Sturt Football Club AGM

[csbowes]

-=* UPDATE *=-

I've since had a chat with Matt Benson, General Manager, Sturt Football Club about the club's relationship with Mr. House as both an individual and as a major sponsor. I must say I'm glad to report that the club and Mr. House have spoken about their differences of opinion on the Port Adelaide Football Club proposal and while they may not see eye to eye on everything, word from Matt is that there is no animosity between Mr. House and the club. In fact, to the contrary, Matt reports that the club has had a sensational time with Mr. House.

My words, not Matt's, maybe this was just a one off?

For those of you who know Matt, I think there'll be nods of agreement out there when I say that Matt has always been a professional and a straight shooter when it comes to how he represents the club and what he reports to members, so I've no reason to doubt the man. It seems that on the night, maybe there was still some sensitivity about the issue and some inappropriate words were said. I still stand by what I said previously, what was said was out of line and certainly didn't cover the man in glory in front of members and supporters alike.

However, I should probably be fair and say apart from this particular outburst, it would be remiss of me to not recognise what I had been told previously by others and that is that Mr. House is a substantial backer of the club, has handed out jobs left, right and centre to recruits and that I think we'd all agree is exactly the type of sponsor we all want our clubs to have. I don't want this to appear like I'm changing tack or whatever, but maybe after a moment of reflection, I feel the guy may deserve a break... for the public to decide I suppose.

Anyway, point is it was important to hear from the horses mouth, in this case Matt's, what the situation was on the ground and I suppose for any concerned fans out there, worried that Sturt may be heading down the road of losing a major sponsor, it appears that as far as the club is concerned, that's not anywhere near the case and to the contrary they can't sing Mr. House's praises enough when it comes to digging deep to help the club. So on that note, purely as a Sturt supporter, one has to be pleased. So clap, clap if the club has smoothed this out.

[Wedgie]

Just for the record mate, I just read your first post and it was brought up (by me) when it happened in one of the Magpies thread as we were already discussing the rumour of Sturt's major sponsor not being happy with the decision in that thread.
http://www.safooty.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=26737&hilit=agm

[csbowes]

Just for the record mate, I just read your first post and it was brought up (by me) when it happened in one of the Magpies thread as we were already discussing the rumour of Sturt's major sponsor not being happy with the decision in that thread.
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=26737&hilit=agm

Ahh well all kudos to you... <bows before the oracle>

[Wedgie]

Just for the record mate, I just read your first post and it was brought up (by me) when it happened in one of the Magpies thread as we were already discussing the rumour of Sturt's major sponsor not being happy with the decision in that thread.
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=26737&hilit=agm

Ahh well all kudos to you... <bows before the oracle>

I was just addressing the point that you were surprised when it already had been discussed at length, I thought you were interested and my like to see the discussion. I was obviously wrong.
Sorry.

[Edward Teach]

Sounds like Sturt need to get rid of House ASAP. Massive conflict of interest there for a start. He has zero place in making a comment on SFC business decision in terms of the Port merger.

His threat and tone did not go unnoticed.

We need 100% Sturt people only - not businessmen making an each-way bet.

Good wrap up and well done for sticking up for the club.

[smithy]

Sounds like all is good, thanks for the info csbowes.
Everyone makes mistakes and sometimes all the good work a person does can go un-noticed by a simple outburst.
Glad you brought up the good work Mr House also does for the players and club so people don't get the impression he's just a trouble maker.

Edward Teach - Did you read the post properly ?
If so I'm surprised you still think that way.

Mr House has been a terrific backer of the sturt footy club and got a bit heated at the AGM on an sensitive issue.
One thing footy does and that's bring out the emotions, and if Mr House could have his time again he would probably go about it a different way.
Sponsors of his generosity mentioned by csbowes don't grow on trees, give the guy a break, he made 1 mistake, big deal, it's all in the past.

[Barto]

Sounds like Sturt need to get rid of House ASAP.

It's either that or accept his eccentricities. I dont think anyone agrees with his stance at the AGM over an external issue but we'd be cutting off our noses to spite our faces if we told the bloke to eff off.

At the end of the day, it's a ringing endorsement for the current board that it was handled professionally from their point of view and they didn't bend to his will.

I'd be more concerned if I was a Port Power supporter.

