Markfs' Board of Directors Watch

[76woodenspooners]

Change for change sake is never your best option.

Sometimes it is.

You can't have change without change.

Things can't be different unless they are done differently.

If the status quo is OK, then cool. But if the status quo is not OK, then some form of change is required.

 

[76woodenspooners]

You really do need a balance. Every board needs industry specialisation. A football clubs needs to be run like a business to a point but there is one fundamental difference. Unlike shareholders, most members could not care less abut large profits.

Completely agree, and I've made this point myself earlier in the thread.

All they want is premierships.

I'd amend that: "All they say they want is Premierships."

If supporters simply wanted to win a Premiership, then all they'd need to do is to keep changing teams to follow the one that has the best chance of winning it at any point in time. And yet people don't do that.

Ask any Collingwood supporter why they follow Collingwood, and no-one will answer "because I want me a team that wins Premierships!!!". And yet we still have a strong membership / supporter base.

Premierships are great, don't get me wrong.

But look at it this way - Carlton have won more than three times the number of Premierships in my lifetime than Collingwood has. Carlton have won more in total. Which club is in better shape ATM?

North have won twice more in my lifetime ... and do I look up upon North Supporters with deep envy, wishing I followed North instead? Nup.

What about Essendon ... their Premiership count is impressive, they must be in healthy shape?

Profit is only a means to that end.

Totally!

I dare say most Collingwood members don't care a lot about social contributions compared to on field success by the club ...

What makes us Collingwood? What is it that defines who we are? In this era of player migration and sharing of home grounds, what is it that makes clubs unique? What defines their identity?

...and when they come from gambling profits, those that do probably see the hypocrisy anyway.

Yeah, but some folks do care.

This is a football club. It's not a pub, it's not a netball club, it's nit a social justice organisation, it's not a profit vehicle it's just a football club.

Totally!!!

As a football club we've been failing for most part of 60 years.

That's a bit harsh. There have been much darker days in my lifetime.

 

[the_champ_2004]

Sometimes it is.

You can't have change without change.

Things can't be different unless they are done differently.

If the status quo is OK, then cool. But if the status quo is not OK, then some form of change is required.

That's not what I said.

I agree that change can be a good thing if done for the right reasons. Change is only ever made with the intention to make things better. No one has ever sought about making change to worsen a situation.

What I do say, and I said earlier that you may have missed what I meant, is that you need to have the right motivation for that change. Your scenario is true and where there would require a change.

If you just want to change and don't care who comes in as long as it's different you are almost certain to fail. Give me an alternative for a board member and I'll make a judgement (albeit a likely uneducated one as I don't know the inner workings of the Collingwood board nor any possible candidates) on which is the best candidate. Until then I wont be joining the people with pitchforks demanding a head.

We are one of only five clubs to win a premiership in the last ten years. Correct me if I'm wrong, I just did this off the top of my head but only Hawthorn and Sydney have played in more grand finals than us since 2000, equal if you count the replay, which I haven't. Keep in mind we were in a Grand Final two years after a spoon, played finals for eight consecutive years after finishing second last. It's so easy to put the blinkers on and look at what is happening this week but this board has helped us through these times.

I love the fact that in times where Melbourne, Bulldogs, Richmond etc have needed to have big cash drives to come out of debt we have gone from strength to strength. We relocated and got it right at the Glasshouse, St Kilda stuffed it up. I don't want to get into coaching and players as this isn't what the thread is about. The next big test for this board will however be to take the emotion out of the Buckley coaching position and I want business people to make that decision, not former teammates.

 

[Markfs]

That's not what I said.

I agree that change can be a good thing if done for the right reasons. Change is only ever made with the intention to make things better. No one has ever sought about making change to worsen a situation.

What I do say, and I said earlier that you may have missed what I meant, is that you need to have the right motivation for that change. Your scenario is true and where there would require a change.

