The Replacement....

[Hollow Knight]

Mate, for the first time I gotta disagree with you, strongly. In fact ,that is an insulting load of shit.

I live in north Queensland. I cannot afford to buy a full membership with tickets to games I will never get to. So I pay a $60 membership & through that I buy tickets to the 2 or 3 games a year I can attend. It does not diminish my support for the club, or the validity of my opinion on who should have the reins.

As to the 1000 memberships & buy a board position - what a load. I person - 1 membership ( or are you suggesting filling the application out of the phone book).

Richmond members on the same package have the same rights. Take out the price of your admission & you pay no more than me - so do',t look down your nose at me. OK?

You are putting words in my mouth. Where did I "look down" on anyone. Like I said, I had an armchair membership myself once.

I am just saying that you have to decide at some point what contitutes a full member of the club. What about someone who doesn't have an armchair membership but buys 200 dollars worth of merchandise a year... should they get a vote? If not, are you looking down on them?

What about people who pay thousands of dollars for premium la-di-dah memberships. Should they be entitled to more than one vote each? Perhaps. It's a matter of opinion.

As for the 100 membership thing, you'd buy them for friends and family and get their proxies. Similar to branch stacking in electoral pre-selections. I was being somewhat facetious with that example but I do think the club does have to put some sort of financial disincentive on people with less than pure motives being able to accumulate a voting bloc.

I don't know the exact specifics of where the voting rights begin. Personally I'd draw the line at 3 game memberships and also institute a premium armchair membership with voting rights included (at 40 dollars more than the current rate, which I'll point out is the same premium that us members pay for voting rights over standard season ticket holders).

. But I did not feel miffed for one second when I was an armchair member that I didn't have voting rights. It's a matter of opinion, but I wasn't for a second looking down my nose at anyone.

 

[roostersgal4eva]

yeah you were....even if it was unintentional

 

[roostersgal4eva]

on a side note, doesnt micky conlan have a son who is a good young footballer? i would be thinking he might be 16 or 17 years old?

lmao

He sounds like a top candidiate! have we got any other options....more top quaity options we have the more likely we have a great candidate to hire

 

[dannitori]

on a side note, doesnt micky conlan have a son who is a good young footballer? i would be thinking he might be 16 or 17 years old?

I know he has a son, don't know of his football ability though. Im sure if he is good enough, he would certainly be on our radar

 

[Haggis McHaggis]

No-one's thumbing their nose at anyone. I spent 5+yrs in NQ, as an armchair supporter and could quite easily accept that I didn't have a vote. Never seemed unfair to me.

Like I suggested though, an additional component on the membership with..

"Would you like voting rights at the AGM? Y/N"

..would be great. Whack a fee on that and I would've happily said yes.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Thanks for making the effort to take my thoughts in the context in which I meant them Haggis. Appreciated.

 

[dannitori]

On the subject of AGM's, it has been raised here before, but live links for the Victorian/Interstate members would be fantastic to have as well.

I hope the new CEO considers this

 

[Hollow Knight]

On the subject of AGM's, it has been raised here before, but live links for the Victorian/Interstate members would be fantastic to have as well.

I hope the new CEO considers this

whatboutbob and a few others are pushing hard for this.

Our now former CEO said he was "looking into it".

I'd urge you to email Angus and keep that issue alive.

 

[BuntonRules]

You are putting words in my mouth. Where did I "look down" on anyone. Like I said, I had an armchair membership myself once.

I am just saying that you have to decide at some point what contitutes a full member of the club. What about someone who doesn't have an armchair membership but buys 200 dollars worth of merchandise a year... should they get a vote? If not, are you looking down on them?

What about people who pay thousands of dollars for premium la-di-dah memberships. Should they be entitled to more than one vote each? Perhaps. It's a matter of opinion.

As for the 100 membership thing, you'd buy them for friends and family and get their proxies. Similar to branch stacking in electoral pre-selections. I was being somewhat facetious with that example but I do think the club does have to put some sort of financial disincentive on people with less than pure motives being able to accumulate a voting bloc.

