Author Topic: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford  (Read 13807 times)

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 40307
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #15 on: July 08, 2004, 01:49:23 PM »
Don't remember in my life so many people not wanting to be apart of something.

Will the real alternative group please stand up! ::)

They cannot stand up because I don't think they know who they are. :-\ :P

Whoever "they" are, they are not presenting a very positive, proactive, professional imagine.  ::) >:(

Don't worry about us being a laughing stock over this "situation" - we already are >:( >:( >:(

Let's see there's:

Gettysburg the re-enactment
Who's on my Ticket?
Will you be on my ticket?
You're not on my ticket?

 :P :P >:( >:(
 ;)



 
« Last Edit: July 08, 2004, 01:52:26 PM by WilliamPowell »
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Offline Tiger Spirit

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #16 on: July 08, 2004, 02:44:58 PM »
If there isn't an alternative ticket then we as a Club are going to be the biggest laughing stock in the League spending $50,000 of our own money, after losing $2 million already, on an election with no candidates  :-\

Surely members won’t agree to an election unless they know who the candidates are, if there are any.  Would we?

On the money side of things, and if I got this right, it costs $50,000 for an election, but how much for an EGM to decide whether we need or want to spend $50,000?
Everything that is done in this world is done by hope.  --Martin Luther

The time you enjoy wasting isn’t wasted time.

Offline Fishfinger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2465
  • You can't put brains in an idiot
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #17 on: July 08, 2004, 03:03:51 PM »
Surely members won’t agree to an election unless they know who the candidates are, if there are any.  Would we?

No choice TS if Michael Pahoff presents his petition. Has been my gripe with his actions from the beginning.
It's 50 of one and half a dozen of the other - Don Scott

Offline Tiger Spirit

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #18 on: July 08, 2004, 03:43:58 PM »
Surely members won’t agree to an election unless they know who the candidates are, if there are any.  Would we?

No choice TS if Michael Pahoff presents his petition. Has been my gripe with his actions from the beginning.

I've lost the plot on the whole thing then Fishfinger. :-\  Cheers.  I'll go refresh my memory, if I can be bothered wading through it all again. :P

This really is crazy stuff. >:( They need to change that clause in the Club's constitution so that the figure is represented by a percentage of members, rather than a figure.  Because, the number of members has increased many times over, since it was written.

I doubt that the majority view can be represented by 100 people signing a petition, when there are over 27,000 members.

How can a man who isn't sure what he is doing be able to speak for our members?  I agree with the principle of the clause, but it obviously needs updating, because this is mind numbing.

At least if we knew who these people were, we could be less concerned.  Or more concerned, as the case may be. :'(

Everything that is done in this world is done by hope.  --Martin Luther

The time you enjoy wasting isn’t wasted time.

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 58597
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #19 on: July 08, 2004, 03:51:04 PM »
They need to change that clause in the Club's constitution so that the figure is represented by a percentage of members, rather than a figure.  Because, the number of members has increased many times over, since it was written.

I doubt that the majority view can be represented by 100 people signing a petition, when there are over 27,000 members.

I agree wholeheartedly with you TS about the fact that a requirement only 0.4% of members is ridiculous but apparently it's now law and part of the Corporate Act to have it set at 100 or 5% (for smaller companies). So much for democracy and majority rule. 
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 40307
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #20 on: July 08, 2004, 04:00:32 PM »
My understanding of this whole sorry saga is this:

If Pahoff lodges his petition then there must and EGM. All members would have to be notified of the EGM and where it would take place (cost 1).

At the EGM he puts forward his motion of no confidence in the current board. A vote would be taken and if his motion is passed an interim board would be appointed (how this happens I'm not sure) while an election is called and organised with the proper returning officers appointed (eg the Club's Auditors = cost 2). All members are then notified again by mail and sent ballot papers that would then be needed to counted by the said returning officers and the winners announced.

Now if all of the interim board nominate and there are no other nominations then there wont be an election but the returning officers are still required to tell us that were no other nominations and the interim board are elected unopposed.

If his motion is defeated then the current board remains.