If you just want to change and don't care who comes in as long as it's different you are almost certain to fail. Give me an alternative for a board member and I'll make a judgement (albeit a likely uneducated one as I don't know the inner workings of the Collingwood board nor any possible candidates) on which is the best candidate. Until then I wont be joining the people with pitchforks demanding a head.

We are one of only five clubs to win a premiership in the last ten years. Correct me if I'm wrong, I just did this off the top of my head but only Hawthorn and Sydney have played in more grand finals than us since 2000, equal if you count the replay, which I haven't. Keep in mind we were in a Grand Final two years after a spoon, played finals for eight consecutive years after finishing second last. It's so easy to put the blinkers on and look at what is happening this week but this board has helped us through these times.

I love the fact that in times where Melbourne, Bulldogs, Richmond etc have needed to have big cash drives to come out of debt we have gone from strength to strength. We relocated and got it right at the Glasshouse, St Kilda stuffed it up. I don't want to get into coaching and players as this isn't what the thread is about. The next big test for this board will however be to take the emotion out of the Buckley coaching position and I want business people to make that decision, not former teammates.

if you cherry pick the successes and ignore the failings then it's reasonable to conclude that things are going well. The current success is built mostly on the popularity which has resulted from historical success. Eddie and the current board have done the corporate thing well, but there were problems with the pokies and failing pubs, so it's not as if everything they did was successful.

However, it's the footy side that has been problematical since the premiership. A lot of the problems can be tracked down to the fact that there is a single decision-maker ....who probably consults with Pert.

I would say that the decision to transition Malthouse out of the coaching position and insert Buckley is one of the worst decisions that ive seen from a club during my life. Lots of clubs have made bad decisions to sack or employ coaches in a desperate need for success, but the coaching transition was based on a complete misjudgement of an incumbent coach.... at best it was naive... at worst, it was a decision based a level of self-belief that bordered on arrogance. How did eddie think that malthouse would meekly go and sit in the back seat? The stupidity is astounding. I dont believe that eddie needs to be sacked for it but things need to change. He needs alternative points of view from the board which he is currently not getting.

It is for that reason that the directors need to be moved along. There is not enough footy knowledge on that board to serve as a counterpoint to Eddie. If that isnt changed, then changes to the coaching position will have no effect. There are other reasons to move the current directors along. I've spoken about them previously. I think the club can do better....

 

[the_champ_2004]

if you cherry pick the successes and ignore the failings then it's reasonable to conclude that things are going well. The current success is built mostly on the popularity which has resulted from historical success. Eddie and the current board have done the corporate thing well, but there were problems with the pokies and failing pubs, so it's not as if everything they did was successful.

However, it's the footy side that has been problematical since the premiership. A lot of the problems can be tracked down to the fact that there is a single decision-maker ....who probably consults with Pert.

I would say that the decision to transition Malthouse out of the coaching position and insert Buckley is one of the worst decisions that ive seen from a club during my life. Lots of clubs have made bad decisions to sack or employ coaches in a desperate need for success, but the coaching transition was based on a complete misjudgement of an incumbent coach.... at best it was naive... at worst, it was a decision based a level of self-belief that bordered on arrogance. How did eddie think that malthouse would meekly go and sit in the back seat? The stupidity is astounding. I dont believe that eddie needs to be sacked for it but things need to change. He needs alternative points of view from the board which he is currently not getting.

It is for that reason that the directors need to be moved along. There is not enough footy knowledge on that board to serve as a counterpoint to Eddie. If that isnt changed, then changes to the coaching position will have no effect. There are other reasons to move the current directors along. I've spoken about them previously. I think the club can do better....

If you cherry pick failings and ignore success, which is psychologically the easiest option, then it's reasonable to conclude things are going poorly.

I disagree with the Malthouse call and take a different view. I believe that it forced him to play for the now and win a premiership that had they not instigated the plan we may not have won. We wouldn't have won it without Ball or Jolly. Buckley was a hot coaching prospect at the time with offers from other clubs to start in 2010. Can you imagine the uproar in Buckey coached elsewhere? Or even worse, was a successful coach elsewhere?

