Richmond Board Nomination

[Penelope]

Remember, the incumbents cannot speak, it is against the bylaws, the only thing we can base our decision on is from the board as a whole and the decisions the club is making to move forward.

And perhaps here in lies a big issue.

The bottom line is that many people are really just guessing when they vote in these elections.

As smokey has said, we can see the direction the board is taking collectively, but most of us would actually know very little about the individuals and their contribution.

For someone wishing to challenge they are in a tenuous position. If they dont make themselves known to the punters it will work against them. If they do as the two challengers have, they are expected to answer a swag of questions, some which they can't and many of which people are not expecting the current board members to answer.

Personally I think the timing is out ( I know that cant be controlled) - either a year too late or possibly two years too early, nor have either of the candidates inspired me enough to vote them in ( I wouldnt have a clue as to who i would vote out if that was the case) and I found phil's fear mongering use of last seasons ladder position alarming.

Perhaps what is needed is a night where all all existing board members and challengers can face the members and answer questions so members can make a better informed decision.

Change for the sake of change, lack of change because of reluctance to embrace change, or making your decision based on the nominees occupation, who they work for, gender, any other such thing, are all as backwards as each other.

Just on the affiliation with Coburg, I tried to find out in the chat with March as to what benefits the affiliation has over a stand alone team, besides costing, but no answer was forthcoming.

[10 FLAGS]

I came up with an idea that I posted a while back. The club should put together a video package of each candidate and stick it on the club website. Each candidate should answer say 8 to 12 questions - each candidate should get the same questions. That way all the members can hear and see the answers and get an understanding of all the candidates. This would be a good reform for the club. The only question is who develops the questions?

[Smokey]

The only question is who develops the questions?

The OER forum members.  A finer group of well-rounded (well, round anyway) balanced individuals you will ne'er find!

[Carvels Ring]

The only question is who develops the questions?

The OER forum members.  A finer group of well-rounded (well, round anyway) balanced individuals you will ne'er find!

I nominate that Gherkin fella!

[Penelope]

The only question is who develops the questions?

The OER forum members.  A finer group of well-rounded (well, round anyway) balanced individuals you will ne'er find!

Who are you calling balanced?

[WilliamPowell]

Mr Powell, I think you clearly misunderstand my comments. When I said some are more passionate than others I was certainly not referring to myself I was referring to others on your forum, so there were no insults intended from my end.
We are not going around in circles unless you are not understanding my position. If you are not understanding my position then please re-read my previous post as I am not sure that I can be more clear on my position. Please also ensure that you have been very clearly answered by the other nominees so that you and all others on this forum can compare my comments directly against the incumbents as I am yet to see anything that directly compares to my comments made in a previous post. Can you please advise me what policies that the incumbents have clearly stated that relate to the following:

Debt? (Maybe we will see something in Febraury 2011)
Stand Alone VFL Team? (All seem happy with Coburg alignment)
Sponsorship? This is a big one!!! (Nothing yet!!!)
Selling Home Games? (if finances do not improve we will continue to sell home games)

I have not heard anything that has substance. Have you? If you have please feel free to let me know. I look forward to your comments.

Phil,

I have read everything you've posted here (which in most casesis what is on your blog), read you blog, read your 100 words on the election stuff that came in the mail. I have read it all

Bottom line is you've been asked a number of question on here and haven't come up with one answer that offers me any idea on HOW you would improve things. You've told me ad nauseum about what's wrong but offered nothing of substance as to how or what oyur plans is fix the debt, increase sponsorship etc.

You have made a lot of comments that on the surface appear simply things you know that members want to hear (eg a stand alone VFL team), that will stir emotion and hopefully translate into a vote for you

You were asked by a number of people to give a reason why they should vote for you and you've continued to avoid answering that question. Why is it so hard to give a reason why? Saying we need change for the sake of it isn't a good enough reason for me at least.

On your four points: Both Infamy & smokey have covered my views rather well but I will add the following:

Debt? (Maybe we will see something in Febraury 2011): as already mentioned the 3-0-75000 plan is the first step. I have no doubt we will see something in February. Why? because with Benny Gale at the helm the RFC of 2010 actually sees projects through. Rather than our previous way of starting something, stopping, moving onto something else and getting back to it later. 

