board, the CEO and as a goddamn member of the list management team! WTF are we doing with that numpty involved in football decisions.

In the name of all that is good Eddie get rid of this absolute ****ing joker from our club, please. He's killing us.

 

[76woodenspooners]

I'm curious about Mark Korda.

Ex-Andersons administrator who was part of the ANSETT wind-up, who then went on to start his own consultancy partnership with the other Mark (no, not you Markfs )

What was he doing back in 2009 when CFC was on the brink of administration? Oops. To be fair, pretty sure he wasn't on the board when the pubs fiasco went down.

Anyway, Markfs , he'd be the expert on good governance. If he's on our board, everything must be um, er, above board.

 

[Scodog10]

Listening to the pre-match yesterday the SEN team had Brian Cook on the show. During that time there was a brief discussion on how their club has remained relevant at the pointy end of the ladder for 10 years (aside from 2015).

Cook in his response briefly touched on them having 5 core competitive advantages which they have successfully translated into onfield results. He didn't go into the detail of what they were, but an easy assumption is that their home ground advantage is one. It got me thinking about what ours are? 76woodenspooners, doodles98 & Bad Horse youre clearly the most intelligent posters on here so what are your thoughts?

I can name three. One is us the supporters there is no other club that can match us in sheer volume and when united we are a significant force. The second is 14 matches at the G each and every year and the third is our revenue which has been number 1 in the league for as far back as I can remember. The thing is the latter two both stem from us as supporters we drive the successes of our club yet where is the engagement? When was the last time the board made a decision to benefit us the clubs greatest asset? A membership price freeze once a decade is about the best I can come up with, whoop dee ****ing doo!

It's clear we are becoming increasingly disenchanted with home attendances plummeting over the past 18 months and membership numbers dropping (despite the freebies to pad things out). When was the last time we saw growth in our finances?

We can't continue to prop up the club as we once did without change because as it currently stands we're going nowhere mired in our own sense of supremacy which trickles like shit downhill from board level!

 

[Scodog10]

Not necessarily - revenue is not much of a measure of anything.

If I buy a loaf of bread for $4.30 and then sell it on to you for $4.30, should I pay tax on the $4.30 I get from you? Of course not. Add a bunch of zeros to those numbers and the same principles still apply.

I'm with you most of the way on this one, but I think a policy of revenue taxing for large businesses could be a good venture when they would obviously be undertaking earnings management initiatives to pay no tax on $430m in revenue. It's only due to the ineptitude of the ATO that that sort of scenario plays out.

 

[Sleuth1]

Overall, the Club is depressing for me. Eddie has control of the Board in his own interest and not the members. Buckley is a discredited coach. His attack on Pendlebury was extremely poor form. The players are taking pot shots at each other. There are no former players giving a critique. It is like everyone outside the power group feel powerless to do anything about it. It is officially a rich person's club.

 

[Markfs]

Not necessarily - revenue is not much of a measure of anything.

If I buy a loaf of bread for $4.30 and then sell it on to you for $4.30, should I pay tax on the $4.30 I get from you? Of course not. Add a bunch of zeros to those numbers and the same principles still apply.

fair point.... if I told a story about how I broke my hand to the coach and it was found out to be untrue, couldn't I have done it because I was suffering psychologically from the pain of the actual injury? You'd have to concede that was possible...