All I can say is since you are so wise and knew about so many stupid decisions without any hindsight, you should either nominate for the board or let them get on with their job.

You're clearly not open to seeing another point of view so this is where I'll leave this thread. A lost cause. If you argue with an idiot for long enough, people can't tell the difference after all.

 

[MarkT2]

I'd amend that: "All they say they want is Premierships."

If supporters simply wanted to win a Premiership, then all they'd need to do is to keep changing teams to follow the one that has the best chance of winning it at any point in time. And yet people don't do that.

Ask any Collingwood supporter why they follow Collingwood, and no-one will answer "because I want me a team that wins Premierships!!!". And yet we still have a strong membership / supporter base.

Fair enough. Let me elaborate on my comment. As a generalisation, all members want from THEIR club is premierships. Real supporters don't move to follow success. We are the embodiment of that. What us members and supporters want though is on field. Off field success is purely a means to that end. If we achieve the latter without translating it into the former then we are failing our members and supporters.

So back to the point of the post.

You need more footy people to understand this and action it rather than business people who will measure their and the club's success against criteria that don't deliver premierships.

We had all the ingredients to win a premiership at the end of 2010 and shot ourselves in the foot because we didn't place enough premium on premierships.

But look at it this way - Carlton have won more than three times the number of Premierships in my lifetime than Collingwood has. Carlton have won more in total. Which club is in better shape ATM?

We have more money.
Who will win a premiership first? Are we any closer? Neither of us have a list capable of winning a premiership. Arguably their coach hasn't proven he wont yet but ours has. What have we done in the last 5 years that indicates we can/will build a premiership list AND achieve it's potential if we do?

We are years and miles away from it even being a relevant consideration.

What about Essendon ... their Premiership count is impressive, they must be in healthy shape?

Interesting example.
Clearly they have had some problems. If they draft and manage their list well in the next 2 years will 2012 have any bearing on 2020?

The thing is, they (and Carlton) have made changes. We have not.

Who is more likely to win a premiership in, say, 2022?
On what basis could you conclude Collingwood?

What makes us Collingwood? What is it that defines who we are? In this era of player migration and sharing of home grounds, what is it that makes clubs unique? What defines their identity?

History in the main which is mainly driven from on field deeds. Very few people take great satisfaction that we raise pokie revenue and contribute our statutory obligation to community projects no matter how much fanfare we try and give it.

I have never met one Collingwood supporter that barracks for Collingwood because we do community work or because we let welfare recipients in for free in the depression. It's a nice fact but it really doesn't drive what we really want.

The reality is most supports come from family ties which were originally driven by premiership when we won them at a rate no one else could match.

Why do you think Hawthorn are the off field powerhouse they are? Premierships!

 

[Markfs]

in the words of his hero alfred e. neuman......"what me worry? .....lets party!!"

 

[Markfs]

i'm sure if anyone was watching the game on tv, you would have seen the shot after the game of the various leaders of the club near the gates..... eddie was there... pert was too.... bucks came over for a hug.... i think i saw the blackmores ceo in the background ....good on her if that was her....

i didnt see alex waislitz.... maybe there was a party on in melbourne and he had to be there.... i'm watching the replay at the moment and i'll see if i can spot any of the other directors...

maybe it was too far from the corporate boxes to come down and give a congratulations to the coach.... it's a long way.... and there's a lot of free food and booze that can be consumed during the day....and of course, it's hard to leave the business partners that you're hosting that you asked to the footy with the hope of a big deal

 

[Anzacday]

The Blackmores CEO as you call her didn't seem too impressed by whatever Pert said to her.

 

[Markfs]

I just had a look at the Geelong board.

http://www.geelongcats.com.au/club/the-board-and-executive

What is noticeable ...well there's a few things.... but one thing is that several members of the board have a stated responsibility for particular areas.

