"There are none so blind as those who will not see".

Apart from indulging in (erroneous) speculation as to what I have stored on my computer have you listened to a word I've said? I could be equally puerile and claim that you had the October 2003 release all along and knew that Harris did not join the Club until the following July when you implicated Harris in the LG/Primus transition. But like I said, this would be puerile.

You started out saying the Primus deal was entered into by "mugs" and named Gardner and Harris. Wrong on all counts. And even after all this you persist with this:

"OK it still looks like it was Gardner and not Harris who wanted to be the hero and delivered Primus and cost us LG which leaves us sponsorless now".

I'll ask you again - what would you have done in the Boardroom in November 2003 when evaluating the Primus and LG offerings? To say that entering into a superior 5 year deal in 2003 has left us sponsorless now is ridiculous even by your standards.

At his first Chairman's address Stynes said this:

"...we need to unite and rebuild relationships with key sponsors and donors who have given generously over the years, while also pursuing new opportunities that this new era of leadership and unity will bring..."

The only reason we are sponsorless now is the failure of Stynes and his Board to either renew the Primus deal or replace Primus with an equivalent or better major sponsor. Such a transition was within the capabilities of the discredited Szondy/Ellis administration. The inability of Stynes/Schwab to match this achievement is full of ominous significance for the Club.

.......The only reason we are sponsorless now is the failure of Stynes and his Board to either renew the Primus deal or replace Primus with an equivalent or better major sponsor. Such a transition was within the capabilities of the discredited Szondy/Ellis administration. The inability of Stynes/Schwab to match this achievement is full of ominous significance for the Club.

RF, while you make some very salient points and your argument re the LG/Primus sponsorships processes are valid, you undo all your good work by this remarkable and unsubstantiated contention above.

The main reason we lack a sponsor at present is a thing called the global financial crisis, which, of course, is not the current administration's fault.

Secondly, once again we were screwed with the draw and subsequent free to air exposure.

I, for one, remain confident this administration will ultimately deliver a marquee sponsor and the announcement will be all about timing.

Imagine the announcement of a new captain, with a new sponsor logo appearing on his MFC polo at the press conference????!!!!!!

Think about it, the lack of a current sponsor cannot be blamed on Jimmy or Schwaby and the current Board.

That contention simply has no merit or basis in fact.

Cheers

You started out saying the Primus deal was entered into by "mugs" and named Gardner and Harris. Wrong on all counts. "

For goodness sake stop misrepresenting me. I have told you the Primus deal was announced by Paul Gardner on October 30, 2003, so it's not wrong on all counts, it's right on ONE count.

It was announced on the internet and in the Herald-Sun.

And unlike IWS I don't think your arguments are valid. The point is the AFL does not rate us because we don't build relationships and one of those relationships was with LG. It was potentially long term and sustainable, and the fellow you seem desperate to defend at all costs, Paul Gardner, brought that undone.

Now why is that?

None of this matters except that the club must not repeat the mistakes of the past when that amateur ad-man and dupe of the smooth talkers ran the club.

And you still need to explain why you suppressed that October 30 statement...maybe you should just change your ID

"What would you have done in the Boardroom in November 2003 when evaluating the Primus and LG offerings?"

Answer the question.

"The main reason we lack a sponsor at present is a thing called the global financial crisis, which, of course, is not the current administration's fault".

Actually I have it on good authority from pitmaster that Harris and Gardner were also responsible for the global financial crisis.

"Think about it, the lack of a current sponsor cannot be blamed on Jimmy or Schwaby and the current Board".

Under the terms of the expiring sponsorship deal Primus had until 31 July to commit to a new sponsorship. Any hope that this might have gone in our favour went out the window with the sacking of our CEO and key negotiator, Paul McNamee, by Stynes 8 days earlier.

"None of this matters except that the club must not repeat the mistakes of the past when that amateur ad-man and dupe of the smooth talkers ran the club".