Stand Alone VFL Team? (All seem happy with Coburg alignment) How do you know they are happy with it? I reckon ever team in the AFL if they could would run their own team but running stand alone VFL teams are not cheap. Bottom line is we have a choice. We are working on the devt first rightly and then we see what happens. This is a smart move and one you actually endorse so I am not sure exactly what is you are trying to achieve with your constant referral to it?   
 
Sponsorship? This is a big one!!! (Nothing yet!!!): I am disppointed that we haven't finalised anything yet. But I have no doubt that it will get done and it will be the best deal for the Club. SPonsorship in sport is a tough gig when you have 10 Vic based clubs, 2 A League teams, a NRL team and now a rugby union team.

Selling Home Games? (if finances do not improve we will continue to sell home games): I thought Gary March covered this off in his chat on-line last week. He made it clear once the debt is clear then we wont be doing it. Didn't you read that?

 

[yellowandback]

Al, that was just a post which hit the sweet spot.
Thanks mate and well done.

[PhilipAnderson]

Mr Powell, I think you clearly misunderstand my comments. When I said some are more passionate than others I was certainly not referring to myself I was referring to others on your forum, so there were no insults intended from my end.
We are not going around in circles unless you are not understanding my position. If you are not understanding my position then please re-read my previous post as I am not sure that I can be more clear on my position. Please also ensure that you have been very clearly answered by the other nominees so that you and all others on this forum can compare my comments directly against the incumbents as I am yet to see anything that directly compares to my comments made in a previous post. Can you please advise me what policies that the incumbents have clearly stated that relate to the following:

Debt? (Maybe we will see something in Febraury 2011)
Stand Alone VFL Team? (All seem happy with Coburg alignment)
Sponsorship? This is a big one!!! (Nothing yet!!!)
Selling Home Games? (if finances do not improve we will continue to sell home games)

I have not heard anything that has substance. Have you? If you have please feel free to let me know. I look forward to your comments.

Phil,

I have read everything you've posted here (which in most casesis what is on your blog), read you blog, read your 100 words on the election stuff that came in the mail. I have read it all

Bottom line is you've been asked a number of question on here and haven't come up with one answer that offers me any idea on HOW you would improve things. You've told me ad nauseum about what's wrong but offered nothing of substance as to how or what oyur plans is fix the debt, increase sponsorship etc.

You have made a lot of comments that on the surface appear simply things you know that members want to hear (eg a stand alone VFL team), that will stir emotion and hopefully translate into a vote for you

You were asked by a number of people to give a reason why they should vote for you and you've continued to avoid answering that question. Why is it so hard to give a reason why? Saying we need change for the sake of it isn't a good enough reason for me at least.

On your four points: Both Infamy & smokey have covered my views rather well but I will add the following:

Debt? (Maybe we will see something in Febraury 2011): as already mentioned the 3-0-75000 plan is the first step. I have no doubt we will see something in February. Why? because with Benny Gale at the helm the RFC of 2010 actually sees projects through. Rather than our previous way of starting something, stopping, moving onto something else and getting back to it later. 

Stand Alone VFL Team? (All seem happy with Coburg alignment) How do you know they are happy with it? I reckon ever team in the AFL if they could would run their own team but running stand alone VFL teams are not cheap. Bottom line is we have a choice. We are working on the devt first rightly and then we see what happens. This is a smart move and one you actually endorse so I am not sure exactly what is you are trying to achieve with your constant referral to it?   
 
Sponsorship? This is a big one!!! (Nothing yet!!!): I am disppointed that we haven't finalised anything yet. But I have no doubt that it will get done and it will be the best deal for the Club. SPonsorship in sport is a tough gig when you have 10 Vic based clubs, 2 A League teams, a NRL team and now a rugby union team.

Selling Home Games? (if finances do not improve we will continue to sell home games): I thought Gary March covered this off in his chat on-line last week. He made it clear once the debt is clear then we wont be doing it. Didn't you read that?