Another thing is the specific previous experience in football administration.....look at the bio for diana taylor

Diana has close to 17 years of AFL, State and Community Football administration experience with her previous roles including President of the Western Region Football League, Victorian Football League Tribunal member, Victorian Football League Appeal Board member and AFL Victoria Fair Game: Respect Matters chairperson.

That is pretty impressive. She hasn't been plugged into the board purely because she's a woman or is a mate of the president...

Another noticeable difference is the stronger links to the community. There's very little of that on the collingwood board...

 

[sideswipe]

I just had a look at the Geelong board.

http://www.geelongcats.com.au/club/the-board-and-executive

What is noticeable ...well there's a few things.... but one thing is that several members of the board have a stated responsibility for particular areas.

Another thing is the specific previous experience in football administration.....look at the bio for diana taylor

Diana has close to 17 years of AFL, State and Community Football administration experience with her previous roles including President of the Western Region Football League, Victorian Football League Tribunal member, Victorian Football League Appeal Board member and AFL Victoria Fair Game: Respect Matters chairperson.

That is pretty impressive. She hasn't been plugged into the board purely because she's a woman or is a mate of the president...

Another noticeable difference is the stronger links to the community. There's very little of that on the collingwood board...

You won't find many clubs in better state than Collingwood. Have read a few of your posts now and it appears you are whingeing for the sake of it. And making personal attacks on directors with nothing to back it up is cowardly.

Every member of our board has been successful in their field and appear to my uninformed eye to offer plenty.

Calling Waislitz some sort of financial advisor (ie. thinking he advises people about their money) is ignorant. His background is investment banking and he is a seriously successful investor with a big brain.
Ian McMullin is an experienced businessman (you want to hang him because his Dad was the founder? That is about as reasonable as bagging someone because their Dad was a deadbeat) and a true football man. An ok VFL career (those 5 goals in a final in his second game was pretty special) followed by a long career in the ammos. None of that is too relevant, but you are bagging a guy who has given 20+ years of service to the club.
Allissa Camplin was a senior IBM exec along with being an elite sportswoman.
Wont go through the rest of them but they are very well-credentialed along with having extensive board and business experience. Korda has seen more businesses than you could dream of.

You know where you want someone in the organization who is experienced in football admin? In the footy admin department! This is the board.

The succession plan was derailed singlehandedly by Malthouse changing his mind.

Name a few potential replacements or give it up.

 

[Markfs]

You won't find many clubs in better state than Collingwood. Have read a few of your posts now and it appears you are whingeing for the sake of it. And making personal attacks on directors with nothing to back it up is cowardly.

Every member of our board has been successful in their field and appear to my uninformed eye to offer plenty.

Calling Waislitz some sort of financial advisor (ie. thinking he advises people about their money) is ignorant. His background is investment banking and he is a seriously successful investor with a big brain.
Ian McMullin is an experienced businessman (you want to hang him because his Dad was the founder? That is about as reasonable as bagging someone because their Dad was a deadbeat) and a true football man. An ok VFL career (those 5 goals in a final in his second game was pretty special) followed by a long career in the ammos. None of that is too relevant, but you are bagging a guy who has given 20+ years of service to the club.
Allissa Camplin was a senior IBM exec along with being an elite sportswoman.
Wont go through the rest of them but they are very well-credentialed along with having extensive board and business experience. Korda has seen more businesses than you could dream of.

You know where you want someone in the organization who is experienced in football admin? In the footy admin department! This is the board.

The succession plan was derailed singlehandedly by Malthouse changing his mind.

Name a few potential replacements or give it up.

I'll do what I like but I'm happy if you want to send a few more ultimatums. As for making personal attacks without evidence, I think that I have provided reasons far beyond the normal opinions you read on BF. This aint a court of law. From what I can see from your post, you have pumped up the board with very little substantiation.

As for your point that the board doesnt have to know anything about football administration because that's Pert's job..... well I wonder how the board justifies its appointments...

