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 Thu Jul 10, 2025 5:21 am

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:55 am 
Offline
Wayne Johnston
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 8128
sheesh...anymore skeletons in the closet? ....if there are more skeletons I hope they're exposed and dealt with this year so we can just move on and start afresh next year


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:14 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24655
Location: Kaloyasena
Wild Blue Yonder wrote:
They'll work out an arrangment to repay the amount in installments over a set period. They'll take into account CFC agreeing to the arrangement and they'll reduce the final amount.


The ATO!! - reduce the final amount1!! - just wait a minute while I stitch up my sides. :roll:

As much chance of that happening as Demetrispew changing his mind and being happy about it. 8) :lol:

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

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:18 am 
Offline
Robert Walls
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:50 pm
Posts: 3508
Location: Under Whelmed
Been there and done that Agro.
It's not hard to negotiate an agreement that sees them get some of the money, the case not go to court etc.

The ATO can be savage but they can also see the benefit in a deal. And as mentioned, I've been in that very sort of negotiation.

Actually, I did laugh after we pulled it off.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:20 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:41 am
Posts: 5540
Location: Big Blue office at the bottom end of town
verbs wrote:
Synbad wrote:
verbs, the clubs financial arm is the social club board.
The footy board runs the football.
the cricket board run the cricket.

Three separate entities


Which, as I said, means the social club carries the football club financially.


Doesn't that kind of back up the ruling? Based on the law the Social Club funds were supposed to go back into the social club and social activities and not the football club - social club members are not generating funds for their own benefit if the funds are going to benefit the club.

Sounds to me that this was an exposed loophole that's just been waiting to be filled in by the ATO... and given who was in charge of the club's finances 5 years ago when this set up was introduced, does it come as any surprise that our exposure is as big as it is?

Chalk up yet another momumental financial @#$%&! up for Mr Elliott...

_________________
If meat is murder then yoghurt must be burglary
GO YOU BIG RED FIRE ENGINE
Move aside Kouta, Lance etc - you're holding us back... from entering the under 18s


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:22 am 
Offline
Ken Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am
Posts: 10628
It's a conspiracy, they can’t get us with salary cap, so they go after our social club and more importantly our "revenue". :evil:

This won’t hurt that much people, will still have our picks at the end of this.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:26 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 3:54 pm
Posts: 5274
Location: Melbourne
Quote:
Chalk up yet another momumental financial F@%&#! up for Mr Elliott...


Who has been running the club for the last 3 years? Who on the board is the pokies boss? Is Elliott responsible for the London bombing?

_________________
"We used to sit around and talk about how bad the game plan was." Anthony Koutoufides


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:27 am 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:04 am
Posts: 28377
Location: *Currently banned*
Wolfister wrote:
verbs wrote:
Synbad wrote:
verbs, the clubs financial arm is the social club board.
The footy board runs the football.
the cricket board run the cricket.

Three separate entities


Which, as I said, means the social club carries the football club financially.


Doesn't that kind of back up the ruling? Based on the law the Social Club funds were supposed to go back into the social club and social activities and not the football club - social club members are not generating funds for their own benefit if the funds are going to benefit the club.

Sounds to me that this was an exposed loophole that's just been waiting to be filled in by the ATO... and given who was in charge of the club's finances 5 years ago when this set up was introduced, does it come as any surprise that our exposure is as big as it is?

Chalk up yet another momumental financial F@%&#! up for Mr Elliott...


Yup. Seems the ruling was made to catch set-ups like Carlton's and StKilda's, but doubt very much the ATO made the ruling specifically to catch out Carlton.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:31 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:41 am
Posts: 5540
Location: Big Blue office at the bottom end of town
TheGame wrote:
Quote:
Chalk up yet another momumental financial F@%&#! up for Mr Elliott...


Who has been running the club for the last 3 years? Who on the board is the pokies boss? Is Elliott responsible for the London bombing?


Elliott set it up - you can't deny that!

Yes, the new board have to accept some responsibility for not changing it, but I will still look at this as part of the cancerous legacy that that prick has left us...

_________________
If meat is murder then yoghurt must be burglary
GO YOU BIG RED FIRE ENGINE
Move aside Kouta, Lance etc - you're holding us back... from entering the under 18s


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:32 am 
Offline
Ken Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am
Posts: 10628
TheGame wrote:
Quote:
Chalk up yet another momumental financial F@%&#! up for Mr Elliott...


Who has been running the club for the last 3 years? Who on the board is the pokies boss? Is Elliott responsible for the London bombing?


It amazes me how our current administration is always not at fault. :roll:

Seriously, even if the Tax office changed the goal posts, I bet a few other clubs where well and truly on the ball. :wink:

It's no coincedence that StKilda & Carlton are the only two implicated at the moment. Sad that we are in the same boat as this rabble these days.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:33 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 3:54 pm
Posts: 5274
Location: Melbourne
They've been running the club for three years they are fully responsible.