I don't know the exact specifics of where the voting rights begin. Personally I'd draw the line at 3 game memberships and also institute a premium armchair membership with voting rights included (at 40 dollars more than the current rate, which I'll point out is the same premium that us members pay for voting rights over standard season ticket holders).

. But I did not feel miffed for one second when I was an armchair member that I didn't have voting rights. It's a matter of opinion, but I wasn't for a second looking down my nose at anyone.

Well, you threw the bait & I bit. Apologies if my interpretation was wrong, but that's how I read it.

I was highly peeved when I found out last year I was not considered a full member. as I stated, take out the admission & there is no difference in any membership. I think the responses on this tonight have enlightened you to the breadth of support nationwide that feel just as disenfranchised as me. Rather than put up barriers to participation would we not be better by allowing as many as possible to participate in voting? Mayhap we could have ended the Kelly/Bowers era sooner if more of us had a voice.

As to the 'branch stacking' - most of us don't live in your political world. It is a football club.Iif that is the reasoning behind these restrictions, well is paranoia too strong a term?

Democracy. 1 member = 1 vote. No matter who you are.



Back on topic. Thanx for the contact to Mickey Conlon. Just about to drop a line, just saying please think about it.

 

[nigelicious]

A lot of these memberships aren't supposed to be amazing value for money. They are supposed to provide a way for you to support your football club. If you don't want to do that, don't get the membership. Simple.

Next you'll be wanting the pet members to get votes?

 

[dannitori]

whatboutbob and a few others are pushing hard for this.

Our now former CEO said he was "looking into it".

I'd urge you to email Angus and keep that issue alive.

I will. Thanks

You know, today I haven't felt this positive about Brisbane for a very long time. It almost feels like a massive wieght has been lifted.

On Facebook people are bringing up going after Paul Roos for the job, Im not so sure about that. Roosy has a fantastic football brain, no doubt... but we need someone with a fantastic business brain

 

[Hollow Knight]

On Facebook people are bringing up going after Paul Roos for the job, Im not so sure about that. Roosy has a fantastic football brain, no doubt... but we need someone with a fantastic business brain

Yeah Roosy would be a dream appointment for the General Manager of Football role, but he seems pretty committed to his work with Fox Sports and the Swans Junior Academy. Seems like the sort of guy who wouldn't reneg on an existing agreement.

 

[irel]

From WA. Never once did I think that contributing $60.00 for an armchair membership, should entitle me to vote. To me it's more of an acknowledgment of my support and attachment to the club.

 

[Hollow Knight]

As to the 'branch stacking' - most of us don't live in your political world. It is a football club.Iif that is the reasoning behind these restrictions, well is paranoia too strong a term?

Yeah, unfortunately footy clubs are political entities though, and these sort of things have to be considered when you create a club constitution.

Democracy. 1 member = 1 vote. No matter who you are.

Yeah but footy clubs aren't exactly a true democracy. It's halfway between that and a publicly listed company, and with public companies, the bigger the share, the bigger the say. Unfortunately money talks and bullshit walks in the new corporate world of professional sport.

e.g. Sponsors come first, then you start worrying about members. It's sadly the way it works.

Back on topic. Thanx for the contact to Mickey Conlon. Just about to drop a line, just saying please think about it.

Tell him to think about it, and then take the job anyway.

 

[Ceebee]

I was an armchair member when I lived interstate and a country member when I lived in the country.I just wanted to feel I belonged some way to the Club and in some small way I was supporting them. Never entered my head about voting rights,I was happy to get the magazines and the sticker for the car.

 

[POBT]

The club was completely wrong to effectively deny non-members a say on important issues. But I think there is a difference between having a say and having a vote. As a non-member who supports the club as best I can, I still want to be listened to. But I don't expect a vote.

That said, the club should instigate a voting membership option that doesn't include attendance benefits. If someone wants to 'own' a piece of the club, they should be entitled to without having to fork quite as much as those who can attend all home games.