[csbowes]

Just for the record mate, I just read your first post and it was brought up (by me) when it happened in one of the Magpies thread as we were already discussing the rumour of Sturt's major sponsor not being happy with the decision in that thread.
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=26737&hilit=agm

Ahh well all kudos to you... <bows before the oracle>

I was just addressing the point that you were surprised when it already had been discussed at length, I thought you were interested and my like to see the discussion. I was obviously wrong.
Sorry.

Hey! ... there was a smiley there! I was being complimentary, not sarcastic!

[beenreal]

Sounds like Sturt need to get rid of House ASAP.

It's either that or accept his eccentricities. I dont think anyone agrees with his stance at the AGM over an external issue but we'd be cutting off our noses to spite our faces if we told the bloke to eff off.

At the end of the day, it's a ringing endorsement for the current board that it was handled professionally from their point of view and they didn't bend to his will.

I'd be more concerned if I was a Port Power supporter.

I'm sure I'll find the basis for that comment absolutely fascinating, not to mention insightful?

[Voice]

Sounds like Sturt need to get rid of House ASAP.

It's either that or accept his eccentricities. I dont think anyone agrees with his stance at the AGM over an external issue but we'd be cutting off our noses to spite our faces if we told the bloke to eff off.

At the end of the day, it's a ringing endorsement for the current board that it was handled professionally from their point of view and they didn't bend to his will.

I'd be more concerned if I was a Port Power supporter.

I'm sure I'll find the basis for that comment absolutely fascinating, not to mention insightful?

Because you're always running at a loss maybe?

[Barto]

Sounds like Sturt need to get rid of House ASAP.

It's either that or accept his eccentricities. I dont think anyone agrees with his stance at the AGM over an external issue but we'd be cutting off our noses to spite our faces if we told the bloke to eff off.

At the end of the day, it's a ringing endorsement for the current board that it was handled professionally from their point of view and they didn't bend to his will.

I'd be more concerned if I was a Port Power supporter.

I'm sure I'll find the basis for that comment absolutely fascinating, not to mention insightful?

Because you're always running at a loss maybe?

That would be the one. Just because House has money, doesn't mean he's a good businessman.

[beenreal]

Yep, it's unbelievable that a club pouring $12M annually into the SANFL coffers can still manage to post a loss. Thank goodness the magnanimous SANFL give a small portion of that money back as a "handout".

[UK Fan]

Yep, it's unbelievable that a club pouring $12M annually into the SANFL coffers can still manage to post a loss. Thank goodness the magnanimous SANFL give a small portion of that money back as a "handout".

When Port Adelaide own AAMI stadium you can keep the cash. See if Pickard will build you your own stadium.

Until then. Its just the standard lease agreement like any other venue hire Im afraid.

Another thing I think port will struggle to buy ever again. Respect.

Well done to Sturt FC.

[Voice]

Yep, it's unbelievable that a club pouring $12M annually into the SANFL coffers can still manage to post a loss. Thank goodness the magnanimous SANFL give a small portion of that money back as a "handout".

When Port Adelaide own AAMI stadium you can keep the cash. See if Pickard will build you your own stadium.

Until then. Its just the standard lease agreement like any other venue hire Im afraid.

Another thing I think port will struggle to buy ever again. Respect.

Well done to Sturt FC.

Btw, I'm getting sick of agreeing with you UK, can't wait until Sturt play the Dogs so we can fire up at eachother again

[beenreal]

Yep, it's unbelievable that a club pouring $12M annually into the SANFL coffers can still manage to post a loss. Thank goodness the magnanimous SANFL give a small portion of that money back as a "handout".

When Port Adelaide own AAMI stadium you can keep the cash. See if Pickard will build you your own stadium.

Until then. Its just the standard lease agreement like any other venue hire Im afraid.

Another thing I think port will struggle to buy ever again. Respect.

Well done to Sturt FC.

Really UK? So it's the same agreement that West Coast and Fremantle endure? The West Coast FC with the same crowd figures as the AFC, the same revenue figures as the AFC, the same profit figures as the AFC.... oh wait, West Coast posted a $4M profit in 2009, while the AFC posted $900K. All because of their respective stadium deals.

But good to see you putting some research into your posting UK.

[Voice]

Yep, it's unbelievable that a club pouring $12M annually into the SANFL coffers can still manage to post a loss. Thank goodness the magnanimous SANFL give a small portion of that money back as a "handout".

When Port Adelaide own AAMI stadium you can keep the cash. See if Pickard will build you your own stadium.