Points to remember: an interim board cannot appoint a new coach so while is this is possibly going we could lose any chance of getting a Wallace or Eade or any of the other top coaching prospect.

The time frame is EGM = 21 days after the redcoats deliver it (or should that be the confederates ???) and a further 21 days for an election after the motion is passed - takes us to mid to late September
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Offline Tiger Spirit

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #21 on: July 08, 2004, 04:05:49 PM »
I agree wholeheartedly with you TS about the fact that a requirement only 0.4% of members is ridiculous but apparently it's now law and part of the Corporate Act to have it set at 100 or 5% (for smaller companies). So much for democracy and majority rule.

Thanks for agreeing MT.  Doesn’t sound like it’s gonna do us much good though.  :(

5% might make sense in the corporate/business world.  But I don’t know that it’s all that workable or sensible in such an emotion charged environment as a footy Club, or any sporting body for that matter.  As we are finding out.

Hopefully this is just a one off, but who knows.

What if members signing a petition had to pay for the cost of an EGM?  Would that change things? ;D
Everything that is done in this world is done by hope.  --Martin Luther

The time you enjoy wasting isn’t wasted time.

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 40307
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #22 on: July 08, 2004, 04:06:07 PM »
I agree wholeheartedly with you TS about the fact that a requirement only 0.4% of members is ridiculous but apparently it's now law and part of the Corporate Act to have it set at 100 or 5% (for smaller companies). So much for democracy and majority rule. 

I don't think this exactly correct MT. If my foggy memory of Corporations Law is working the 100 signatures or 5% is for smaller companies or those that do not have a constitution or articles of association (they are called replaceable rules) if you have a constitution like the RFC does then you are governed by that - so if we change it, which we should, then it takes precedent over the Corporate Act.

IMHO it should be 10% of our voting members.
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Offline Tiger Spirit

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #23 on: July 08, 2004, 04:25:52 PM »
My understanding of this whole sorry saga is this:

If Pahoff lodges his petition then there must and EGM. All members would have to be notified of the EGM and where it would take place (cost 1).

At the EGM he puts forward his motion of no confidence in the current board. A vote would be taken and if his motion is passed an interim board would be appointed (how this happens I'm not sure) while an election is called and organised with the proper returning officers appointed (eg the Club's Auditors = cost 2). …

If his motion is defeated then the current board remains.

That was how I thought events would unfold.

Glad you can make sense of it all WP.  Thanks for clearing things up for me. ;)
Everything that is done in this world is done by hope.  --Martin Luther

The time you enjoy wasting isn’t wasted time.

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 58597
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #24 on: July 08, 2004, 04:41:14 PM »
I don't think this exactly correct MT. If my foggy memory of Corporations Law is working the 100 signatures or 5% is for smaller companies or those that do not have a constitution or articles of association (they are called replaceable rules) if you have a constitution like the RFC does then you are governed by that - so if we change it, which we should, then it takes precedent over the Corporate Act.

Thanks WP. This is where I got the 100/5% from. I see that (1A) gives you the chance to change the 100 number in any case by my reading. I agree with you it should be at least 10%.

CORPORATIONS ACT 2001
- SECT 249D
Calling of general meeting by directors when requested by members

(1) The directors of a company must call and arrange to hold a general meeting on the request of:

(a) members with at least 5% of the votes that may be cast at the general meeting; or
(b) at least 100 members who are entitled to vote at the general meeting.

(1A) The regulations may prescribe a different number of members for the purposes of the application of paragraph (1)(b) to:

(a) a particular company; or
(b) a particular class of company.

Without limiting this, the regulations may specify the number as a percentage of the total number of members of the company.


(2) The request must:

(a) be in writing; and
(b) state any resolution to be proposed at the meeting; and
(c) be signed by the members making the request; and
(d) be given to the company.

(3) Separate copies of a document setting out the request may be used for signing by members if the wording of the request is identical in each copy.

(4) The percentage of votes that members have is to be worked out as at the midnight before the request is given to the company.

