AFL appoints US company to find footy’s next boss

[Ian4]

Surely Frydenberg has to be a wind up

I read recently that the AFL Commission now includes no ex players for the first time in its history. It shows

putting aside his political allegiances, Frydenberg would still be a terrible appointment. AFL HQ is on the nose with supporters and has been for many years. It feels to me like the AFL are completely oblivious to this hatred, or just don’t care.

What they desperately need is a positive PR campaign. Of course, the new CEO needs to be competent, But it’s also important that he is likeable and relatable to the fans. And he or she must be a footy person. Gil just always came across as a corporate suit and toff.

Josh Frydenberg is not that likeable and relatable. Not even close.

And I suppose Peggy is useless too?

Useless isn’t a word I would use, but I am most definitely not a fan

Ok let’s run through your suppositions.
1. Brendan Gale inherited the Wantirna club and because he chose not to exit to your acceptable timeframe, it’s a “stain” on his reputation? Do you honestly believe it’s his decision alone and that he would not have the support for this decision from the entire board. Including Peggy?
Then you go and compare our financial performance against other clubs that, until recently, had massive investments in pokies and derived the majority of their revenues through them? I call it prudent financial management although socially unattractive. When the time is right, they’ll exit. Without a stain on them.
The people with better financial acumen than you would also understand the dire financial position we were in as recently as 2013 when we had raging debts, a very disproportionately small, high net worth supporter base compared to other big clubs, only a few loyal sponsors and a medium membership base that still expected results and wouldn’t accept mediocrity ( like bottoming out )
2. Our membership operations are poor? This is simply an outrageous sensationalist claim. Over $100k members for multiple years and clearly number one in recruiting new members. Gale introduced industry leading innovations like hiring a demographer to map out our potential demographic support base and set about marketing directly to them.
The only problem is that success sometimes breeds complacency and many members haven’t renewed their memberships because they feel they’ve been neglected by an “arrogant “ club or that their needs haven’t been sufficiently met. Those people should travel overseas to appreciate how successful clubs grow and how difficult it become to purchase tickets once you become “very” successful.
3. Our sponsorship arrangements are underwhelming? Think you’ll find we’re in the top 3-4 clubs for sponsorship revenue. Enough said.
4. You’re blaming Gale for the AFL’s decision to deny us an early AFLW license? That is an unimaginable stretch. Peggy and a couple of board members actually formed a subcommittee to formulate their strategy and presented it directly to the AFL.
5. Governance disquiet? What does that even mean? Have you been following Cornes or Mark Robinson?
Gale came to the club as CEO when we were a basket case. He put together a plan and judged by any metrics, has been wildly successful.
Suggest you’re taking the pI$$

I don't have the time to reply to this now, but I dead set disagree with this. I'll try to respond in more detail tomorrow. after yesterdays disagreement on another thread, its interesting i find myself generally agreeing with @The Big Richo

 

[St Kevin]

Form all reports this is purely on the AFL. In terms of the club actions what exactly did they do wrong?

Be more persuasive in their presentation? I'd be surprised if something like that was subject to the AFL's dislike of the club and how we have called them out on occasion.

 

[jb03]

