NMFC Board Elections

[Snake_Baker]

Why aren’t you dirty on Arch for not showing up in the thread?

My take is that he's a football related appointment, and therefore very sorely needed. If you have issues with his candidacy, then post away.

Buckley also gets a vote because he stepped up when the board lost control of the football department, and the club went in to freefall. If you have issues with his candidacy, then post away.

P. Crapper is a possible alternative factor. If you have issues with his candidacy, then post away.

Sonja is not any point of difference, as she has publicly stated, and I don't believe she is running for any AFL related purposes, as her previous dealings with the club would suggest. In regards to Sonja, folks should not lose sight of the fact that early in the piece I did state that I would be amongst the first to put my hand up and acknowledge if she did actually gain an appointment and achieved anything significant, that was not some obvious puff piece, or Scanlon & sexual politics related. I stand by that. If you have issues with her candidacy, then post away.

 

[Snake_Baker]

So if i post something unrelated or stoopid i should piss off? Mate, if that were the standard you wouldn't be allowed near the joint again. But for sake of clarity...

You have a stick up your arse about our clubs alignment to our social engagement programs driven by the Huddle because, I don't know, SJW's or something? Ok, giving you the benefit of the doubt I will say its because it distracts from winning games of football. We know why this engagement exists, and that is because Scanlon money was dependent on the club moving in this direction. We have survived as a club accordinly and have done so when putting something positive back into the community rather than sucking at the teet of pokies. I'm ok with that.

I see no evidence that the Huddle has a negative impact on football outcomes other than a corrolation between its existance and a period of not winning a flag. As a scientist I'm sure that you would not draw any conclusions between those two sets of data, right? I do see it as an important, ongoing community outreach program that makes us more attractive to local and stage govt and socially conscious companies which we can leverege for benefit. It is a branch of our club weather you like it or not and as such requires operational and strategic oversight at board level. Dr. Sonja Hood is easily the most qualified for this role given her background in this space.

I think that the majority of North members would agree that our engagement with the Huddle is a positive for the club and something that the board should continue to look to expand our club identity around. You may not, and thats fine, but you are a minority. Much like with AFLW. But being in the minority does not necessarily make the majority stupid, which you clearly think when it comes to this s**t. What it does do is make you wrong, so perhaps some introspection on your behalf. Your shouting from the rooftops that th house is burning and that we are all to ******* pussified to see it is boring, dull and turning this place into an unbearable shithole.

Mr Crapper seems like a decent bloke, has some good experience in engaging with govt etc but I don't see him as having any stand out traits that would make him a must have for the board. Furthermore, his platform of being a member advocate seems a little flimsy to me. I recall reading on here that member engagement would occur via an email accout or something, which if the case is utter bullshit. If he was serious he would be advocating for something like a memberships consultative committee with him as chair that has input into board level discussions. Good on him for coming on here and engaging with fans but even after that I don't buy what he is selling. So far he has not provided much to remove my doubt that he is no more than a connected businessman looking to pad out his CV.

Now, transmission as normal please. Cuck me up or something.

Take your fake consensus crap and piss off.

 

[The Warlord]

Richmond have an AFLW team and community programs coming out their arse, and a female leader, and they have won two of the past three flags.

 

[GarnerSmash]

Take your fake consensus crap and piss off.

Dude, you are so transparent that you probably can't see yourself in a mirror.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Dude, you are so transparent that you probably can't see yourself in a mirror.

Thanks for the compliment.

You should put away the smoke & mirrors and try doing the same thing.

 

[GarnerSmash]

Thanks for the compliment.

You should put away the smoke & mirrors and try doing the same thing.

No smoke and mirrors here.

 

[Caracas]

Thanks for the compliment.

You should put away the smoke & mirrors and try doing the same thing.

Lol. Is GarnerSmash Travis Cloke?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[see see]

It's vote stacking. Period.

Can you explain how giving a vote to each member of a membership-based organisation is vote stacking?

 

[Sillygit]

Can you explain how giving a vote to each member of a membership-based organisation is vote stacking?

or his previous brag of "orchestrating" 4 votes for Crapper

 

[The Anvil]

It’s not looking good Snakes. Sonja has 1,000 of her chick mates with NMFC AFLW Memberships and their votes should be enough to get her over the line. Only if there were 1,000 NMFC AFLM Memberships. The blokes might win the day. :stern look

If I buy some pet memberships can they vote too?

 

[Gasometer]

No Tef/Mario/Snake/whatever other name you have had, this ain't an alt account.

Vote 1 Sonja

I remember you
You just don’t post much anymore

 

[Only Forwards]

Can you explain how giving a vote to each member of a membership-based organisation is vote stacking?

It's not.

But it doesn't have to be.

There are a bunch of issues with the election of board members and virtually none of them have to do with who is running.

There is a board sanctioned gateway to candidacy.
Basically anyone who runs against the board endorsed candidates are pushing it up a vertical incline with a toothpick.
The board tend to have members step down prior to an election and then install someone into the vacancy. Making them an incumbent, incumbents are incredibly hard to unseat.

