2010 Board Report

[Casper The Ghost]

how do you turn around 11 million when gaming only grew by a few million? keep in mind that gaming accounts for 95% of the revenue of the leagues club?

sums dont add up.

2008 was an asset impairment, hence the massive loss
2009 was a sale of assets (two blues sale)
2010 not over yet,

i am a big parra fan and i hope that the club can turn it around, the problem is i have little faith in the ability of the people being employed by the club.

Any outsider who reads the "2010 Board Report" I expect would raise their eyebrows at a few items as it does present more like a strategically worded election piece rather than a genuine report to the members. I say that because it appears to leave many questions unanswered or perhaps some topics omitting important information.

A few things:-

• It states that the Board asked Fitzy to "attend a meeting with the Board" and that Fitzy commenced court proceedings to "restrain the board from dealing with him". Thereafter it states that the Board has given the court undertakings "not to continue with the process". It seems odd that they can't be up front about the fact that this is all about revoking his life membership. Clearly they felt that supplying all the facts would not be politically advantageous.
• I am unaware if using the clubs funds for election matters is illegal and what Project Pittsburgh (PP) entailed. It seems odd however that they have spent $250k on legals and PI's on a witch hunt when the PP allegedly cost the club only $100K.
• It does smack of a employee witch hunt. There is one thing to bring in new practices for the better in the workplace, but to go about digging to find dirt on people so you can punt them seems on the surface to be dirty pool. Again we have only been given a rough outline on some of the terminations but one wonders if these staff were given fair opportunity to work under the new regime's expectations and standards.
• It's interesting to see the club's position with Ando at the moment; "the decision was taken to negotiate a buy-out of the balance of Daniel's contract and that is what is occurring." So they are not paying him the remainder of his contract but actually trying to pay him less.
• It's financial shenanigans to suggest that there has been a $9m turn around in profits. We all know that the $8m loss in 2008 was a paper loss only brought about by asset revaluations. This is what companies do to reduce their tax burden. Putting that aside their figures after the Global Financial Crisis have improved the bottom line from $1.5M to a projected $2.1M. It's not ground breaking but hey they are running leaner with wages and other contracts so I can't say it's not an improvement. Having said that I am not privy to the numbers from clubs of a similar size and it would be nice to be able to compare apples with apples. I suspect that their numbers would have improved comparatively.
• LOL at them using Fitzy's infamous "5 year" comment. That will haunt him until the day he dies. I don't often defend the pelican but I must point out that the 5 year comment was used by him with his Registered Clubs lobbyist hat on when the State Government increased the way that they calculate pokie tax. He referred to how the increase in tax would make it hard to put a team on the paddock. Spag is now using that out of context and suggesting that he predicted the demise of the licensed club. FYI Fitzy's comments are here and here.
• Finally, I though that club and football operations were separate ? Reading that report it does not seem that the football club have much say about what happens around the place.

Agreed, read it 3 times.... its propaganda time.... out come the boxing gloves. I'll keep reading this string.

 

[Casper The Ghost]

Jodeci, I supported a change, and voted these current clowns in. We got a change (ie. Fitzgerald departed, which imo he was likely to do anyway in the next one-two years).

But on any number of fronts I'm extremely displeased with the way these cowboys have been running our club since Fitzy left, and we the Members deserve a better choice of candidates this time.

You seem to have tied yourself to the current Board/3P mast so tightly you can't think freely. But most of us Members can look at things with a critical eye, and will support future changes for the better, so the club can truly move forward from the state it is currently in.

Agreed..... and this is not an anti Jodeci claim or anti other pro 3P forumites.

 

[Casper The Ghost]

Just on that point, Gronk, and this is not indicative of my view of the Report as a whole...

Team PLC is singled out by the Board (our Board? haha) for Pittsburgh because they believe, in addition of course to the money issue, the involvement of employees of the Club, in Club time, at Club expense, whilst on the Club payroll is unlawful and in breach of provisions of the Registered Clubs Act and not in the interests of members.

Considering this Report is obviously a propaganda piece (not necessarily a negative comment on my behalf but instead just an observation) then wouldn't it come under the same heading? Involves Club employees, in Club time, on Club payroll and at Club expense?

