New Jersey unveiled today!

[PertRoosOsborne]

It could also suggest that FFC prefer to come to a resolution that is close to a win-win situation with things being sorted out through mediation and agreement, rather than trying to enforce a resolution that would be seen to cause immediate financial issues for BL.

Yep I agree with you, however if there was a "line in the sand" issue this would be it so wouldn't you go hard?

However the points you raise below show that there are many and varied possible outcomes that may not implicate the jumper design in the decision.

This whole jumper issue simply makes me feel crook in the guts.

 

[Stocka]

Yep I agree with you, however if there was a "line in the sand" issue this would be it so wouldn't you go hard?

Yeah perhaps. I tend to think though, that FFC's reaction is one of wanting to pursue the interests of those Fitzroy supporters/members who are also Brisbane Lions supporters/members, and that their attitude is more pacifist (for want of a better word - diplomatic, perhaps) than some on here are interpreting.

Looking at things from an FFC perspective, if the logo/jumper issue is not resolved in a manner that appeases the people who want to see the Fitzroy Lion logo reinstated, the FFC will still be continuing its own endeavours at a local level in Victoria as they have been since the merger. Sure, it will be disappointing for those Brisbane Lions supporters who would have liked to have seen the Fitzroy Lion logo reinstated, but it's not as if FFC sees itself as being limited to looking out for the interests of those Brisbane Lions supporters who want to see the merger agreement upheld. I suspect that it is under this reasoning that the FFC is probably less inclined to go "all out" and attempt to hold BL over a barrel than some on here think. I could be wrong on that though.

Now this is merely my own speculation, but I tend to think that the FFC board will do everything that it can in a manner of due diligence to look out for the interests of those who want to see the merger agreement upheld by the Brisbane Lions. But, I also feel that they may well take the view that if the love for the merger agreement is truly unrequited by BL that it is not a hill that they'd be willing to die upon, considering that the FFC still has significant fish to fry in local Victorian football. *

* (Couldn't resist throwing in a couple of mixed analogies there! )

 

[whatboutbob]

Yeah perhaps. I tend to think though, that FFC's reaction is one of wanting to pursue the interests of those Fitzroy supporters/members who are also Brisbane Lions supporters/members, and that their attitude is more pacifist (for want of a better word - diplomatic, perhaps) than some on here are interpreting.

That (mis)interpretation is not surprising given some of Bowers' rhetoric.

IMO the FFC have earned the benefit of the doubt. Looking at their post-merger history, despite Brisbane and the AFL clearly not upholding their end of the agreement, the FFC have never gone about resolving these clear transgressions in anything but a diplomatic manner.

If only the Brisbane Lions could have the same approach we might have a bit more support in Melbourne.

 

[Last of the Roys]

Does anyone know when the court hearing is scheduled?

Would it be reasonable to assume that this will be sorted out before the season starts? -if not does that mean the club will have to wear the old jumper until a legal ruling is delivered?

Geez why I am calling it "the old" jumper when it should be "the" jumper!

The latest word is that mediation will begin in February, with the court case scheduled for April. This was reported in the Herald-Sun over the last couple of weeks, and confirmed by someone who has been in touch with FFC.

Unless something amazing happens, I think we will be wearing the 'Paddle Pop' jumpers for at least 2010. Mediation is unlikely to lead to anything, and a win by FFC in the court case will almost certainly see Brisbane continuing to wear the Paddle Pop jumpers for at least the rest of 2010, and possibly on-going (who knows what Brisbane's reaction will be to a FFC legal victory?).

Whatever the outcome of the court case, our best chance to try to ensure that we revert back to our 'traditional' jumpers (and to safeguard the Brisbane Lions identity on an ongoing basis) is to develop member resolutions to be voted on at the December 2010 AGM. Once they have been developed they will need to be supported by 100 full members (according to the Corporations Act 2001, section 249N) to ensure they get voted on, and this really needs to occur before September 2010 just to be safe in case the Club decides to call an early AGM (given the 2 months notice for members resolutions that is also in the Corps Act).

