Where does this leave Archie Fraser ? !!

Eastern · Post: # 453615Post **Eastern** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 12:50pm

Although Ken Sheldon looks ready for the chop no matter what hapens at the EGM, Archie Fraser would be on shaky ground should the Footy First Group get up.

After all a group of that stature would want to put their stamp on the place as soon as they got in and that would go all the way to Archies seat.

Ross Levine has been remakably quiet lately and what is Jim Watts up to these days? !!

saintm · Post: # 453617Post **saintm** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 12:52pm

There is a note regarding Archie and other senior staff on the West of Moorabbin site.

www.westofmoorabbin.com

Eastern · Post: # 453623Post **Eastern** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 1:00pm

saintm wrote:There is a note regarding Archie and other senior staff on the West of Moorabbin site.

www.westofmoorabbin.com

Thanks. Noted !!

stinger · Post: # 453634Post **stinger** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 1:25pm

interesting...seems archie might be white anting from within.....and here"s me thinking that he would get the chop along with sheldon......

SAINTLY73 · Post: # 453637Post **SAINTLY73** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 1:30pm

Archie HAS been part of this for a while. Gdansky and himself have similar views on many issues especially the redevelopment fiasco.

How appropriate is it for a current CEO to be involved and support such a move?

And people thought the RB/GT stank.

skeptic · Post: # 453642Post **skeptic** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 1:33pm

would love to see AF get the chop... not impressed with this man at all

meher baba · Post: # 453737Post **meher baba** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 3:34pm

The Peanut's claims are quite extraordinary if they are genuinely based upon what Fraser himself has been saying.

Assuming that people close to Butterss read the various Saints-related websites regularly, I would expect that Butterss will be contacting Fraser shortly to find out if they are indeed correct. If Butterss doesn't take this sort of action, it will be a sign of how weak his position has now become.

If it is true that Fraser has been whiteanting Butterss, it is only what Butterss should have anticipated, given how assidiously Fraser undermined GT in the weeks leading up to September 12 2006.

Regardless of how close or distant he might be from the likes of Gdanski, the challengers would be mad to keep AF on if they win control of the Board. Indeed, if the suggestion that AF is on their side gains wider coverage, then I suspect that this would serve to diminish the popularity of the St Kilda Footy First team's cause.

Sam23 · Post: # 453748Post **Sam23** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 3:42pm

Gawn.

killa_gram · Post: # 453798Post **killa_gram** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 4:48pm

It's an interesting one. Archie was going to go (resign) if there was no challenge, he will stay if the challenge gets up. So I suppose it's no skin off his nose if RB knows all this and gets rid of him as he would have been out of there anyway.

yipper · Post: # 453802Post **yipper** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 4:59pm

So is Jim Watts busy these days??

busso mick · Post: # 453844Post **busso mick** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 5:39pm

It appears that Archie Fraser might be heading for his Archie Bunker and keeping it "All In The Family" - only the oldies amongst us might know what I'm on about.

Mr Magic · Post: # 453847Post **Mr Magic** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 5:46pm

yipper wrote:So is Jim Watts busy these days??

Didn't he just knock-back an AFL job?

I'm wondering if the StKildaFootyFirst group are much more advanced than they are letting on?

What wonderful times for conspiracy theorists?

Firstly, a guy who is partners with David Friend in a marketing/membership business is the owner of their website domain name.

Jim Watts knocks back a serious job offer from the AFL

WHat else is bubbling away in the background?

yipper · Post: # 453852Post **yipper** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 5:51pm

Mr Magic wrote:
yipper wrote:So is Jim Watts busy these days??
Didn't he just knock-back an AFL job?

I'm wondering if the StKildaFootyFirst group are much more advanced than they are letting on?

What wonderful times for conspiracy theorists?

Firstly, a guy who is partners with David Friend in a marketing/membership business is the owner of their website domain name.

Jim Watts knocks back a serious job offer from the AFL

WHat else is bubbling away in the background?

Yes indeed. There may actually be plenty of substance behind the new group. Westaway, Ross Levin and John Gdanski are good friends with Watts aparently. Very interesting times ahead indeed.

mischa · Post: # 453855Post **mischa** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 5:52pm

Archibald seems very strange. Am surprised he's still there frankly-his attitude (now) seems to be one of saving your own skin "if the board wasn't challenged"

The Craw · Post: # 453893Post **The Craw** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 6:38pm

yipper wrote: Yes indeed. There may actually be plenty of substance behind the new group. Westaway, Ross Levin and John Gdanski are good friends with Watts aparently. Very interesting times ahead indeed.

