Role of Presidents

[rolling fog 1,207]

Just read the thread about kennet comong out and voicing his opinion on the AFL site. Jeff Kennet and Paul Gardiner appear to be the only club presidents visible in the public domain. Kennet has been very vocal on his thoughts of Ben Cousins, Illicit Drugs, Player welfare and the role of the AFL and clubs in this area as has Gardiner. Footy classified showed three presidents last week in beat the press with gardiner, smorgan and the essendon pres. who i'd never seen/heard of. Eddie everywhere is not as everywhere as he once was...should club presidents and club administrators for that matter be active in the media and participate in dialogue in the football community or should they remain behind the scenes?

[Kit Walker 225]

Depends on how credible your president is. I think Paul Gardner is very credible and well respected. Must surely help with membership, sponsorship, and media coverage.

Not all publicity is good publicity though, Rod Butterss for example.....

[Pates 9,660]

I think we've got a good mix with Gardner, our previous presidents (Gutnick & Szondy) we either non-existent or too much in the media.

Joe was always at loggerheads with the AFL and i think it impacted on our club culture at the time, and Szondy hardly said anything at all (although i understand he was just a temp and was try to steer the ship). When Gardner speaks to the media, it's usually for a good reason. I was happy for him to express his views on the drugs issue at the time because he was always been quite vocal against drugs, and when he was on FC he needed to answer questions about ND's immediate future as well as get one back on those blood-suckers.

[demonfanjezza 1]

I think it depends on the situation whether they speak or not

Paul is a very good president for our club

[NO MERGER 20]

I am not a Paul Gardner fan.

[deanox 9,898]

I am not a Paul Gardner fan.

why not? off field we are having great financial success, the best in decades. the board is stable, we have a record membership and we are moving into a new training and administration base soon. the president is well spoken, keeps a low profile unless he needs to stand up for or speak out about something. he is a charitable person and he has, imo, done good things for the Melbourne brand name.

the only issue i could see anyone taking with him is not sacking ND after 9 losses, but personally i dont think ND should have been sacked because it would have been destablising over all.

what more does he need to do to impress you?

[NO MERGER 20]

why not? off field we are having great financial success, the best in decades. the board is stable, we have a record membership and we are moving into a new training and administration base soon. the president is well spoken, keeps a low profile unless he needs to stand up for or speak out about something. he is a charitable person and he has, imo, done good things for the Melbourne brand name.

the only issue i could see anyone taking with him is not sacking ND after 9 losses, but personally i dont think ND should have been sacked because it would have been destablising over all.

what more does he need to do to impress you?

The success at MFC has been a effort contributed by a number of people. I wouldn't say Gardner has soley achieved all this on his own without the input from other departments and members of the club.

"unless he needs to stand up for or speak out about something"

I have witness him single handedly put down certain individuals or groups of people which in my eyes is seen as disrespectful.

In regards to Neale Daniher....he's a big part of the MFC and in my opinion should be applauded for his efforts. I hope he presses on coaching next year or for another 10 years...

[deanox 9,898]

i found this quote in the report by steve harris which is currently on the mfc website which documents the success of recent times off field, i thought it was interesting.

It is testimony to the hard work of many people across the Club -- board, management team, football department -- that in the past three to four years we have lifted membership by 40%, total revenue by 50%, improved our net asset position by $3 million and experienced a $5 million improvement in our debt position.

which groups and individuals have you seen or heard him put down needlessly? im sorry but i havnt witnessed this and im keen to hear about it if it happened.

[NO MERGER 20]

i found this quote in the report by steve harris which is currently on the mfc website which documents the success of recent times off field, i thought it was interesting.

It is testimony to the hard work of many people across the Club -- board, management team, football department -- that in the past three to four years we have lifted membership by 40%, total revenue by 50%, improved our net asset position by $3 million and experienced a $5 million improvement in our debt position.

which groups and individuals have you seen or heard him put down needlessly? im sorry but i havnt witnessed this and im keen to hear about it if it happened.

It's great to see that MFC have pulled together to achieve such great numbers in members and financial turnover. As Steve Harris says, it's from a number of people across the club etc...

Best to not say who or what he said, but I'm sure there were other people at the charity cricket match at the Junction Oval last year that might have picked up on a defamatory remark. Enough said.

[Alan Smithee 0]

The success at MFC has been a effort contributed by a number of people. I wouldn't say Gardner has soley achieved all this on his own without the input from other departments and members of the club.

Well said MFC.

I am in no position to criticize what is being done by the board. Tey are a collective and are in the process of trying to salvage a club racked by financial concerns which date back as recently as the Andersons and Ellis fiasco. I reckon its best to stop there on that one. What's the point looking back all the time?