(I no longer see an EGM as a viable option. I think it is best for members to know the outcome of the court case first [hopefully in FFC's favour] and see how Brisbane reacts as a result of that decision. Waiting for the 2010 AGM also allows us plenty of time to develop things properly. Given the court case / financial issues around merchandise, and that a lot of full members won't really think about this issue until they see the players wearing the new jumpers, I think our best chance to win the support for member resolutions will be at the 2010 AGM.)

 

[Mappa]

The most recognisable part of a club in my opinion is always the jumper. That is what we see on the field, and that is what we (primarily) wear as a means of supporting our club. As has been stated in previous posts, save for the colours, Brisbane can put whatever they want on the jumper, and I think they will keep the current design for a while yet.

My reading of the agreement is that they must keep the "Fitzroy Lion Logo", but it doesn't say in what form. What exactly does an "official logo" constitute ? Does it have to be displayed a certain percentage of the time ? Could, for instance, the Brisbane Lions use the new Paddlepop Lion on ALL their merchandise such as t-shirts, and flags, and jumpers etc etc, but stick the Fitzroy Lion logo on their official documentation like letterheads ?

It's for much smarter people than i to decide, but i would argue that they could. The Gen Ys that they are hoping to attract don't give a toss about letterheads, but they do about what they wear. Clubs can sell whatever merchandise they want, with whatever they want on it, and I think that's the path they will go down. The world we live in now is filled with sneaky business practices, dodgy backroom deals and spin doctors (bulltish artists) who get their way when they want to, and this will be another case of that.

Bit sad really.

 

[Roylion]

Thanks Roylion. That makes sense and you've explained it very well. Cheers.

Is it fair enough to make a crude simplification of saying that Fitzroy FC basically took over the running of the Fitzroy Reds, even though they both exist as two separate legal entities?

Keeping it simple... pretty much.

The Fitzroy Reds though now have a signficant input into the Fitzroy Football Club. Five Reds board members comprised half of the ten man board of the Fitzroy Football Club in 2009. All Reds life members became life members of the Fitzroy Football Club. Reds groups such as the Reds Foundation continue either as part of or in support of the Club. Not sure what will happen with the history of the Fitzroy Reds and how that will be recognised in the structure of Fitzroy's existing history.

 

[JB75]

Where is Demetriou in this whole saga. The AFL had their finger prints all over the merger agreement and should ensure that it is honoured.

 

[adey115]

. Given the court case / financial issues around merchandise, and that a lot of full members won't really think about this issue until they see the players wearing the new jumpers, I think our best chance to win the support for member resolutions will be at the 2010 AGM.)

With regard to the merch, which is a part of this issue.... I believe that a major reason why the BL Board and Admin have changed the logo and jumper is to generate merch sales.

Mr Bowers mentioned that the BL would lose somewhere between $1m and $4m if they were forced to scrap the logo and thus merch. BUT the BL might also lose money if no one buys the merch because they simply don't like it. If that happens, then no one can blame the FFC legal action for the loses.

Now I'm sure when you bring out a completely different new range of merch, there are more sales than previous years - for instance, if I bought a traditional and wonderful BL (complete with Fitzroy Lion) guernsey in 2007, then I'm unlikely to buy one in 2008 or 2009 that is virtually the same (except for sponsor logo change for instance, or unless I'm a kid who has grown a fair bit). Whereas with a 'new' guernsey, then people who want to wear the updated version will buy it.

Hence I'd think that there will be some form of spike in merch sales - but the question is, how significant will it be? And how much of the spike have the BL anticipated by ordering up big?

My point - if the spike in new merch/new jumper sales is not large because people simply don't like it, and the BL are stuck with stock, then the Lions Board and Admin will have brought any loss on themselves - regardless of the legal action by the FFC.