Sure, there's a significant difference when dealing with the overall costs relating to this Report as opposed to Pittsburgh but when dealing with probity (as Gronk has mentioned) dollars mean absolutely nothing.

You cannot launch a public attack on the ethics and lawfulness of your enemy when that attack itself breaches the same guidelines.

********

Also, this is clearly a propaganda piece, for those who would seek to object to my above comment. I've been trained to deconstruct and analyse texts and I'm ridiculously good at it.

The standout word from the Report that indicates this is the oft-repeated "your" in relation to "your Board" (as opposed to, say, "the Board"). The purpose of this word is to link you emotionally to the Board and subversively instill within your thoughts a belief that you are inately connected to them and they are undoubtedly working in your best interests.

Thus when the term "your Board" is used (and it isn't always) the desired effect is that the surrounding material is taken in with a positive outlook and incorporated into your own point of view.

So, when is "your Board" used as opposed to "the Board"?

Thel;argest recurring use is within the phrase "in the opinion of your Board", which came up three times. Not once is the term "in the opinion of the Board" used.

When talking about how Pittsburgh was not disclosed to "your Board" (meaning you), which has two usages.

When adressing the negative outlook on previous construction matters, "your Board" became aware of their waste.

Discussing how "your Board" set out to bring the Club back to profitability (the figures used to justify this have already been questioned in this thread).

In essence, any time there was either an emotional element or a grey area within the Report, the usage of the term "your Board" starts popping up. The whole point is to have you become emotionally attached to the information being presented before you so that you incorporate it into your own opinion.

Now, I'm not stating any positive or negative opinion in relation to this. I'm only saying one thing - this is undoubtedly a propaganda piece designed to begin the push towards the election. It is election material.

Now, there's plenty of interesting stuff in there which I will address in a later post. There's also other questions I have in relation to the material presented. This, however, was one of the first things to jump out at me as I read the Report and it kept coming up again and again as I went through it. After reading Gronk's post above, I thought I'd point this out to start with before coming back and addressing other aspects which I can hopefully do tomorrow.

Remember, this is what I am trained to do and I do it very well, so I know what I'm talking about.

Agreed........

 

[Casper The Ghost]

With all due respect... WTF does that have to do with Bart's opinion of this current board?

"My daddy is better than your daddy"

"No he's Not" "My daddy is better than your daddy".

"No he's Not" "My daddy is better than your daddy".

 

[bartman]

just a quick question for Bartman..

would you have prefered if the board didn't release the report to explain themselves to members??

Sorry Stags, just catching up on this thread.

I don't think the Board did a good job of explaining much in this letter. I wasn't aware of the perceived criticisms of them from Hadley (as I don't listen to that type of show and never saw any allegations reported), and the tone of the letter seems to be out of touch with those parts of the membership who might not have the assumed knowledge of whatever Hadley was talking about.

I personally think the Board should have explained themselves and communicated with the membership much earlier and much more regularly about a wider range of things than this. Like why they f**ked up on Cayless' retirement for example, why they haven't instituted regular fans forums as promised, and various other things. Not as a one off paid political advertisement masquerading as a letter to members.

tbh Stagger, it appeared to do nothing but pass the buck and spare them of any wrong doing.

^ Sums up what I meant much more concisely.

 

[bartman]

:lol: "Sangreal 86" has had a shocker on here today, imo.

Coming out all guns blazing any critical comments about "his buddies", instead of using the opportunity that this forum gives to listen to where the membership's thinking is at, and take their opinions back to his buddies, so that they can improve their performance and communication.

It's been a very one-sided version communication with members over these these past (almost) two years. And not often a very gracious attempt, if Sangreal 86's style of accepting feedback is all we have to go by. The pity is that imo we were sucked in by 3P with promises of so much more on that front...

 

[Casper The Ghost]

I'm just doing what you guys are doing. If you guys stop the bullsh*t so will I.
Many of you have over dramatised the issues surrounding the board especially the sacking of DA.


