From memory club president jobs are not paid jobs. Demetriou makes a pretty penny from his job so there is a slight difference right there. One is a voluntary job and the other is a paid job. And at the end of the day if there is no direct correlation between the two jobs/incidents like there is none with Pratt then no Fat mat Demetriou should stay on.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Pratt must resign
- Thread starter nutcase888
- Start date
- Tagged users None
From memory club president jobs are not paid jobs. Demetriou makes a pretty penny from his job so there is a slight difference right there. One is a voluntary job and the other is a paid job. And at the end of the day if there is no direct correlation between the two jobs/incidents like there is none with Pratt then no Fat mat Demetriou should stay on.
Has it ever occurred to you that we do not give a toss what you think!
- Banned
- #78
pratt is a genious. he got us judd and saved our club financially. get off his back. lets enjoy and reap the benefits he has brought to the club. so what he go fined some money for cheating PRIOR TO JOINING CARLTON. lets look forward to a great next season.
Dramoth
Premium Platinum
Ohhhh boy, you're a dead man.
This is going to be good...
But will Bee give him the benefit of the doubt that he didnt realise that Bee is a she
Refer to my post in the thread on the main board.
I have to say most of this post is false and is really just excusing the inexcusable. Collusion (This type or not) is NOT the basis for a well functioning market economy. That is just absurd.
Pratt/ Visy and Amcor underhandedly agreed to set prices so as to maximise their profits, plain and simple.
What they did was not a gentleman's agreement, but rather just another example of corporate greed that unfortunately exists everywhere.
If you are going to shoot down my argument, make sure you are doing so in the right context. This comment was made in response to the question of whether Pratt has brought the game into disrepute & I was pointing out that the actions of Pratt & Visy from 2001-2004 have nothing to do with the Carlton Football Club in 2007, in much the same way that the actions of Jeff Kennett as Premier of Victoria have nothing to do with his current presidency of the Hawthorn Football Club.
Not for a moment do I condone the price-fixing that occurred, although it does amaze me that the laws were introduced after the scrapping of the farcical two-airline agreement & that they haven't gone far enough to prevent certain supermarket chains sending their employees out to various independent fruit & vegetable retailers & butchers to monitor their prices, with a view to immediately undercutting the price, often 2 or 3 times in a day. I fail to see how the actions of Pratt & Visy 3-6 years ago mean that Pratt is not a fit person to hold the presidency of our club. You show me where Pratt in his role as our club president has acted illegally or unethically & I will reconsider my opinion. Otherwise there should be no reason, other than the relevant regulatory authority preventing it, why Pratt should not continue his tenure as club president. Or perhaps you would rather see another summer of infighting while our club finds a president who is acceptable to every member of our board.
There really does seem to be two main points of disagreement.
a. Whether what he did was wrong.
b. Does this negatively impact CFC. ie. Should he resign.
IMO -
a.Yes
b. I would limk to see a quiet handover to a succesor, in the next 6-12 months. Maybe a little too long, but I am still a little undecided.
a. Whether what he did was wrong.
b. Does this negatively impact CFC. ie. Should he resign.
IMO -
a.Yes
b. I would limk to see a quiet handover to a succesor, in the next 6-12 months. Maybe a little too long, but I am still a little undecided.
Correct if I am wrong:-
- Pratt did all this prior to becoming President and we approached him.
- Pratt has assisted getting the club back financially and got the leaders working for the members and supporters.
- When you do the crime (not violent) and then do the time (36million fine) that's it for him, throw him in the scrap heap forever. Hardly.
Rubish.
The idea that corporations agreeing on a price is somehow out of the ordinary is a pipe dream. Has it ever occured to you that the price of mobile phones contracts to a pear are the same ? Why ? Because of market forces, the invisible hand, directing supply and demand to the equilibrium point. No. Because there is competitive price fixing at every level in every market of teh economony. To think otherwise is the height of denial. The difference between the activity of Visy and Amcor sitting in a pub and doing it, and Optus and Telstra doing it is almost zero.
Wheather or not corporations are greedy, act in the best interests of the state, society or the citizen, are ethical, or even moral, is of absolutely no interest here and has no bearing what so ever. It is utterly moot. I will be the first to say the corruption of the coprate world is beyond perverse, but this is not the point.
The activities of Pratt and co are far less a perversion of ethical standards that that being perpetrated by inumerable other sources. Including the government and the AFL itself. Hence there is a long list of organistations and representative bodies which need attention before Pratt due to their vastly more nefarious activites.
The reactions being displayed here are a direct emotional reaction to the capitalist structure as a whole rather than any ethical infraction. These personal moral discrencies are being fed by the state-media and voracioiusly consumed by the compliant citizen.