Hence, I am wondering how merch sales are going as part of this issue??

Seems to me that if the merch sales don't actually result in a significant spike within a 1-2 season window, then financially it might be prudent for the Lions to bring out a 'new' merch range in a year or two - such as one featuring an updated yet traditional Brisbane Lion that 'might' look like the Fitzroy Lion that people seem to like(!), that would sell. And because of that, a jumper change backwards could be a part of it.

That is a major reason why I'm interested in the merch activities of the Club at the moment, and wondering if people are actually buying the stuff with the new logo on it and the new jumper - because if it simply doesn't work (regardless of the legal activities of the FFC) then the BL faces a choice of what to do next.

Clubs like alternative strips or away jumpers because it gives them a new item to sell. A new home and new away jumper (which is what the BL have done) could be viewed as a goldmine, if successful. To me the old p1ss away strip wouldn't have helped at all because it simply didn't sell due to backlash on the design. Whereas I assume there was some success with the Fitzroy Red 'away' jumper this year in terms of sales to Victorian supporters and perhaps also in Brisbane. An important question is - will the 'new' jumper/s be a sales success? And what are the actual sales like at the moment? And come Round 1 when the jumpers get seen on the players, will there be a significant enough sales spike?

I for one can't say I'm interested in buying any of it.

 

[Hollow Knight]

To get 100 members to vote for a special resolution would require an exponential increase in effort in AGM attendance relative to this year's performance.

I was dumbstruck by the poor currency conversion rate of Internet Rage > AGM rage.

Disappointing.

 

[Stocka]

To get 100 members to vote for a special resolution would require an exponential increase in effort in AGM attendance relative to this year's performance.

I was dumbstruck by the poor currency conversion rate of Internet Rage > AGM rage.

Disappointing.

I suppose emphasising this point would also have to be a major part of the campaign.

 

[whatboutbob]

To get 100 members to vote for a special resolution would require an exponential increase in effort in AGM attendance relative to this year's performance.

I was dumbstruck by the poor currency conversion rate of Internet Rage > AGM rage.

Disappointing.

You know I was as disappointed as you were, but I suspect proxy votes will help significantly - if only so the Vic delegation gets some representation.

 

[maroon and blue]

It's an interesting question maroon and blue. Following is my explanation of it....(and hopefully the reasons why I hold that opinion are explained clearly).

There's little doubt in my mind that the Fitzroy Football Club (that is now competing in the VAFA) is the same club as the one that used to hold an AFL licence and fielded a team in the VFL-AFL competition for one hundred years. Before that of course the club fielded a team in the VFA (now VFL). In 1996 Fitzroy Football Club was removed from the AFL in its own right, went into recess (in terms of on-field operations) for thirteen years, until the beginning of the 2009 season, when they resumed fielding football teams. That means of course that the Fitzroy Football Club was formed in 1883 and 2010 will mark Fitzroy Football Club's 127th year of existence.

There are those who would suggest that the Fitzroy Football Club is NOT the same club as the one that competed in the VFL-AFL. However, as a shareholder of the club since 1986 (when the were part of the VFL_AFL), I can certainly attest to my continued shareholder membership of the very same Fitzroy Football Club. My shares have never been transferred to any other entity...new or otherwise. Since they were ejected from the AFL, Fitzroy Football Club Ltd. still had (from 1998-2008) a board of directors (pretty much the same members as in 1996), the very same 700 odd shareholders (as it did from 1986-1996), merchandise, as well as about 300 ordinary members, who joined annually. Basically the Club was never liquidated. In December 2008, the Club (Fitzroy Football Club Ltd.), incorporated the Fitzroy Reds, (formerly the University Reds) and resumed playing operations again...for the first time since 1996. Note the word 'incorporation'. By the terms of the agreement between Fitzroy and the Fitzroy Reds, all Fitzroy Reds assets were transferred to the Fitzroy Football Club. Hence I am still a shareholder member of the very same club, that now has has five teams (Seniors, Reserves, two Under 19 teams and a Club 18 side.)

