For those of us unable to attend or view the online stream, aside from the notification put out by the club of the successful new board members, did anything else of note get talked about at the AGM or was it just the same old same old?

7 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

For those of us unable to attend or view the online stream, aside from the notification put out by the club of the successful new board members, did anything else of note get talked about at the AGM or was it just the same old same old?

Sorry you can’t access the reports on the MFC website DD, but the President, CEO, Financial, Goodwin and Stinear Reports were all very positive and informative and a lot of members questions were answered by each of the presenters. Would have liked to have been there for the Q&A session after the presentation, but the club is in a very solid situation and I believe Good hands.

Watching the live stream on the night, they did say that while they were unable to stream the final Q and A session due to broadcasting restrictions, they would get them up on the club site for all to see. Hopefully today some time. Agree this would be very interesting to watch.

Just doing a quick maths calculation, and assuming that all voters would have endorsed Steven Smith, is it only members who have renewed for 2025 who are eligible to vote? 

Doing the maths, 23% of eligible voters voted, and Steven Smith received 8.3k, that puts our membership tally at around 36k. This aligns with the recently updated membership tally on Demonland. Our membership for 2024 was 67k, which means a lot of 2024 members weren't eligible to vote in a 2024 election.

It doesn't bother me because my membership rolls over, but I'm curious if this is the case. 

Edited December 18, 2024Dec 18 by mo64

17 minutes ago, mo64 said:

Just doing a quick maths calculation, and assuming that all voters would have endorsed Steven Smith, is it only members who have renewed for 2025 who are eligible to vote? 

Doing the maths, 23% of eligible voters voted, and Steven Smith received 8.3k, that puts our membership tally at around 36k. This aligns with the recently updated membership tally on Demonland. Our membership for 2024 was 67k, which means a lot of 2024 members weren't eligible to vote in a 2024 election.

It doesn't bother me because my membership rolls over, but I'm curious if this is the case. 

That is not correct.

It is 2024 members who vote for the 2024 AGM/Election.

I was happy to hear there is already $10m pledged towards the home base and hopefully more to come…

3 hours ago, Big Gun said:

Watching the live stream on the night, they did say that while they were unable to stream the final Q and A session due to broadcasting restrictions, they would get them up on the club site for all to see. Hopefully today some time. Agree this would be very interesting to watch.

All the videos are online inc the open Q&A

3 hours ago, Redleg said:

That is not correct.

It is 2024 members who vote for the 2024 AGM/Election.

If that's the case then about 30,000 members are ineligible to vote. We must have a lot of pets as members.

4 hours ago, Big Gun said:

Watching the live stream on the night, they did say that while they were unable to stream the final Q and A session due to broadcasting restrictions, they would get them up on the club site for all to see. Hopefully today some time. Agree this would be very interesting to watch.

https://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/1705616/agm-question-answers?videoId=1705616&modal=true&type=video

 

Here is the link for the Q and A. Interesting watch to put it politely. 

27 minutes ago, mo64 said:

If that's the case then about 30,000 members are ineligible to vote. We must have a lot of pets as members.

Or kids, 3 game memberships, restricted not full memberships etc, or the percentage stated was incorrect.

peptides the same - their highest polling candidate was former player dean solomon - 7,459 total votes

There was one statement that I hoped would be responded to about how poor our goal kicking is/has been and it looked as if Richo was going to have a right of reply but the next part of the question started to be answered and he put the microphone down. 

4 hours ago, mo64 said:

If that's the case then about 30,000 members are ineligible to vote. We must have a lot of pets as members.

Children under 18 can’t vote…..

If under 18 no vote, then my 6 reduces to 2, and we had too much on,  but interested.

Feel like it's voting at a Company AGM. The proxy votes have the candidate selected and chosen, individual votes give a vibe.  Not a result. 

Geez, I'm 11 minutes into watching the Q&A session from the other night online and it's a hard watch. Is it always complete peanuts that hog the microphone at these events? 

33 minutes ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Geez, I'm 11 minutes into watching the Q&A session from the other night online and it's a hard watch. Is it always complete peanuts that hog the microphone at these events? 

I made it to 37 mins. Quite embarrassing.

36 minutes ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Geez, I'm 11 minutes into watching the Q&A session from the other night online and it's a hard watch. Is it always complete peanuts that hog the microphone at these events? 

Absolutely cringeworthy is it.? 

If that is the standard of the voters then we are in for a lot of pain in the future, and probably explains why we are where we are as a club.

 

37 minutes ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Geez, I'm 11 minutes into watching the Q&A session from the other night online and it's a hard watch. Is it always complete peanuts that hog the microphone at these events? 

Some Bomber nuff whinged about them playing at Geelong and got a near standing O.

54 minutes ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Geez, I'm 11 minutes into watching the Q&A session from the other night online and it's a hard watch. Is it always complete peanuts that hog the microphone at these events? 

One and a half questions in and my head hurts. 

The first question felt like it went for 2 hours - 99% of which was the fella providing important 'context' to frame his question - including referencing mutiple articles.

Green gave an answer (of sorts) and asked if that addressed the question, to which Mr 'I have dealt with bs all my life' responded with something like 'well that's your answer, wether I accept it or not....'.

Jesus wept.

I'll bet green is ruing his commitment to transparency. 

Edited December 19, 2024Dec 19 by binman

thank goodness for 2x playback

14 minutes ago, george_on_the_outer said:

Absolutely cringeworthy is it.? 

If that is the standard of the voters then we are in for a lot of pain in the future, and probably explains why we are where we are as a club.

 

It could have been a Guinness Book of Records attempt to fit the most amount of stupid people in the one room at the same time. 

The fact Brad Green had to answer a question about if the club was against anti-semitism blew my mind….

1. Obviously the club is against that and any other form of racism or discrimination. If you’re not in the modern world then have a look at yourself.

2. What does that have to do with the club financial or on field performance?

Edited December 19, 2024Dec 19 by DistrACTION Jackson

3 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

The fact Brad Green had to answer a question about if the club was against anti-semitism blew my mind….

1. Obviously the club is against that and any other form of racism or discrimination. If you’re not in the modern world then have a look at yourself.

2. What does that have to do with the club financial or on field performance?

I might go next year and ask if we're against genetically modified crops and suggest we open a cat cafe at Casey Fields. 

1 minute ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

I might go next year and ask if we're against genetically modified crops and suggest we open a cat cafe at Casey Fields. 

What is our stance on AI and do we think it will help or hinder our training methods

29 minutes ago, binman said:

One and a half questions in and my head hurts. 

The first question felt like it went for 2 hours - 99% of which was the fella providing important 'context' to frame his question - including referencing mutiple articles.

Green gave an answer (of sorts) and asked if that addressed the question, to which Mr 'I have dealt with bs all my life' responded with something like 'well that's your answer, wether I accept it or not....'.

Jesus wept.

I'll bet green is ruing his commitment to transparency. 

I found the suggestion about building a retirement village for our supporters out at Caulfield convinced me......to vote for mandatory euthanasia at the age of 70 if it ever gets to parliament.