Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Mon Jul 14, 2025 3:15 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 194 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 9:38 am 
Offline
Robert Walls
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:50 pm
Posts: 3508
Location: Under Whelmed
Umm, I think you're dribbling a bit synbad.

_________________
This might sound extreme in the context of alleged sexual assault, drunken violence and a drug trafficking charge...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 9:58 am 
Offline
Garry Crane

Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 5:21 pm
Posts: 202
I agree with the sentiments expressed by Grandstand Guru, Jarusa etc. The apparent disbanding of the Pratt ticket due to a Feb AGM seems a weak excuse, noting that a Nov/Dec AGM had been mooted for many months. No, I think the so-called Pratt ticket appears to have been more of a wish-ticket rather than a real item.

So be it.

Likewise for the De Lutis ticket.

Note, Tom Elliot is still pushing onwards.

With Stephen Moulton and Mark Harrison recently joining the board (as independents) we do have some board rejuvention occurring. Noting that Moulton/Harrison have the backing of Williams/Brown.

Elliot/Moulton/Harrison seem like good board candidates to me. I'm not as down as others are around here. If the voting members oust some of the dead wood (Diggins/Lee) then things will be on the up.

Dennis.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:04 am 
Offline
Garry Crane
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 10:33 pm
Posts: 205
Location: Melbourne
Could not some of the DeLutis faction join forces with the Tom Elliot group? It seems they are still seeking a leader to be the President?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:18 am 
Offline
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 1:09 pm
Posts: 6013
Number19Tram wrote:
Could not some of the DeLutis faction join forces with the Tom Elliot group? It seems they are still seeking a leader to be the President?
They're available in March if we give them four months notice.

_________________
░L░I░N░K░I░N░B░I░O ░


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:27 am 
Offline
Laurie Kerr

Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 4:22 pm
Posts: 146
Synbad needs to calm down. People aren't as stupid as he obviously thinks :shock: Berating people isn't the way to win them over :lol:

Another year of waiting will not kill us despite Synbad's wails of doom and gloom. With Smorgon having already signed off on the sponsorships for example very little could be done there.

This challenge, if there actually ever was a serious one, was poorly handled and the extra time will allow them to plan a proper one. Smorgon of all people played them and at the very least they underestimated him :oops:

Smorgon will still be vulnerable at the end of next season unless we have an outstanding year on-field and if that was to happen we would all be rapt wouldn't we :?:

Our list is coming along nicely so I don't think we need to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet :) If these saviours are serious about a challenge they will do it better at the end of next season....hopefully :)

The Blueskies aren't that far away :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:32 am 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:23 am
Posts: 1701
Location: Smorgyland Village North Carlton
Another year another couple of million :?
We are flowered unless a white knight rides into town, interest alone will crush us.

_________________
Green Shooter


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:33 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24657
Location: Kaloyasena
BlueSkys wrote:
With Smorgon having already signed off on the sponsorships for example very little could be done there.



Well for "budgeted" sponsorships maybe.

But what about over and above what has been budgeted for.

Just because our current administration have set low targets doesn't mean a new board can't go out and get more corporate dollars.

Doesn't stop Eddie at Collingwood - he just creates a new sponsorship category "Super Duper Premium Platinum Plus" :P insert "Crazy Johns or Emirates" here.

I am being a bit flip I know - but I hope the point is made. :wink:

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:36 am 
Offline
John James

Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 2:18 pm
Posts: 675
Location: Adelaide
It is funny, we were constantly told this rival ticket would come. Any Friday now, we were told. Now that Smorogn has called their bluff, we realise it was all smoke and mirrors. There was no ticket before, the peole who were 'in the know', knew nothing. All there is a loose collection of people who are thinking about it. This crack team was thwarted by an early AGM, which shows they we no further in their planning but the very early preliminary stages.

Synbad asks for people to get behind them, when there is nothing to get behind. It is time for all the people like Synbad, to quiet down until they have something real, other than posting rumours and hearsay as fact.

Is this the crack rival ticket people kept telling us about? Are we know no better off?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:38 am 
Offline
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 1:09 pm
Posts: 6013
BlueSkys wrote:
Synbad needs to calm down. People aren't as stupid as he obviously thinks :shock: Berating people isn't the way to win them over :lol:

Another year of waiting will not kill us despite Synbad's wails of doom and gloom. With Smorgon having already signed off on the sponsorships for example very little could be done there.

This challenge, if there actually ever was a serious one, was poorly handled and the extra time will allow them to plan a proper one. Smorgon of all people played them and at the very least they underestimated him :oops:

Smorgon will still be vulnerable at the end of next season unless we have an outstanding year on-field and if that was to happen we would all be rapt wouldn't we :?:

Our list is coming along nicely so I don't think we need to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet :) If these saviours are serious about a challenge they will do it better at the end of next season....hopefully :)

The Blueskies aren't that far away :)
Welcome back Sal.

