Letter from Peter De Rauch

[linnaeus]

My family received letters from Peter de Rauch today re the AGM. I suggest that you treat this carefully. Reading between the lines I think he is challenging Mark Brayshaw. I may be wrong and it may be that the letter etc is inelegantly written. I intend to do nothing about the letter until I get the intentions confirmed. I have no difficulty with him challenging for a Board position, but I do have difficulty if this is not clearly stated. Timing of the letter is also a bit as Admin are pretty much on leave.strange

 

[Event Horizon]

Can you scan the letter and post it here?

 

[Handsome.B.Wonderful]

My family received letters from Peter de Rauch today re the AGM. I suggest that you treat this carefully. Reading between the lines I think he is challenging Mark Brayshaw. I may be wrong and it may be that the letter etc is inelegantly written. I intend to do nothing about the letter until I get the intentions confirmed. I have no difficulty with him challenging for a Board position, but I do have difficulty if this is not clearly stated. Timing of the letter is also a bit as Admin are pretty much on leave.strange

I don't think Peter has much choice but to oppose either MB or O'Hoy after the board chose not to replace Ron Joeseph.

Actually there is a strong belief that JB (and the board) chose to continue on without replacing RJ with the intention of keeping PDR off the board. Not sure what the history is between Peter and JB is.

 

[Event Horizon]

Not sure what could be so detrimental about having PdR run for the the board. A loyal supporter over many years, with money the club could benefit from vs a part time "new" supporter like O'Hoy, isn't necessarily an easy choice to make, I would have thought.

 

[Jonnoo]

A proxy form handing over voting rights to PDR was also included with letter above.

Easier to read link below...

http://i607.photobucket.com/albums/tt158/jonnoo/CCF23122010_00000.jpg

Pretty clear he is opposing Mark B.

 

[Tas]

He says, "I would like to add my abilities to strengthen the board and with dedication and hard work, look forward to the opportunity to work together with James Brayshaw and Trevor O'Hoy."

The three positions up for re-election are Trevor O'Hoy, James Brayshaw and Mark Brayshaw.

You do not need to be a rocket scientist to connect the dots, only one name is missing from his letter.

I'd like to hear from the club in terms of what each candidate brings to the table and which other people have nominated to run.

I have mixed feelings about Peter on the board, I have no reservations at all in terms of dedication to the club and what he has done for the club, but he also sat on the board at a time the club was handled quite poorly off-field.

With Ron out I don't mind having another strong pro-Melbourne voice on the board but we also need people who have fresh ideas and people that can get things done on the board.

I am disappointed with the candidates up for review, most of the names up for re-election are the guys the members elected the last time we had a vote. I'd prefer to be given the option of re-electing the guys that have been on the board a long time via the shareholder kickback scheme because I wouldn't lose any sleep in booting out a pro-GC board member for a pro-Melbournian.

 

[linnaeus]

I have no difficulty as I said with Peter De Rauch running. I have great difficulty with handing over a signed proxy form as he asks us to do without a clear statement of who he is running against and how the proxy form will be used. It is, I would have thought, a tad unethical.Read the entire letter and proxy forms and make up your own mind.

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

I would like to see PDR back involved ta board level and if Mark B makes way for that, I see a net benefit for the club.

 

[trevagreene]

is Perko willing to throw his hat into the mix ?

 

[toepoker]

How do you think JB would view this & how cohesively could he work with the current board?

 

[kangalover]

I don't think Peter has much choice but to oppose either MB or O'Hoy after the board chose not to replace Ron Joeseph.

Actually there is a strong belief that JB (and the board) chose to continue on without replacing RJ with the intention of keeping PDR off the board. Not sure what the history is between Peter and JB is.

Spot on Handsome.

In my opinion the current board prefers autocracy to democracy.
PDR has put up with a lot of nonsense during his tenure as a board member in the past, so he knows what it takes and what he is in for.


PDR would be an excellent addition to the board. We need to have a member elected representative and he is the man. There is currently no member elected representative and in my opinion I think the current board would prefer to keep it this way.

I trust PDR in respect of anything to do with our beloved club, the man loves it with his heart and soul, and at many times, his wallet.

 

[gokangas]

Spot on Handsome.

In my opinion the current board prefers autocracy to democracy.
PDR has put up with a lot of nonsense during his tenure as a board member in the past, so he knows what it takes and what he is in for.


PDR would be an excellent addition to the board. We need to have a member elected representative and he is the man. There is currently no member elected representative and in my opinion I think the current board would prefer to keep it this way.

I trust PDR in respect of anything to do with our beloved club, the man loves it with his heart and soul, and at many times, his wallet.

Couldn't have put it better myself. One vote here for Peter De Rauch.