Now I concede that the DA situation was handled poorly and I don't like the leaks. But are these issues really deserving of the scathing garbage that we have been getting on this forum.
Some stuff on here that has been posted about the board is absolute rubbish.

1. Kearney was lined up months before the "official announcement".

2. The desperate inquiry into Phil Gould for coach was fabricated to cover up point 1.

3. Ray Spags lied to fans, members, staff and players like Nathan Hindmarsh about Daniel Anderson staying on. To intentionally mislead others is lying.

4. Daniel Anderson was a dead man walking for many months.

etc
etc
etc
etc
etc
etc
etc

Jake, have you actually comprehended what you are saying?????

Get a tradesman who does a terrible job........ where do you stand with matters close to your heart and your wallet..... What would you do?

 

[Casper The Ghost]

Not at all, mate. I just thought your answer may help me make what I consider a valid point. You may appreciate it.
It would be near on impossible getting you to perhaps see reason as your hatred of DF appears to be clouding your vision. Atleast that is what I am getting from reading your posts of late. Perhaps you and I together could help you see more clearly?

I didn't think that a "hatred" of DF and a "love" of 3P were mutually exclusive.

I thought you could be glad that DF is gone but still not concede the sun shines out of the current boards collective arse. On the other side of the coin, I thought that you could be totally unhappy with 3P's performance yet still not want DF and co. back.

Maybe it is just me, but when I sit back and try to think about it logically I can obviously see a little more grey than your constant black and white view on the politics that is Parra Leagues.

An excellent approach coming from a healthy balanced view surrounding facts!!!

 

[Jake the snake]

1. Kearney was lined up months before the "official announcement".

2. The desperate inquiry into Phil Gould for coach was fabricated to cover up point 1.

3. Ray Spags lied to fans, members, staff and players like Nathan Hindmarsh about Daniel Anderson staying on. To intentionally mislead others is lying.

4. Daniel Anderson was a dead man walking for many months.

etc
etc
etc
etc
etc
etc
etc

Jake, have you actually comprehended what you are saying?????

Get a tradesman who does a terrible job........ where do you stand with matters close to your heart and your wallet..... What would you do?

Yes I know what I'm saying. I'm just not over dramatising issues like some people on here.

Have you considered any of the positives that come out for the fans since the new board have come in?
Can you bring yourself to admit that the current board have been more fan friendly since coming in?

 

[Casper The Ghost]

Deserves what she gets that woman that emailed stuff to her hubby. I'd have punted her on the spot too.

So would I.

 

[cv8z]

1. Kearney was lined up months before the "official announcement".

2. The desperate inquiry into Phil Gould for coach was fabricated to cover up point 1.

3. Ray Spags lied to fans, members, staff and players like Nathan Hindmarsh about Daniel Anderson staying on. To intentionally mislead others is lying.

4. Daniel Anderson was a dead man walking for many months.

etc
etc
etc
etc
etc
etc
etc

Jake, have you actually comprehended what you are saying?????

Get a tradesman who does a terrible job........ where do you stand with matters close to your heart and your wallet..... What would you do?

1 unlike the coach the board had plans
2 you don't sh*t
3 you know for a fact the votes were locked forcing spagnolo to cast the deadly vote?

You should save your typing and just.cut and paste your posts
There seem repetitive.
You could save yourself from RSI :lol:

 

[Jake the snake]

Casper I could of sworn that you were Paul Osbourne fan when you first came on these forums.
I remember your posts how Parra is in goods hands blah blah.

What happened??

 

[Casper The Ghost]

Jake, the conspiracy theorists on here who continually make negative statements about the current board do my head in.

They ignore all the good things they have achieved and the fact they have taken action on numerous issues that were blocked under the previous admin, They won't like this but I have a fair knowledge of what went on and is happening, and in general terms the current admin deserve a lot more support on here than they have been getting.

We all agree there have been some things that could have been handled better, but w need to move on big time, the constant reference to the old board as if it was some pious regime that never did anything wrong has proved to be incorrect. In all honesty I wish these threads could be closed and we got on talking about the real issue, the footy.

