SFF's 'Financial Plan'.

[The Peanut]

I don't know this . . . but I doubt very much that SFF will produce even an outline of a financial plan. RB and remaining current board members would be able to pull it to pieces no matter what is was - supporters and therefore SFF don't have details of financials until the AGM. Even if they do know what the financial details are they wouldn't be able to prove it or even declare it. This always provides the sitting accumbants a trick card. Same thing is relevent in the bigger game - Federal politics. When voting for someone new you always have to take some sort of a risk - people will have to make there minds up on the challenging board members records or stick with the 'better the devil you know' vote. In my view there is a risk staying with the RB crew because of all that is going on down at the club and the lack of a name to put on our guernseys next year.

It is my understanding that SFF are receiving a good response with proxies so my guess is that people waiting for more detail will miss out as the new ticke mat declare while they are still making up their mind. It will be a pity for those who intend to vote for RB.

[plugger66]

I don't know this . . . but I doubt very much that SFF will produce even an outline of a financial plan. RB and remaining current board members would be able to pull it to pieces no matter what is was - supporters and therefore SFF don't have details of financials until the AGM. Even if they do know what the financial details are they wouldn't be able to prove it or even declare it. This always provides the sitting accumbants a trick card. Same thing is relevent in the bigger game - Federal politics. When voting for someone new you always have to take some sort of a risk - people will have to make there minds up on the challenging board members records or stick with the 'better the devil you know' vote. In my view there is a risk staying with the RB crew because of all that is going on down at the club and the lack of a name to put on our guernseys next year.

The Saints will get a sponsor whoever runs the club next year. I think people who say otherwise are using scare tactics.

[The Peanut]

That could be true plugger66 - but the sitting board haven't devulged who it will be if there is one - so why must SFF?

[plugger66]

That could be true plugger66 - but they haven't devulged who it will be if there is one - so why must SFF?

SFF doesnt have to say who will sponsor that would be impossible but they would know how much a sponsor provides so the can give us details of how much approx income they will receive and the approx spend. I know people will say then RB should give his detail as well. They do every year to the AFL and it has already got the tick of approval. Also they have form as they have made 4 million dollar profits in row so we know what to expect from them but what are we getting from the other group. That is the big question.

[rodgerfox]

Also they have form as they have made 4 million dollar profits in row so we know what to expect from them but what are we getting from the other group. That is the big question.

There's a fair bit of bad form in there too though.

[plugger66]

Also they have form as they have made 4 million dollar profits in row so we know what to expect from them but what are we getting from the other group. That is the big question.

There's a fair bit of bad form in there too though.

Yes but not with profit making and we can know see that they are spending more for next season on recruitment and injury prevention and this wasnt done after the challenge.

[Mr Magic]

Roger, Let me give you a business analogy.

If I offered you a 'prospectus' for a new company starting up that contained the names of people you respected in both Business and Real life, but with no financial statements or projections or business plans, would you invest any of your hard earned cash into it?

WHat is the basic difference between that scenario and what SFF are doing?

Yes their 'Board of Management' appears impressive, including a couple of really respectable Club champions.
Yes they appear to be well organized.
Yes their 'prospectus' is glossy and appealing at first glance.

Where's their financial statements, projections or business plans?

It wouldn't matter except they are exhorting us to give them our proxies (invest in them) now, before any of the detail is revealed.

Roger, I'm sure that you and any other prudent investor (we members), might get excited at the prospects of this new 'startup' but to invest your money (proxy) in them without seeking more detailed information? I don't think so.

[ashjam]

Mr.Magic
Can you show me a copy of the financial plan that we as members were given by the Butterrs adminstration at any time over the last 7 or 8 years?
That would be appreciated.
Cheers

[Mr Magic]

Mr.Magic
Can you show me a copy of the financial plan that we as members were given by the Butterrs adminstration at any time over the last 7 or 8 years?
That would be appreciated.
Cheers

Ashjam there is a major difference which you either aren't aware of or are choosing to ignore.

The SFF are choosing to challenge the incumbents. As such they can choose to divulge whatever information they wish to support their challenge.

At this point in time they have chosen not to divulge much of their detailed financial plans, as is their right.

All I, and some others (heavily in the minority on this forum) are asking for, is some details on these financial plans.

If they want my proxy vote then they are going to have to give me more than a 'glossy brochure' and an SMS text message. Why is it unreasonable for me to want to know more about the people who are asking me for my vote and their plans for my Club?

If and when SFF give me some more details about their financial plans then I will be able to compare them to what the incumbents have done in the past and what they plan for the future.

You don't think the incumbents have any chance of being re-elected if SFF produces a detailed plan and they don't respond do you?

And BTW, you can see the incumbents financial performance by just looking at the anuual reports each member has been sent over the last 7 years.

Do I take it by your responses to me that you won't be asking SFF about the membership list?

[ashjam]

Mr.Magic

The club's Constitution states that any potential candidate for the board is allowed access to the club's books and member information ...

Perfectly okay ...

And your proxy vote may not be required.

From what I understand it will all be over by the middle of the week with weight of numbers having already voted in favour of SFF.

[saintsRrising]

Mr.Magic

From what I understand it will all be over by the middle of the week with weight of numbers having already voted in favour of SFF.

What is the vote required?

[Mr Magic]

Mr.Magic

The club's Constitution states that any potential candidate for the board is allowed access to the club's books and member information ...

Perfectly okay ...

And your proxy vote may not be required.

From what I understand it will all be over by the middle of the week with weight of numbers having already voted in favour of SFF.

