PDA

View Full Version : SSI Response to RWO Questions



SSI
13th March 2003, 09:27 PM
Please find the SSI response to the questions raised previously on RWO. This is presented in Q&A format. The questions posed on RWO are listed in bold.

It is intended that some representatives of SSI will attend the Trivia Night next weekend, in a social function. No doubt there will be opportunities for further discussion at this event.

For those who questioned why the anwers could not come immediately, the answer is that SSI is not one person. The group is currently represented by an Interim Committee and it is appropriate that all agree on the responses.

Your website mentions a ?provisional board?. If so, when are the SSI board positions going to be open for election? Will all board positions or only some be open for election? Will Arunas Carl Blandis? position as Chairman be up for election?

The interim committee of SSI will serve until an election is held. ALL interim committee positions including that of interim President will be open for contest by any SSI member in accordance with Part 3-18 of the SSI constitution. Should Arunas Carl Blandis wish to contest the Presidency he is required to observe the same process as any other member of SSI. To answer the specific question, yes, Arunas Carl Blandis? position as President will be open for contest.

The timing of the election is currently planned for 1 May and will be held in accordance with the constitution of SSI.

Why is it your stated aim to get SSI members onto the Swans board, either through election or appointment? Why isn?t it enough to simply get voting rights?

The preferred option is to secure board representation through the election process, this being one of the aims and objectives of SSI. Until this happens the only means of securing board representation is by appointment.

We believe that SSI will become a voice of the members and supporters. We are planning a survey of members and supporters in the near future and will be taking this input to the Club for a response. It is our opinion that a larger group of members is more likely to receive a response and action from the Club than individuals operating alone.

This principle extends to the aim of getting one or more SSI members onto the board. Those members will have access to the views of the SSI membership and be able to state their position. This provides members with an avenue for input to a board member, something which is currently not available.

Does the afore-mentioned stated aim mean that SSI members are expected to vote according to the ?party line??

In the event of the Club opening board positions for election, it is likely that all Swans members will receive a vote. Some Swans members will also be SSI members. SSI will put forward one or more candidates for the board. SSI members are under no compulsion to vote for the SSI candidate(s). It is appropriate to note, however, that SSI would use its membership and mailing list to promote the SSI candidate(s) as this would be in the interests of SSI furthering its objectives.

What actual evidence do you have that you were ?instrumental in getting Paul Roos appointed as coach?? Does this mean that you believe it to be acceptable that fans try to subvert Swans management decisions?

Any club member and supporter has the undeniable right of protest and voicing their displeasure at any decision or handling of an issue, as was the case in the coaching issue. We do not consider this to be an act of subversion.

In the period prior to the appointment of Paul Roos, approximately 1,100 members and supporters chose to voice their protest over the coaching issue by agreeing to petition the club through a coordinated campaign conducted by Arunas Carl Blandis, now of SSI.

We believe that this protest was influential in the appointment of Paul Roos because of comments made to us by both respected press and TV journalists and members of the Swans organisation.

What is SSI policy on voting rights for full Swans members who are under 18 years of age?

The Club has yet to put forward a model for the election of members to its board. However, we would expect that this would allow for voting rights for full Swans members who are 18 years and over at the date of the election. We believe that this is standard practice and would endorse it. If our member survey indicates that the majority of SSI members wish for an alternative approach, then we would take this on board with our communications with the Club.

The SSI website claims that it is a stated aim to assist the Swans in broadening the Club?s membership and support bases. How do you intend to do this?

The opportunity for SSI to increase the Club Membership base by encouraging non-club SSI Members to take up Membership does exist. SSI will support and provide the activities and functions of club related bodies should they be, in its opinion, in the interests of the club, members and supporters.

Already, we have organised a function that resulted in a number of supporters choosing to become members. We are planning further functions and will expand communication through our website and newsletter. We will actively encourage supporters to become members.

?Promote links between Sydney-based and non-Sydney-based supporters of the Sydney Swans? ? what plans are in place for this?