I am actually looking forward to next year with the idea we may have some structure and plans, something I really wosh DA had given us, as I like the person a great deal as an individual but turned out to be the wrong fit in the NRL.

You have to be sick to be sick - your head has to be done in to be done in.

The threads are closed the moment you stop venturing into them.

We all want to move on, the debate is about with who and the reasons why no and and why yes with who. Why is this negative? All in preparation for the pending elections, it's great having a forum where we can all express our views about the present board and with those who'll put their hands up to challenge them.

Over the past 12 months or so have hardly noticed anyone in this forum praising the old board - don't know where you get this "pious regime" slant from?

 

[Casper The Ghost]

Casper I could of sworn that you were Paul Osbourne fan when you first came on these forums.
I remember your posts how Parra is in goods hands blah blah.

What happened??

Yes, was very happy about Paul becoming CEO, but have since become very disappointed in how things panned out. Am not the only one Jake, there are many thousands of Eels supporters disappointed. We live and learn from our mistakes and move on. Can't say anymore because it will be libel.

 

[Casper The Ghost]

Yes I know what I'm saying. I'm just not over dramatising issues like some people on here.

Have you considered any of the positives that come out for the fans since the new board have come in?
Can you bring yourself to admit that the current board have been more fan friendly since coming in?

Among the many staff employed in my old business were some who lied to management. Even after given the benefit of doubt, they had good points about them, the leopards spots never went away and they had to go. They caused more damage to the business keeping them on. One of the hardest lessons I had to learn over those 20 years was not to talk myself into employing someone or keeping someone on when I had/felt a slight doubt about them. Hanging over my head were influences that had me be lazy or impulsive or frightened of disturbance. Influences that brought me grief ............. avoid the grind of interview after interview to find that "right" staff member, so get it over and done with (I was selfish to the wellbeing of my business)......... there was a wave to catch down the road, I wanted to be at the beach and not in the office.......... avoid the dirty, the hassle, the uprooting, the unsettling tasks and effects of having to confront and fire them....... etc, etc.. Over the years I got better with this until I was no longer plagued by these negative attitudes. I learnt to be kind and strong at the same time. If someone had good points but were also liars, I fired them on the spot. Same with 3P, they have to go.

 

[Casper The Ghost]

As for my opinion on the 12-page letter... I've read it, slept on it and read it again. It's clearly more a propaganda piece than straight talking communication to the members, imo.

The propaganda starts in the first sentence, where "our Board" stakes a claim (without evidence) that they are on a path of proper governance. That's political posturing right there, with elections just two and six months away.

The propaganda continues with the selective inclusion of information, and the clever choice of words to describe situations. Under the John Kolc and Sharon Wilson it says they
commenced proceedings in Fair Work Australia "and those proceedings were subsequently settled". This appears to be a sneaky way of saying that John Kolc and Sharon Wilson actually won their unfair dismissal claims against the club/Board...?

Looking at the mentions of Fair Work Australia, it appears that this Board has been found to have unfairly dismissed two people (Kolc and Wilson), has one case still open (Francesco) and claims two "wins" where someone didn't follow through with unfair dismissal action (Grosvenor) and where someone had to be paid their twelve week entitlements (Delaney).

That's only a 50% rate of proper employee terminations in the eyes of Fair Work Australia, with one case to come - and of course the Court Case about Fitzgerald's membership (cleverly not mentioned in the letter, though they're happy to mention a few other "allegations"). I'm not happy my club/Board terminates any employees improperly, let alone 50%, yet Spags seems to think this is a virtue?

The propaganda continues, with the "clever" mention of Peter Wynn as a competitor to the club's merchandise store. Wasn't aware this was even an issue of confusion for any member, but given that Peter Wynn has been reported to be considering running for the FC elections in December, Roy decides to get a negative printed in a letter that goes to all members. They're politicking like crazy ladies and gentlemen, imo.

The claim that they are chasing $100K of Members money through their Project Pittsburgh witch hunt is someone cancelled out by the relevation that they have spend $130K on Mr Findlay and $170K on solicitors to do so - that doesn't add up to me? It's bad business (and bad politics) to spend $300K to chase $100K and then crow about it.