Thank you for the info.
I'm so glad you don't require my vote.

Will I still be allowed to renew my membership, even though I had the temerity to ask questions before fully embracing the SFF?

[saintsRrising]

Mr.Magic

The club's Constitution states that any potential candidate for the board is allowed access to the club's books and member information ...
Perfectly okay ...

.

having the right to access.....and having obtained the access through correct channels may be two different things.

The mail out arrived very quickly from when the notice was served......allowing for processing ofa mail merge list, mail house lodging of privacy forms etc etc...


So the club must have rushed through emailing the mail list immediate. Grat service.

Perhaps archie is on board with FF?????


Or perhaps the list was aquired via other means???

[Dan Warna]

i think theres 21,000 voting members

I havent sent my proxi in yet.

I guess if they get 10,501 they win at the AGM.

[Eastern]

i think theres 21,000 voting members

I havent sent my proxi in yet.

I guess if they get 10,501 they win at the AGM.

Hey Dan !!

My experience with non-compulsory elections is that you can expect responses from 20-40%. This could be different because of the emotion involved !!

[ausfatcat]

Yeah you imagine it would be 50% of the vote that is entered so in all reality i think somewhere around 7000 votes will get them in. Just guess but I reckon only 14,000 or the 23,000 will actually vote.

[Eastern]

Back on Topic !!

I would think that there would need to be some sort of audit of the books prior to that info being handed over to SFF.

I would very much doubt that either side would be in a position to put a financial plan out there for at least another 3 weeks. Both sides will probably use every minute possible and them some before going public with their financial plans !!

[Oh When the Saints]

I have no idea what St Kilda's constitution says on this matter (there isn't a copy on our club website!)

According to Hawthorn's constitution (which I could find), a candidate for the position of director must receive the highest total of votes from those members present at the AGM.

If you sign a proxy form, you are treated as present at the meeting.

So it's a simple, first-past-the-post system.

Now, you wouldn't expect more than about a thousand members to turn up to the meeting itself ...


If St Kilda Footy First were to receive say 3000 proxy votes, by my reading, that would mean 3000 members would have to turn up at the meeting to support Butterss (or fill out his proxy).


So basically numbers at the meeting won't be enough to sway the challenge either way ... it will be decided on proxies, and Burke/Westaway have the advantage here.

Let's say 10,000 eligible Voting Members vote ... that's 1000 at the EGM and 9,000 proxies.

If Burke/Westaway get 5000 proxies, you would think they are home.

[Eastern]

Hey OWTS !!

My experience at StKFC AGM's is that somewhere between 100-300 turn up. I'd expect the numbers at the EGM to be a bit more than that (500max) but many will have already put their proxys in (sticky nose factor).

My guess would be that 3,000 - 3,500 votes could be enough to win this election !!

[Mr Magic]

I seem to recall that the total number of votes at the Carlton election earlier this year (when Smorgon was voted out) was around 4000?

Unlike in a company takeover scenario, where the proxies equate to a specific number of shares held by a shareholder, here each member has only 1 proxy and no-one has the ability to go and 'cherrypick' any members who hold large numbers of proxies.

The mere fact that SFF have been asking (and apparently receiving) proxies already means they are well advanced on the incumbents who are not even at the stage of asking for proxies from the members.

All in all a very well thought out and executed plan by SFF to steal a march on the incumbents.

[To the top]

In response to a question Mr Magic raises, and by way of example, people invested in One Tel because Packer jnr. and Murdoch jnr. did.

Guess what happened?

Fools and their money are easily parted.

In regards my views on this matter, and the status of it, they are on other threads and are hopefully well known.

But to draw from the response to Mr Magic, any one sending off their proxies at this stage probably also invested in One-Tel.

[saintsRrising]

I seem to recall that the total number of votes at the Carlton election earlier this year (when Smorgon was voted out) was around 4000?

.

Ah...but the Blues election also hada sting on the tail...

I cannot the exact detail....but you had to register IN ADVANCE 9and there may have even beena seperate fee as well) to be able to vote..and not just be a member.

This meant that many members who wanted to vote could not.

[The Peanut]

Hey OWTS !!

My experience at StKFC AGM's is that somewhere between 100-300 turn up. I'd expect the numbers at the EGM to be a bit more than that (500max) but many will have already put their proxys in (sticky nose factor).

My guess would be that 3,000 - 3,500 votes could be enough to win this election !!

I am not sure and I will try and find out what numbers are required - been too busy today . . . but I thought that I heard something about 2000 votes - but can't remember where from.

[Teflon]

That could be true plugger66 - but they haven't devulged who it will be if there is one - so why must SFF?

SFF doesnt have to say who will sponsor that would be impossible but they would know how much a sponsor provides so the can give us details of how much approx income they will receive and the approx spend. I know people will say then RB should give his detail as well. They do every year to the AFL and it has already got the tick of approval. Also they have form as they have made 4 million dollar profits in row so we know what to expect from them but what are we getting from the other group. That is the big question.

You have it in 1 Plugger.

There is a group that wants change - as is their right - produce the evidnce to support your grand statements - promises of Premierships or big spending in the footy dept do nothing for me......show me where the increased revenue is coming from? wheres the smoking startegy we are all mikssing????

We ALL know the current Boards successes/failures.......its time for Greg to put up.......

What IF there IS NO plan....and they are cocky enough to know the marketing will get many simpletons to rush in and vote proxy for them without the detail so its over well before an EGM........what then?