- Joined
- Aug 1, 2012
- Messages
- 19,619
- Reaction score
- 16,715
Is there actually anyone putting themselves forward to replace them?
As The Who says:
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss
As The Who says:
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss
The mil a year was just media bullshit to put it on the players who cost us it. Was no where near it and even a lot less than the apparent current 500k deal.Just my humble opinion on the sponsorship arrangement. Rashays was a mil a year and laundys 500k. Whilst there's obviously an initial dollar discrepancy upfront, a hotel chain versus a restaurant chain without the same diversity and number of patrons a hotel would have, I feel in the long run it's a better deal. The bulldog brand would get more exposure. The owner himself is more active in his passion for the team he's sponsoring. How much say he has time will tell. I don't mind the idea of him personally going to the country to entice Staines and Burton's parents. This is bringing some old fashioned family persuasion back to the way things where done at the club and provided long time success. A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush.
Great post and I’m in exactly the same position and will do the same thing.I am a football club member. I didn't sign the document. I will ask you guys this:
Why did Ballesty and Anderson fail to tell the other Board members about Ballesty's financial interest in the Laundy Group? Does good corporate governance require disclosure of such a material fact?
Remember the pressure they were under to find a sponsor. If you believe the media articles a zero payment by the Laundy Group in 2020 and $500K next year. Is that a good deal? Do we have the right to seek answers?
Why didn't the Chair seek the approval of her elected board? Isn't it up to the Chair to promote and seek harmony or is it the role of the Chair to dictate what the board should do without seeking agreement based on the principal of "majority rules"?
You do know she wanted to resign Pay!!
Just some food for thought.
If an EGM is called I will attend to listen to the arguments of both sides. I will make a decision at that time.
Pull up. Don't be an Alexander the knob.
Thats your opinion my friend. He was Macedonian in my honest opinion.Yeah, but Alexander the Great was Greek.
Sorry here nasheed. Need to debate you on this thought.Given this is a rugby forum with rugby fans.
Perhaps we can make it a Souths forum for the next month?
Everyone's second team, in the hunt for a title. Makes more sense than an English (or sw sydney) soccer team.
No it wasn't, the Bulldogs admin was quoted as saying $1mil as were numerous sources.The mil a year was just media bullshit to put it on the players who cost us it. Was no where near it and even a lot less than the apparent current 500k deal.
Not to make it political and I won't say anymore after this, but he was Greek Macedonian. Not from a Slavic background.Pp
Thats your opinion my friend. He was Macedonian in my honest opinion.
The 10% only create a vote which I think needs 75% of votes favour to pass which I read on the I may wrong.Wow! If all it takes is less than 10% of voting members to bring about an EGM that would be the first thing I'd be changing. To leave it this easy to cause disruption is a recipe for future upheaval.
Time will tell.So now they have handed in their little demand note, are they going to have the balls to suggest who the three are to replace them ? Or are they going to wait until the EGM to introduce their "big" surprise......
That's right. But what happens if only 500 members show up to vote? I assume you will only need a percentage of the 500 to oust the 3.If I remember rightly it's not a simple majority, maybe 2/3rd's of the votes?
Go Dogs
If you are a sponsor who loves the club and puts their hard earned cash into it, don't you think you would want the club to be successful so you ate getting a return on your investment?"The coup is believed to have been driven by one of the club's primary sponsors,"
If its one of the clubs primary sponsors it can't be that hard to identify which one and ask the question why? Why would a sponsor devalue their own investment by bringing the club back to its knees as its trying to get up? Makes zero business sense to me. And if the sponsor is reckless enough to de-value their own investment, it hardly qualifies them to be part of running the club.
If the coup fails and the sponsor is identified, would you want to see the current board cut ties with them? I realise it's a no win situation for the club, but it has to make a stand and send a message about who's in charge at Belmore!
They would be replaced and the new board would remain until Feb 2022 when the next Vote would take place. If the new board fails they will be voted out in Feb 2022.Also sya they go.
What happens then?
Who replaces them?
And if they are replaced will that just cause more trouble with the remaining board members?
The article does not give names of who is running this and who will be in their places.
But who are the replacements going to be?They would be replaced and the new board would remain until Feb 2022 when the next Vote would take place. If the new board fails they will be voted out in Feb 2022.
I THINK it's a ploy to back away at any point with full anonymityBut who are the replacements going to be?
Why won't they say?