_________________
░L░I░N░K░I░N░B░I░O ░


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:56 am 
Offline
Laurie Kerr

Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 4:22 pm
Posts: 146
AGRO wrote:
BlueSkys wrote:
With Smorgon having already signed off on the sponsorships for example very little could be done there.



Well for "budgeted" sponsorships maybe.

But what about over and above what has been budgeted for.

Just because our current administration have set low targets doesn't mean a new board can't go out and get more corporate dollars.

Doesn't stop Eddie at Collingwood - he just creates a new sponsorship category "Super Duper Premium Platinum Plus" :P insert "Crazy Johns or Emirates" here.

I am being a bit flip I know - but I hope the point is made. :wink:



That would make us even less attractive to sponsors in the future. You need to be seen to honour your deals especially when your brand name is not the most attractive in the marketplace. The last thing you would want to do as a new administration would be to be seen as willing to devalue current sponsorship deals.

The deals we have are obviously well below what they should be, but in business if you do not honour your deals when you are not the most attractive option out there, you are in real strife.

In the future perhaps we could afford to put people offside, but our brand name at the moment is nowhere near as strong as Collingwoods :oops:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 11:08 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24657
Location: Kaloyasena
BlueSkys wrote:
AGRO wrote:
BlueSkys wrote:
With Smorgon having already signed off on the sponsorships for example very little could be done there.



Well for "budgeted" sponsorships maybe.

But what about over and above what has been budgeted for.

Just because our current administration have set low targets doesn't mean a new board can't go out and get more corporate dollars.

Doesn't stop Eddie at Collingwood - he just creates a new sponsorship category "Super Duper Premium Platinum Plus" :P insert "Crazy Johns or Emirates" here.

I am being a bit flip I know - but I hope the point is made. :wink:



That would make us even less attractive to sponsors in the future. You need to be seen to honour your deals especially when your brand name is not the most attractive in the marketplace. The last thing you would want to do as a new administration would be to be seen as willing to devalue current sponsorship deals.

The deals we have are obviously well below what they should be, but in business if you do not honour your deals when you are not the most attractive option out there, you are in real strife.

In the future perhaps we could afford to put people offside, but our brand name at the moment is nowhere near as strong as Collingwoods :oops:



Sorry dont agree,

We need to think outside the square.

If new board members can bring in new sponsorship dollars over and above what we have - we say no sorry next year. Spare me please.
:roll:

Don't patronise me BlueSkys with a pat on the head and an on your way sonny leave it to me we know better. :roll:

Our revenue streams are 50% less than the Collingwood and Essendons of this world and you want to reject potential new sponsors because you think you will offend the existing sponsors.

There are ways of bringing new sponsors on board, and I dont think exisiting sponsors would be offended if they are associated with "Blue Chip" corporates that have been touted to come on board.

The networking alone would be worthwhile. The President's Lunches back in the late 80s mid 90s were a who's who of Corporate Names - no-one was offended. You think second tier corporates would be offended sitting next to Fahour from the NAB. :wink:

C'mon BlueSkys - get with the program and show us a bit of that MBA acumen. :wink:

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Last edited by AGRO on Wed Dec 27, 2006 11:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 11:10 am 
Offline
Laurie Kerr

Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 4:22 pm
Posts: 146
jezzarules wrote:
BlueSkys wrote:
Synbad needs to calm down. People aren't as stupid as he obviously thinks :shock: Berating people isn't the way to win them over :lol:

Another year of waiting will not kill us despite Synbad's wails of doom and gloom. With Smorgon having already signed off on the sponsorships for example very little could be done there.

This challenge, if there actually ever was a serious one, was poorly handled and the extra time will allow them to plan a proper one. Smorgon of all people played them and at the very least they underestimated him :oops:

Smorgon will still be vulnerable at the end of next season unless we have an outstanding year on-field and if that was to happen we would all be rapt wouldn't we :?:

Our list is coming along nicely so I don't think we need to throw the baby out with the bathwater just yet :) If these saviours are serious about a challenge they will do it better at the end of next season....hopefully :)

The Blueskies aren't that far away :)
Welcome back Sal.


:lol: The ill fated Sal :shock:

Suspicion is fine mate especially around an election, but you also need to be careful about driving away new members :) That is my point about Synbad. He may drive fencesitters to the other side by rubbing them up the wrong way.

Check my join date :wink: As I don't think we will have a successful enough season to save him i.e finals I believe Smorgon will get rolled at the end of next season at the latest. He is not the answer.

What we do need is a well organised ticket with people able to put the time into a big job. It would also help if they don't telegraph that they are coming :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 11:38 am 
Offline
Laurie Kerr

Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 4:22 pm
Posts: 146
AGRO wrote:
BlueSkys wrote:
AGRO wrote:
BlueSkys wrote:
With Smorgon having already signed off on the sponsorships for example very little could be done there.



Well for "budgeted" sponsorships maybe.

But what about over and above what has been budgeted for.

Just because our current administration have set low targets doesn't mean a new board can't go out and get more corporate dollars.