And that $300K figure doesn't include the "settlement" costs that appear to have been paid to John Kolc and Sharon Wilson for unfair dismissal... as a Member I'm more concerned about that $300K or $400K (or possibly more?) of "our money" that's been unnecessarily spent by "our Board" on their witch hunt (which Spags goes on to deny is taking place, even though he's given the evidence for it in this letter, imo).

The DA stuff - they claim no Board involvement in Webb and Maitua, and claim no Osborne involvement in Mateo, Inu and Keating... but fail to mention or address Board involvement/interference in the failed quest to land Quade Cooper.... just convenient, or plain selective politicking?

The financial stuff - it's not very detailed, and until it comes from certified audited financial statements it's not worth the paper it's printed on. Not saying they're deliberately misleading, just that in my line of work I receive organisation's financial figures on the run, and then the final audited ones for the financial often differ by a huuuuge amount.

Personally, observing what's happened with the GFC and world economies, it's a bit ingenious to claim the turnaround from 2008 to 2009 is due to the new Board/administration. Again, in my line of work I've seen financial reports from organisations nearly all turn around in that magnitude, and hardly any had any change of approach/management/directors. It's like blaming politicians at one point in time for global recessions (or crediting them for global growth).

They've reduced executive employment costs - but as stated above had to have (at least) two unfair dismissals to do it, plus a pending court action.

There are some good things they've done in the letter, and for those who accuse me or others of not highlighting the good things... why would I retype them, when Spags has just spent "our money" posting a 12 page pre-election publicity letter to every member. (Incidently, how different is this really to the previous Board sending a much shorter politicking letter in Mandarin to various Tingha Patrons, other than Spags' letter not having any vouhcer and is typed in English...)

Instead I choose to highlight the "missing items", raise the questions that I believe we the Members should be thinking about, and I choose not to blindly swallow Spagnolo's steaming hot pre-election political advertisement/letter like it's gospel.

Spagnolo imo has been shown not to be a man of his word (through his statements and then turnaround on DA seeing out his contract), and if you look at the list of promises from the FC elections, his ticket (which he proudly names throughout this "nuetral" letter) hasn't carried through on many of them within the FC in the past 22 months.

NB. For the slow learners who carry on lately about critical comment, the above is "just an opinion", and if you don't like my opinion then instead of whinging and being paranoid, then please just scroll past or here's the link to ignore my posts: ignore bartman

Well done Barty, a very impartial balanced appraisal of the facts at hand.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Get a tradesman who does a terrible job........

Leave Suity out of this.

 

[Parra Guru]

:lol: "Sangreal 86" has had a shocker on here today, imo.

Coming out all guns blazing any critical comments about "his buddies", instead of using the opportunity that this forum gives to listen to where the membership's thinking is at, and take their opinions back to his buddies, so that they can improve their performance and communication.

It's been a very one-sided version communication with members over these these past (almost) two years. And not often a very gracious attempt, if Sangreal 86's style of accepting feedback is all we have to go by. The pity is that imo we were sucked in by 3P with promises of so much more on that front...

I guess we are all prone to shockers on here, and when the bagging is directed at someone you know and respect (as in this case of Sevens and Spagnolo), it just goes to show it's hard to bite your tongue no matter who you are.

But coming out claiming people are keyboard cowboys due to a few (tame) negative comments, is a little silly.

 

[born an eel]

1 unlike the coach the board had plans
2 you don't sh*t
3 you know for a fact the votes were locked forcing spagnolo to cast the deadly vote?

You should save your typing and just.cut and paste your posts
There seem repetitive.
You could save yourself from RSI :lol:

fact? show me the evidence please I must have missed it. I know how much you hate bullsh*t on the forums, so you wouldn't have made a statement like that without evidence.

Two of the eight directors supported Anderson staying for the remainder of his contract but the other six wanted Kearney straight away, knowing there was a real risk they would lose the best young coach in the business to the Brisbane Broncos.http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...-broncos-in-2011/story-e6frexnr-1225930129874

 

[Casper The Ghost]

Leave Suity out of this.

Has your home fallen down to?