_________________
"We used to sit around and talk about how bad the game plan was." Anthony Koutoufides


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:39 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24655
Location: Kaloyasena
TheGame wrote:
They've been running the club for three years they are fully responsible.


You don't have to be Einstein to work that out - as a Director you are responsible for the club/corporation as an entity, end of story. Our current Directors would have been responsible for this the same day they were elected, so whats your point?

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

Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:40 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 3:54 pm
Posts: 5274
Location: Melbourne
Whats your point Agro?

_________________
"We used to sit around and talk about how bad the game plan was." Anthony Koutoufides


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:42 am 
Offline
Rod Ashman
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:08 pm
Posts: 2585
Location: Hoppers Crossing
How can it really be any administration's fault though if the ATO changed the way it interprets it?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:43 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:41 am
Posts: 5540
Location: Big Blue office at the bottom end of town
So Elliott escapes unscathed once again... seriously, his shit must not stink... DID HE NOT SET IT UP????

_________________
If meat is murder then yoghurt must be burglary
GO YOU BIG RED FIRE ENGINE
Move aside Kouta, Lance etc - you're holding us back... from entering the under 18s


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 10:51 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24655
Location: Kaloyasena
TheGame wrote:
Whats your point Agro?



If your a paid up member then you'll owe 50 bucks as well. :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 Jul 20, 2005 11:27 am 
Offline
Craig Bradley
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:29 am
Posts: 6418
Location: Casa Da Carlton - The Place to Be
Wolfister wrote:
So Elliott escapes unscathed once again... seriously, his shit must not stink... DID HE NOT SET IT UP????


so the current board escapes unscathed again.

they have been in there for this their third year and were supposed to have gone through all the finiancials during this period yet you are prepared to simply allow them to slide under the radar, yet again, becuase its Elliot's fault?

i know some people dont like Elliot - but gee - lets not blame him for every trouble the club may find themselves in.

IMO - niether board is to blame.

the ATO appears to have changed the rules half way thourgh the game and i cant understand how they can legally do that, but that is a debate for another time.

_________________
Got to love the stare Down by Setanta on Llyod :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:28 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 3:54 pm
Posts: 5274
Location: Melbourne
You would think the Pokies king would be well aware of any law changes.

_________________
"We used to sit around and talk about how bad the game plan was." Anthony Koutoufides


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:39 am 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 9:27 am
Posts: 28528
Location: Free Beer!!
Good point that the new board were meant to have gone right through everything, they've had 3 years to uncover something like this. Should have been done in Yr 1. Did they find it and sweep it under the carpet and hope it went unnoticed?

Having said that obviously the Elliott board must share blame for this.

Its kinda like Bracks blaming the previous government for everything that went wrong in Victoria.

Just on Elliott coping the blame for everything, would it really have been soley his responsibility to check the legalities of something like this? How much blame also needs to go to Stephen Gough, Don Hanly, the other CEO who's name escapes me and the rest of the board?

I know that he did run things authoritatively (if thats a word) but sometimes you get the feeling Elliott would be held accountable for the poor choice of floor tiles in the ladies toilet's.

_________________
"The ability to speak doesn't make you intelligent." Qui-Gon Jinn 15-05-2005

"there’s more chance of me becoming the full forward for the [Western Bulldogs] than there is of any change in the Labor Party." Julia Gillard 18-05-2010


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 11:46 am 
Offline
Robert Walls
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:50 pm
Posts: 3508
Location: Under Whelmed
I don't think blame can be apportioned unless we know when the ATO ruling was changed.

It could be apportioned if the change was made some time ago (yrs perhaps) and the CFC CSC etc chose to ignore the advice. If thats the case then headhunting is in order. If not, ATO rulings change frequently and people, companies etc get caught out. The admin then has to negotiate the best way out of it.

I suppose they could always try to lodge an application for a private ruling with ATO commissioners discretion.
Well, for a laugh.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 12:08 pm 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:10 am
Posts: 4827
Rather than laying blame on Elliott the current board or whoeva I am more intersted in limiting the damage and finding a remedy either dissolve or merge the social club etc... I'm sure a repayment plan can be worked out and I would be hitting the AFL competitive balance fund...we paid our dues and helped keep some clubs running so with exepcted cash flow problems I would be asking for some money to tide us over.
I wouldnt be allowing this to get in the road of rebuilding the club on and off the ground and you have to stick fat with the board and their forecasts of better financial results in 2007....it will be sorted..

_________________
"When you have the attitude of a champion, you see adversity as your
training partner."
- Conor Gillen


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 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