MICHAEL PAHOFF.

[Ox]

I want some facts and figures on this guy.
Start with.

Name - MICHAEL PAHOFF

Financial worth - ?????

What corporations has he worked for and among before  - ?

Who Is his employer - ?

Does he have a criminal record ?

Is his personal life a success ???

Does he subscribe to Tony Robbins?

Does he watch Law and Order ?

Is he a mormon ?

Is he friends with Mick Gatto ???



If u want to put yourself out there then you should hide nothing.

Anyone have any answers ????????????????????

[Fishfinger]

He hasn't put himself out there oxx. He's not running for the board and he's got nothing to do with any ticket which may emerge. I think that makes your questions a point of interest rather than required information.
The way I see it, he is just a disgruntled member who has used the only way he can to force change. An agitator with good intentions, but a misguided agitator imo. He is just a trigger for change and nothing more. He shouldn't have to divulge personal, professional  and financial information because he will have not have any official position at the club.

[Ox]

Fair enough but he shouldn't hold it back either.
The topic was tongue in cheek anyway.


It may be just a point of intrest to u but i classify it as required information.
It wouldn't lessen my opinion of him in any way, just give an insight on the
person behind the voice.

[Jackstar]

I would think that he should disclose his background, might give him some creditabilty if thats possible.

[Bulluss]

This bloke is an absolute tool, we all want change at the RFC but he isnt going about it the right way. If he had some creditable people behind him well then fair enough, but to just get out there and force the club into a full spill of all positions is stupid.

As to Ox's question in realation to his previous criminal history, i thought i seen him with a long overcoat and bag of lollies in his pocket. Does this mean anything to anyone?

[WilliamPowell]

He hasn't put himself out there oxx. He's not running for the board and he's got nothing to do with any ticket which may emerge.

Got to disagree with yuo here FF - in the last week he has aligned himself to the "nameless and faceless" ticket. 

But then again this is a new week and it could change.

Flip-flop

[Tiger Spirit]

What he is proposing is the most democractic way of doing things.

The problem is that he's lost everyone with the his lack of professionalism, direction and decisiveness about what he's doing.

He therefore lacks credibility and even though he accuses the Club of not being open and honest in their dealings, he turns around and conducts himself in the same under-handed, unprofessional manner he accuses the Club of. 

[Ox]

What he is proposing is the most democractic way of doing things.

The problem is that he's lost everyone with the his lack of professionalism, direction and decisiveness about what he's doing.

He therefore lacks credibility and even though he accuses the Club of not being open and honest in their dealings, he turns around and conducts himself in the same under-handed, unprofessional manner he accuses the Club of. 

Thats Very true TS

[Puntroadroar]

I'm still having trouble with the thought that this Mick Molloy lookalike is challenging Casey.

kind of reminds me of mick's shonky golf video LOL

but i cant help think of the segment "S@it scared" with Rob Sitch on the late show


things are getting ugly at tigerland

[Ox]

Geez,Mick wouldn't be to happy about that.

I rekkon he looks like Tiny Tim to be honest.

[Fishfinger]

A couple of specific questions have been directed to Michael Pahoff on PRE. Seeing 99% here seem to be banned I'll give a summary. 

1. Whether CC's account of him pushing ahead even if it is not in the best interests of the club is true. A reply given but not a definitive answer.

2. Whether he is part of a rumoured alternative ticket or just an instigator of change. No reply as yet.

If an answer to the second is given and he is part of a ticket, then many of the questions in ox's original post would be relevant and answerable.