 

Mr Powell,

I know that you are passionate to get answers about exactly how all our problems would be solved and my role in that, but this is not the forum to go through these issues in detail suffice to say that this forum is about getting to know who I am and what I stand for. Gaining credibility in a very short time is a difficult process, but those that know me understand that I am determined to succeed and put my knowledge and capabilities to the betterment of the Richmond Football Club. The key criteria is that I show you what I stand for and where I wish to take the club. Bearing in mind also, that should I be successful in gaining a seat on the board that I will have one vote out of 9 votes. This is unlike a normal election process whereby there are two parties and you vote for either of the two.

Unfortunately I do not have the benefit of inside information as I am not currently on the board thereby making it difficult to comment on specifics. The only thing that I can look at from the outside is what has or has not been achieved. Reviewing Gary's chat on the Richmond website there were no specifics provided by Gary on how issues would be addressed and exactly what would be done, just that they either were or weren't on the radar at this time. And I might add under no circumstances should we air ideas that can and possibly would be used by other clubs if this information was made public.

With respect to Sponsorship, I am committed to a considerably closer relationship than it appears that we have at this current time. Each of our major sponsors signs on and then signs off. We have no longevity.

The person that nominated me to stand for the board was Cliff Gale - Managing Director of Lite N' Easy. Lite N' Easy are one of Richmond's largest sponsors and perhaps the largest left at this time. Cliff asked me to put something on my blog, which I hope you don't mind if I cut and paste here for all to see.

“With great confidence and anticipation I nominated Philip Anderson to be elected to the Board at the Richmond Football Club … he is a great bloke and man with enormous passion and determination which has enabled him to establish a very successful and fast growing  business. He is a listener and I believe he will be a wonderful asset to our Board.

As a current sponsor of the Richmond Football Club it is essential that we have a strong impetus and drive quality sponsorship dollars into the Football Club … Phil is committed to this process. Phil, I wish you all the best in your endeavours”

I know that you find it difficult to vote for me, but my job is to show that you will have a high quality candidate working very hard for you and all other members of the Richmond Football Club.

Thank you again for giving me the opportunity to voice my views.

[WilliamPowell]

[Mr Powell,

I know that you are passionate to get answers about exactly how all our problems would be solved and my role in that, but this is not the forum to go through these issues in detail suffice to say that this forum is about getting to know who I am and what I stand for. Gaining credibility in a very short time is a difficult process, but those that know me understand that I am determined to succeed and put my knowledge and capabilities to the betterment of the Richmond Football Club. The key criteria is that I show you what I stand for and where I wish to take the club. Bearing in mind also, that should I be successful in gaining a seat on the board that I will have one vote out of 9 votes. This is unlike a normal election process whereby there are two parties and you vote for either of the two.

There in lies problem. I still don't quite know what you stand for despite all your long responses to questions. And at the end of the day for me at least you give repsonses not concrete answers. All you've done is repeatedly told me what's supposedly wrong with the place. You've been critical of the incumbents which is your right but you have failed to address the issues when we've raised questions which in turn has meant we've been critical of you

With respect to Sponsorship, I am committed to a considerably closer relationship than it appears that we have at this current time. Each of our major sponsors signs on and then signs off. We have no longevity.

Again how do you the relationships aren't close? You seem to be making an assumption based on what exactly? The person who nominated for the board?

Sorry on the part I've underlined I cannot agree.

I posted this either on this thread or on another one but do you remember the TAC? Up unitl they pulled the pin (rightly so IMHO) our deal with them was the 2nd longest continuos sponsorship arrangment in the comp behind Geelong and Ford. We had Motorola for 4-5 years before they decided to cease their sponsorship which wasn't the Club's fault it was a decision made by Motorola. We had AFG for 3-4 years until the GFC hit again not the Clubs fault. As for Dick Smith & LuXbet - they are remaining but at a llower evel so that tells me that the Club must be doing something right or they would have walked away completely.

Sometimes (and I know this wont suit your arguement) companies just decide to cease their involvement. They start with a very clear strategy and once they achieve what they set out to do they walk away. Nothing more nothing less.

As I said yesterday sponsorship in sport in this state is tough gig always has been always will be. And I reckon to use the stance that we cannot hang onto sponsors is this case is just a form of fear mongering when history tells us that it isn't necessarily the case.