Until then. Its just the standard lease agreement like any other venue hire Im afraid.

Another thing I think port will struggle to buy ever again. Respect.

Well done to Sturt FC.

Really UK? So it's the same agreement that West Coast and Fremantle endure? The West Coast FC with the same crowd figures as the AFC, the same revenue figures as the AFC, the same profit figures as the AFC.... oh wait, West Coast posted a $4M profit in 2009, while the AFC posted $900K. All because of their respective stadium deals.

But good to see you putting some research into your posting UK.

Did your club agree to it. You can't have a lease contract without both sides negotiating. Your club agreed so stop whining FFS. You seem to be the only one thats still going with this sooking. Beenreal, time to get real.

[Voice]

BTW, The Crows only posted 900k because of them pouring money into the new facility. Research, maybe do some of your own.

[UK Fan]

Yep, it's unbelievable that a club pouring $12M annually into the SANFL coffers can still manage to post a loss. Thank goodness the magnanimous SANFL give a small portion of that money back as a "handout".

When Port Adelaide own AAMI stadium you can keep the cash. See if Pickard will build you your own stadium.

Until then. Its just the standard lease agreement like any other venue hire Im afraid.

Another thing I think port will struggle to buy ever again. Respect.

Well done to Sturt FC.

Really UK? So it's the same agreement that West Coast and Fremantle endure? The West Coast FC with the same crowd figures as the AFC, the same revenue figures as the AFC, the same profit figures as the AFC.... oh wait, West Coast posted a $4M profit in 2009, while the AFC posted $900K. All because of their respective stadium deals.

But good to see you putting some research into your posting UK.

WHat a Brilliantly researched Point Been Real. Move to Subiaco if you think it will help your club.

Let me guess. You want the same deal as subiaco but you arent willing to move away from AAMI and The shed. Anybody else not surprised.

Let me also go out on a limb and suggest its the SANFL and the 8 SANFL clubs fault you cant get everything you want.

Maybe if you didnt have the lowest home attendance in the league and actually had die hard supporters you would make $$$$ ??? Crazy talk.

Oh well good to see your flimsy we make the SANFL $12 mill crap stopped in one post. Next youll claim the West Lakes council owes you cos they make extra money for car parking when your games are on. And the local businesses owe you a %%% of increased profits from game day.

Been Real continuing to make it up as he goes along for 4 months and counting.

Burying any semblance of respect his old club had. Love it.

[dedja]

Great reporting and followup csbowes ...

[beenreal]

Yep, it's unbelievable that a club pouring $12M annually into the SANFL coffers can still manage to post a loss. Thank goodness the magnanimous SANFL give a small portion of that money back as a "handout".

When Port Adelaide own AAMI stadium you can keep the cash. See if Pickard will build you your own stadium.

Until then. Its just the standard lease agreement like any other venue hire Im afraid.

Another thing I think port will struggle to buy ever again. Respect.

Well done to Sturt FC.

Really UK? So it's the same agreement that West Coast and Fremantle endure? The West Coast FC with the same crowd figures as the AFC, the same revenue figures as the AFC, the same profit figures as the AFC.... oh wait, West Coast posted a $4M profit in 2009, while the AFC posted $900K. All because of their respective stadium deals.

But good to see you putting some research into your posting UK.

WHat a Brilliantly researched Point Been Real. Move to Subiaco if you think it will help your club.

Let me guess. You want the same deal as subiaco but you arent willing to move away from AAMI and The shed. Anybody else not surprised.

Let me also go out on a limb and suggest its the SANFL and the 8 SANFL clubs fault you cant get everything you want.

Maybe if you didnt have the lowest home attendance in the league and actually had die hard supporters you would make $$$$ ??? Crazy talk.

Oh well good to see your flimsy we make the SANFL $12 mill crap stopped in one post. Next youll claim the West Lakes council owes you money cos they make extra money for car parking when your games are on. And the local businesses owe you a %%% of profits from game day.

Been Real continuing to make it up as he goes along for 4 months and counting.

Burying any semblance of respect his old club had. Love it.

It's just one mindless cliche' after another with you UK.

Funny, I thought Port Adelaide actually wanted to move to Adelaide Oval?

$12M is FACT. Look it up.

When Geelong attract 22,000 to Kardinia Park they pocket $500K. When Port get the same crowd they owe the SANFL $100K+

But apparently Port have the lowest attendance in the League, and I'm the one making stuff up.