The difference between what goes on every day, in every market, by every capitalist corporate machine and what Visy-Amcor have done is simply the fact that is has been pointed out to you. For you to act failry and reasonably you must consider first the long list of infractions being carried out which are vastly more sever than this one. In conjcntion wiht the fact that many of the most serious infractions are being perpetrated by the very organisations which are now the most vociferous in objection to the current activites, in fact, are the ones publicly chastising Pratt and co.
Remember the inquisition people. Citizens were torured for years before being burnt alive, gutted if lucky and innocent, for crimes such as "washing themselves". A particularly dasterdly deed carried out by Jews. The public on teh whole would be outraged at this henious crime and the moral response was general and ubiquitous. But a rational response can see that washing yourself is not a craime against society. Nor is agreeing on the price to sell your boxes.
Get a grip.
Every industry in the world has price fixing. It's about supply and demand, and when there are only a few companies with a large market share, price fixing will always occur. Cardboard industry, oil/petrol companies, banks, supermarkets, car industry, whatever the industry, there is always some form of price-fixing.
Pratt was unlucky (lucky for his customers) to get ratted out by Amcor. Both colluded, Amcor dobbed in Visy, and escaped a court appearance and a hefy fine. The crime was committed before he became president of Carlton FC, and has he has served his punishment (a fine).
Every President has skeletons in their closets, hell, a former Victorian premier is head of Hawthorn, he mismanaged a whole state.
It doesn't excuse what Pratt done, but it has nothing to do with this Football club.
Pratt was unlucky (lucky for his customers) to get ratted out by Amcor. Both colluded, Amcor dobbed in Visy, and escaped a court appearance and a hefy fine. The crime was committed before he became president of Carlton FC, and has he has served his punishment (a fine).
Every President has skeletons in their closets, hell, a former Victorian premier is head of Hawthorn, he mismanaged a whole state.
It doesn't excuse what Pratt done, but it has nothing to do with this Football club.
QUOTE=nutcase888
all u people that want to believe i am a troll are just listening to what u want to ohear. Bee u know I am not or else u would have banned me long ago. I haven't even started a thread for ages before this. I have never said anythign positive? Does defending the coach of the club count as a positive? How about defending the players as I have said that they shouldn't be blamed b/c it's just a young team. I have preached patience when most of the people here have been screamin like idiots b/c we can't deliever immediate on field success. but lets stick to the topic at hand and look a some of th very sad arguments that have been used to justify this criminal behaviour and Pratts continuation as CFC president..
argument 1
every other company does it so why can't Visy
absolute rubbish. Not all companies collude. I'm sure there are other companies out there that do collude but that doesn't give Pratt the right to do what he did. Anyhow there is no evidence that Oil comoanies or supermarkets are colluding. There is a diffrence between say an oil company raising the price of petrol the day before a long weekend or someoone from Coles goign over to Bilo and seeing what the price is of eggs in their supermarket. That is legal behaviour. The behaviour from Visy is illegal b/c they have got together with their only competitior and colluded to keep the price above the rate it should be. It is theft on a mass scale. And so what if other company's collude? It's like saying that other people do drugs so what Benny done is no big deal. You guys that defend Pratt here then go on Bay 13 and stir up West Coast fans over Cousins are the ultimate hypocrits.
Stick to the facts hey ? Cousins ?
Your absolutely wrong...there is no difference between setting the price of goods through a wink and a nod and setting the price openly. The fact of eh matter is that supermakrets are just too big to deal with. Oil compaines make Visy's worth every month, they areon a different scale. Further there isa vested interest in the government allowing the price of these "ESSENTIAL" items to be set and controlled and that is why it occurs, NOT because what they are doing is legal, but is better for society to allow it.
argument 2
Pratt didn't know about it
this is the argument i hate the most and is why i have lost complete respect for Pratt. If he seriously did not know what is happening he should be prosecuted for stupidity. But of course he knew what was happening. But rather than stand up and take responsibility for it he hangs his CEO out to dry.
This is not the argument, actually it was organised by other board members and executive officers, he found out about it subsequently and went along with it.
argument 3
It's no big deal, he wasn't even charged with a criminal offence
In 12 dveloped countries he would be going to gaol for this. He gets away with it in australia b/c his liberal party mates have not acted on the ACCC's recommendation to criminalise cartel behaviour.
Name thse 12 countries. You talk sh1t. This is what I do all day long mate and you are creaming out your jetsie at the moment. Countries like the U.S. and teh U.K. thrive on far worse activity than this. I do not think here is the place to go into the Euro Jet bribery scandal or the institutionalised corruption of the U.S. coporate lobby.
