He may well be excellent, but the hard thing for Pert will be that he is following in the footsteps of the best football administrator we've had in my time following the Dees.

Anyone following PJ will need to be outstanding just to be considered reasonable.

I wish him luck.

2 minutes ago, hells bells said:

He may well be excellent, but the hard thing for Pert will be that he is following in the footsteps of the best football administrator we've had in my time following the Dees.

Anyone following PJ will need to be outstanding just to be considered reasonable.

I wish him luck.

Another way to look at that is, if PJ is the best, then everyone else is behind/below him, Pert is the best of that bunch. PJ is leaving so we had to choose someone and this guy is next best, it's all we can do.

22 minutes ago, hells bells said:

He may well be excellent, but the hard thing for Pert will be that he is following in the footsteps of the best football administrator we've had in my time following the Dees.

Anyone following PJ will need to be outstanding just to be considered reasonable.

I wish him luck.

PJ has set him up beautifully. Best time to be the CEO of our soon to be great again Club in the past 50 years if not ever. 

It sounds like PJ has already set up where and what the training base is going to be. Other than that he's going to have the biggest bucket of money the Club has ever had from Leighoak and ultimately the sale of the Bentleigh Club. He's inheriting not only PJ's work but also the Gardiner admin's work in getting those venues. Plus hopefully the footy Dept is very settled at the moment with most pieces in place. 

There's no one more experienced in the AFL industry to develop facilities and membership. Bring it on. 

20 minutes ago, SFebey said:

Another way to look at that is, if PJ is the best, then everyone else is behind/below him, Pert is the best of that bunch. PJ is leaving so we had to choose someone and this guy is next best, it's all we can do.

He helped them get to 75,000 members

That is exactly what we need right now. 

PJ built the solid foundations and should forever be revered at the MFC

8 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

He helped them get to 75,000 members

That is exactly what we need right now. 

PJ built the solid foundations and should forever be revered at the MFC

Any idea how many members they had when he took over in 2007? They had 80,000 in 2013. 

Edited June 15, 20186 yr by Ethan Tremblay

2 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Any idea how many members they had when he took over in 2007? 

74,643

Cant say I agree with this decision, but backing PJ and the gang all the way.

4 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Any idea how many members they had when he took over in 2007? They had 80,000 in 2013. 

Not sure ET but i would guess 35-40,000 in 2007. 

I do know it grew quickly...

7 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Any idea how many members they had when he took over in 2007? They had 80,000 in 2013. 

6 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Any idea how many members they had when he took over in 2007? They had 80,000 in 2013. 

2007 - 38,587

2008 - 42,498

2009 - 45,972

2010 - 48,408

2011 - 71,796

2012 - 72,688

etc, etc...

6 minutes ago, SFebey said:

Thanks. Membership exploded whilst Pert was there. 

Exactly what we need, from that we get exposure and better fixtures. 

To grow you must take carefully planned risks. Some may fail, but the wins can be huge. 

The flag might have helped those numbers a bit (tigers, anyone?)

1 hour ago, Rob Mac...... said:

I imagine that most of us, like myself, have great trust, admiration, respect and gratitude for the great job Peter Jackson seems to have done, while we know relatively little about our board and president and their ability to make the correct choice of a CEO. 

That IMHO being the case, I can’t understand why they wouldn’t consult with PJ about this decision, even if solely to make the supporters feel more comfortable with the choice?   

Of course PJ has no vote In choosing his replacement, but seeking his advice during the process would surely make supporters feel better about the choice, and how a clubs supporters feel is important too. 

I hope we’re about to be informed that PJ was consulted?   

Most likely they did RM.

 

... but what IF the choice was down to a shortlist of say 3, and the board was divided on close choices.

_ and then, what if the choice was leaked from head office, before the board had chosen ?  What then ?

10 minutes ago, small but forward said:

The flag might have helped those numbers a bit (tigers, anyone?)

Certainly does, Bulldogs went from 39k to 47k post premiership!

19 minutes ago, small but forward said:

The flag might have helped those numbers a bit (tigers, anyone?)

Absolutely. But you have to know how to maximize that growth (Bulldogs...)

20 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

Wow.   Did anyone see that coming?

Funnily enough he was the first one to come to my mind...didn't mention him at the time though.

Thought he was done with footy.

I wonder if the Roos connection played any part? a pity the podcast was before the announcement.

Edited June 15, 20186 yr by rjay

2 minutes ago, rjay said:

Funnily enough he was the first one to come to my mind...didn't mention him at the time though.

Thought he was done with footy.

I wonder if the Roos connection played any part? a pity the podcast was before the announcement.

Interesting thought.......

1 hour ago, It's Time said:

Tried to delete post saying 38,587 as others have already done it but you can't delete posts. 

 

And now you have doubled down....

7 minutes ago, rjay said:

I wonder if the Roos connection played any part? a pity the podcast was before the announcement.

Yeah we would definitely have asked him about that. 

50 minutes ago, DV8 said:

Most likely they did RM.

 

... but what IF the choice was down to a shortlist of say 3, and the board was divided on close choices.

_ and then, what if the choice was leaked from head office, before the board had chosen ?  What then ?

ooooh nastae!

1 hour ago, DV8 said:

Most likely they did RM.

 

... but what IF the choice was down to a shortlist of say 3, and the board was divided on close choices.

_ and then, what if the choice was leaked from head office, before the board had chosen ?  What then ?

There is no pleasing some people...

Is it common practice for a CEO to choose their own replacement? 

20 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Is it common practice for a CEO to choose their own replacement? 

Short answer:  No.  But it is common to have succession planning in place. 

Long answer:  Ultimately it is still the responsibility of a Board to find the best candidate.  Bartlett drove the search process having engaged head hunters: Russell Reynolds.  

In our case it is our Board and the AFL (who still pull the strings as we are not entirely out of the woods).  Caroline Wilson reported a few weeks ago that MFC wanted Mahoney but the AFL had other ideas.  No idea if that is true.  However, we do know the AFL is not beyond using Machiavellian methods to get its way.

If the AFL did lean on our Board to appoint Pert I understand why.  It is highly probable they will chip in land and or $ for our new facilities and they want to make sure the CEO can deliver.  Pert has a track record of achievement in that area which is our next and critical phase of development.  He is definitely the low risk option.

Edited June 15, 20186 yr by Lucifer's Hero

May have missed it but what has Pert been doing since he left Collingwood? 

18 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Is it common practice for a CEO to choose their own replacement? 

I wouldn't think so. It's a board appointment.

Having said that when PJ announced that he was stepping down he indicated that he would have a hand in the succession planning. I'm not positive what exactly went down in appointing Pert but some parts of the media are salivating at the prospect that there may bad blood spilled. I'm hoping that this is just journos looking for a story where there is none.

I guess we'll find out in due time.