On 16/06/2018 at 09:15, Mach5 said:

 

Explain, if it is "all about winning", how exactly that applies to Pert's appointment?

And then how that has anything at all to do with corporate contacts?

Winners get taken seriously. 

The rest get what’s left over (the NT)

The top clubs wouldn’t even look at that deal. We had no choice

Time to get serious

  On 16/06/2018 at 05:11, Mach5 said:

 

Thats the point I was making.

Beware the fool's gold of any staff coming from Hawthorn, Collingwood, Geelong, etc. It's easy to get the job done while the team's has wins coming out its backside and hangers-on are clamouring to get to club events to rub shoulders with legends. Many a coattail ridden in these circumstances.

The real work is done at the also-ran clubs, and the pretender-to-contender clubs.

This happens at Melbourne board level too often in our past. 

We had too many thinkers, that think they know how to,,, and jump on Board, only to leave us floundering in the mudheap, having gone no-where.

 

This club needs people of real courage and vision; for our future... Not on-field, but our off-field future;  to grow this clubs base.

Edited June 16, 20186 yr by DV8

  On 16/06/2018 at 10:01, Sir Why You Little said:

Winners get taken seriously. 

The rest get what’s left over (the NT)

The top clubs wouldn’t even look at that deal. We had no choice

Time to get serious

So how is Pert going to help us win games?  That's what we pay Goodwin for.

  On 15/06/2018 at 23:13, Bonkers said:

I'm not so sure of this huge dormant supporter base that you speak of. Our club punches above its weight with supporter to membership conversion. However Roy Morgan research has the MFC as the lowest supported club outside of GC and GWS in the AFL. 

http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7345-roy-morgan-afl-supporter-ladder-2017-201709210118

shame they cant say how many pet and 3 game memberships in a break down , would be interesting to see what difference this makes 

Is Carlton considered to be one of the ‘big 4’ clubs within Melbourne? 

  On 16/06/2018 at 10:40, Ethan Tremblay said:

Is Carlton considered to be one of the ‘big 4’ clubs within Melbourne? 

Bottom 4.  Not big 4.

  On 15/06/2018 at 07:10, Lucifer's Hero said:

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.

It’s not common for succession within the AFL. 

  On 16/06/2018 at 09:27, Roost It said:

If Pert wasn’t a good get he wouldn’t be coming, it’s that simple. There’s no way Jackson or the AFLwould allow us to employ a Muppet. For you quoting Collingwood sources saying he’s no good you’re probably the same clowns who said the same about Jackson. HE has a simple task, get 50,000 members and increase our revenue

60,000 members

  On 16/06/2018 at 10:34, markc said:

shame they cant say how many pet and 3 game memberships in a break down , would be interesting to see what difference this makes 

Pet and 3 game memberships don't count in the AFLs audited end of year tallies

  On 16/06/2018 at 10:33, Wiseblood said:

So how is Pert going to help us win games?  That's what we pay Goodwin for.

Collective force from all levels

stop thinking small WB. We are beyond that now. 

The CLUB demands excellence from all levels

  On 16/06/2018 at 05:20, Sir Why You Little said:

It’s all about winning for the MFC. That is the only way we will grow. 

No, it's a key factor in growth but there's a lot more to it than that.

Get the wins but place yourself to take advantage of them, that's the way we will grow.

North are a great example of a team who weren't able to translate on-field success to support and memberships.

  On 14/06/2018 at 10:36, Travis Boots said:

Wow, my friend knows someone very high up at the pies and this is could turn out to be a horrible appointment

Mate of mine worked at Collingwood for a time and agrees with above!

?

  On 16/06/2018 at 12:17, rjay said:

No, it's a key factor in growth but there's a lot more to it than that.

Get the wins but place yourself to take advantage of them, that's the way we will grow.

North are a great example of a team who weren't able to translate on-field success to support and memberships.

We are not Nought Melbourne. 

They are. 

Our growth corridor is so much bigger

it is yet to be tapped

I have concerns like a few others on here which I think are reasonable to express:

According to the grapevine and the evidence at hand: 

Pert developed his professional career in an environment which is not like our own.

He has shown a heavy hand in the past, and a disposition to involve himself in footy dept. matters.

Regardless of what due process at that level should ordinarily be, Jackson seems to have been sidelined.  

Our president has made some comments to this effect which are suggestive of political ego.

Our board still hasn't demonstrated that they can be entirely trusted.

We have some decent operators who have missed out on the role. 

That said, I'm happy with this appointment. For the following reasons:

It seems the AFL had a say in the recruitment - which is okay by me and I think super important.

The AFL would have had a say for a reason - e.g. they have plans to support our expansion.

Pert seems like the right fit for such a job, and has the experience to get it done. 

Indeed, I see a parallel to the Roos-Goodwin transition (not in experience obviously):

Jackson steadied the ship and laid the foundations, and we now have an ambitious operator to take us to the next level. 

