The OFFICIAL 2011 Board Election Thread

[LT Smash]

Perhaps it will sound wrong, but would be good to have some financial contribution as a requirement to join the board. For example 50k contribution as a right to join. The board should ideally be full of business people with money, and they should be able to contribute easily, and these sorts of people should have no problem helping the club to make money, in both football and non football revenue streams.

There was a suggestion of this nature floating a year ago based on the Carlton model instigated by Dick Pratt and it was howled down by the socialists of the forum. I only hope we can clear our debt by raising sufficient Kumbayas - though not sure if they are yet to be traded as hard currency.

In the event that this ludicrous plan - selling board spots - did come in, I'd be setting the bar slightly higher than 50k.

Quite right - make them responsible for attracting $50K new business per year. Better yet, make that $150K per year. I don't see it as necessary that this is personal play money they have to put up. They are simply required to attract funds of that amount into the club. It's not about 2007 share structure, it's about essential revenue and it's about ensuring the people on the board are suitable directors of a company turning over $30 million per year. We don't need raffle ticket sellers, we need people who can turn this struggling little sports club into a multi million dollar enterprise with a future.

 

[Limerick]

Quite right - make them responsible for attracting $50K new business per year. Better yet, make that $150K per year. I don't see it as necessary that this is personal play money they have to put up. They are simply required to attract funds of that amount into the club. It's not about 2007 share structure, it's about essential revenue and it's about ensuring the people on the board are suitable directors of a company turning over $30 million per year. We don't need raffle ticket sellers, we need people who can turn this struggling little sports club into a multi million dollar enterprise with a future.

No problems with the concept of having Board members having a target of bringing in additional revenue however as the Board operates as a team it will be difficult to track each initiative against individuals.

The main challenge for the Board from this point on is to grow the NM membership to the average AFL membership level, currently close to 40k, and to have attendances representative of that number. The security of our future lies in gaining a size that has us out of the firing line, not relying on a small number of wealthy members tipping in considerable sums.

 

[LT Smash]

No problems with the concept of having Board members having a target of bringing in additional revenue however as the Board operates as a team it will be difficult to track each initiative against individuals.

Which is also the challenge for us as we try to analyse just how vital a cog an incumbent and standing board member is with regard to the record revenues and new initiatives the club is undertaking. I mean, is there an implied suggestion from the Chairman that the board members who have stood down did so because they had achieved as much as they could at board level, and that the remaining board members have been endorsed by the Chairman because they continue to provide valuable service? Is that what he is telling us?

 

[Limerick]

Which is also the challenge for us as we try to analyse just how vital a cog an incumbent and standing board member is with regard to the record revenues and new initiatives the club is undertaking. I mean, is there an implied suggestion from the Chairman that the board members who have stood down did so because they had achieved as much as they could at board level, and that the remaining board members have been endorsed by the Chairman because they continue to provide valuable service? Is that what he is telling us?

My understanding is that standing board member is seeking re-election as is required by the Constitution and not because of any thoughts of the Chairman.

But your initial question is valid - how do we analyse just how vital a cog the incumbent and standing board member is? Todate no one has addressed this question.

Additionally our "record revenues" left us with a loss of $580k this year. So there is a requirement for much further work in the future and maybe some new blood. Happy to be convinced otherwise.

 

[LT Smash]

My understanding is that standing board member is seeking re-election as is required by the Constitution and not because of any thoughts of the Chairman.

If Inserra and Head hadn't resigned, and if the board hadn't decided to reduce from 8 to 7 seats, then Inserra and Head would be required by the constitution to seek re-election alongside Houghton, iirc. I can't even remember how we got onto this point about the Chairman's thoughts, but I suspect he is quite satisfied with the outcome, and that the two who resigned were thanked for their services and those remaining were required players so to speak. It's like a streamlining of the board through natural attrition. I don't think it's an accident.

 

[RoyalBlue]

My view right now is that the club is still not in the right place to be handing board positions to rich blokes. Too much of the club's administration is still being molded into that of a professional organisation, and extra support provided by the board members using their skills.

One day we'll be in a position to effective make board positions something good for blokes who chip in cash, right now, no way.