So why don't I feel better now that the Club is run by a ruckman and a CEO on whose watch MFC salary cap rorts occurred and were revealed costing the club a fortune in ATO and AFL fines and draft pick penalties?

RF,

While this is a "members" forum, may I resepctfully suggest that you and the Demonland moderators acquaint yourselves with the libel laws.

RF, you are walking on some very thin ice at present.

Debate is great and welcome, but let's not get personal..........shall we?

"What would you have done in the Boardroom in November 2003 when evaluating the Primus and LG offerings?"

Answer the question.

My Answer: I'd have built a relationship with a loyal sponsor who had been with us six years and who had a global strategy of sponsoring sport...(and now I would not be embarrassed about having an LG VCR, DVD and widescreen telly)

"Actually I have it on good authority from pitmaster that Harris and Gardner were also responsible for the global financial crisis

My response: That's not strictly true, but they did nothing to prevent it.

"None of this matters except that the club must not repeat the mistakes of the past when that amateur ad-man and dupe of the smooth talkers ran the club".

So why don't I feel better now that the Club is run by a ruckman and a salary cap cheat?

My response: This is where you make me deeply suspicious RFW. C Schwab was not the salary cap cheat and why would you bring that up?

Schwab inherited deals done by Hassa Mann and took the fall. The full story is that Fremantle was encourged by the AFL to go hell for leather and did everything they could to lure Steven Tingay among others. Hassa did what football clubs then did and defended the patch. When the Melbourne crew fronted up to the AFL Ian Collins said to them: "what the hell are you doing here?" It was his way of expressing his amazement that we had dobbed ourselves in (ie: we were never going to be caught in the culture of the times).

All of that is of no moment. It will only give you ammo to take another swipe at me, but I am enjoying this too much to stop now. I just want to work out who the ---- you are. Your defence of Gardner over the course of this thread is fascinating. Why would you bother? No-one is beating him up. I just don't get it.

He stuffed up but he did his best, leave it at that, but learn from his errors: ie: build relationships.

Although I can see already that you're not very good at that.

Now tell me why you kept secret that press release. Go on, it will make you feel better to get it off your chest.

PS I can't work out why my earlier responses are in your box but that stuff about the LG TV etc, that's me, and that stuff about how harris and gardner did not prevent the economic meltdown, that's me too. Me? I was buying LG gear to keep the economy going.

RF,

While this is a "members" forum, may I resepctfully suggest that you and the Demonland moderators acquaint yourselves with the libel laws.

RF, you are walking on some very thin ice at present.

Debate is great and welcome, but let's not get personal..........shall we?

OK - how's this then?

"...a CEO on whose watch MFC salary cap rorts occurred and were revealed costing the club a fortune in ATO and AFL fines and draft pick penalties"?

Schwab did not initiate the salary cap rorts. They occurred in seasons 1995-98 inclusive. Schwab was appointed CEO in 1997. The decision as whether to come clean on what had been happening was the cause of the falling out between Schwab and Gutnick.

Truth is an absolute defence in a defamation proceeding.

And BTW - ever stop to think "Who were the players in receipt of the under the counter payments?".

Seems to be some fire in the belly there. Wow.

However, i'm not sure if its heart burn or just hot air.

Go Dees - Go Jimmy. You certainly have my support

"Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. In the first stage of life the mind is frivolous and easily distracted, it misses progress by failing in consecutiveness and persistence. This is the condition of children and barbarians, in which instinct has learned nothing from experience". (George Santayana The Life of Reason, Volume 1, 1905).

Tell us more O Wise One...and you can start by answering my query

Tell us more O Wise One...and you can start by answering my query

Pearls before swine.

Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim.

George Santayana, Life of Reason (1905) vol. 1

"Before you contradict an old man, my fair friend, you should endeavor to understand him".