 

[Hollow Knight]

That said, the club should instigate a voting membership option that doesn't include attendance benefits. If someone wants to 'own' a piece of the club, they should be entitled to without having to fork quite as much as those who can attend all home games.

Yeah, agreed. Like I said, the difference between a season ticket and a voting rights membership is 40 dollars. Chuck that as an optional extra on the armchair membership and Bob's your uncle.

 

[dannitori]

The club was completely wrong to effectively deny non-members a say on important issues. But I think there is a difference between having a say and having a vote. As a non-member who supports the club as best I can, I still want to be listened to. But I don't expect a vote.

That said, the club should instigate a voting membership option that doesn't include attendance benefits. If someone wants to 'own' a piece of the club, they should be entitled to without having to fork quite as much as those who can attend all home games.

Spot on!

My main issue really was that fact that I wasn't being heard (even though I am a member), I would prefer to have voting rights, but that wasn't my main issue. When the whole 'jumper-gate' thing happened, I voiced my opposition and was pretty much told that my opinion didn't matter, and wasn't worth a sack of crap.

I have to tell you, at that time I was ready to walk away from the club, and not return until Bowers was gone I was that livid with not only my treatment, but the treatment of fellow Lion members and fans. But my love for the club is stronger then my dislike for Bowers.

When Tony Kelly called Fitzroy 'irrelavent', that basically summed up for me what Kelly and Bowers thought of the Fitzroy contingent. To me, that was wrong. I love the fact that we are a unique club, I love the Fitzroy connection, I love the Bears connection... our club is blessed to be in a position of having all these components that make us, us!

I thought under Bowers and Kelly, we lost that veiw. Which saddened me, as Ireland did so much to cherish it.

 

[AndrewD]

That said, The club has to make money, and what are you going to give people for $60 that doesn't put the club in the red? Of course, you don't shaft them, but you have to give them something that gives some feeling of connection, but doesn't put you in the red in the process.

Personally, I think that the guideline for giving someone voting rights should be based on whether or not the club includes them in the official membership total. Simply put, the club can call you a supporter or a donor but they can't claim (and count) you as a member unless they give you a vote.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Personally, I think that the guideline for giving someone voting rights should be based on whether or not the club includes them in the official membership total. Simply put, the club can call you a supporter or a donor but they can't claim (and count) you as a member unless they give you a vote.

Pretty sure that is how it works.

Armchair members aren't including in official AFL membership figures.

 

[Conlan 12]

on a side note, doesnt micky conlan have a son who is a good young footballer? i would be thinking he might be 16 or 17 years old?

Micky has two sons, one around 20 and the other mid 20s both gun junior footy players, dont think they went on to play much football though! which sucks

 

[western royboy]

Back on topic.....

Shortlist for the position of Lions CEO

1. Brian Cook - the best in the business - highly unlikely but we must ask the question

2. Gary Pert - my idol as a young bloke - unobtainable but ask anyway

3. Mick Conlan - Why not?

4. ?

 

[jackess]

K-Rudd?

Kevin 11.

 

[POBT]

I think the most important thing for this chief executive to be able to deliver on is financial stability. As such, whilst a football background would be advantageous, I don't believe it is mandatory. I want someone to deliver in terms of financial performance, so us supporters can go back to just thinking about the on-field stuff, rather than worrying about whether we'll have the money to pay promoted rookies.

I like the idea of any of Cook, Conlan or Pert. But I think we need to be open to people from outside traditional football circles.

 

[Ray Button]

I think the most important thing for this chief executive to be able to deliver on is financial stability. As such, whilst a football background would be advantageous, I don't believe it is mandatory. I want someone to deliver in terms of financial performance, so us supporters can go back to just thinking about the on-field stuff, rather than worrying about whether we'll have the money to pay promoted rookies.

I like the idea of any of Cook, Conlan or Pert. But I think we need to be open to people from outside traditional football circles.

Yeah, something like a 7-year, $14M sponsorship might do.