A message to Rod Butterrs

[plugger66]

He's not 90% gone, 6000 is about 20%. While many will not vote, and the momentum is impressive, and it certainly the sentiment here that he's gone, you'd be disenfranchising 80% of Saints members to call it done now.

Yes, spend the 100k, 20% of members do not get to decide until the rest have a chance to show up.

21,000 voting members.

6000/21000*100 = 28.57% ...


Let's say 3000 people show no interest in voting ... that's probably about the right figure.

That's 6000/18000*100 = 33.33%


SFF already have a third of votes by my reckoning.


Butterss now has to produce more votes himself.

They will only get 10,000 people voting at the very most so SFF is over the line unless there is a clause we do not know about.

[saintspremiers]

He's not 90% gone, 6000 is about 20%. While many will not vote, and the momentum is impressive, and it certainly the sentiment here that he's gone, you'd be disenfranchising 80% of Saints members to call it done now.

Yes, spend the 100k, 20% of members do not get to decide until the rest have a chance to show up.

21,000 voting members.

6000/21000*100 = 28.57% ...


Let's say 3000 people show no interest in voting ... that's probably about the right figure.

That's 6000/18000*100 = 33.33%


SFF already have a third of votes by my reckoning.


Butterss now has to produce more votes himself.

They will only get 10,000 people voting at the very most so SFF is over the line unless there is a clause we do not know about.

spot on, or should I say a fair assumption considering its an optional vote and not for a political party.....as a footy club member, voting for a president is unusual and as such a very low voter turn out could be a strong possibility.

What exactly has RB done to get votes?

Why hasn't he SMS'd and mailed out to get proxies?

Is anything stopping him doing this??

[saint patrick]

So next year we dont make the finals and there is another challenger and he has more proxys the board just say it is your turn now and it goes on and on. As usual every Saints supporter blames everyone but the players.

That is alarmist to say the least...Rod has had eight bloody years FFS and 7 as president.As Ashjam rightly acknowledges he has achieved a great deal but if he really has the clubs interest at heart he will move off graciously and let someone else takre up the baton...

Just can't believe the unwillingness of some people to accept that this proxy vote received already represents a massive statement from the members and that if 2 former current board members and 2 respected and inteilligent ex players see a need for a change then most of us are willing to accept they are right

Rod Butterss was a dead man walking so to speak the moment his financial deals with Thomas and the subsequent unprofessional public spat were there for everyone to cringe at...

Agree with Ashjam 100%...he should save the club some money,put the club in a strong position for trading time and retain a modicum of respect from everyone at the club...

[Juggernaut]

Dear Mr Butterss
I've got a pen in my right hand and a proxy form in my left
Give us some indication as to what you are going to do taking the club forward or else I'm gunna sign it!!!
youv'e got 3 days

[saintly]

Dear Mr Butterss
I've got a pen in my right hand and a proxy form in my left
Give us some indication as to what you are going to do taking the club forward or else I'm gunna sign it!!!
youv'e got 3 days

that is a problem he has said nothing since last week.

i wonder why?

why not send out material about what he will do in the future?

seems like he is not putting up much of a fight at all.

it could evben appear that he doesn't want the job!

[BAM! (shhhh)]

He's not 90% gone, 6000 is about 20%. While many will not vote, and the momentum is impressive, and it certainly the sentiment here that he's gone, you'd be disenfranchising 80% of Saints members to call it done now.

Yes, spend the 100k, 20% of members do not get to decide until the rest have a chance to show up.

21,000 voting members.

6000/21000*100 = 28.57% ...


Let's say 3000 people show no interest in voting ... that's probably about the right figure.

That's 6000/18000*100 = 33.33%


SFF already have a third of votes by my reckoning.


Butterss now has to produce more votes himself.

Wasn't aware we had a number on voting members, interesting to know.

Regardless, as someone who has not made their mind up yet, I will feel very disenfranchised if the current board rolls over based on the alleged 6000 (is someone going to tell me today that it's 7000?) proxies sent so far.

I agree with plugger66 that it's unlikely the vote will exceed 10,000 total. Nonetheless, there are around 15,000 of us who haven't yet signed up to SFF. While I wait on a response from Butterss, I also wait on answers I will consider substantial from the new guys, I'm not going to put a deadline on either (beyond the obvious 23rd of October), and I'm more than willing to make my mind up for myself DURING the EGM.

That's more than enough to swing a vote over the course of a month.

Conceding the 6,000, then SFF has run over the course of 2 weeks, a very good advertising campaign for ousting Butterss. Considering that so many were dissapointed with the lack of bang when the ticket was first announced, one has to wonder whether without substantial addition to the current statements whether they'll be able to maintain their popularity.

I expect SFF to win. I'm dissapointed that so many seem to want to deny me my vote based on a 28% proxy return.

[joffaboy]

I expect SFF to win. I'm dissapointed that so many seem to want to deny me my vote based on a 28% proxy return.

Yes i find it very interesting considering how many were up in arms about Butters wanting the AFL to judge who had the better financial plan and the best plan wins.