Further appranantly he didn't get away with it.
argument 4
If Jeff Kennett, being an ex politician who closed down schools and hospitals can be a president then why not Dick?
This is a laughable argument and shows how desperate the pro Pratt mob is. The premier of the state has to make judgement calls regarding school and hospitals and the cost to the txpayer and the needs of the community, the economic needs of the state. It's a very complex business and just b/c Jeff may have been an economic dry and closed some schools and hospitals, does not make him a dishonest thief. I am actually offended that somebody (you know who you are) would use that as argument to defend Pratt.
No where near as offended I am by your ignorance and spurious arguments based on what can only be described as pub knowledge and today tonight insight.
Furhter I will argue with you, and pound your unethical arse, on the abhorent nature of what jeff Kennet did. Let me just sum it up. He removed an entire level of publicly elected government and installed self appointed commissioners. It doesn't get any more evil than that buddy. Seriously you don't know WHAT you are talking about.
argument 5
If Visy's customers didn't like the price they could have gone somewhere else
Techinically true. but what other company's besides Visy or Amcor would be large enough to meet the needs of say Woolworths? There is none to my knowledge, Visy and Amcor rule the market which is how collusion occurs. Anyhow Woolworths don't care as long as they don't set the price up to high b/c they just pass the cost on to us. Everyone one of us have been stolen from by Visy and Amcor.
Garbage. Thats the idea of golbalaisation buddy. They could have gone any where. The point of this is not "were we being ropped off", were they setting outrageous prices. No they were not. In fact they were fair and reasonable. furhter yes these people could have gone anywhere else, in fact, they could have even set up their own.
argument 6
Pratt has donated large sums to charity.
This is an argumet that could be used to justify leniency in a court of law if it went that far. But donating money to charity does not give Pratt the right to then go and rip off ordinary Australians. we are all accountable before the law. you guys would probably say that Pratt now has an excuse to go out and committ murder due to the money he has donated? what an absolutely ridiculous argument.
No it goes to reference his character, it is taken into account whenever a sentence ie being made. This just highlights how bloody stupid you are.
argument 7
It is nothing to do with Carlton
i can't believe you are all serious about this. Pratt is the president of our club. People ask themselves what type of club is Carlton? They then look at our leader and see he is the head of the company implicated in the biggest price fixing scandal in Australian history. Pratt is running the club, he is the head, the leader etc. I spose you wuldn't think it would matter if Christopher SKase was runig the club? Of course it would b/c SKase has no credibility and neither does Pratt after this. His reputation has been destroyed. I am thankful for him being a good president but now for the good of CFC he must go.
You are a specialist in using extreme cases to back up your argument which is just ludicrous. (See the " I donate to charity and can therefore commit murder" argument above.) Your extremism means that we should accept hitler, or stalin. In reverse, according to your moronic logic, we should sack someone for J-Walking. Absolutely dumb.
Some more facts about this case
You all had the opportunity to come out and state that you are opposed to this and you would not support Pratt as president of our club as a result of this. However all except maybe 1 or 2 others have chosen to to try and sweep this under the carpet and minimise these actions as no big deal. well i'm sorry to say that it is a big deal and as long as Pratt is president of our club, we deserve to be known as the carlton crims.
You dont get that this case did not affect anyone, it as it were business to business, rather than corporates trying to rip off the consumer, like petrol stations and supermarkets. What you need to do is realise there are a lot of people on these boards who are a lot more ethical than you, people who are also a lot more intelligent than you obviously are, and what you need to do is consider other factors and what others are actually saying and realise that your middle class moralising is very different to intelligent considered ethics. In fact consider what these things are, what does niddle class moralising refer to in contrast to ethics.
Learn to think.
all u people that want to believe i am a troll are just listening to what u want to ohear. Bee u know I am not or else u would have banned me long ago. I haven't even started a thread for ages before this. I have never said anythign positive? Does defending the coach of the club count as a positive? How about defending the players as I have said that they shouldn't be blamed b/c it's just a young team. I have preached patience when most of the people here have been screamin like idiots b/c we can't deliever immediate on field success. but lets stick to the topic at hand and look a some of th very sad arguments that have been used to justify this criminal behaviour and Pratts continuation as CFC president..
argument 1
every other company does it so why can't Visy
absolute rubbish. Not all companies collude. I'm sure there are other companies out there that do collude but that doesn't give Pratt the right to do what he did. Anyhow there is no evidence that Oil comoanies or supermarkets are colluding. There is a diffrence between say an oil company raising the price of petrol the day before a long weekend or someoone from Coles goign over to Bilo and seeing what the price is of eggs in their supermarket. That is legal behaviour. The behaviour from Visy is illegal b/c they have got together with their only competitior and colluded to keep the price above the rate it should be. It is theft on a mass scale. And so what if other company's collude? It's like saying that other people do drugs so what Benny done is no big deal. You guys that defend Pratt here then go on Bay 13 and stir up West Coast fans over Cousins are the ultimate hypocrits.
