Hazyshadeofgrinter

Congratulations to the MFC for achieving 5 out of 6 years of profit since 2004. Let us hope that the profit figure of $20k does not lead some of our demonland members to state that this year's financial report is let us also hope that said members do not state that and that they amount to hypocrite.

I take it that you are referring to this year's promising draftees?

From your article, June 15: "The Demons have 27,658 members, only 419 short of the club's all-time membership record - a target that Stynes believes is within their sights." Thus, only a few hundred more were needed to secure another broken membership record. The truth is, you're not making an argument at all, you're indulging in your typical petty sniping. Unfortunately, I can't see that ship turning around any time soon.

Care to let everyone know what you are arguing? <reminder: This thread is entitled "The ship has turned", belzebub59 has been arguing that the club has been a basket case for the last few years.>

Yes, the final tally for 2008 was 29,667. This was another record number. Most of these members signed up before Jim became chaiman. I still don't see your point. This year we had 31,508 members. Another record. I'm glad that the current board is building on the work of the previous one, and I hope and expect that we will continue to post record memberships, particularly given the anticipation that surrounds our on-field performance. This is still by no means "turning the ship around". Gardner increased the membership by around 37% whilst he was at the club. But whereas I am happy to recognise the good work that the current board has continued to do on membership - others can't bring themselves to admit that the previous board had an excellent record in his department. Instead they just ignore the facts and crap all over them. It just doen't fit with your fairytale does it?

Looks to me like we got screwed.

Well you have no idea then do you? OUr membership ion 2003 was 20,555 in 2007 it was a record 28,077. in 2008 this record was again beaten. Some modest thanks is due to Jim's encouragement but it is mostly due to the 27,xxx members who were paid up before Jim came on the scene. There is no reason to think that the previous board couldn't achieve a second year of record memebrship. Indeed, they were poised to do so. Either way - it's not exactly "turning the ship around" is it?

Yes, the last few hundred or so members signed up after Jim took over. The first 28,000 or so signed up beforehand. Your point?

I have always been behind the football club and I remain behind the football club today. This is one of the reasons why the preservation of our football club's history is important to me. This is not a matter of differing recollections. It is about truth.

I have tried to wade through your hyperbole to try and find an argument to oppose. This is the best that I could come up with: This is incorrect, you stated that the club has been a basket case of the last few years. That is bashing and it is unsubstantiated. This is true. We lost $8.52 million between 1999-2003 (Average $1.42 million/annum). It would be fair to say that Gardner inherited a basket case, Jim did not. There is not argument that the club made profits between 2004 and 2007. Elsewhere you call these profits “dubious”. Clearly you cannot bring yourself to acknowledge the success of the MFC board between 2004-2007 but the facts are there. No, the reality of the situation is that we made profits every year between 2004-2007. I know this gets in the way of your Jim Stynes fairytale but those are the facts. We reduced our debt during this period by $2.8million without asking our supporters for unsustainable charity. No, the reality is that before Jim took over in 2008, the club was expecting to make a loss of around $1.5m. Obviously this is a significant sum and it was a disappointing development for the club. However, this one bad year does not equate to the club “still haemorrhaging.” It does not meant that the club was a "basketcase" for a "handful of seasons" before JIm stepped in. Even in you take this $1.5m into account, the club debt would have been reduced over the term of the Gardner board. Jim inherited a club with less debt that the one Gardner inherited. There was no secret debt. The club’s accounting was of a high standard and the situation was made clear to Jim as soon as he took over. He did not “uncover” anything. No club can function without AFL money, this is because, in essence, the clubs are sponsoring the AFL. Surely you do not critcise Gardner (or Jim for that matter) for trying to secure as much AFL funding as possible. I agree that is was ludicrous. However it was solely the doing of the current board. McNamee was sacking during the most sensitive period of renegotiation for our major sponsor (8 days before the deadline for renewal). The club was prevented from approaching other possible sponsors until the results of this renegotiation were made clear. I have heard some pretty crazy excuses for why Jim couldn’t secure a major sponsor for so long (one poster said that we were waiting for the Australian Open to finish so we could announce it!) Trying to blame the previous board for Jim’s poor performance on sponsorship (poor performance according to you I might add) is the most ridiculous thing I have heard so far. Please give an example? Are you referring to 2008? Because that would be a project profit (singular) and in any case, it was a project loss. I mentioned earlier that one of the more promising things to come out of the new administration was this announcement. But, on reflection, it didn’t seem to be anything more than a PR exercise. The club continues to receive money from the MCC, just as it has for a number of years now. The MCC are not obligated to help us in any way. Your unsubstantiated claim the the club had an acrimonious relationship with the MCC continues your trend of trying to make the past look wose so that the present looks better. What are you talking about? The Casey deal was put together by the previous board. Jim’s board obviously liked it enough to go ahead with it. Having said that, this is about as close as you come to backing up your assertion that the club has been a basket case for the "last handful of seasons" (but it's not very close). And it’s very hard to suggest that we were in such a bad position when all you have is hyperbole and no facts. If credit is due to any board here then surely it is the previous board who appointed our current coach and our current football operations manager? The club recorded record membership in 2007 and was poised to do so again in 2008 before Jim took over. I'm not sure that this is an argument for the club being a "basketcase" for the "last handful of seasons". If anything it is merely a nod to one of Jim's modest acheivments (the summits). TO be honest I think the summit was an ok idea but I don't think it changed much - I'm not really into "perceptions" as much as you are. I wasn't really convinced by Kevin Rudd's summit either. At least the "Heartland" intitiative came out of the demons one (although there is argument about that on this site so I'm not really sure). Jim can justifiably feel proud about starting "Heartland". As a member I don't feel like I have any more control over the club than I did a few years ago. Once again I thank the supporters of the MFC for their passion and their financial support of the club during the donation drive. Of course I doubt that we would have donated so much money this time if the previous board asked held their cap out as well. For what it is worth, I think Jim has managed the donation drive well. Certainly his profile and fantastic history with the club has helped in this regard, although he could have lent his image to any donation drive we had irrespective of whether he was the club chairman or not. I do find it a little rich to call what is essentially a tin-rattle a "debt reduction strategy". I am worried about what will happen when this non-sustainable revenue dries up. I am dismissive on explanaing thing in non-factual ways. Your perceptions are clearly based on fantasy and you don’t want the facts to get in the way of your fairytale. You obviously feel the need to crap on the club’s last few years in order to make Jim look better. Why is this? You're the one in denial here pal.