I maintain that the only way an 'outsider' will be elected onto the board will be to campaign with rank and file through the season.

For all the piss and wind in this thread the insular club board has us in about the strongest position we've been in off field doesn't it?

We had about as big of a clean out as a FD can have last year. To correct from some clear errors.

So if our house is truly in order now, we are in a decent position to see what unfolds onfield.

As to the election, the board endorsed candidates will win.

 

[The Other Dean]

If you believe Sonja would have sat on her hands during Roosistence, or supported the GC move, if not for an opportunity to work with the Huddle, which didn't even exist at the time, you definitely shouldn't vote for her.

Lol.

Some truly bizarre stuff doing the rounds in this thread.

I spoke to Sonja every day while the Roosistence stuff was happening. Often several times a day. Met with her regularly. Not once did I ever get the impression that she was motivated by anything other than her love of the club, and a desire to see it stay in its rightful home at Arden Street. Any attempt to question her altruistic intent in 2007 is way, way off the mark.

Unless of course you subscribe to the theory that Lidge, pharro, and myself (oh, and Ron Joseph, too) were all duped into being willing pawns in her Machiavellian designs.

It's also worth noting that the work Sonja did with Roosistence in 2007 was only a part of her greater contribution to the anti-relocation effort. As those in the know are aware, the biggest disruptive force (with a profile) during the anti-GC push was Ron Joseph. And I can guarantee you that Sonja was working alongside Ron every step of the way. Anyone who doubts my words is quite welcome to verify that with Ron himself. Her contribution to keeping North south in 2007 was far more significant than most people would be aware. Credit where it's due.

And before I get accused of just looking out for a mate here, I can tell you that I haven't spoken to nor had anything to do with Sonja in a number of years. On a similar note, I have only contributed one previous post to this thread and it was to express my frustration at the board election process, not to pump up Sonja's tyres. There is no cheerleading going on here. My motivation is solely to inject a little truth and first-hand experience/knowledge into the discussion.

 

[Limerick]

I agree that Sonya was a positive force in 2007 against the AFL proposed relocation. She is a strong NMFC advocate.

My issue with her candidacy is that it is another insider selection. This is another version of "hey members pay up and shut up".

I want to see some fresh influence on the Board.

Where is our exit Tasmania strategy?

Where is our aggressive membership growth strategy?
Look at our Melbourne competition.
.............. 2016 ......... 2019
Melb....... 39,146........52,426
NMFC ...... 45,014 ...... 42,419
St Kilda.....38,009....... 43,038
Bulldogs....39,459....... 44,373
We are effectively going backward. Included in our total is what 5,000 Tassie membership most of which will disappear as the Tassie exit looms up.

 

[Gasometer]

Lol.

Some truly bizarre stuff doing the rounds in this thread.

I spoke to Sonja every day while the Roosistence stuff was happening. Often several times a day. Met with her regularly. Not once did I ever get the impression that she was motivated by anything other than her love of the club, and a desire to see it stay in its rightful home at Arden Street. Any attempt to question her altruistic intent in 2007 is way, way off the mark.

Unless of course you subscribe to the theory that Lidge, pharro, and myself (oh, and Ron Joseph, too) were all duped into being willing pawns in her Machiavellian designs.

It's also worth noting that the work Sonja did with Roosistence in 2007 was only a part of her greater contribution to the anti-relocation effort. As those in the know are aware, the biggest disruptive force (with a profile) during the anti-GC push was Ron Joseph. And I can guarantee you that Sonja was working alongside Ron every step of the way. Anyone who doubts my words is quite welcome to verify that with Ron himself. Her contribution to keeping North south in 2007 was far more significant than most people would be aware. Credit where it's due.

And before I get accused of just looking out for a mate here, I can tell you that I haven't spoken to nor had anything to do with Sonja in a number of years. On a similar note, I have only contributed one previous post to this thread and it was to express my frustration at the board election process, not to pump up Sonja's tyres. There is no cheerleading going on here. My motivation is solely to inject a little truth and first-hand experience/knowledge into the discussion.

We need you posting more on everything TOD. Get to it man.

 

[Gasometer]

I agree that Sonya was a positive force in 2007 against the AFL proposed relocation. She is a strong NMFC advocate.

My issue with her candidacy is that it is another insider selection. This is another version of "hey members pay up and shut up".

I want to see some fresh influence on the Board.

Where is our exit Tasmania strategy?

Where is our aggressive membership growth strategy?
Look at our Melbourne competition.
.............. 2016 ......... 2019
Melb....... 39,146........52,426
NMFC ...... 45,014 ...... 42,419
St Kilda.....38,009....... 43,038
Bulldogs....39,459....... 44,373
We are effectively going backward. Included in our total is what 5,000 Tassie membership most of which will disappear as the Tassie exit looms up.