 

[jschwag]

I was disgusted that the board chose to protect Fulvio Inserra and Stephen Head. Those two were the most amenable, shall we say, to us moving to Queensland. The three least likely to be dumped have been put up for election to attempt to maintain status quo on the board!

If I wasn't already a supporter of DeRauch, I would vote for him just on principal! I won't hand over my proxy, but I'll attend the AGM and make my vote count. I'll also be looking forward to the election when we can get rid of board members that are 'protected'. They deserve a backlash for this!!

Not happy, Jan!!

 

[Devil Fish]

Buddy Holly = The Day

 

[Mr Reliable]

I was disgusted that the board chose to protect Fulvio Inserra and Stephen Head. Those two were the most amenable, shall we say, to us moving to Queensland. The three least likely to be dumped have been put up for election to attempt to maintain status quo on the board!

If I wasn't already a supporter of DeRauch, I would vote for him just on principal! I won't hand over my proxy, but I'll attend the AGM and make my vote count. I'll also be looking forward to the election when we can get rid of board members that are 'protected'. They deserve a backlash for this!!

Not happy, Jan!!

Why do you think they are protected, J? Is it because they were shareholders?

 

[Tas]

Why do you think they are protected, J? Is it because they were shareholders?

My gut feel is that it was part of the agreement to hand over the shares. I guess they would like an opportunity to prove that they could perform in a proactive and well run administration.

I think a lot of people were sucked in by the pro-relocationists, some honestly believed there was no other alternative with a bleak future with a hostile AFL. I do believe they acted with the best interest of the club at heart, but I believe they were misguided by others who prefer to make a name for themselves than care about the club that has existed long before their time and should long after.

I'm open to giving the guys a chance that didn't flee like rats when the GC ship sunk, so am trying to keep an open mind, at least trying to.

 

[Wrath]

If the three didnt put themselves up for re-election then they would be criticised for hiding away from member voting.

The club should allow each candidate to present their thoughts, charter and reasons as to why they should get the member vote so that everyone can make some sort of informed decision on who they vote for. The website would be the ideal forum.

There is an old saying, if ain't broken, there there is no need to fix it. This would apply for the board, if you feel things are going well given the climate the guys have had to deal with over the past year or two, then you vote yes, if you feel they let you down, then you vote no....pretty simple equation. It shouldnt come down to a popularity vote, it should be based on acheivements and the future against the potential achievements of a new candidate.

Fresh blood is great, but nothing beats a united board with a clear charter of where they are taking the club with the endorsement of the members. I would hate for the on-field momentum we are building to be railroaded by off field politics which would unstabilise the Board.

I don't any of the candidates but l would like to know more about them each and their thoughts on why we should vote them. All l want for Xmas is for the North Melbourne Club to remain united and on the path it is treking.

Wrath

 

[gokangas]

The club should allow each candidate to present their thoughts, charter and reasons as to why they should get the member vote so that everyone can make some sort of informed decision on who they vote for. The website would be the ideal forum.

I like that idea. Not sure what the usual protocol is when there is an election.

 

[The OBSTacle]

What's the problem with Mark Brayshaw?

 

[ThePezDispenser]

Hard to vote without having a full understanding of each candidate and their current intentions.

 

[kangalover]

What's the problem with Mark Brayshaw?

Was not member elected. Nor are any of the other board members.
In my opinion that is why they want to keep the current members unopposed because if there is opposition it will have to come from the members.
Easy for the board to keep the status quo of the existing board but not sure if that is a good thing now that the members have a say in electing board members.

 

[True North]

Dear Eugene,

Who do I vote for? I trust your judgement completely. PM me your selection and I will humbly serve.

On a side note, is PDR a White Knight? I see the Hawthorn address plus he was a shareholder. Throw a Million to the club and you can have both Brayshaw jobs plus Shane Harvey's.

 

[Bigeasy]

I got the letter today and while I like PDR, the letter is scant in detail. The timing is also suss. I smell something fishy going on. May defer giving PDR the proxy and turn up to the AGM in person.

 

[Mr Reliable]

Dear Eugene,

Who do I vote for? I trust your judgement completely. PM me your selection and I will humbly serve.

On a side note, is PDR a White Knight? I see the Hawthorn address plus he was a shareholder. Throw a Million to the club and you can have both Brayshaw jobs plus Shane Harvey's.

I don't know any of the candidates or what they stand for but several posters who I highly respect (KL, SLF, JS and GK) have endorsed PDR. Not sure about EH's position.....

That's just about good enough for me given the information vacuum so far.

It is early days and if there's going to be an election I'd be surprised if the candidates don't try to win my vote.

 

[kangalover]

I got the letter today and while I like PDR, the letter is scant in detail. The timing is also suss. I smell something fishy going on. May defer giving PDR the proxy and turn up to the AGM in person.

The only thing smelly fishy is that the current board want to continue unopposed