Apparently Butters was denying us all a chance to vote (quite how has never once been established BTW) but when the FFS say they wanted the proxies to pressure the board to step down, therefore denying us the chance to vote, these very same people who were so outraged by Butters are mute, silent.

Well who would have thought.

[JeffDunne]

Some of the point scoring attempts in this debate are nothing short of pathetic.

How on earth is Rod stepping down denying anyone their vote?

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Some of the point scoring attempts in this debate are nothing short of pathetic.

How on earth is Rod stepping down denying anyone their vote?

It's ignorning the possibility that were te vote held today, the current board might get 6,001. It's denying me the priviledge of making up my mind based on my own criteria who I want to vote for over the time scheduled. Put simply, if Rod steps down today, I don't get to vote, I have been denied the chance.

Point scoring attempt? How is wanting to make up my mind based on more than I've got so far a point scoring attempt?

[JeffDunne]

If Rod decides to stand down it will be his decision and his alone.

Now if you want to bag him for denying you a choice to vote - then that's your decision.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

I expect SFF to win. I'm dissapointed that so many seem to want to deny me my vote based on a 28% proxy return.

Yes i find it very interesting considering how many were up in arms about Butters wanting the AFL to judge who had the better financial plan and the best plan wins.

Apparently Butters was denying us all a chance to vote (quite how has never once been established BTW) but when the FFS say they wanted the proxies to pressure the board to step down, therefore denying us the chance to vote, these very same people who were so outraged by Butters are mute, silent.

Well who would have thought.

I have no issue with SFF collecting proxies. As they have not at this stage declared the number for suffiecient for it to behoove Butterss to resign, I don't think they're denying me my vote. Heck, even if they did, they've got a vested interest in the outcome, they might as well make the call.

As an undecided, the espoused view from posters that it would be better for the club to make it's decision based on an announced proxy figure than a full vote leaves me cold though.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

If Rod decides to stand down it will be his decision and his alone.

Now if you want to bag him for denying you a choice to vote - then that's your decision.

Have no doubt, if Rod steps down based on the current situation at this time, I'll rate it as the worst thing he's done as President. If he can't mount a defence, I at least expect him to present an alternative, and force more out of SFF then they've given so far.

[saint patrick]

Greg Denham on SEN talking to Bartlett has just declared it all over for Rod...expects him to resign very soon.

Said that SFF expect to have around 8000 votes by the next few days and he will have no choice but to concede.

Hope for the clubs sake and his dignity this is true.

[SENsei]

Apparently Butters was denying us all a chance to vote (quite how has never once been established BTW) but when the FFS say they wanted the proxies to pressure the board to step down, therefore denying us the chance to vote, these very same people who were so outraged by Butters are mute, silent.

Well who would have thought.

That could be aimed in my direction, but I made a conscious decision to be mute, as you put it. Last week, I put up my case for RB's removal. I have said very little on the subject since, purely because I was sick of the arguments going around in circles but mainly because I wanted to see what the majority of people thought.

I'm not going to hammer my opinion down peoples throat like some others.

[bungiton]

I just wanted to know in the whole debate about members choice, how Butterss was voted in as president??

He wasn't, he was elected to the board, a year later after some backroom dealing named as the successor to Plympton. At least in this process the members are being given a choice, you have the right to give your proxie or vote to either party, given that at most elections the voting members usually tally 700, the amount of proxies gathered so far by SFF is an overwhelming amount of interest.

I don't doubt or take lightly the amount of work the incumbants have done, the retirement of debt is the only outstanding success, the infighting, negative press, prolongued GT vs RB battle, the lack of training facilities blah blah blah, are reasons that the day has come for the residing board to pull up stumps and move aside.

Noone is denying you a vote, anti, pro or undecided are choices you have now, the gathering of proxies is a vote either way.

[chook23]

Greg Denham on SEN talking to Bartlett has just declared it all over for Rod...expects him to resign very soon.

Hope for the clubs sake and his dignity this is true.

Heard that as well.

One thing I have said all along is that it appears so many have voted on personality - RB

or hoping just to kill off the GT/RB era

and not the board in total.

Burke has pulled at the heart strings etc and many have appeared to have voted on this alone.

I suppose good politics by SFF

but I think they have/will get in without much scrutiny.....

It was not denying a vote when RB said plan should have spyglass over it..

If better Board walkaway

If plan did not stand up...........SFF SHOULD walk away

IF SFF did not walk away WE WOULD then have voted knowing which finanancial plan better according to the AFL money crunchers......

Where is the denying of VOTE THERE................


anyway loks done and dusted......


Door to door salesman still have a good chance with many on this forum

[Juggernaut]

As Iv'e posted before the board are only custodians of the club on behalf of the members.
The members decide who they want to they want to represent us
we are the ones who must make to decision, but to do that we require both parties that would like to control the clubs destiny to put up what their plans are. At this stage only one is (or at least something ) the other is saying look at what we have done in the past but has then gone quiet.
I am sick of the lack of information to be able to make up my mind as to who is better for us

[SENsei]

Door to door salesman still have a good chance with many on this forum

Geez that's just bulltish chook.