Doesn't stop Eddie at Collingwood - he just creates a new sponsorship category "Super Duper Premium Platinum Plus" :P insert "Crazy Johns or Emirates" here.

I am being a bit flip I know - but I hope the point is made. :wink:



That would make us even less attractive to sponsors in the future. You need to be seen to honour your deals especially when your brand name is not the most attractive in the marketplace. The last thing you would want to do as a new administration would be to be seen as willing to devalue current sponsorship deals.

The deals we have are obviously well below what they should be, but in business if you do not honour your deals when you are not the most attractive option out there, you are in real strife.

In the future perhaps we could afford to put people offside, but our brand name at the moment is nowhere near as strong as Collingwoods :oops:



Sorry dont agree,

We need to think outside the square.

If new board members can bring in new sponsorship dollars over and above what we have - we say no sorry next year. Spare me please.
:roll:

Don't patronise me BlueSkys with a pat on the head and an on your way sonny leave it to me we know better. :roll:

Our revenue streams are 50% less than the Collingwood and Essendons of this world and you want to reject potential new sponsors because you think you will offend the existing sponsors.

There are ways of bringing new sponsors on board, and I dont think exisiting sponsors would be offended if they are associated with "Blue Chip" corporates that have been touted to come on board.

The networking alone would be worthwhile. The President's Lunches back in the late 80s mid 90s were a who's who of Corporate Names - no-one was offended. You think second tier corporates would be offended sitting next to Fahour from the NAB. :wink:

C'mon BlueSkys - get with the program and show us a bit of that MBA acumen. :wink:


Nothing wrong with thinking outside the square. As that is what we need, but it is honestly not as easy as we need more money lets sign up more sponsors if you have existing ones.

Agreements are signed with stipulations.

Nor am I trying to be patronising, although I seem to be doing it :)

Even with our currently poor brandname our current board have obviously undervalued our worth. Lets just hope the agreements are only short-term.

We will just have to agree to disagree I guess :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:56 pm 
Offline
Wayne Johnston
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 8128
Well, lets just hope Tom Elliott can get some candidates running. As Speedy said, Smorgon just HAS to go.

_________________
There's so much I could say...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:16 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls

Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 6:03 pm
Posts: 3510
Location: East Brunwick
Was told of the Pratt backed ticket falling through over christmas but was away and couldn't get to a computer.

This is what i been told....

The whole Frasier Brown threat months back was basically a scare for those in power to get there act together or else. Smorgan is running scared and is bowing to authority by someone?

Problem is that the Pratt backed ticket wanted changes to be made like Dennis Pagan so when they come in they will not have to make any tough desions that would seperate supporters and cause angst.

Dennis Pagan will not see out the year.... a push lead by Gleeson, Moulton and Harrison will see him go.

Brett Ratten will become the senior coach of Carlton already the club raising his media profile with news paper article and interviews on SEN and 3AW.

The Pratt backed ticket will come in power when the this current board do there dirty work (Pagan) and piss the AFL off which has begun.

Smorgon apparently has raised some money to pay back the AFL the money loaned by them.... things are about to get nasty between this current board and the AFL.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:21 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24657
Location: Kaloyasena
Melvey wrote:
... things are about to get nasty between this current board and the AFL.



Wish this board got nasty when the AFL shafted us by changing the Priority Pick qualification criteria. :evil:

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 1:30 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 18078
dlb99 wrote:
With Stephen Moulton and Mark Harrison recently joining the board (as independents) we do have some board rejuvention occurring. Noting that Moulton/Harrison have the backing of Williams/Brown.


How are they "independents?

Moulton and Harrison are part of Smorgons ticket. :?
Not to mention this continuing ascertian that they having the backing of Williams/Brown. Where have either of Williams/Brown endorsed these men?

Do you know either of these individuals dlb and what strengths do they bring?
How are they happy to be associated with Smorgon yet apparently they are keen to see the back of him?

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 2:05 pm 
Offline
Ken Hands
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:39 pm
Posts: 487
Synbad wrote:
Ok the question i want you all to answer now is will you answer yes or no to the questions that were asked.

Would you put your hand up and say yes ive had enough of this clubs board in self preservation mode and im fed up with it.
Id like to add my name on a list that will go to the media as a protest that will hopefully educate the masses in the wider community about whats going on.

So far there is ...

Synbad
Dannyboy


You can tell them how desperate you all were to make Barry Mitchell coach as well, he was the one everyone 'just had to have', that will add instant credibility.

_________________
"Davies could eventually become a player of Judd's ability" - Paganite03 Click here to see for yourself!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 2:11 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24657
Location: Kaloyasena
Phew!!!, I'm glad Carlton God is here, means I dont have to post anymore.

Hey Goddy, I'm taking a few days off between now and the 5th of January, you just keep posting for me will you, I need a break.

You know exactly what I want to say. :roll:

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 2:22 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 10:24 am
Posts: 40291
Location: seaside
Gartlon Cod..............!


kindest regards tommi

_________________
that'siti'mnotchangingthistagain......!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 194 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 10  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 37 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group