Ok let’s run through your suppositions.
1. Brendan Gale inherited the Wantirna club and because he chose not to exit to your acceptable timeframe, it’s a “stain” on his reputation? Do you honestly believe it’s his decision alone and that he would not have the support for this decision from the entire board. Including Peggy?
Then you go and compare our financial performance against other clubs that, until recently, had massive investments in pokies and derived the majority of their revenues through them? I call it prudent financial management although socially unattractive. When the time is right, they’ll exit. Without a stain on them.
The people with better financial acumen than you would also understand the dire financial position we were in as recently as 2013 when we had raging debts, a very disproportionately small, high net worth supporter base compared to other big clubs, only a few loyal sponsors and a medium membership base that still expected results and wouldn’t accept mediocrity ( like bottoming out )
2. Our membership operations are poor? This is simply an outrageous sensationalist claim. Over $100k members for multiple years and clearly number one in recruiting new members. Gale introduced industry leading innovations like hiring a demographer to map out our potential demographic support base and set about marketing directly to them.
The only problem is that success sometimes breeds complacency and many members haven’t renewed their memberships because they feel they’ve been neglected by an “arrogant “ club or that their needs haven’t been sufficiently met. Those people should travel overseas to appreciate how successful clubs grow and how difficult it become to purchase tickets once you become “very” successful.
3. Our sponsorship arrangements are underwhelming? Think you’ll find we’re in the top 3-4 clubs for sponsorship revenue. Enough said.
4. You’re blaming Gale for the AFL’s decision to deny us an early AFLW license? That is an unimaginable stretch. Peggy and a couple of board members actually formed a subcommittee to formulate their strategy and presented it directly to the AFL.
5. Governance disquiet? What does that even mean? Have you been following Cornes or Mark Robinson?
Gale came to the club as CEO when we were a basket case. He put together a plan and judged by any metrics, has been wildly successful.
Suggest you’re taking the pI$$

Not sure if this is reflective of our membership operations but our membership packs are bordering on embarrassing and navigating the membership part of the website is certainly not easy (many don't notice or care as they are on auto-renewal).

 

[tigerman]

4. With Peggy, it was mystifying we didn't have an AFLW team for the inaugural season.

The RFC did put a bid in, but were up against the AFL boys club.

Collingwood were granted one on the inaugural licences in the same week that McGuire offered to pay $50k if anyone held Caroline Wilson under the water at the big freeze, Gill just turned a blind eye.

 

[IanG]

Be more persuasive in their presentation?

How do you know we weren't?

 

[T-Shirt Tommy]

Be more persuasive in their presentation?

Be more persuasive how?
Brown paper bags?
Free hand jobs?

 

[St Kevin]

Be more persuasive how?
Brown paper bags?
Free hand jobs?

I think if we offered the latter, it would have been with a pincer grip!

 

[DavidSSS]

Brendan Gale inherited a basket case - performing badly on and off the field. He, along with others but Gale was the CEO, turned the club around and now we are financially stable and successful. Given his record at Richmond he should clearly be considered for the AFL position, but won't be because the AFL don't want someone from outside their little club of entitled boys.

But, what I would really take issue with is the pokies. Totally agree that we should get out of pokies as soon as we can. But, what have the clubs who have got out of pokies done? Have they reduced the harm that their pokies caused? Not at all. Why? Because they sold the licences and/or venues which had pokies to someone else. Complete cop-out in my opinion. If you get out of pokies but just sell the licences and/or venues to someone else then that is useless. How exactly is allowing another organisation to continue the damage done by pokies having any impact at all? It isn't, it is just washing your hands of the problem and making yourself look good. The serious response would be to hold the licences and not use them. Expensive I know but it would make a big point. While we're at it, we should get together with other clubs and pressure the AFL on sponsorship by gambling companies.

I really see little point in selling the pokie licence, it is just posturing. Has no impact, keep the licence and remove the machines, now that is a statement

DS

 

[Willo]

Brendan Gale inherited a basket case - performing badly on and off the field. He, along with others but Gale was the CEO, turned the club around and now we are financially stable and successful. Given his record at Richmond he should clearly be considered for the AFL position, but won't be because the AFL don't want someone from outside their little club of entitled boys.

But, what I would really take issue with is the pokies. Totally agree that we should get out of pokies as soon as we can. But, what have the clubs who have got out of pokies done? Have they reduced the harm that their pokies caused? Not at all. Why? Because they sold the licences and/or venues which had pokies to someone else. Complete cop-out in my opinion. If you get out of pokies but just sell the licences and/or venues to someone else then that is useless. How exactly is allowing another organisation to continue the damage done by pokies having any impact at all? It isn't, it is just washing your hands of the problem and making yourself look good. The serious response would be to hold the licences and not use them. Expensive I know but it would make a big point. While we're at it, we should get together with other clubs and pressure the AFL on sponsorship by gambling companies.