Also, from what I can tell things seem a bit better and you point that out Deanox.Well said.But it can also be a bit of fluff when you break it all down. And no disrespect for your thoughts .Lets just ask what kind of dollars we will see at the end of the day, if we factor in the AFL handout combined with the forecasted takings? Financially we may still be treading water, or worse, record a trading loss. This is even factoring in a healthier membership for '07.

I guess I share some of your reservations about things MFc . But I'll try & remain upbeat.

[deanox 9,898]

...Lets just ask what kind of dollars we will see at the end of the day, if we factor in the AFL handout combined with the forecasted takings? Financially we may still be treading water, or worse, record a trading loss. This is even factoring in a healthier membership for '07...

i think an interesting point is made by steve harris that yes we recieving the CBF handout from the AFL but other clubs recieved other concessions. geelong got $5 million to build a stadium and then they sell the seats as reserve seats to make money. the AFL are giving st kilda money to redevelop a base. sydney and brisbane get salary cap concessions and sydney gets handouts too. collingwood, yes they have more supporters, but they also get more games at the g getting bigger crowds. the other interstate sides have the advantage of captive and gauranteed supporter bases and therefore big crowds. in all the places we miss out the CBF is their too make up for it a bit. i dont believe it will be short term, i think it will be long term and the afl are realising this too.

[Demon15 0]

i think an interesting point is made by steve harris that yes we recieving the CBF handout from the AFL but other clubs recieved other concessions. geelong got $5 million to build a stadium and then they sell the seats as reserve seats to make money. the AFL are giving st kilda money to redevelop a base. sydney and brisbane get salary cap concessions and sydney gets handouts too. collingwood, yes they have more supporters, but they also get more games at the g getting bigger crowds. the other interstate sides have the advantage of captive and gauranteed supporter bases and therefore big crowds. in all the places we miss out the CBF is their too make up for it a bit. i dont believe it will be short term, i think it will be long term and the afl are realising this too.

And most important, if we want to stag at the MCG, then we have to forgoe signage rights from that revenue source as well.

[Pates 9,660]

While i agree with you that you can't put the off-field success all down to PG, i don't think we'd be in as this stronger position. In terms of him talking about things outside the club, the only time i can think of is him talking about Ben Cousins and i have a feeling that the Footy Show got him on so to talk about whether they'd sack Danners and, since drugs was an issue at the time, wanted t get a side comment from him but it turned into a bigger story than keeping Neale on for the year.

[Alan Smithee 0]

i think an interesting point is made by steve harris that yes we recieving the CBF handout from the AFL but other clubs recieved other concessions.

I think the Doggies are another getting a bit of a hand with redevelopments too? But then again, so are we I think or last time I heard? Can the AFL be accused of being astute with their investments? Why fork the green if a return can't be seen.

I view the comp. fund as being akin to keeping the beggar quiet enough until his next feed. But Does the beggar wan't to be a beggar?

[deanox 9,898]

we dont want to be a begger no doubt. once we have cleared the debt and have a home we will be able to start accumulating cash with which we can invest. we have made some poor investment choices like buying a hotel that was denied pokies but once we are debt free hopefully we can start using the CBF money to make our own money. we can invest in buisnesses and even shares (see collingwood) if thats what it takes, but we cant do that while we have no money. its a hard cycle, you need to have money to make money, atm we have no money and we need the afl handout. once we are above zero i think you'll see us solidify our position quickly. if only we could get 10 thousand more members we would be set.

[Alan Smithee 0]

we dont want to be a begger no doubt. once we have cleared the debt and have a home we will be able to start accumulating cash with which we can invest. once we are above zero i think you'll see us solidify our position quickly. if only we could get 10 thousand more members we would be set.

\\

Agree Ox. Finding a permanent base will be a asset. Maybe it will create a platform for a new era?

But I reckon it will take more than extra members to solidify our position quickly.

Just like everyone else from the board down, I would like to see the club completely free of any handouts from the AFL.

Our position is far different than what Collingwoods was. They sold their way out. Theirs was an acute problem. Ours appears to be chronic.

Still, I'm looking forward to Monday!!

[beelzebub 23,313]

all in all doesnt it sit nicely for a change that the boys in the back room actually seem to not only know what they are on about but get on with it. They have further tests looming ( but im sure that will unravel in the fullness of time as they say ). But after many years of turoil and topsy turvy fiscal situations, things are certainly looking up :-)

well done fellas....dont drop the ball now for chrisake !!lol