Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I hate the politics that will envitably hit our club through this election if it hasn't already.
No one ever wins from these scenarios.
Wrath
I hate the politics that will envitably hit our club through this election if it hasn't already.
No one ever wins from these scenarios.
Wrath
Good to see you back posting, another from the '02 class.I hate the politics that will envitably hit our club through this election if it hasn't already.
No one ever wins from these scenarios.
Wrath
Good to see you back posting, another from the '02 class.
I hate the politics that will envitably hit our club through this election if it hasn't already.
No one ever wins from these scenarios.
Wrath
were the original proxies to be sent to pdr or to the club ?
Both - proxy givers choice.
I wonder if so many proxies were sent to the club it caused the re scheduling ?
NORTH Melbourne has set a new date for its annual general meeting in order to "clear the air" after a letter to 20,500 members from former major shareholder and poll candidate, businessman Peter de Rauch.
The announcement that the meeting would now be held on February 16 and not January 27 will intensify the lobbying for the proxies that current chairman and TV personality James Brayshaw and two others need to hold their positions.
The club claims, in a special website message to members, that the way de Rauch received the confidential membership data was "not endorsed or supported by the club".
Former director and club legend Ron Joseph has been accused of releasing the database to de Rauch after his resignation from the board for personal reasons.
Joseph said he intended to attend the AGM at North's revamped Arden St complex.
A decision by North Melbourne not to fill Joseph's seat and reduce the number on the board is expected to heighten the interest in the poll in which Brayshaw, his brother and former Roo Mark Brayshaw and Trevor O'Hoy are standing as a block.
De Rauch has said his intention all along has been to give the members the right to decide who should be on the board.
He spent $20,000 for his mailout to every club member.
Club chief executive Eugene Arocca said yesterday it was anticipated a leading supporter figure in David Wheaton would be a fifth candidate.
In essence, the Kangaroo poll starts again. Any proxies completed for the scrapped AGM on January 27 including those issued through the correspondence of de Rauch will no longer be valid.
Members will receive new proxy forms in a few days.
Good move. I hope that the 5 candidate statements go up next week and not approx 7 days prior to the AGM.
Amending the constitution so any proposal to play more than four home games interstate will require a vote of members.
Not the way I read it Obst. My reading is that his aims are;
(i) to push to grow the Club in Melbourne and out through the Ballarat corridor thereby (hopefully) removing the need to sell significant games interstate.
(ii) to bring the Club closer to the membership, and
(iii) should the Board come to the conclusion that we need to "co-locate or relocate" that they involve the membership in the process.
While the JB/EA team has achieved much over the last 3 years we have yet to crack the big challenge (revenue/membership & attendance).
I want to hear the views of the 5 candidates on this.
1. The club is already pursuing that policy. You also claim that this removes the need to sell games interstate. Do you have any facts to support that premise or is this just wishful thinking on your behalf?
2. I think this is insulting to the very people that delivered the club back to the members in the first place.
3. I couldn't see such a thing going ahead without the input of rank and file in the first place. If we are ever were to "co-locate or relocate", it would be because the club was financially gone and the AFL had taken the licence. All the member representation on the commitee in the world couldn't change that.
4. Success and exposure in new markets are only things that will turn around this situation. The current board have been beyond reproach in speeding up this process.
3. Where was the member input into the Tassie proposal
4. Can you elaborate as to what the Board has done to "speed up this process".
I want the best NMFC Board possible. If thats JB,MB & TOH being re-elected fine. But I want to be able to make an informed decision.
1. The members backed Brayshaw, that is when they had input. If certain cliques want the power to continually second guess an elected board then the situation will eventually become unworkable.
2. Do I need to tell you the obvious?
CEO, facilities, new coach, footy dept expenditure, fast tracking juniors etc.?
As for member numbers, the club sat back and watched for 2 years whilst an expected continued membership surge never eventuated.
3. Then they moved on to option B and managed to almost pull off revenue raising in not one, but two, new markets.
1. Agree with this on most issues however a potential Club relocation (any more than 4 games) needs member consultation. I don't support the position that the Board has the power to dramatically change/destroy the Club unless it was a component of their election campaign.
2. The issue here was "While the JB/EA team has achieved much over the last 3 years we have yet to crack the big challenge (revenue/membership & attendance)". Your response doesn't address this.
3. If moving to Plan B is to significantly change its position to "we may not be able to be a Melbourne based Club" then I want to hear the arguement. 7 games in both Launceston & Hobart together with removing Hawthorn from Tassie would be the first step to relocation (read death of NMFC) and be no different to GC proposal.