Stick to the facts hey ? Cousins ?
Your absolutely wrong...there is no difference between setting the price of goods through a wink and a nod and setting the price openly. The fact of eh matter is that supermakrets are just too big to deal with. Oil compaines make Visy's worth every month, they areon a different scale. Further there isa vested interest in the government allowing the price of these "ESSENTIAL" items to be set and controlled and that is why it occurs, NOT because what they are doing is legal, but is better for society to allow it.
argument 2
Pratt didn't know about it
this is the argument i hate the most and is why i have lost complete respect for Pratt. If he seriously did not know what is happening he should be prosecuted for stupidity. But of course he knew what was happening. But rather than stand up and take responsibility for it he hangs his CEO out to dry.
This is not the argument, actually it was organised by other board members and executive officers, he found out about it subsequently and went along with it.
argument 3
It's no big deal, he wasn't even charged with a criminal offence
In 12 dveloped countries he would be going to gaol for this. He gets away with it in australia b/c his liberal party mates have not acted on the ACCC's recommendation to criminalise cartel behaviour.
Name thse 12 countries. You talk sh1t. This is what I do all day long mate and you are creaming out your jetsie at the moment. Countries like the U.S. and teh U.K. thrive on far worse activity than this. I do not think here is the place to go into the Euro Jet bribery scandal or the institutionalised corruption of the U.S. coporate lobby.
Further appranantly he didn't get away with it.
argument 4
If Jeff Kennett, being an ex politician who closed down schools and hospitals can be a president then why not Dick?
This is a laughable argument and shows how desperate the pro Pratt mob is. The premier of the state has to make judgement calls regarding school and hospitals and the cost to the txpayer and the needs of the community, the economic needs of the state. It's a very complex business and just b/c Jeff may have been an economic dry and closed some schools and hospitals, does not make him a dishonest thief. I am actually offended that somebody (you know who you are) would use that as argument to defend Pratt.
No where near as offended I am by your ignorance and spurious arguments based on what can only be described as pub knowledge and today tonight insight.
Furhter I will argue with you, and pound your unethical arse, on the abhorent nature of what jeff Kennet did. Let me just sum it up. He removed an entire level of publicly elected government and installed self appointed commissioners. It doesn't get any more evil than that buddy. Seriously you don't know WHAT you are talking about.
argument 5
If Visy's customers didn't like the price they could have gone somewhere else
Techinically true. but what other company's besides Visy or Amcor would be large enough to meet the needs of say Woolworths? There is none to my knowledge, Visy and Amcor rule the market which is how collusion occurs. Anyhow Woolworths don't care as long as they don't set the price up to high b/c they just pass the cost on to us. Everyone one of us have been stolen from by Visy and Amcor.
Garbage. Thats the idea of golbalaisation buddy. They could have gone any where. The point of this is not "were we being ropped off", were they setting outrageous prices. No they were not. In fact they were fair and reasonable. furhter yes these people could have gone anywhere else, in fact, they could have even set up their own.
argument 6
Pratt has donated large sums to charity.
This is an argumet that could be used to justify leniency in a court of law if it went that far. But donating money to charity does not give Pratt the right to then go and rip off ordinary Australians. we are all accountable before the law. you guys would probably say that Pratt now has an excuse to go out and committ murder due to the money he has donated? what an absolutely ridiculous argument.
No it goes to reference his character, it is taken into account whenever a sentence ie being made. This just highlights how bloody stupid you are.
argument 7
It is nothing to do with Carlton
i can't believe you are all serious about this. Pratt is the president of our club. People ask themselves what type of club is Carlton? They then look at our leader and see he is the head of the company implicated in the biggest price fixing scandal in Australian history. Pratt is running the club, he is the head, the leader etc. I spose you wuldn't think it would matter if Christopher SKase was runig the club? Of course it would b/c SKase has no credibility and neither does Pratt after this. His reputation has been destroyed. I am thankful for him being a good president but now for the good of CFC he must go.
You are a specialist in using extreme cases to back up your argument which is just ludicrous. (See the " I donate to charity and can therefore commit murder" argument above.) Your extremism means that we should accept hitler, or stalin. In reverse, according to your moronic logic, we should sack someone for J-Walking. Absolutely dumb.