(5) The directors must call the meeting within 21 days after the request is given to the company. The meeting is to be held not later than 2 months after the request is given to the company.

http://scaleplus.law.gov.au/html/pasteact/3/3448/0/PA004060.htm
« Last Edit: July 08, 2004, 04:43:11 PM by mightytiges »
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 58597
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #25 on: July 13, 2004, 01:55:27 AM »
Casey guard up as Schwab bid builds
13 July 2004   
Herald Sun
Trevor Grant

A RICHMOND rebel group is set to launch its much-awaited challenge to president Clinton Casey.

Led by former director Brendan Schwab, the group is expected to approach Casey within the next fortnight to demand his resignation.

"It could be either this week or next, but you can say it's on," one source said yesterday.

Schwab would not comment on the timing of any challenge, but he indicated it was still very much alive.

"Obviously I'm very worried about the on-going viability of the football club," he said.

"I certainly don't rule out having an involvement in the future in any capacity that the people of Richmond want me to have."

It is understood Schwab and Tigers' 1980 premiership wingman Peter Welsh met at the weekend to firm up plans to oust Casey.

While the exact make-up of the reform ticket is still to be finalised, Schwab, 36, a lawyer who is chief executive of the Australian Entertainment Industry Association, is believed to be considering taking on the role of president if his group gains control.

His board is expected to include Welsh, who runs a successful business in sporting apparel and footwear, Mike Humphris, a liquidation expert and former director who played a major role in saving the Tigers from the financial precipice in the early 1990s, and Colin Radford, an executive with the Tigers' sponsor, the TAC.

Former premiership wingman Bryan Wood has also been linked with the group. It is understood the group would also move to enlist the support of board members Gary March and Alan Nicklos.

The revolt at Richmond was brewing well before the team began to show it was headed for another disastrous season. It had its origins in the resignations of Schwab and Welsh early in the year, which were based on their assessment of the club's finances and a dispute over board governance.

The appointment of a new coach to replace Danny Frawley, who will step down at the end of the season, is a key issue. Ideally, the alternative group would want to have some input into the appointment, but the driving force is the club's financial position.

The club expects to lose in the region of $2 million this year, which would take its accumulated losses in the past two years to almost $3 million.

Casey's predecessor Leon Daphne said earlier this year that when he departed the presidency at the end of 1999, the club had "$1 million in the bank".

"It's not about personalities. It's about the alarming deterioration in the club finances," a source said.

If Casey does not step aside when he's approached, the new board would force an extraordinary general meeting and ask the club membership to decide.

Casey has stated firmly a number of times he would be willing to talk to any potential challengers.

But he's given no indication he would stand down. Only last week he declared that it was "business as usual" at Richmond.

The group has spent many weeks mulling over the idea of a challenge.

However, it has been delayed by an extended recruitment and selection process. Many past players and supporters have been approached; others are said to have offered to be part of the push.

It is believed that Schwab and his men decided to make their run only in the past few days.

It's understood the group does not believe the lack of a prominent Richmond figure to head the ticket will affect its chances of taking office if the matter goes to an election.

Schwab, who served on the Tigers board for five years, is the son of the late Alan Schwab, whose rise to senior executive level at the AFL began when he became Richmond secretary in 1968. Brendan's elder brother, Cameron, currently chief executive at Fremantle, was general manager at Richmond from 1988-1994.

Brendan's background is in sports and industrial law. Before joining the AEIA a year ago, he was chief executive of the Australian Professional Footballers Association, representing Australia's elite soccer players.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,10120850%255E19771,00.html
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 58597
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #26 on: July 13, 2004, 02:25:46 AM »
Quote

Schwab would not comment on the timing of any challenge, but he indicated it was still very much alive.

"Obviously I'm very worried about the on-going viability of the football club," he said.

"I certainly don't rule out having an involvement in the future in any capacity that the people of Richmond want me to have."

Typical political-speak that gives me the proverbial  ::). Casey's no better I might add. Say some hand-wavey BS which is neither giving an answer of yes or no. If they're so confident they're the right people to lead Richmond into the future then what are afraid of - their past failures when they were on the RFC board! It's not as though Clinton has much of a leg to stand on or the support of members. Where's the transparency?! >:(. I'll believe it when I see it.   