I really see little point in selling the pokie licence, it is just posturing. Has no impact, keep the licence and remove the machines, now that is a statement

DS

Great post David

 

[The Big Richo]

This is a Board decision not a CEO decision

He sits on the board and no doubt provides plenty of advice to them.

We did nothing wrong. It was purely an AFL decision and entirely out of our hands no matter how impressive our presentation was, but... you know... why deal with reasoning and logic when you can take another cheap shot at our president and CEO?

Sorry, hadn't realised you were in the room when they presented.

Why accept your presentation may have fallen short on merit when you can pop on a tin foil hat and blame an AFL conspiracy?

 

[taztiger4]

Ok let’s run through your suppositions.
1. Brendan Gale inherited the Wantirna club and because he chose not to exit to your acceptable timeframe, it’s a “stain” on his reputation? Do you honestly believe it’s his decision alone and that he would not have the support for this decision from the entire board. Including Peggy?
Then you go and compare our financial performance against other clubs that, until recently, had massive investments in pokies and derived the majority of their revenues through them? I call it prudent financial management although socially unattractive. When the time is right, they’ll exit. Without a stain on them.
The people with better financial acumen than you would also understand the dire financial position we were in as recently as 2013 when we had raging debts, a very disproportionately small, high net worth supporter base compared to other big clubs, only a few loyal sponsors and a medium membership base that still expected results and wouldn’t accept mediocrity ( like bottoming out )
2. Our membership operations are poor? This is simply an outrageous sensationalist claim. Over $100k members for multiple years and clearly number one in recruiting new members. Gale introduced industry leading innovations like hiring a demographer to map out our potential demographic support base and set about marketing directly to them.
The only problem is that success sometimes breeds complacency and many members haven’t renewed their memberships because they feel they’ve been neglected by an “arrogant “ club or that their needs haven’t been sufficiently met. Those people should travel overseas to appreciate how successful clubs grow and how difficult it become to purchase tickets once you become “very” successful.
3. Our sponsorship arrangements are underwhelming? Think you’ll find we’re in the top 3-4 clubs for sponsorship revenue. Enough said.
4. You’re blaming Gale for the AFL’s decision to deny us an early AFLW license? That is an unimaginable stretch. Peggy and a couple of board members actually formed a subcommittee to formulate their strategy and presented it directly to the AFL.
5. Governance disquiet? What does that even mean? Have you been following Cornes or Mark Robinson?
Gale came to the club as CEO when we were a basket case. He put together a plan and judged by any metrics, has been wildly successful.
Suggest you’re taking the pI$$

a great post DA

 

[jb03]

Brendan Gale inherited a basket case - performing badly on and off the field. He, along with others but Gale was the CEO, turned the club around and now we are financially stable and successful. Given his record at Richmond he should clearly be considered for the AFL position, but won't be because the AFL don't want someone from outside their little club of entitled boys.

But, what I would really take issue with is the pokies. Totally agree that we should get out of pokies as soon as we can. But, what have the clubs who have got out of pokies done? Have they reduced the harm that their pokies caused? Not at all. Why? Because they sold the licences and/or venues which had pokies to someone else. Complete cop-out in my opinion. If you get out of pokies but just sell the licences and/or venues to someone else then that is useless. How exactly is allowing another organisation to continue the damage done by pokies having any impact at all? It isn't, it is just washing your hands of the problem and making yourself look good. The serious response would be to hold the licences and not use them. Expensive I know but it would make a big point. While we're at it, we should get together with other clubs and pressure the AFL on sponsorship by gambling companies.

I really see little point in selling the pokie licence, it is just posturing. Has no impact, keep the licence and remove the machines, now that is a statement

DS

Who were our CEO's before ? Apart from the Nike dude I thought they weren't too bad.