My one simple hope: Pert makes us great again and stays the [censored] away from the on-field activities. 

And that the board has the foresight and chutzpah to enforce these divisions. 

Otherwise, I say congratulations MFC on another coup and let's make it happen. 

Go Dees!

 

  On 16/06/2018 at 21:34, Skuit said:

I have concerns like a few others on here which I think are reasonable to express:

According to the grapevine and the evidence at hand: 

Pert developed his professional career in an environment which is not like our own.

He has shown a heavy hand in the past, and a disposition to involve himself in footy dept. matters.

Regardless of what due process at that level should ordinarily be, Jackson seems to have been sidelined.  

Our president has made some comments to this effect which are suggestive of political ego.

Our board still hasn't demonstrated that they can be entirely trusted.

We have some decent operators who have missed out on the role. 

That said, I'm happy with this appointment. For the following reasons:

It seems the AFL had a say in the recruitment - which is okay by me and I think super important.

The AFL would have had a say for a reason - e.g. they have plans to support our expansion.

Pert seems like the right fit for such a job, and has the experience to get it done. 

Indeed, I see a parallel to the Roos-Goodwin transition (not in experience obviously):

Jackson steadied the ship and laid the foundations, and we now have an ambitious operator to take us to the next level. 

My one simple hope: Pert makes us great again and stays the [censored] away from the on-field activities. 

And that the board has the foresight and chutzpah to enforce these divisions. 

Otherwise, I say congratulations MFC on another coup and let's make it happen. 

Go Dees!

 

We have to grow to become succesful, we won’t be the same “little” quaint MFC anymore. Some blood will be spilt, it is inevitable. 

PJ stripped it all back for efficiency, Pert i hope will grow the Club with the right people doing the right jobs to help us grow and be respected (hated)

i wonder if many on here realize how competitive Austereo is on the radio market

You have to be a good operator to run that place, even though the radio stations were awful!!! I am not their demographic

I’m surprised that Pert lasted as long as he did at collywobbles given he was working with Eddie spaghetti. 

Couldnt imagine he (spaghetti) would be easy to work with so to last as long as he did is quiet the achievement. 

Dont forget collywobbles got rid of Balme too. Bit of history there. 

Welcome to the Dees Perty. 

I' d bet on Eddie having been worse for the culture at Collingwood not Pert

  On 16/06/2018 at 05:20, Sir Why You Little said:

It’s all about winning for the MFC. That is the only way we will grow. 

It’s been too long. 

Pert will have many contacts from his time at Austereo and The Filth

He was also a Director of Pacific Star Network (owners of SEN) for a while.

  On 16/06/2018 at 10:33, Wiseblood said:

So how is Pert going to help us win games?  That's what we pay Goodwin for.

Pert's job is to make sure Goodwin  has the resources he needs and a stable back of house, both things denied to every coach from Norm Smith to Mark Neeld. If you think it's just the coach's responsibility to help us win games you haven't really been paying attention.

First thing he will need is a new desk.

I'd suggest French Oak,.

  On 17/06/2018 at 07:35, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

He was also a Director of Pacific Star Network (owners of SEN) for a while.

Yes you are right. 

More contacts in the Portfolio ? 

Pert has a healthy ego. 

He may well be a good appointment but there may be a downside if current staff leave. 

He will ruffle some feathers. There will be a noticeable difference to style of PJ. 

  On 17/06/2018 at 07:47, hemingway said:

Pert has a healthy ego. 

He may well be a good appointment but there may be a downside if current staff leave. 

He will ruffle some feathers. There will be a noticeable difference to style of PJ. 

I would rather Pert than a no name CEO at this point in our  history. We need to grow...

a place we haven’t been before

Here is what I don't necessarily believe (or believe at all) ...

• That the AFL had to rubber-stamp the appointment of Pert
• That PJ wasn't involved in the decision making process
• That Pert is not the correct appointment
• That there is some sort of mythical rift between Bartlett & Jackson
• That our current board can't be trusted in making good sound decisions

There are a lot of assumptions being made without any proof-positive evidence to back up those assumptions.  All things considered the club is in a sound financial position and our last 5 annual reports back that up.  And the current CEO is responsible for the last 5 annual reports (apart from this year)

I wish Gary Pert all the best and the good news for him is that we almost certainly are ready for some sustained growth.  Winning more games than you lose has always been the key and a good basis to work from. 

Previously,  I've held an almost polar-opposite view to the above.

  On 17/06/2018 at 07:40, Biffen said:

First thing he will need is a new desk.

I'd suggest French Oak,.

I suggest a card table.

Like others this appointment left me feeling weird initially. The work that PJ had done to build his club back up really had me wanting a ‘mini-PJ’ understudy who knew the way. Pert, while a credible CEO in his own right I just feel will come in and stamp his authority. The ship needs to sail on to an extent and I did feel that Mahoney was the guy for this.

Im warming to the Pert idea more but I really hope we have put our club in the right hands. Big shoes to fill