The person that nominated me to stand for the board was Cliff Gale - Managing Director of Lite N' Easy. Lite N' Easy are one of Richmond's largest sponsors and perhaps the largest left at this time. Cliff asked me to put something on my blog, which I hope you don't mind if I cut and paste here for all to see.

“With great confidence and anticipation I nominated Philip Anderson to be elected to the Board at the Richmond Football Club … he is a great bloke and man with enormous passion and determination which has enabled him to establish a very successful and fast growing  business. He is a listener and I believe he will be a wonderful asset to our Board.

As a current sponsor of the Richmond Football Club it is essential that we have a strong impetus and drive quality sponsorship dollars into the Football Club … Phil is committed to this process. Phil, I wish you all the best in your endeavours”

Now I know Cliff (though Cliff wouldn't remember me  ). I know he is a passionate Tiger member and supporter but ethically I will admit I have an issue with his decision to nominate you.

Did he do it as a member who happens to be a sponsor or a sponsor who happens to be a member? For me it seems a bit of a conflict of interest here but that's just my take.

[gerkin greg]

[yellowandback]

"Sometimes (and I know this wont suit your arguement) companies just decide to cease their involvement. They start with a very clear strategy and once they achieve what they set out to do they walk away. Nothing more nothing less."

willy, that is just a show of blind loyalty to the board.
What a poor excuse to justify our current sponsorship issues.

There is a clear lack of strategy when securing long term sponsors, what we are doing is tactically getting what we can due to not having the right contacts and thought process when developing plans to land long term partnerships.

Sponsors are looking for "high engagement" activities with their clients when considering who to partner and what return it will generate. Create value with the deal and watch the value of the sponsorship grow over time.

A good example is the arrangement Hawthorn have with Tasmanian football. There's a reason north and the afl failed and it's linked to deep collaboration and high engagement with the community and the hfc.

Richmond are stuck in a mire of tactical, opportunistic deals, I hoping Benny will be addressing that with the current deal.

[WilliamPowell]

"Sometimes (and I know this wont suit your arguement) companies just decide to cease their involvement. They start with a very clear strategy and once they achieve what they set out to do they walk away. Nothing more nothing less."

willy, that is just a show of blind loyalty to the board.
What a poor excuse to justify our current sponsorship issues.

Y&B nothing could be further fromt eh truth

Trust me it isn't blind faith it is my opinion and view based on first hand experience 

[Carvels Ring]

WP smashes Phil for six, straight back over his head into the crowd! 

[yellowandback]

"Sometimes (and I know this wont suit your arguement) companies just decide to cease their involvement. They start with a very clear strategy and once they achieve what they set out to do they walk away. Nothing more nothing less."

willy, that is just a show of blind loyalty to the board.
What a poor excuse to justify our current sponsorship issues.

Y&B nothing could be further fromt eh truth
Trust me it isn't blind faith it is my opinion and view based on first hand experience 

so do you think we have the skill, experience and capability to develop the long term sponsors we need to avoid have this charade every other year where we are waiting to release club merchandise because we don't have agreements in place?
This is elite management?
 

[WilliamPowell]

so do you think we have the skill, experience and capability to develop the long term sponsors we need to avoid have this charade every other year where we are waiting to release club merchandise because we don't have agreements in place?
This is elite management?
 

Every other year? Apart from Luxbet who we had as a major for only 2 years this "every other year" argument doens't hold. IMHO it is pretty clear that Luxbet had a strategy - new company trying to establish its brand nationally looked to a sporting sponsorship to achieve that aim. They achieve their goal and scale back - as I said it does happen 

this is only the 2nd time I can remember where we have been in this sitauation of a delay in releasing merch because of a major sponsor not being on board. We aren't the first club it has happened to and we wont be the last

I will say it again the sponsorship market is bloody tough - these things take time. Do I wish it was different - bloody oath I do! I wish it was signed sealed and delivered but it isn't and I will trust Beeny Gale and his team to get this done

And yes personally, I think we have the right management team and structure at the Club now to get the absolute best deal for this footy club. 

And one more small point. It is not the job of the board to find sponsors and sign them (certainly their contacts help) it is the job of the management and the various departments of the club.

Unfortunately this seems to have got lost in some of the nominees postings as they seem to lay the blame of the current sponsorship situation soley at the feet of the incumbents