Archie Fraser is very good mates with Jim Watts, read into that what you will.

StSteven · Post: # 453926Post **StSteven** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 7:32pm

O notice there was no denial on radio that GT could be called on as CEO? Any whispers on this?

ausfatcat · Post: # 453938Post **ausfatcat** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 7:41pm

StSteven wrote:O notice there was no denial on radio that GT could be called on as CEO? Any whispers on this?

Because it wasn't mentioned? WTF

I didn't hear ronald mcdonald mentioned as CEo either will he be?

StSteven · Post: # 453943Post **StSteven** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 7:47pm

If you heard Andrew Thompson on SEN you would have heard the question. I was in the car and did not catch it all but to be fair it was raised by the interviewer. The reply was non-commital.

Q5 · Post: # 454004Post Q5 » Tue 11 Sep 2007 8:47pm

Mr Magic wrote:
yipper wrote:So is Jim Watts busy these days??
Didn't he just knock-back an AFL job?

I'm wondering if the StKildaFootyFirst group are much more advanced than they are letting on?

What wonderful times for conspiracy theorists?

Firstly, a guy who is partners with David Friend in a marketing/membership business is the owner of their website domain name.

Jim Watts knocks back a serious job offer from the AFL

WHat else is bubbling away in the background?

Jim Watts did work at the AFL for about 12 months but has left recently to, I think, 'spend time with his family'. I badgered an AFL acquaintance about the real reason for Watts' departure, but hit a brick wall!

Whilst not usually a 'conspiracy theorist', I too find this all very interesting and think it is further along than what is being let on. In business, a lot of things can go on for 12 months or more, before finally folding, or a takeover / buyout etc. being announced. Hmmm......

saintsRrising · Tue 11 Sep 2007 8:56pm

StSteven wrote:O notice there was no denial on radio that GT could be called on as CEO? Any whispers on this?

forget that......anyone at the club knows that GT would be terrible in sucha role.

Just talk to anyone that has worked or volunteered there. They are not glowing....

saintsRrising · Tue 11 Sep 2007 9:01pm

Q5 wrote:
, I too find this all very interesting and think it is further along than what is being let on. In business, a lot of things can go on for 12 months or more, before finally folding, or a takeover / buyout etc. being announced. Hmmm......

Well I would actually be ver dissapointed if the Alternate Board had not in fact have well researched plans ready....

I mean you don't want them to get elected and then ask themselves what the f do they do now!!!!!

Q5 · Post: # 454077Post Q5 » Tue 11 Sep 2007 10:13pm

saintsRrising wrote: Well I would actually be ver dissapointed if the Alternate Board had not in fact have well researched plans ready....

I mean you don't want them to get elected and then ask themselves what the f do they do now!!!!!

TouchÃ©! Though my comment was specifically in relation to MM's regarding the 'rebel group' (to quote the official 'party' line) and their ticket being further advanced than what they are letting on.

Had to laugh when reading a BF post about the challenge, where an Essendon supporter was bemoaning the feeble attempt by their supporters to instigate change...

GrumpyOne · Post: # 454087Post **GrumpyOne** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 10:25pm

stinger wrote:interesting...seems archie might be white anting from within.....and here"s me thinking that he would get the chop along with sheldon......

Wouldn't surprise me if he was. Would still be smarting that Butterss torpedoed his negotiating stance over Moorabbin, you know, the "Yes we're going/no we're not" couple of days.

Brombergsaint · Tue 11 Sep 2007 11:31pm

Well i think its just part of evolution. When the saints had no team and no money we needed a autocratic style to make the decisions needed to turn the club around. Thomas in the football dept and Butters off field. It is because of their success that our club has moved so far forward that both their styles are no longer required.

Dont get me wrong, our club needed boyh men at the time and we owe them a great deal indeed. But to go the next level we now have to look elsewhere and I trust Burkey and Thomo. they have my vote.

P.S. Is it only social club members who can vote...?????

stinger · Post: # 454152Post **stinger** » Tue 11 Sep 2007 11:34pm

Brombergsaint wrote:Well i think its just part of evolution. When the saints had no team and no money we needed a autocratic style to make the decisions needed to turn the club around. Thomas in the football dept and Butters off field. It is because of their success that our club has moved so far forward that both their styles are no longer required.

Dont get me wrong, our club needed boyh men at the time and we owe them a great deal indeed. But to go the next level we now have to look elsewhere and I trust Burkey and Thomo. they have my vote.

P.S. Is it only social club members who can vote...?????

no...all members can vote.....