Some more facts about this case
- the federal court has described this case as the worst in corporate history.
Not one person was affected by it. As aopposed to teh pyramid colla[se, Skase, onetel, salmonella in dried meats, champignon botchulism, vitamin poisneing where hundreds and thousands of ordinary citizens lives are destroyed or even die. Not a single citizen was affected by this, you do not use your brain.
- The judge said that Mr Pratt and his excutives were responsible for setting up the deal.
What as opposed to the tooth fairy ?
- The conduct of Visy and Amcor was described as 'extremely destructive'.
To whom ? IN what regard ?
- The fine iimposed on Visy was twice as big as any fine previously.
Is this taking into consideration of interest rates, the level of money exchanged, what ?
You all had the opportunity to come out and state that you are opposed to this and you would not support Pratt as president of our club as a result of this. However all except maybe 1 or 2 others have chosen to to try and sweep this under the carpet and minimise these actions as no big deal. well i'm sorry to say that it is a big deal and as long as Pratt is president of our club, we deserve to be known as the carlton crims.
You dont get that this case did not affect anyone, it as it were business to business, rather than corporates trying to rip off the consumer, like petrol stations and supermarkets. What you need to do is realise there are a lot of people on these boards who are a lot more ethical than you, people who are also a lot more intelligent than you obviously are, and what you need to do is consider other factors and what others are actually saying and realise that your middle class moralising is very different to intelligent considered ethics. In fact consider what these things are, what does niddle class moralising refer to in contrast to ethics.
Learn to think.
We are going to play finals in 08 thanks Dick. AFL is bigger than cardboard, Learn to live
- Thread starter
- #90
Audus u talk out your arse. i can tell by your aggressive language that u are upset b/c you tried to pretend that you knew what you were talking about but it is now obvious u do not. i can tell u right now mate i know exactly what i am talking about and u don't. i am not going to write another 500 word essay rebutting your ridiculous arguments. glad to see what type of person you are audus.
Best of luck with that buddy. Your gonna need it.
well done audas, a fine piece of work... references to other cases etc in a civil manner rate it highly
I usually skip over long winded essay type responses but yours well worth the read!
Does this help in any way?
7-in-10 Australians Think Richard Pratt Should Be Sent To Jail
http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2007/4228/
Just because it took you all morning to read just heading let me flag the part that says...
"If price fixing were a criminal offence"
Ouch... time to go back to your study... year 12 exams are on aren't they?
yes but that is irrelevant... for you see you and I dont make the rules... so therefore it is a stupid poll that is a total waste of time and money.
He has been fined and it is all done.
My god you know how to waffle. When you finish your Sociology degree, go to a concise writing class.
Just a few of points -
a. You say 'I will be the first to say the corruption of the coprate world is beyond perverse, but this is not the point.' It is exactly the point, this type of perversion may go on all the time, but for you this makes it ok. That is absurd logic. Everyone is doing it, so then it must be ok.
b. You say the AFL has committed acts far worse than VISY. This is not only false, but see point a/ for why it is wrong aynway.
c. My reaction is a response to an ethical infraction. Frankly I found it very unetihcal to rip the consumer off for 100's of millions of dollars. Do you?
d. You spend along referring to other infractions, but list none. What are you on about?
e. The point on inquisitions and previous laws is just sad. VISY / AMCOR articially inflated the prices to maximise their profits. Plain and simple.
WOW Jones
Debutant
NUTCASE Comments:
"I am ashamed of the Carlton fans on this thread all of who have defended Pratt except for one. I guess what those oppositions supporters say is true. You all really don't care what these guys do as long as they bring in the money. SHAME SHAME SHAME"
Theres a very simple solution nutcase and if you are so ashamed go follow another club because this one and its supporters turn you off..... Im sure youre original post should have read PRATT MUST RE-SIGN
let start a thread nutcase must Fxxk Off
He has fixed a penis to his head !!!
"I am ashamed of the Carlton fans on this thread all of who have defended Pratt except for one. I guess what those oppositions supporters say is true. You all really don't care what these guys do as long as they bring in the money. SHAME SHAME SHAME"
Theres a very simple solution nutcase and if you are so ashamed go follow another club because this one and its supporters turn you off..... Im sure youre original post should have read PRATT MUST RE-SIGN
let start a thread nutcase must Fxxk Off
He has fixed a penis to his head !!!
Is that the same Roy Morgan organisation that told us the Sydney Swans had the most supporters? The same one that had Paul Keating winning the 1996 Federal Election? The same one that had Mark Latham winning the 2004 Federal Election? Lies, damn lies & statistics.
