Jump to content

  • Latest Podcast: Josh Mahoney Interview



Stretch Johnson

New CEO - Gary Pert

Recommended Posts

On Open Mike a few years back if anyone is interested. I recall that I thought him pretty impressive at the time, but on watching it again I hope that he can curtail the heavy on-field focus that he developed at Collingwood - which I also hope was out of necessity rather than it being a natural personality/ego thing. I further hope that our board have made it clear that our club is an entirely different landscape to the CFC and such an approach isn't necessarily necessary, rather than our board thinking that such an approach can magically emulate Collingwood's success. That is all. Good luck Gary, and welcome aboard.  

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whenever someone in a senior position leaves any job, there is always some bad blood somewhere. Otherwise why leave? 

Anyone who has ever left a job usually feels some animosity towards their former employer and vice versa. 

I am very comfortable with this appointment and I trust both our board and the AFL. If Pert did a lot wrong they wouldn’t endorse his appointment. We have come too far and they don’t want us to become a basket case again! Trust me, they have enough issues with the likes of GC.

Now let’s build a home base, get a better fixture and get rid of the NT deal. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Pert has the experience and he isn’t Lethlean.

We seem to have strong and talented staff developed by Jackson. I hope Pert didn’t make changes purely for the sake of it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jaded said:

Whenever someone in a senior position leaves any job, there is always some bad blood somewhere. Otherwise why leave? 

Anyone who has ever left a job usually feels some animosity towards their former employer and vice versa. 

I am very comfortable with this appointment and I trust both our board and the AFL. If Pert did a lot wrong they wouldn’t endorse his appointment. We have come too far and they don’t want us to become a basket case again! Trust me, they have enough issues with the likes of GC.

Now let’s build a home base, get a better fixture and get rid of the NT deal. 

We have no bad blood with Roos and vice versa. 

Pert left Collingwood because he was about to be removed. Coaches are generally better the second time let's hope Pert is as well.

From what I understand he is excellent at his job but was previously not a great culture builder. I hope he has learnt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wrecker45 said:

We have no bad blood with Roos and vice versa. 

Pert left Collingwood because he was about to be removed. Coaches are generally better the second time let's hope Pert is as well.

From what I understand he is excellent at his job but was previously not a great culture builder. I hope he has learnt.

Roos like Jackson didn’t leave. He effectively retired, which is very different. 

I don’t think Melbourne would let another CEO meddle in the footy department. The problem at Collingwood is that everyone felt entitled to get involved in the footy department because their president did. 

How can a president except the CEO not to get involved when he is so deeply and destructively involved, I don’t know. 

We have a very different set up and a very different structure. I have no doubt when given the job, Pert was told his KPIs revolve around revenue, membership, sponsorship and finding a permanent united home base. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Adzman said:

Damn, I was hoping to get the CEO role....

Good luck to Pert, I think I would have been a more entertaining appointment...

Certainly no issues with a receding hairline for photo shoots Adzman!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Colin B. Flaubert said:

What I do know was that he resigned around the time they appointed Peter Murphy to do an external review of the club.

That indicates to me that the results concerning him coming from that review may not have been particularly flattering. I don't know particulars but that alone is worrying.

As a Demon, I don't know who else fell on their sword in that review but I knew that he was of the highest consequence.

I'm not a sky is falling type concerning every move we make. I hope also that the move works out. But I would be lying if I said it didn't make me raise an eyebrow.

So a fair bit of assumption there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, drysdale demon said:

So a fair bit of assumption there.

So why do you think he resigned at that time then? Nearly in tears might I add. Because he has been cutting too many onions as CEO?

It is OK to be skeptical at times so long as you aren't over the top. I don't believe I have been. 

It's also possible to be an unquestioning fan boy who shoots down any rational discussion by dismissing critical analysis as people being 'hysterical'.

Perhaps you could let me know why you believe it's a good appointment before you dismiss others?

 

Edited by Colin B. Flaubert
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Colin B. Flaubert said:

So why do you think he resigned at that time then? Nearly in tears might I add. Because he has been cutting too many onions as CEO?

It is OK to be skeptical at times so long as you aren't over the top. I don't believe I have been. 

It's also possible to be an unquestioning fan boy who shoots down any rational discussion by dismissing critical analysis as people being 'hysterical'.

Perhaps you could let me know why you believe it's a good appointment before you dismiss others?

 

Time will tell if it is a good appointment or not, I am just not in the habit of criticizing decisions made by the club without knowing any facts or details. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I genuinely hope he stays away from the FD @Jaded and I think he is smart enough to do so.

While he has played the game and probably has a better grasp of the game than CS, the last time our CEO tried that it was disastrous.

One of the most impressive thing about PJ'S reign is that responsibilities have been clearly defined. No one ever steps onto others turf and as a result the kind of bunfights that occurred pre PJ just don't happen.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, drysdale demon said:

Time will tell if it is a good appointment or not, I am just not in the habit of criticizing decisions made by the club without knowing any facts or details. 