And as far as hanging mcmullin because of his connection to his father, you need to ask the people who write the bios for these board members why it's so important that their kids barrack for collingwood.... I dont see the relevance..

p.s thanks for reading my posts. I'll try to return the favour in the future

 

[sideswipe]

I'll do what I like but I'm happy if you want to send a few more ultimatums. As for making personal attacks without evidence, I think that I have provided reasons far beyond the normal opinions you read on BF. This aint a court of law. From what I can see from your post, you have pumped up the board with very little substantiation.

As for your point that the board doesnt have to know anything about football administration because that's Pert's job..... well I wonder how the board justifies its appointments...

And as far as hanging mcmullin because of his connection to his father, you need to ask the people who write the bios for these board members why it's so important that their kids barrack for collingwood.... I dont see the relevance..

p.s thanks for reading my posts. I'll try to return the favour in the future

I am not prepared to go through each director because I am not sure reason will work with you anyway. Suffice it to say, Alex Waislitz is a successful institutional investor. This means his job is to examine, question and review organizations. He has been really good at it which is pretty compelling evidence that he is astute. This is a good quality, no? Why you have it in for him is beyond me. As for him not being down on the ground at the end of the game? Well, I would prefer directors did that rather than backslap. But either way, it is completely unimportant. You and I cannot know what goes on at board level, so you can't effectively assess the board members. I have seen nothing to say that they are doing a poor job. Quite the contrary.

 

[Markfs]

North Melbourne is a different kettle of fish in some ways. You could understand if the North Board is full of people who are experienced at making money because North isnt a rich club..

http://www.nmfc.com.au/club/club-information/our-people/board-members

However, one thing that sticks out immediately and that is that they have three ex-footballers on the board. Even though there are many people on this forum who think that an investor has all the skills that might be required of a AFL club board member, I would argue that it's beneficial to have people on the board who have some knowledge of football if the board is going to be making decisions on coaches - even if they're only ratifying decisions by people contracted to come up with a name..... and of course, one of those people is glenn archer.

 

[Pacman Carney]

i'm sure if anyone was watching the game on tv, you would have seen the shot after the game of the various leaders of the club near the gates..... eddie was there... pert was too.... bucks came over for a hug.... i think i saw the blackmores ceo in the background ....good on her if that was her....

i didnt see alex waislitz.... maybe there was a party on in melbourne and he had to be there.... i'm watching the replay at the moment and i'll see if i can spot any of the other directors...

maybe it was too far from the corporate boxes to come down and give a congratulations to the coach.... it's a long way.... and there's a lot of free food and booze that can be consumed during the day....and of course, it's hard to leave the business partners that you're hosting that you asked to the footy with the hope of a big deal

The blonde in the background was not Christine Holgate.

 

[Markfs]

I am not prepared to go through each director because I am not sure reason will work with you anyway. Suffice it to say, Alex Waislitz is a successful institutional investor. This means his job is to examine, question and review organizations. He has been really good at it which is pretty compelling evidence that he is astute. This is a good quality, no? Why you have it in for him is beyond me. As for him not being down on the ground at the end of the game? Well, I would prefer directors did that rather than backslap. But either way, it is completely unimportant. You and I cannot know what goes on at board level, so you can't effectively assess the board members. I have seen nothing to say that they are doing a poor job. Quite the contrary.

I've got nothing against Alex. As you say, he's astute at building his empire. He's made a lot of money for himself. I have no problem with that. He's gone through a divorce and he's out to have a bit of fun. I dont begrudge him. He's put aside a very small of amount (compared to his wealth) to promote himself with his self-named charities and he keeps his hand in the collingwood footy club because of the networking opportunities. I dont see a problem with that....

hang on.... I do see a problem with that

but let me move along. He plugs a million bucks into the club (well reportedly at least although I havent seen the evidence) and evidently we're supposed to grateful in a "crawling to richard pratt" way. I dont see a problem .....ummmm ...hang on I got a problem here too

but it's not personal. As I've said a few times, he appears to be a very nice guy