 

[Shinboner Schem]

A couple of points:

first, if the main benefit of a particular board member is their expertise (e.g. in building - re the redevelopment), then we shouldn't expect that board member to be bringing in 50k.
What if we had some sort of sports scientist who wanted to nominate for the board? they wouldn't be on a CEO's wage and wouldn't have the wealthy contacts to bring in the 50k.


secondly, i don't want to end up in the situation where we don't get new candidates to the board because they can't afford to front up the cash.
and i don't want to end up in the situation where once on the board, the member feels some sort of ownership of the club and hence their decisions, and doesn't feel the need to justify those decisions to members

 

[Event Horizon]

A couple of points:

first, if the main benefit of a particular board member is their expertise (e.g. in building - re the redevelopment), then we shouldn't expect that board member to be bringing in 50k.
What if we had some sort of sports scientist who wanted to nominate for the board? they wouldn't be on a CEO's wage and wouldn't have the wealthy contacts to bring in the 50k.


secondly, i don't want to end up in the situation where we don't get new candidates to the board because they can't afford to front up the cash.
and i don't want to end up in the situation where once on the board, the member feels some sort of ownership of the club and hence their decisions, and doesn't feel the need to justify those decisions to members

A sport scientist should be employed by the club if we need one, there is no need having one on the board. The same goes for many others "needs" that people may bring to the table - if we need this skill, hire someone who has it. The board is for people who oversee the ship and put in the funds to help to guide the ship.

But I agree with RB, that perhaps we aren't yet in the position to implement this kind of board setup.

 

[MaddAdam]

The board is for people who oversee the ship and put in the funds to help to guide the ship.

No it isn't.

 

[LT Smash]

No doubt it's a fine line or indeed a slippery slope between recruiting and nominating potential board members with the contacts and acumen for raising new revenue, and a rich person's birth right as RB implies. But I do feel a little uneasy about the prospect of a company director of a $30 million annual turnover enterprise being incapable of attracting genuine business opportunities to the club because they are just regular joes. Happy to have those types serve on the committee of the local tennis club, but I don't feel confidence in them steering our professional football club into the future.

 

[GarnerSmash]

We are a club in the biggest and wealthiest sporting code in Australia. We should be looking at getting people on the board who have national or international level experience and contacts in their field of speciality, experience and contacts that will serve the club well in growing and developing it's business. It is this, and not the board members bank balance and willingness to part with $$$, nor their BFNAAKness, that should be the basis of their election to the board. Get the best people possible to help North secure its future and grow its name.

 

[MaddAdam]

We are a club in the biggest and wealthiest sporting code in Australia. We should be looking at getting people on the board who have national or international level experience and contacts in their field of speciality, experience and contacts that will serve the club well in growing and developing it's business. It is this, and not the board members bank balance and willingness to part with $$$, nor their BFNAAKness, that should be the basis of their election to the board. Get the best people possible to help North secure its future and grow its name.

See, I'd have Punter on the board. His links internationally with sporting orgs, corporates would be invaluable.

 

[GarnerSmash]

See, I'd have Punter on the board. His links internationally with sporting orgs, corporates would be invaluable.

Depends on how savvy he is in relation to business activities and development. I'd happily approach him as an official ambassador for the club, but a board member requires more than just the contacts and profile. They need to be able to inform strategic decisions.

 

[Event Horizon]

No it isn't.

That's arguable, but if you look at EPL club boards, you'll find that most people on those would have a financial stake at the club. I would argue that in most cases board members need to contribute to the club financially.

 

[GarnerSmash]

That's arguable, but if you look at EPL club boards, you'll find that most people on those would have a financial stake at the club. I would argue that in most cases board members need to contribute to the club financially.

You will also find that EPL clubs like that are not member owned. I do not want a board where the members are financially invested in the club, other than off their own bat. Money is just another thing that could make a functional board dysfunctional very quickly.

 

[RoyalBlue]

We've just emerged from a period of semi-rich ****s running the board at North.

We wound up on our knees and only very luckily did we emerge from it.

The club needs to be ticking along frightfully before I'll cop money prerequisites for board membership.

 

[MaddAdam]

That's arguable, but if you look at EPL club boards, you'll find that most people on those would have a financial stake at the club. I would argue that in most cases board members need to contribute to the club financially.

If I look at the EPL I see the most successful team (Man City) at the moment just recorded an $AUD400m+ operating loss and is entirely reliant on the whims of a bunch of crooked sheikhs from Abu Dhabi.

If I look at the EPL, I see how a family of American "sports entrepeneurs" took the debt free cash cow Man United and turned it into a "franchise" crippled by 700m+ debt.