Added to that of course..is a club leaving one competition and going into recess for a period of time...does not a new club make. Fitzroy, for example didn't start in 1883 and then begin as a new club in 1897 because they moved from the VFA to the VFL. Neither did any of the other Melbourne based AFL clubs when they moved competitions in 1897 (Melbourne, Geelong, Collingwood, Essendon, Carlton, Fitzroy, South Melbourne and St Kilda), 1908 (Richmond and University) and 1925 (North, Hawthorn and Footscray). Fitzroy from 1997-2008 had no on-field team, but still existed as a club with membership, shareholders and assets (as explained above). Essendon, Geelong, Melbourne, South Melbourne and St Kilda were all in recess at various stages between 1916 and 1918 and yet they're all considered to be the same club before and after those years. Several VFL-AFL clubs were in recess during World War II as well.

Where do the Brisbane Lions come in? There's no doubt that a merger agreement exists between the Fitzroy Football Club Ltd. and the Brisbane Bears-Fitzroy Football Club Ltd., that merged the AFL club operations of both clubs. What actually happened the AFL Club Operations of Fitzroy were essentially incorporated into the Brisbane Bears AFL Club Operations. However the legal entities of both clubs were not merged or incorporated. (If they had been I'd now be a shareholder of the "Brisbane Bears-Fitzroy Football Club Ltd." And I'm not.) Brisbane even agreed as part of the merger agreement that "nothing in this Deed will be construed or interpreted to mean that Brisbane Bears will assume any liability for the debts or obligations of Fitzroy or that the Brisbane Bears will have any input in the ongoing management of Fitzroy after the Merger Date."

That means that Fitzroy and Brisbane are separate clubs, and they always have been separate clubs. Brisbane have no input into the management of Fitzroy and Fitzroy have no input into the management of the Brisbane Lions, except as provided in the Deed of Arrangement. Those provisions include the use of "the Fitzroy lion logo" by the Brisbane Lions which according to Clause 7.2 c) had to be used "in perpetuity".

So I guess the rights to Fitzroy's heritage are held by both Fitzroy (the entire Club's history from 1883-2010) and the Brisbane Lions who are preservers and commemorators of Fitzroy's AFL heritage (1897-1996) within the national competition. However how much the Lions preserve and commemorate is entirely up to the primarily Queensland based Brisbane Lions. The minimum the Lions have to observe is outlined in the merger agreement and naturally if that is seen to be violated by the other merger partner (i.e Fitzroy), then Fitzroy Football Club (as a signatory to the merger agreement) will seek clarification of the legalities of the violated clauses, (which is what they have done).It was so that the merger agreement with the Lions would not be affected (for issues such as this) that the Fitzroy Reds Football Club was incorporated into the legal structure of the Fitzroy Football Club.

Fitzroy Football Club members who support other AFL clubs? Well they would certainly have an interest in the issue no doubt. However it is the shareholders of Fitzroy Football Club Ltd. who elect the Fitzroy board. Fitzroy Football Club paid up members can certainly influence the board though and as their numbers are likely to be greater than the shareholder members, they may be quite successful in doing just that. Certainly it appears that the large number of complaints by Fitzroy members (and indeed many Brisbane Lions members) to the Fitzroy Football Club board had an influence on the decision by the board to seek a legal ruling on Clause 7.2 c. Hopefully a ruling in favor of Fitzroy's argument will prevent the Brisbane Lions using their new logo and they will be required to use "the Fitzroy lion logo" as part of their official logo. which was situation between 1997 and 2009

Yep, agree with all that, quite a historical litany of events, from your perspective. I may add I bought a brick, I bought $1000 bucks worth of shares(took out a loan, young family, to do so). But I guess the GWC has ruined my chances of cashing them in. Have you read "Fitzroy, a hundred years of ..", forgotten the rest, as that beautiful book, I lent to someone and never got it returned. But I digress, it has a message, and that message is that life goes on. It changes. But the thread still continues, even if we sometimes don't like the weaving. ( Curse the b/s urine stained jumper, didn't see any rage for that.) Can't wait for the season to start.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Curse the b/s urine stained jumper, didn't see any rage for that

Were you living in a cave on Mars with your fingers in your ears?

