Toast The New Carlton Thread: inexperienced Collingwood winger to rule Carlton

Remove this Banner Ad

I’m sure it doesn’t.

But do his fellow directors want ACCC probing around into their affairs to make sure?

What’s the risk of damage to their reputation if Sayers goes down?
Please let this go. The only ACCC connection is a bloke who left there 20 years made a comment about Sayers. The ACCC has been nowhere near the PWC scandal.
 
I’m sure it doesn’t.

But do his fellow directors want ACCC probing around into their affairs to make sure?

What’s the risk of damage to their reputation if Sayers goes down?
Somebody/ some authority is going to follow up the PwC thing and they won't give a rat's ar#e about the Carlton Board
 
I’m not sure about Sayers being tainted by the PWC debacle, but even a hint, a suggestion, a raised eyebrow will do. Anything to keep this pile on going at Carlton. There’s something new and delicious every day. It’s a smorgasbord of issues. What a treat!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I’m not sure about Sayers being tainted by the PWC debacle, but even a hint, a suggestion, a raised eyebrow will do. Anything to keep this pile on going at Carlton. There’s something new and delicious every day. It’s a smorgasbord of issues. What a treat!
**** it, let’s make it stick. The media would do the same if it was us. Screw Carlton
 
Sayers was CEO when much of this was going on so there’s no escaping it for him.
It's a bit of a different situation than a CEO of a private/public company innit? A CEO of a large partnership not necessarily the top dog and might not have gotten too close to the actual professional services being provided?
 
It's a bit of a different situation than a CEO of a private/public company innit? A CEO of a large partnership not necessarily the top dog and might not have gotten too close to the actual professional services being provided?
Oh yeah for sure. I’m not suggesting he will be found guilty of anything but he’s going to be investigated for any part of or knowledge he may have of what was going on.
 
Last edited:
Oh yeah for sure. I’m not suggesting he will be found guilty off anything but he’s going to be investigated for any part of or knowledge he may have of what was going on.
Whatever happens, it's another shonky, dodgy looking businessman associated with Carlton. President of Carlton, no less. And I'm loving every minute of it.
 
It's a bit of a different situation than a CEO of a private/public company innit? A CEO of a large partnership not necessarily the top dog and might not have gotten too close to the actual professional services being provided?
Not really. He was a Partner. I'd be shocked if he wasn't fully aware, given the use of the sensitive information was by senior Partners and he was directly benefiting from the improper use of it. In fact, he would be more aware than a CEO of a bank being aware of what the minions are up to in the branches.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)



This was from 5 years ago.


Not much has changed then..


I was going to say that it was clearly fake because he didn’t look old enough to know any different from Carlton?
 
It's a bit of a different situation than a CEO of a private/public company innit? A CEO of a large partnership not necessarily the top dog and might not have gotten too close to the actual professional services being provided?
No different at all.

All PWC Australia's various corporations are either Pty Ltd or Ltd in structure. They are not a traditional partnership and their Board of Partners, which includes the CEO, come under ASIC and have the same duties and obligations as any other corporate board. Pretty sure the partnership act would have a similar duties requirement for office holders as the corporations act anyway.
It will come down to what they can be shown to have known, or what they reasonably should have known with the exercise of proper due diligence and corporate governance.

Nobody expects directors or CEO's to be at the coal face of service provision but that doesn't get them off the hook if they fail assessment in the line above.
 
No different at all.

All PWC Australia's various corporations are either Pty Ltd or Ltd in structure. They are not a traditional partnership and their Board of Partners, which includes the CEO, come under ASIC and have the same duties and obligations as any other corporate board. Pretty sure the partnership act would have a similar duties requirement for office holders as the corporations act anyway.
It will come down to what they can be shown to have known, or what they reasonably should have known with the exercise of proper due diligence and corporate governance.

Nobody expects directors or CEO's to be at the coal face of service provision but that doesn't get them off the hook if they fail assessment in the line above.

It’s more about the hierarchical structure of a big firm. But lovely to hear of the Partnership Act. Slightly thinner than the Corps Law if I recall.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Paddy Dow must be a real shift footballer
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Toast The New Carlton Thread: inexperienced Collingwood winger to rule Carlton

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top