Rash generalisation much? You know exactly how each and every proxy voting person came to his/her decision do you?

Door to door salesmen!!

The board is fractured and unworkable in it's present form. Which part of that is so hard to understand?

You have your opinion, but it is YOUR opinion only. Don't denegrate other members of this forum or the club, just because they don't agree with you.

[rodgerfox]

One thing I have said all along is that it appears so many have voted on personality - RB

Possibly, infact probably.

However most I think, have voted, or at least been opne minded to SFF due to the current state of our club's admin.

Loss of members.
No home.
Loss of sponsors.
Infighting on the current Board.
Terrible training facilities.
Loss of key staff consistently.
4 years lost to injury.


I still sense that some think 'if it's not broken, why fix it' - and see this challenge as a panic in response to poor on-field performance last year.

I don't think many members are actually voting due to panic. I think most are smart enough to have realised that we are in trouble, and the issues mentioned above need to be addressed. Now.


An in relation to people voting on personalities - Butterss has himself to blame or this. He put himself out there so often, and in the start actually played the 'personality card' to his own benefit.

[chook23]

Geez that's just bulltish chook.

Rash generalisation much? You know exactly how each and every proxy voting person came to his/her decision do you?

Door to door salesmen!!

The board is fractured and unworkable in it's present form. Which part of that is so hard to understand?

You have your opinion, but it is YOUR opinion only. Don't denegrate other members of this forum or the club, just because they don't agree with you.

Going by comments of many not all

it appears the case as I mentioned.

The door to door comment was in reference by comments of many
they appeard easily swayed.


Only commenting on alot of which I have read.

I did not mention whether I consider or not the current board is fractured or not....... (pretty obvious when a member who was for a period a double agent)

I did not mention who I was voting for SO you are so called assuming as well.....

I just honestly believe (again on comments read) a lot have voted purely on personality and with little scrutiny on SFF

[bungiton]

If people are voting based on personality, there is only one perso to blame for that, perhaps two.

Opinions are just that, everyone is entitled to vote based on any reason they see fit, if the reason is that a battle of egos, played out on a very public stage is destabilising and detrimental to the club, then that is their right. People keep likening this to a commercial board, if the chairman of any company I was a shareholder in acted in the way Rod Butterss has in the last 18 months, he'd already have recieved his severance.

[joffaboy]

Greg Denham on SEN talking to Bartlett has just declared it all over for Rod...expects him to resign very soon.

If thats the case do we still need the EGM or could the board all resign and we have the new board from the AGM?

This would be a fair way to do it if possible and save the club money.

But if this is the case and it is all over what have we got to fight about for the next 3 or four monts St.Pat

[SENsei]

joffaboy,

We can still fight about the new board's plans for Moorabbin.

We can fight about our CEO's position.

We can fight about our football manager, although I don't think that's going to be an issue for long either.

We can fight about TRADE WEEK, that's always fun and games

We can fight about fighting on end of season trips?

Or we can just plain do what we normally do...fight for the sake of fighting!

[bungiton]

Greg Denham on SEN talking to Bartlett has just declared it all over for Rod...expects him to resign very soon.

If thats the case do we still need the EGM or could the board all resign and we have the new board from the AGM?

This would be a fair way to do it if possible and save the club money.

But if this is the case and it is all over what have we got to fight about for the next 3 or four monts St.Pat

If the writing is on the wall as it seems, doing the right thing and walking away will save the club money, after all wasn't cost cutting a big part of RB's platform???

[joffaboy]

That could be aimed in my direction, but I made a conscious decision to be mute, as you put it. Last week, I put up my case for RB's removal. I have said very little on the subject since, purely because I was sick of the arguments going around in circles but mainly because I wanted to see what the majority of people thought.

I'm not going to hammer my opinion down peoples throat like some others.

No not at all Saintsational. I just found it curious that some on here were up in arms when Butters wanted to put the two plans forward and the best plan for the club would run it (or words to that effect). To me that menat if the FFS plan was better Rod would resign and let Greg and his ticket take over.

however the hue and cry about Butters taking our voting rights away was incredible and laughable. As bungiton just stated, there was no vote when Butters took over, no wailing at the moon and gnashing of teeth then. It is a perfectly legitimate way of changing the board and President, and very less messy. I saw no problems with it at all.

But the funny thing was, when it was announced that the FFS was gathering proxies to pressure RB and the board to resign (so in effect doing exactly what RB was accuesd of doing) therefore denying us a vote, there was no outcry.

Where was the wringing of hands and howling at the moon? Where were the cries of indignation toward the tactics of the FFs to deny us the vote?

Has the FFS slightly embarrassed their own supporters who went down this path?

Oops your petticoats are showing ladies

BTW I believe both arguments are false and misleading. Neither the FFS or RB wanted to deny the membership a vote. Both wanted to avoid an EGM and spill and ensure either a smooth transition or a continuance of the status quo. And AFAIAC both tactics were legitimate and were never designed "to imit the members voting rights"

I find it incredibly amusing that the ones so upset by Butters plan, has said nothing about the FFS plan