Rumour *Separated discussion* Board, Mick, Rogers, whiteanting, powerbrokers, competency or lack thereof

Remove this Banner Ad

Are Ahmed Fahour and Raphael Geminder aligned to either of the factions on the board ?

Geminder is a Pratt-in-law.

Fahour ... no, stand alone hard ass.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

The life of the 1%. How dramatic.

Yeah, the rest of us threaten each other on social media for not forking over that $200 for the Datsun 180b someone bought off us on credit to get to work until pay day.
 
Last edited:
Are Ahmed Fahour and Raphael Geminder aligned to either of the factions on the board ?
Pratt camp if I remember rightly what the alignments were from a post years ago. Ruffy is firmly in that camp... Jeanne's son in law. Fahour might have umm'd and ahh'd about things but he usually supported the Pratt side of any board argument.
 
Pratt camp if I remember rightly what the alignments were from a post years ago. Ruffy is firmly in that camp... Jeanne's son in law. Fahour might have umm'd and ahh'd about things but he usually supported the Pratt side of any board argument.

So basically the Mathieson faction is taking over lock, stock and barrel.

Jeanne has already removed Visy money from the club.
 
yeah... thats how I read it as well. When the board was reduced in size last year wasn't Trainor the Pratt backed candidate for the presidency? And didn't he quit shortly after not getting the job?

That's my understanding.

So a powerbroker arm wrestle, the loser gets weeded out and withdraws all financial support while the winner gets a stronghold on the board. Might be good for board unity and like under Elliot/Lofts conducive to a reasonably successful formula but it can leave them immune to scrutiny and all comes crashing down if Bruce can't keep his trap shut.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

That's my understanding.

So a powerbroker arm wrestle, the loser gets weeded out and withdraws all financial support while the winner gets a stronghold on the board. Might be good for board unity and like under Elliot/Lofts conducive to a reasonably successful formula but it can leave them immune to scrutiny and all comes crashing down if Bruce can't keep his trap shut.
And we all know that Bruce is a bit like Elliott when it comes to keeping his trap shut. He will mouth off about something and drop himself and the club into the mire. He might be doing all this for the right reasons, but eventually hubris will come into play and he will be drinking his own kool-aid.

I think that when the elections come, we might see a couple more Mathieson backed applicants sitting up against Jeanne and any remaining Pratt fraction members.
 
And we all know that Bruce is a bit like Elliott when it comes to keeping his trap shut. He will mouth off about something and drop himself and the club into the mire. He might be doing all this for the right reasons, but eventually hubris will come into play and he will be drinking his own kool-aid.

I think that when the elections come, we might see a couple more Mathieson backed applicants sitting up against Jeanne and any remaining Pratt fraction members.

I do think having two powerbroker factions was probably worse for us because of the leaking and disunity factor. Like always I guess, if they get the job done, nobody will say anything. Don't breach the rules, don't alienate the supporters.

It always irked me that the powerbrokers stayed away when Elliot was turfed out. Their support has always been conditional and their money via an investment opportunity or a drip feed rather than meaningful upfront dollars to reflect our position.
 
I do think having two powerbroker factions was probably worse for us because of the leaking and disunity factor. Like always I guess, if they get the job done, nobody will say anything. Don't breach the rules, don't alienate the supporters.

It always irked me that the powerbrokers stayed away when Elliot was turfed out. Their support has always been conditional and their money via an investment opportunity or a drip feed rather than meaningful upfront dollars to reflect our position.
Thats the thing that has really pissed me off as well. We seem to have a massive amount of affluent supporters who could write off our debt with a single cheque. But none of them seem inclined to reach into the pocket and pull out the loose change.

If one or two of the billionaires decided to donate 1% of their net worth to the club, we could be debt free and could afford to do the renovations to the ground and possibly get the boutique stadium nod from the AFL.
 
Thats the thing that has really pissed me off as well. We seem to have a massive amount of affluent supporters who could write off our debt with a single cheque. But none of them seem inclined to reach into the pocket and pull out the loose change.

If one or two of the billionaires decided to donate 1% of their net worth to the club, we could be debt free and could afford to do the renovations to the ground and possibly get the boutique stadium nod from the AFL.

Teach a man to fish and all that. I think our biggest challenge has been leaving the ways of old Carlton behind. We seem to be assembling the right people to move us forward now, as supporters we can't ask for much more than that.
 
Thats the thing that has really pissed me off as well. We seem to have a massive amount of affluent supporters who could write off our debt with a single cheque. But none of them seem inclined to reach into the pocket and pull out the loose change.

If one or two of the billionaires decided to donate 1% of their net worth to the club, we could be debt free and could afford to do the renovations to the ground and possibly get the boutique stadium nod from the AFL.
Wealthy people don't get wealthy by giving money away.

But yeah it would be nice for the club to do a 'debt demolition' type function or two to get some big chunks taken off that debt. Personally I have had enough of all the $100 raffle tickets they try and flog me so the club can raise a few grand.
 
Teach a man to fish and all that. I think our biggest challenge has been leaving the ways of old Carlton behind. We seem to be assembling the right people to move us forward now, as supporters we can't ask for much more than that.
I'm just concerned that while we seem to be getting the right people into place, the machinations behind the board driving private agenda's might wreck the club again.

While we have someone pulling strings behind the scenes, we could end up stuffed again at some point in the future.
 
Teach a man to fish and all that.

Yes and a sound principle it may be, but you can't be this wealthy but wise benefactor spouting this rhetoric at us, still not helping us to recover and still staking your claim to special privilege in the club. Either/or ... please.
 
Wealthy people don't get wealthy by giving money away.

But yeah it would be nice for the club to do a 'debt demolition' type function or two to get some big chunks taken off that debt. Personally I have had enough of all the $100 raffle tickets they try and flog me so the club can raise a few grand.
I am quite certain that the wealthy could hire a good enough accountant to fiddle the donation to the club so that they can get all the money back.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top