The approach is to ?build bridges? between the diverse membership base of the Club.

Representatives of SSI have met with Melbourne-based supporters of the Swans to understand their issues and concerns with the Club. We have petitioned the Club to provide representation (coaching staff and players) to a Melbourne-based function to celebrate the appointment of Paul Roos. This would have a similar purpose to the cocktail party held in December 2002. Our survey will be soliciting other ways that we can foster links from our members.

We also intend to run functions in Sydney to make interstate visitors to games feel welcome. This initiative has come about through discussions with a number of Melbourne-based members who have indicated interest in SSI.

Apart from voting rights, is SSI planning on encouraging other benefits for members?

SSI will be seeking input from its members as to what issues and benefits we should be discussing with the Club. Depending on the level of agreement with each item raised, we will raise these with the Club.

Our anecdotal feedback is that many members have tried to raise issues with the Club and have been frustrated with the response (or lack thereof). We are attempting to provide some accountability and strength in numbers to progress members? concerns. A good example relates to next week?s Guernsey presentation dinner. Members received an email, offering an ?early bird? price for booking to this function ? however the email arrived after the early bird cut off. We would raise such issues with the Club on our members? behalf.

Given that SSI is committed to (as above) promoting links between the Sydney-siders and interstate members, how will they be involved with the meetings etc. that are held by SSI? Should there be places on the SSI board for interstate representatives?

All members of SSI are eligible to stand for board positions. We have discussed the logistics of an interstate representative and are happy for this to occur.

What specialised expertise can members of the SSI board (in particular Arunas Carl Blandis) bring to the SFC board if they are elected/appointed?

SSI does not have a ?board?. Please refer to the rules of incorporation, available on the website, www.swanssupporters.org. These rules have been lodged with the Department of Fair Trading. Until the AGM, an interim committee has been established.

The interim committee of SSI has representation from the following fields:
- Law
- Public Relations
- Marketing
- Finance
- Administration
- Information Technology
- Management Consulting.

Various of the committee members are currently company directors. Most have tertiary qualifications, both under-graduate and post-graduate. Candidates for the Swans board will publish their specific credentials. Arunas Carl Blandis operates a management accounting practice.

(to be contined)

SSI
13th March 2003, 09:29 PM
Continuing on from the post above.....

What is SSI policy on Victorian members? What would SSI do to ensure a better situation for Victorian members? Would the interests of Victorian members come second to the interests of Sydney-based members, or are Victorian members seen as equal to Sydney-based members? How can Victorian-based members take part in SSI if they were inclined to do so?

SSI recognises all Swans members and supporters and does not have a policy for any particular group. We do recognise the estimated 6,000 loyal supporters in Melbourne as the largest group of supporters outside Sydney. As mentioned previously, we have already forged links with a number of Melbourne members. Their opinions have been included in our current position.

A survey of SSI members is planned for the near future to enable us to approach the Club with specific issues. We would rather wait until we have this feedback before identifying specific items for discussion with the Club. We anticipate that the strength of numbers will allow our petition to receive greater attention than that of individuals. Specific issues relating to Melbourne-based supporters? concerns can be raised in the survey.

Any supporter or member can participate in SSI by taking out membership should they be inclined. It makes no difference as to their location. Communication between SSI members is taking place largely through email, although we do have other mechanisms in place for those who do not have email and internet access.

What is SSI?s view on the "entire" club history including before 1982?

SSI recognises that the Club?s roots lie with the South Melbourne Football Club. Our intention is to focus on the future of the Club and its engagement with all members, regardless of location (or any other characteristic).

What are your favoured options for member voting rights eg 1 spot at a time or all in 1 go?

We believe that a gradual transition to election of the Swans board is appropriate. This would likely involve the election of one or two board members initially.

What plans do you have for Victorian members and fans and what would you like to see done to resolve many of the problems that many in Victoria have with the club in this regard?

A survey of SSI members is planned to enable us to approach the Club with specific issues. We anticipate that the strength of numbers will allow our petition to receive greater attention than that of individuals. Specific issues relating to Melbourne-based supporters? concerns can be raised in the survey.