 

[maroon and blue]

Were you living in a cave on Mars with your fingers in your ears?

No, I wasn't , I was living in a sulubrius castle in the burbs at the time. And , help me here, my memory is fuzzy, was there a court order involved, or the mass hysteria? By the way your little blue man yelling eek is very yesterday.

 

[Hollow Knight]

No, I wasn't , I was living in a sulubrius castle in the burbs at the time. And , help me here, my memory is fuzzy, was there a court order involved, or the mass hysteria?

I suspect there was no court order about the piss strip, just as there is no court order about our new jumper, because there is nothing legally protecting the jumper design... just the logo.

Regardless, there was plenty said about the piss strip, both online and at that years' AGM.

By the way your little blue man yelling eek is very yesterday.

 

[maroon and blue]

I suspect there was no court order about the piss strip, just as there is no court order about our new jumper, because there is nothing legally protecting the jumper design... just the logo.

Regardless, there was plenty said about the piss strip, both online and at that years' AGM.

Very funny, like it.For once you have expressed your true emotions over my comments.

 

[Grandmaster]

I received my invite/notification of the AGM on the day of the AGM accompanied with "a with compliments slip apologising for the late notice" I wonder how many other members got the same. I don't normally go or care, but did intend on going to the last AGM because I reckon Bowers is a total disgrace, and the new guernsey is a joke!!! I for one will be voting for whatever action is being taken to return the good old Lions jumper of the premiership years, next time.....

 

[Hollow Knight]

I received my invite/notification of the AGM on the day of the AGM accompanied with "a with compliments slip apologising for the late notice" I wonder how many other members got the same. I don't normally go or care, but did intend on going to the last AGM because I reckon Bowers is a total disgrace, and the new guernsey is a joke!!! I for one will be voting for whatever action is being taken to return the good old Lions jumper of the premiership years, next time.....

Wow... any other interstaters get theirs late?

Brisbane based members received theirs in plenty of time.

Is it possible the club were trying to "accidently" weed out interstate supporters who may be more sympathetic to the 'Fitzroy' angle?

 

[John]

Wow... any other interstaters get theirs late?

Brisbane based members received theirs in plenty of time.

Is it possible the club were trying to "accidently" weed out interstate supporters who may be more sympathetic to the 'Fitzroy' angle?

No . They knew he was a Hawthorn plant who had waged a mental war on Hooper .

 

[lionbear]

Wow... any other interstaters get theirs late?

Brisbane based members received theirs in plenty of time.

Is it possible the club were trying to "accidently" weed out interstate supporters who may be more sympathetic to the 'Fitzroy' angle?

I never got mine with any notice, one year I got my voting paper on the day it was due back.

The club has never been the best with the mail to Victorian members and this goes back to 1996 when I first joined.

 

[whatboutbob]

The club has never been the best with the mail to Victorian members and this goes back to 1996 when I first joined.

I've always wondered why that was. It is not like post takes that much longer to get down here...

 

[royboy2]

How bad does the Jumper look on Luey??, the side on view is atrocious.

 

[whatboutbob]

The home guernsey is far from great, but the away guernsey's just godawful.

 

[Eons]

How bad does the Jumper look on Luey??, the side on view is atrocious.

he doesnt look too happy in that pic.

 

[Lace Out]

The jumper is so embarassing.

Worse still,a large majority of opposition supporters wouldn't have really seen it yet.I fear most of the grief is still ahead of us.

Still cannot believe this has been allowed to happen.