So you haven't really thought about it at all then and are willing to follow whatever is presented to you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Colin B. Flaubert said:

So you haven't really thought about it at all then and are willing to follow whatever is presented to you?

It is a decision made by the club, they know all the details, I do not, so at the moment I will go along with it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've got to love a bitter Mick Malthouse taking pot shots at Pert already, claiming they never really 'got along', although you would believe that Pert wouldn't be the first or the last person not to get along with angry Mick.  

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mick is still so bitter about the Buckley succession deal.  you signed off on Mick!

I think Pert will do very well, he oversaw a period of success on and off the field for Collingwood.  they made a mistake with the buckley move but stuff happens.  That young 2010 team really should have won 1-2 more flags but Buckley decided a re-build was in order, hilarious!  they are only now recovering 6 years later

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

You've got to love a bitter Mick Malthouse taking pot shots at Pert already, claiming they never really 'got along', although you would believe that Pert wouldn't be the first or the last person not to get along with angry Mick.  

I'm more confident in the decision now that Mick Malthouse has come out against it. He's always the contrarian for the sake of being one.

  • Like 8
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We won't know if Pert's any good until after he's been in the job a while:

I thought Ray Ellis was going to be good

I thought Schwab was going to be good

I thought MacNamee was going to be good

I thought Harris was going to be good

Etc Etc Etc

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Wrecker45 said:

Just read that too. I'm normally glass half full on anything MFC but very concerned about this.

I was told by a passionate Collingwood supporter who both he and wife had independent professional dealings with Pert that Pert was toxic at Collingwood. When I was told this Collingwood had just done it's review and Pert left. he even said to bet on Collingwood to make finals after he left because rifts would be healed.

 

Hey wrecker that's definitely a worry.

Can you provide more detail of what aspects constituted his toxicity?

Maybe we can avoid that attribute and benefit from his other recognised strengths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m pretty sure our ‘saviour’ Jackson left Essendon under acrimonious circumstances... that obviously didn’t impinge on the results he’s achieved with us

  • Like 7
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there are no cleanskins anywhere... people have fallings out either inadvertently or otherwise in life...

clearly there are no MAJOR ethical or governance concerns...and his resumè and body of work is exemplary.

We are a destination club on and off the park, at this point in time...amen to that.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Take on Pert leaving Collingwood is either Pert or Buckley had to go to keep the supporters happy.  It is easier to replace Pert than Buckley.

On the Peter Jackson being excluded from the call, his job would be to present options for the board to choose, the end of the day Jackson isn't the one that has to work with his replacement.

Is it a good or bad appointment we will know in 3 years time,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Colin B. Flaubert said:

What I do know was that he resigned around the time they appointed Peter Murphy to do an external review of the club.

That indicates to me that the results concerning him coming from that review may not have been particularly flattering. I don't know particulars but that alone is worrying.

As a Demon, I don't know who else fell on their sword in that review but I knew that he was of the highest consequence.

I'm not a sky is falling type concerning every move we make. I hope also that the move works out. But I would be lying if I said it didn't make me raise an eyebrow.

I genuinely no nothing about why Pert left Collingwood, but I could see that the review that Collingwood undertook came to the conclusion that there needed to be a change at the top which could have meant the President or the CEO...and the President made sure it wasn't him.

Pert had spent a long time at Collingwood, so it was probably the right move for both him and that club for him to move on.

And Mick Malthouse has apparently today slammed the appointment of Gary Pert as our new CEO. In my opinion, that just confirms the club has made the right decision!

  • Like 4
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

A few points on overseeing a footy department.

1. Sometimes the CEO and the Board must get involved in list management eg when a player decision will bring much media scrutiny eg Grimes, Trengove, Watts, Lever. 

Or selection of Captains etc. 

It s essential everyone sings from the same song book when the media comes calling. 

2. Chris Judd recently said on FC that Bolton is rock solid as their coach and they had just extended his contract.  Judd's explanation was that the Board had signed off on the List Management strategy and the Game Plan.  Bolton was delivering to the Board's KPI's. 

3.  I would expect the CEO and Board to sign off on any 'outside the parameters' player contracts.

etc

It is about good governance, so the CEO and the Board must be involved in the football matters but at a strategic level and not a day to day management level. 

The key is to get the balance right between the Eddie show; the CS/CC level interference and letting the football department do their own thing.  Only time will tell if Pert can do that.  (I doubt he would have survived for 10 years as a CEO anywhere if he wasn't a very good juggler).

Edited by Lucifer's Hero
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure "Keeping your nose out of the footy department" would have been one of the first criteria stated to pert when interviewing him for the job...

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Blinkybill said:

Well Pert has the experience and he isn’t Lethlean.

We seem to have strong and talented staff developed by Jackson. I hope Pert didn’t make changes purely for the sake of it.

A little bit underwhelmed, Bb?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

Wow.   Did anyone see that coming?

Not me. Never even thought he was a contender. 

On the face of it seems a good appointment, as he is very experienced in the role from previous clubs.

Edited by Redleg
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×