 

[Markfs]

The blonde in the background was not Christine Holgate.

damn...and i was hoping so hard

 

[sideswipe]

North Melbourne is a different kettle of fish in some ways. You could understand if the North Board is full of people who are experienced at making money because North isnt a rich club..

http://www.nmfc.com.au/club/club-information/our-people/board-members

However, one thing that sticks out immediately and that is that they have three ex-footballers on the board. Even though there are many people on this forum who think that an investor has all the skills that might be required of a AFL club board member, I would argue that it's beneficial to have people on the board who have some knowledge of football if the board is going to be making decisions on coaches - even if they're only ratifying decisions by people contracted to come up with a name..... and of course, one of those people is glenn archer.

Meh. We have 2.

 

[Darkyprotector]

You crap on about financial advisers being leeches, which I take offence to by the way (I am one). I'm certainly in the business to help my clients, as are most other advisers. Do you realise Andy Gowers is also a financial adviser?

I suppose that is ok because he is on the Hawks board and he played more games than McMullin?

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Okay
Quick question ,what a family trust ,what's it purpose?why do we have them ,who do they assist?
Multiple choice
1. Avoid tax
2 protect assets from creditors
3. Live a high life at the expense of others
4 greed
You're the expert can you please tell me
Planned liquidation is the scourge of the 21st century , I don't consider that SMART I consider that immoral and unethical and yes been burnt plenty of times because of TRUSTS, POOR me the unsecured creditor.
I don't care how much he has, I hate greed

 

[MagpieJoel]

Okay
Quick question ,what a family trust ,what's it purpose?why do we have them ,who do they assist?
Multiple choice
1. Avoid tax
2 protect assets from creditors
3. Live a high life at the expense of others
4 greed
You're the expert can you please tell me
Planned liquidation is the scourge of the 21st century , I don't consider that SMART I consider that immoral and unethical and yes been burnt plenty of times because of TRUSTS, POOR me the unsecured creditor.
I don't care how much he has, I hate greed

I could give you an answer, but you're mistaken as to what a financial adviser does. You're talking about something an accountant would have intimate knowledge of.

 

[sideswipe]

Okay
Quick question ,what a family trust ,what's it purpose?why do we have them ,who do they assist?
Multiple choice
1. Avoid tax
2 protect assets from creditors
3. Live a high life at the expense of others
4 greed
You're the expert can you please tell me
Planned liquidation is the scourge of the 21st century , I don't consider that SMART I consider that immoral and unethical and yes been burnt plenty of times because of TRUSTS, POOR me the unsecured creditor.
I don't care how much he has, I hate greed

See point above about Waislitz not being an advisor. Lets not bring Gowers into it - he got the suitcase punched out of him when Brisbane made a lanky wingman play centre half back. You being burnt by phoenixes (building industry maybe?), sorry to hear it, but has zero relevance to the composition of our board. And my guess is you could just as easily be talking about limited liability companies where the shareholders can walk away if the company goes bust.

 

[Pacman Carney]

damn...and i was hoping so hard

I think it was Pert's wife.

 

[Markfs]

I think it was Pert's wife.

angling for a board position?

 

[Pacman Carney]

angling for a board position?

Or maybe seeing who can next use the Pert family Noosa holiday home!

 

[MarkT2]

Name a few potential replacements or give it up.

So if someone is dissatisfied with the performance of the board they should keep it to themselves unless they name replacement(s) for the incumbent(s)?

Whatever the background of individual casual vacancy appointments of Eddie since ,well, all this century, the incumbents have performed poorly in the one key metric that matters most to every member and supporter. Overseeing the dramatic demise of 2010/2011 on field position of the club to where we are today. The board doesn't pick the players, develop the players, train the players or set the game plan but they ultimately appoint and measure the performance of everyone that does. Overlay an at best financial performance given the member/supporter base it's hard to see why anyone should have any confidence in anyone on the board.