George Santayana

US (Spanish-born) philosopher (1863 - 1952)

“Doubt is thus the space between reality and the application of an idea. It ought to be given over to the weighing of experience, intuition, creativity, ethics, common sense, reason and, of course, knowledge, in balanced consideration of what is to be done. The longer this stage lasts the more we take advantage of our intelligence.”

John Ralston Saul

Where on earth has this topic gone?

Clunk

Quite an education we're getting today

Quite an education we're getting today

So do we have a sponsor yet or not ?

Google is our new sponsor? wait what...

I would love to know if Melbourne considered my Snickers idea. It would be the sponsorship to end all sponsorships.

How about LG...

I am enjoying this too much to stop now.

Mate, you should have quit back here:

Wrong again.

Szondy was Chairman at the time the LG deal ended and the Primus deal commenced. Gardner was elected as Chairman in January 2004.

More readjustment required.

- you're just making yourself look silly.

You were already drawing a very long bow by trying to suggest that Jim and Co. are not resposible for our current sponsorship situation by making out that it was Harris' (and also Gardners by proxy) fault for not sticking with LG.

Carping on about "relationships" doesn't change the fact that neither Harris nor Gardner were responsible (not that that is even relevant). It doesn't change the fact that the Primus desicion was the right one at the time. And it doesn't change the fact that six months ago when we had a major sponsor Jim identified the importance of retaining sponsors and attracting new ones, and now we have no-one.

Now that Harris and Gardner are out of the equation I suppose you'll blame it on the Boogie? Or will you just cop out with some refence to the financial crisis (which other clubs seem to be dealing with)?

This kind of rabid fan-boi attitude is ridiculous - just because someone played ruck for us does not excuse them from being judged by the same standards as anyone else who runs the club - and in this case by their own standards.

As for you I'va - you're not much better.

Think about it, the lack of a current sponsor cannot be blamed on Jimmy or Schwaby and the current Board.

Give me a break - who else are you going to blame? This has all happened on Jim's watch. It seems like nothing could be blamed on the current board if you had it your way.

And as for

the announcement will be all about timing.

well that's just the lowest cop out yet.

Allow me to remind you again of what you posted back in August.

It would appear Primus are not going to renew there major sponsorship for 2009.

News we did not need to hear right now.

Lets hope Jimmy and the boys have something big planned in that area.

God knows we need it.

The best "timing" for the announcement would have been the same day that Primus announced that they were not renewing their sponsorship.

Most people on these forums seem to be more one-eyed than Collingwood supporters when it comes to "big Jimma and the boys."

Well, the honeymoon is over. Time for a little bit of reality, critical thinking and common sense in these debates please.

Give me a break - who else are you going to blame? This has all happened on Jim's watch. It seems like nothing could be blamed on the current board if you had it your way.

I guess it depends on whether or not you think that blame needs to be doled out for the current sponsor situation.

I think given MFC's on-field performance over the last couple of seasons, recent board & administration turn-over & the club's financial problems, not to mention the consequent bad publicity, coupled with the current Global Financial Crisis... any CEO or president would have been hard pressed to produce a quick & positive solution to our lack of a major sponsor.

Currently the MFC projects an image to the public of a brand that is associated with failure more than success. The club is working to change that and it is happening. Slowly but surely.

Unfortunately the results need to come on-field before this will change drastically.

But in terms of blame for Schwab or Stynes, I'd rather them wait for the right deal instead of going for a quick deal where we get insufficient compensation. Potential sponsors will be looking at our current form, but this deal won't be a 1 year deal remember. We can only go up from here & should be paid accordingly.

Jim's had 6 months in which he could have either secured our last major sponsor or found a new one.

If you don't want to approtion blame then that's your rose-tinted perogative but there can be no doubt that the current situation is Jim's responsibilty.

The longer we wait the more money we are forgoing - the new administration has had 6 months already to find the "right deal."

However, if this level of reality impinges too greatly upon your Jim fantasies I guess you could always come up with some half-baked conspiracy theory and blame a random member of a previous administration for letting Tooheys slip through their fingers.

Give me a break.