2011 Board Elections

[murraymob]

Fibro

i to was suprised by the numbers.Everyone i spoke to was voting nadim .But having the said that the numbers are right.They where conducted by a independant guy and sadly did not go the way we would have liked.

 

[The OX]

It's run by an independent company. But you weren't the only one to vote yesterday. I voted in the morning at 10am and another bloke voted straight after me.

 

[darkbloom]

It's run by an independent company. But you weren't the only one to vote yesterday. I voted in the morning at 10am and another bloke voted straight after me.

I also voted yesterday.

 

[darkbloom]

Nothing. The proposal stipulates it is an option in the JV agreement that Panthers can buy-back should they so choose.

If they elect to not buy-back per JV Agreement, they continue in same way as today.

But new constitutional rules say we now have ability to buy-back into the future as well.

I understand the first point.

I understand the second one to a degree.

But where are the new constitutional rules?

 

[Panther]

No criticism from me of the independent company running the election but the way Panthers handled it was incompetent or designed to make it as hard as possible for new people to get aboard.

The bylaws, lack of information about independent candidates on the websites (profiles of sitting board members have been on team site for yonks) and information about the election not arriving to members in some cases as late as Friday this week. There are probably other things which could leave the way open for a challenge if anyone wanted to.

Next time there has to be an opposition ticket and it needs to declare itself at least three months out from the elections. Somebody said it would cost $20k per candidate but I don't think so. What it will take is a genuine desire to follow through as a team.

 

[Big Mick]

I understand the first point.

I understand the second one to a degree.

But where are the new constitutional rules?

They are in the proposal to be voted on Monday.

 

[The OX]

All you need is a group of 5-6 people who can act as a team (Nads and Nigel didnt).

even if those two were elected they would be stonewalled at every meeting, and none of their suggetions would get considered.

You must have a cohesive group with great exposure to the community.

FFS you could pay for the membership of 1000 people and get them to vote for you.

 

[Fibroman]

All you need is a group of 5-6 people who can act as a team (Nads and Nigel didnt).

even if those two were elected they would be stonewalled at every meeting, and none of their suggetions would get considered.

You must have a cohesive group with great exposure to the community.

FFS you could pay for the membership of 1000 people and get them to vote for you.

Spot on Ox.

It needs to be structured and organised.

We need organised rallies with free sausage sizzles etc. etc. We need to spend $$$ to advertise in such a way that there are no mentions of names etc etc.

We need to get a list of names and numbers and somebody needs to take a weeks holiday off work and drive people to and from the club in a minibus etc etc.

In short. There needs to be a lot more planning.

We need to capture the Gen Y vote.

 

[The OX]

Offer a cash payment for everyone who provides proof of voting based on your how to vote card.

If you had a party of 6 candidates it wouldn't cost a lot each.

Money Talks.

 

[murraymob]

All you need is a group of 5-6 people who can act as a team (Nads and Nigel didnt).

even if those two were elected they would be stonewalled at every meeting, and none of their suggetions would get considered.

You must have a cohesive group with great exposure to the community.

FFS you could pay for the membership of 1000 people and get them to vote for you.

your last point being a very good one.

now if we at least 410 people who voted exactly that would mean at least half of a rebel ticket got on.Good point ox and worth considering going into the next election

 

[franklin2323]

your last point being a very good one.

now if we at least 410 people who voted exactly that would mean at least half of a rebel ticket got on.Good point ox and worth considering going into the next election

I have heard more then 410 people complain over the board yet again. No one votes that's the problem

 

[Nigel Highley]

Firstly I would like to thank all those members who took the time to vote.

This will be the last time I stand for the election, as I have stated elsewhere that as a club if the best we can do in terms of voter turnout is 445 then we as a club deserve what we get!

As for the election process voter numbers will never increase until our club introduces online voting, this was proposed on my behalf at the 2010 AGM and I am still waiting......

As for the ING situation I am aware of the buy back component but lets be realistic which financial institution is going to finance Panthers to do this? $80 million to an organisation that hasn't traded profitably in at least 10 years.

I doubt very much that Panthers could sustain such a financial situation!

 

[Big Mick]

Well Gus appears aware of it...I asked him on Twitter regards to it to which he replied, aware of it, but confidential at this time.

So it must be at least a consideration.

It is really sad that we are talking about having 1000 paid to sign up and vote...that's all it takes to run a multi-million dollar club...that is just...wow.

 

[The OX]

How else can you get voters there Mick?

Change is needed and has been for some time. Methods need to be found to get a crew together to follow a voting plan and a way of getting people there to vote in such a way to punt the current dead wood.

If that cost each of 5-9 new board members few grand each so be it. Is that so much to follow a cause you so passionately believe in?

 

[Panther]

Firstly I would like to thank all those members who took the time to vote.

This will be the last time I stand for the election, as I have stated elsewhere that as a club if the best we can do in terms of voter turnout is 445 then we as a club deserve what we get!

As for the election process voter numbers will never increase until our club introduces online voting, this was proposed on my behalf at the 2010 AGM and I am still waiting......

As for the ING situation I am aware of the buy back component but lets be realistic which financial institution is going to finance Panthers to do this? $80 million to an organisation that hasn't traded profitably in at least 10 years.

I doubt very much that Panthers could sustain such a financial situation!

I'd like to thank both Nigel and Nadim for trying.

 

[Panther]

Well Gus appears aware of it...I asked him on Twitter regards to it to which he replied, aware of it, but confidential at this time.

So it must be at least a consideration.

It is really sad that we are talking about having 1000 paid to sign up and vote...that's all it takes to run a multi-million dollar club...that is just...wow.

The problem is that Gus isn't on the board and will not be involved in any decision.

 

[Big Mick]

The problem is that Gus isn't on the board and will not be involved in any decision.

Didn't say he was.

Just said he is obviously aware of it.

So it must be a part of discussions.

Either way...if we don't buy-back it has no impact on us.

 

[Big Mick]

How else can you get voters there Mick?

Change is needed and has been for some time. Methods need to be found to get a crew together to follow a voting plan and a way of getting people there to vote in such a way to punt the current dead wood.

If that cost each of 5-9 new board members few grand each so be it. Is that so much to follow a cause you so passionately believe in?

I'm not disagreeing.

I'm saying its sad that it would come to that.

 

[Panther]

Didn't say he was.

...Either way...if we don't buy-back it has no impact on us.

Wish I felt as confident.

 

[roofromoz]

Make the vote also available by proxy, just like the NRMA. There would surely have been more than 400-odd votes. But I agree that there would need to be a rebel ticket, or at least 5 or 6 new candidates to bring about some real change.