Haha. I'm not sure we're having much success...

Same reason as you mate.

You're probably right but I'm not here to make friends. If I truly was an ex-boardmember with some shadowy agenda I probably would care about being tactful. But I'm not and I don't. Anyway, enough about me.

You will appreciate that my true opponent is not Jim Stynes but "truthiness".

Guys, if all you want to talk about is me then start another thread.

You didn't ask anything - all you have done is make vague threats towards me, some unfounded assertions and some bleating about passion. If your justification of the club being a basket case for the last few years starts and finishes with Junction Oval.. well, you can't exactly expect me to make any effort to explain things for you when you haven't even tried to explain them to yourself yet.

I am not attacking him, I don't know where you got this from. I also respect Jim's right to change his mind and make his cancer story public. In fact I even wrote that I admire him for it (because I think he has good intentions). I can be critical of the show without being critical of Jim's decision to be on it.

I have never once insinsuated that cancer treatment is a waste of time. For some people, cancer treatment can lead to a cure. For others like Jim, such treatment can be helpful for its pallitaive benefits (ie.e. it won't stop them from dying, but it might help them feel better). Alternative treatments somteims offer some palliative benefit (meditation), often they are of no use whatsoever (aside from the placeabo effect). Of course positive thinking is also useful to a limited extent - cancer and depression is worse than cancer alone. I'm sorry to hear about your friend, but it doesn't change the facts. If your friend's cancer is similar to Jim's cancer, then no amount of poisitve thinking is going to stop him or her from dying sooner rather than later. P.S. I really wicsh you hadn't brought this up in a post about cancer treatment, but if you want to see my record on demonland you don't even have to bother looking up my old posts, Hannabal has done it for you somewhere - ask him about it. Unlike him I don't re-write history by deleting my old posts.

If all you are going to do is spout hot air then save your breath. In the words of some guy on here "Don't say it show me."

This is such a typical response I really don't know where to begin - but I'll give it a try. I do not wish ill on Jim. Quite asidfe from being a club legend Jim is a dedicated family man who has given a lot back to the community with his reach foundation. Even if he was a racist mouthy slag like Jade Goody, I still wouldn't wish cancer on him. This does not change the fact that Jim has cancer. He has secondaries in his brain and no amount of "positive thinking" is going to change that fact. These are the facts - these are not things that I hope are true. If Jim is spreading the message that positive thinking and alternative therapies can cure his cancer then he is being irresponsible and is causing damage to the community no matter how good his intentions are. DO YOU HONESTLY BELEIVE THAT THE 40,000 OR SO AUSTRLIANS WHO WILL DIE OF CANCER NEXT YEAR WILL DO SO BECAUSE THEY LACK THE CHARACTER TO "FIGHT IT"? If any good comes out of Jim's choice to make his cancer journey public, it will be a hightened level of skepticism amongst Australian cancer sufferers, many of whom are ripped off by low-life snake oil merchants who pray on their false hopes. I really don't see what makes Jim's cancer journey any different to that of the 100,000 or so Austrlians who are diagnosed with cancer every year. If the channel 7 show is anything to go by then I do not think he has any special insight to offer. I also don't see what any of this has to do with Liam Jurrah and the whole production smacks of the kind of exploitative circus that organisations like channel 7 do so well out of. I do not agree with you about my having an axe to grind. I do not agree with your assertion that the club would have gone under if Jim hadn't stepped in. Jim's cancer has no bearing upon either of these.

Whatever mate - are you going to damage me? You can't pay the bills with passion. Clearly you give Jim a lot of credit for essentially rattling a tin, I believe that the credit belongs to all of those who out money in that tin - any board could have rattled it, and for that matter, Jim could have done his bit to raise the profile of a tin-rattle without being a boardmember. So far, the most promising sign from Jim's board in my opinion was probably the press release about the club reintegrating with the MCC but there hasn't been any sign since that this was anything more than hot air. That is whilst the MCC had renwed (and maybe even increased?) it's financial support of the MFC there are still no signs of "proper" incorporation. Is "passion" really the best that you can come up with?

If there is a mod here that is deleting posts can he or she please explain what is going on? Personally I would prefer the record to accuratley reflect the abuse that I have been recieving and my response to it. If you are going to censor the discussion then you might as well delete everything after my first post in the thread (#25), given that just about everything after that was personal attacks and my responses to them.

I'm more than that, I'm a member.

I was rounding up to put in Jim's favour according to the figure that he gives in this article which you mentioned earlier. Now do you have anything of worth to contribute?

Any chance that we can reinstate "delicious jurrah coffee"'s abusive post? I prefer to have such things on the record.