Coincidentally those three years were pretty much garbage on field; if I didn’t have the disposable income I would have cancelled as well

 

[gokangas]

I agree that Sonya was a positive force in 2007 against the AFL proposed relocation. She is a strong NMFC advocate.

My issue with her candidacy is that it is another insider selection. This is another version of "hey members pay up and shut up".

I want to see some fresh influence on the Board.

Where is our exit Tasmania strategy?

Where is our aggressive membership growth strategy?
Look at our Melbourne competition.
.............. 2016 ......... 2019
Melb....... 39,146........52,426
NMFC ...... 45,014 ...... 42,419
St Kilda.....38,009....... 43,038
Bulldogs....39,459....... 44,373
We are effectively going backward. Included in our total is what 5,000 Tassie membership most of which will disappear as the Tassie exit looms up.

Couldn't agree more Limerick. No plan B seems to be a specialty on and off the field at times. Membership is the critical problem as I see it. Numbers generally bring security and if we are not able to grow our membership ahead of Tassie's demise (if it comes) then we are in trouble and extremely vulnerable. Figures you just posted are very alarming.
I hope Paul is elected although I doubt it. I am willing to risk an unwelcome (so it seems) board member as we have nothing to lose. Maybe his scrutiny will see changes that are to our benefit.
I have a lot of respect for Sonja too so this is not about hoping Sonja loses but more about hoping Paul wins.

 

[Limerick]

Coincidentally those three years were pretty much garbage on field; if I didn’t have the disposable income I would have cancelled as well

St Kilda's on-field performance over those three years was below ours yet they increased their membership by 5k. We went back 2.5k.
I agree that on-field performance is important BUT believe that our Achilles Heel is our image. We need new members i.e. those never aligned
with an AFL Club to join us and stay. The constant "North Melb will be shipped off to Tassie OR die" isn't a positive image to attract new blood.

 

[Colbys Boots]

Membership numbers are a novel distraction for people who can't read balance sheets. It matters little that we boost member numbers by a few thousand if that doesn't translate into enough money to insulate ourselves from the potential loss of Tasmanian money. I'd suggest we would need to find around 25,000 more adult members to do that. So that's unlikely. We can't get that many people to turn up to games, with or without memberships so I don't know where these new members are going to come from.

The replacement money will have to come from other sources.

 

[Limerick]

Membership numbers are a novel distraction for people who can't read balance sheets. It matters little that we boost member numbers by a few thousand if that doesn't translate into enough money to insulate ourselves from the potential loss of Tasmanian money. I'd suggest we would need to find around 25,000 more adult members to do that. So that's unlikely. We can't get that many people to turn up to games, with or without memberships so I don't know where these new members are going to come from.

The replacement money will have to come from other sources.

But "Other Sources" typically want to be associated with a successful Club i.e. large membership, large crowds, AND on-field success. An increase in membership and crowds will make attracting other sources easier.

 

[Val Keating]

I agree that Sonya was a positive force in 2007 against the AFL proposed relocation. She is a strong NMFC advocate.

My issue with her candidacy is that it is another insider selection. This is another version of "hey members pay up and shut up".

I want to see some fresh influence on the Board.

Where is our exit Tasmania strategy?

Where is our aggressive membership growth strategy?
Look at our Melbourne competition.
.............. 2016 ......... 2019
Melb....... 39,146........52,426
NMFC ...... 45,014 ...... 42,419
St Kilda.....38,009....... 43,038
Bulldogs....39,459....... 44,373
We are effectively going backward. Included in our total is what 5,000 Tassie membership most of which will disappear as the Tassie exit looms up.

Selling games to Tassie has had a negative effect on growing our Victorian membership

 

[numchuks]

The reason why other clubs memberships have increased whilst selling games is because they’ve been successful whilst doing it.

We were told that selling games to Tassie would make us more successful and have us playing finals.

Instead we haven’t played any final since since then and have even less games to attend in melbourne. No wonder why our membership numbers have stagnated.

Oh Heath

 

[blackshadow]

But "Other Sources" typically want to be associated with a successful Club i.e. large membership, large crowds, AND on-field success. An increase in membership and crowds will make attracting other sources easier.

I have a feeling the reason we've drafted in BA as the CEO is to maximise our revenue streams....

Shore up the finances to cover the Tasmanian funding and look for growth in Melbourne, especially leveraging off what is happening with the development around Arden Street.

 

[Zondor]

Selling games to Tassie has had a negative effect on growing our Victorian membership

Agreed. A two month gap last season between Melbourne Home Games does not help. We need to make going to the Footy a Habit. Once you start attending games the next logical step is to buy a Membership. More Home Games in Melbourne would be a start. :stern look

 

[blackshadow]

Agreed. A two month gap last season between Melbourne Home Games does not help. We need to make going to the Footy a Habit. Once you start attending games the next logical step is to buy a Membership. More Home Games in Melbourne would be a start. :stern look

One of the challenges we've had is even when our membership numbers have been healthy our supporters haven't turned out in healthy numbers... part of that is lousy fixturing but part of that has to do with attendance numbers... It's a vicious circle.