 

[Baloo]

Who were our CEO's before ? Apart from the Nike dude I thought they weren't too bad.

Stephen Wright before Benny, who with Gary March rebuilt the foundations that Benny was able to build on.
Campbell & Brayshaw. They were under Clinton Casey. They pretty much steered us onto the highway to the danger zone

 

[AngryAnt]

Brendan Gale inherited a basket case - performing badly on and off the field. He, along with others but Gale was the CEO, turned the club around and now we are financially stable and successful. Given his record at Richmond he should clearly be considered for the AFL position, but won't be because the AFL don't want someone from outside their little club of entitled boys.

But, what I would really take issue with is the pokies. Totally agree that we should get out of pokies as soon as we can. But, what have the clubs who have got out of pokies done? Have they reduced the harm that their pokies caused? Not at all. Why? Because they sold the licences and/or venues which had pokies to someone else. Complete cop-out in my opinion. If you get out of pokies but just sell the licences and/or venues to someone else then that is useless. How exactly is allowing another organisation to continue the damage done by pokies having any impact at all? It isn't, it is just washing your hands of the problem and making yourself look good. The serious response would be to hold the licences and not use them. Expensive I know but it would make a big point. While we're at it, we should get together with other clubs and pressure the AFL on sponsorship by gambling companies.

I really see little point in selling the pokie licence, it is just posturing. Has no impact, keep the licence and remove the machines, now that is a statement

DS

Pokie licences are valid for ten years, then they have to be renewed. If RFC didn't renew, they'd be allocated to someone else - unless you are suggesting RFC keeps renewing in perpetuity.

 

[tigersnake]

He sits on the board and no doubt provides plenty of advice to them.



Sorry, hadn't realised you were in the room when they presented.

Why accept your presentation may have fallen short on merit when you can pop on a tin foil hat and blame an AFL conspiracy?

There is ample evidence that the AFL aren't big fans of Richmond. There is a fine line between conspiracy and non-favoured status, its clearly the latter for me, but you can take your pick. A logical and rational argument can, and has been made. Pundits have commented on it on the record. No tin foil hats needed.

 

[The Big Richo]

There is ample evidence that the AFL aren't big fans of Richmond. There is a fine line between conspiracy and non-favoured status, its clearly the latter for me, but you can take your pick. A logical and rational argument can, and has been made. Pundits have commented on it on the record. No tin foil hats needed.

I'd love to see some of that stuff if you're able to direct me to it.

 

[Dont Argue]

I'd love to see some of that stuff if you're able to direct me to it.

Check out my post in the Steven May thread on how the AFL handled Rioli and Bolton’s misdemeanour vs May and Melksham.
You’d be stunned if I told you some of the anti Richmond sentiment I’ve heard, conveyed to me from the very top. If you care to believe me of course.
It’s real. No ifs or buts

 

[tigersnake]

I'd love to see some of that stuff if you're able to direct me to it.

tried before, its pointless, especially to a man who thinks culture doesn't exist. pundits have regularly said there are 'problems' between Richmond and the AFL for last 2 years. Hocking bringing in stand rule to rein in us, I think you don't buy that so whatever, the Womens side, Caro said at the time we were shafted, Peggy alluded to it but alluded might be a bit subtle right? There are many more individual examples that have been discussed thoughtfully and compellingly on here.

One mans tin foil hat is another mans the AFL just plain don't like us.

 

[tigersnake]

Check out my post in the Steven May thread on how the AFL handled Rioli and Bolton’s misdemeanour vs May and Melksham.
You’d be stunned if I told you some of the anti Richmond sentiment I’ve heard, conveyed to me from the very top. If you care to believe me of course.
It’s real. No ifs or buts

agreed.

 

[Baloo]

The only time I heard Peggy say anything but pleasantries about the AFL was when she was asked about our failed AFLW bid. She was ropable and pretty much said that it was a question of who you were mates with in AFL house rather than the quality of your bid.

Benny backed that up and said we need to do a bit better at lobbying within the inner circle.