Quote
It is believed that Schwab and his men decided to make their run only in the past few days.

That I find very hard to believe given Caro reported the same thing in The Age a couple of weeks back ::).

Quote
It's understood the group does not believe the lack of a prominent Richmond figure to head the ticket will affect its chances of taking office if the matter goes to an election.

In terms of pure politics they most likely will romp it in. With Casey in power for 5 years, people will demand change under current circumstances - both on-field and off. The worry in that is what scrutiny will be placed on the alternative ticket to demonstrate that they will be different to past "new" groups over the last 20 years who promised the world but proved to be no different to their predecessors. As I said previously, a ticket consisting of mainly and lead by former board members gives me no faith whatsoever in them being able to do the job required when they only screwed up especially in regards to the footy department when last on the RFC board.
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

froars

  • Guest
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #27 on: July 13, 2004, 09:19:01 AM »
Does anyone know where Boy Blunder Pahloff is and what he's up to at the moment - and what he's currently doing to our club?

Offline om21

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 598
  • Original Melbourne 21
    • Original Melbourne 21
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Clay, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #28 on: July 13, 2004, 10:02:55 AM »
Yeah I understand the sceptism but guys Casey and co havent performed. His results dont justify another tenure (similar to Dud). The best thing Schwab and co could do is state why they left the board.....if they are able to show that their input was being neglected or that Casey's direction and control was one of the wrong path then I have no qualms that the new party will win.

I have already told my father and friends that if they vote for Casey, Im done with sitting with them at the footy. In 5 years, Casey has one of the worst records I have seen......it must speak volumes.
Den uparxei Ellada xwris AEK.

Finally our new webage: http://www.original21.com/melbourne

Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 40307
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Alternative ticket: Schwab, Welsh, Wood, Humphris and Radford
« Reply #29 on: July 13, 2004, 10:40:56 AM »
Led by former director Brendan Schwab, the group is expected to approach Casey within the next fortnight to demand his resignation.

"It could be either this week or next, but you can say it's on," one source said yesterday.

Schwab would not comment on the timing of any challenge, but he indicated it was still very much alive.


Hmm to challenge you'd need 100 signatures - so they must have a petition. Pahoff says that he's given his petition to an alternative ticket but wont say which one.

Simple questions Brendan - do you have 100 signatures? Do you have Gettysburg Pahoff's petition? If you don't have these things then how do you plan on challenging?


"Obviously I'm very worried about the on-going viability of the football club," he said.

Well at least we finally agree on something Brendan


"I certainly don't rule out having an involvement in the future in any capacity that the people of Richmond want me to have."


Guess what Brendan personally I don't want you. Why? The reasons are pretty simple actually.

Firstly, your track record. You were a member of the current board - actually as the report says you were a board member for five years. You were part of the decision making process during this time.  You were on the board that appointed Frawley and then agreed to extending his contract, you were on the board that OK'd Gaspar 5 year deal. You walked away annd gave NO REASON to the people you are answerable to the members- instead we read bits and pieces that have been given to Caroline Wilson. Further, you appear to have proceeded to point fingers and blame the "Casey Board" - the facts are you were part of that board. Take some responsibility because until you do - you have no hope of getting my vote.

Secondly, Brendan's track record in attending board meetings over the years is poor to say the least. 2003 he attended 11 of a possible 12. Prior to that it reads 9, 8, 8. If you are going to this job you have commit the time and effort. 8 meetings out of 12 doesn't show great commitment.



The revolt at Richmond was brewing well before the team began to show it was headed for another disastrous season. It had its origins in the resignations of Schwab and Welsh early in the year, which were based on their assessment of the club's finances and a dispute over board governance.


What the  :o :o. When Peter Welsh resigned earlier this year he was quoted in the H/Sun as saying that there was nothing "sinister" he just didn't have the time. Which is it?

And just one further point - anyone challenging better have plenty have time and deep pockets and be able to cover the $$$ Casey has put into the Club because I don't think it is a option, it is a necessity
« Last Edit: July 13, 2004, 10:43:28 AM by WilliamPowell »
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)