If I look at the EPL I see how clubs that were competing in the top flight like Portsmouth and West Ham have been relegated and almost destroyed by having big business type board members and owners.

Piss poor example.

As RB said above, we've already had an era of boys club put 50k on the table type running of the club and it almost ****ing killed us.

Ayn Rand has no place in a civilised society let alone a boutique community footy club.

 

[Event Horizon]

Ayn Rand has no place in a civilised society let alone a boutique community footy club.

Interesting point - wonder how much you actually know or read about Ayn Rand to be bothered to include her into your post. Not suggesting you haven't - just wondering.

Look, I understand all the "boutique and community" side of it, but believe me - at the end of the day the community won't take us deep into the 21 century. We are a unique club, there is no doubt about that, but a few more years of $500k losses, and we'll be flying to Tasmania much more than 2 times a year to watch the side play - we'd be lucky to see a Melbourne match more than half a dozen times a year.

People with vision and money to back the vision up are needed. The difference between West Hams of this world and us is that we actually get to vote those people in - they can't just buy their way in.

 

[MaddAdam]

Interesting point - wonder how much you actually know or read about Ayn Rand to be bothered to include her into your post. Not suggesting you haven't - just wondering.

Look, I understand all the "boutique and community" side of it, but believe me - at the end of the day the community won't take us deep into the 21 century. We are a unique club, there is no doubt about that, but a few more years of $500k losses, and we'll be flying to Tasmania much more than 2 times a year to watch the side play - we'd be lucky to see a Melbourne match more than half a dozen times a year.

People with vision and money to back the vision up are needed. The difference between West Hams of this world and us is that we actually get to vote those people in - they can't just buy their way in.

How long do you reckon that will last - the voting business - once we let the rich blokes with vision in?

Let's not recall that under your model people had the vision of sending us to Sydney. Then to the Gold Coast.

 

[Z_K]

Interesting point - wonder how much you actually know or read about Ayn Rand to be bothered to include her into your post. Not suggesting you haven't - just wondering.

I have, and as such am sure that I state the following with some experience and knowledge....everything she put into print should be burned. Gathered up, clustered together in an enormous pile and burned. All the ashes, all the charred and barely together spines and pages smashed together again and then burned again. It is the only way.

Look, I understand all the "boutique and community" side of it, but believe me - at the end of the day the community won't take us deep into the 21 century.

The community is the only thing that will get North Melbourne deep into this century.

 

[Event Horizon]

The community is the only thing that will get North Melbourne deep into this century.

I hope it does mate. Honestly do. But my head tells me otherwise. What do you make of the 500k loss? Will getting rid of the debt magically solve all the problems? Or will "community" account for natural growth to 40k plus members?

The reality is the community and loyal members like us may be soul of this club, but the soul also needs a body to live in, as once the body is dead, the soul will turn into a spirit which will live in our memories and history books. And to make sure the "body" doesn't die, we need to continue reinventing ourselves, as we have been doing through out the time of our existence. That requires vision, and people with business acumen, not merely relying on the community. How many more 500k losses can we sustain? Mind you, I am not at all suggestion relocation or any other similar crap - as you would know. We live or die here at North Melbourne. But we need to find revenue streams, and we have to become the best marketed club in this country. We are a long way away from that.

As for Ayn Rand - do you realise that "Atlas Shrugged" has sold second most copies to the Bible?

 

[Shinboner Schem]

A sport scientist should be employed by the club if we need one, there is no need having one on the board. The same goes for many others "needs" that people may bring to the table - if we need this skill, hire someone who has it. The board is for people who oversee the ship and put in the funds to help to guide the ship.

But I agree with RB, that perhaps we aren't yet in the position to implement this kind of board setup.

Yes, a sports scientist should be employed by the club, but if some expertise were on the board then that knowlege can be used in decision making and direction.

Just like with the case for our 7/11 candidate, we still need a marketing person to be employed by the club, but having that expertise on the board is also valuable.
The example of a sports scientist was merely chosen to illustrate that not all worthwhile candidates will come from/be able to bring in money.

 

[spurs]

The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum. whenever evil wins, it is only by default: by the moral failure of those who evade the fact that there can be no compromise on basic principles.
Ayn Rand, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, 1966

 

[scottywiper]

Did Ayn ever play at the top level?

 

[LT Smash]

Atley Shrugged. That's all I'll say on the matter. And by the way, who is Rod Galt?