ACB are you lining yourself up for a run for a seat on the board or are you planning not to run in the interest of fairness?

SSI will endorse one or more candidates for election to the Board of the Swans. At this stage, no-one has been identified as candidates. Arunas Carl Blandis, as a member of SSI, will have the prerogative to offer himself as an SSI candidate.

We are not sure why it would be either fair or unfair for Arunas to stand. Note that this does not imply that he would or would not offer himself as a candidate.

Do you plan any fundraising events to help the club out which is seen in England with supporter clubs which in some cases have help clubs out of financial problems?

This is not on the agenda at present, although if SSI members felt it was appropriate to raise would be considered. We do, however, support any actions relating to fund raising for the Club and would be more than willing to engage with the Club in this area, if it is their desire.

Why SSInc when Swans Supporters Club would sound less like a business and something more like a club for members which I think is the aim?

SSI is an association of members, not a Club. There are specific legal requirements relating to clubs that are not relevant to SSI. Associations are required to be incorporated and it was felt that it was appropriate to make this clear in the name of the body. Please refer to the Rules of incorporation, to be found on the www.swanssupporters.org website. These have been registered (as is required for incorporated membership bodies) with the Department of Fair Trading.

One of the stated aims of SSI is: "The appointment and/or election of SSI members who are Members of the Sydney Swans to the Board of the Sydney Swans". How will SSI do this? By block voting?

In the event of the Club opening board positions for election, it is likely that all Swans members will receive a vote. Some Swans members will also be SSI members. SSI will put forward one or more candidates for the board. SSI members are under no compulsion to vote for the SSI candidate(s). It is appropriate to note, however, that SSI would use its membership and mailing list to promote the SSI candidate(s) as this would be in the interests of SSI furthering its objectives.

Will SSI members stand for election on their own platform or the platform of SSI? If it's SSI's platform then can this be articulated?

The SSI-endorsed candidates for the Swans board would stand on the SSI platform. The platform will be articulated after the SSI member survey has been conducted and the views of members are known.

Will this aim be pursued for the first board election?

Yes.

This stated aim appears in the list before: "Progress towards achieving full voting rights for members to the Board of the Sydney Swans Limited" Isn't this getting the cart before the horse? Wouldn't SSI case for full voting rights for members be stronger if the appointment of SSI members wasn't also on the agenda?

We feel it is appropriate to be upfront about our intentions. Achieving voting rights is the first step, presenting candidate(s) is a second step. We feel it is appropriate to be clear about this. We feel that a person elected to the Board who represents a group such as SSI will have greater accountability to those who have elected him/her. Once voting rights are achieved, we would want to be ready to present a candidate at the first election, so it is appropriate to indicate our objectives now to our members.

Charlie
13th March 2003, 09:43 PM
Thankyou. That's very informative. I don't intend to join, but I feel much more comfortable about the existence of SSI now that some issues have been addressed.

I've got another question, which I realise will be difficult to answer now that the committee meeting is past, but I'll ask anyway... no rush to answer.

If elected, would an SSI endorsed candidate remain a member/representative of SSI, or would it be considered prudent to keep the SFC board and SSI separate?

CureTheSane
13th March 2003, 09:47 PM
As expected that was a lot of words that meant very little.

SSI is...

1. devisive
2. wholey self serving
3. opportunistic

I hope the club keeps their distance from this one.
IMO it has the potential to be one big pain in the ass.

NMWBloods
13th March 2003, 10:13 PM
As expected that was a lot of words that meant very little.

I thought it was just me being cynical when I thought this sounded like a political announcement or someone overdosing on MBA-speak. Good to see I'm not the only one!

treespirit
14th March 2003, 09:43 AM
Still got your cynics hat on, eh, CTS & NMW? :) Are you being open minded or did you make up your mind before their response? I'm not sure what other sort of repsonses anyone could expect to the questions posed. I thought the responses were reasonable - predictable and political, but reasonable nonetheless.

I think everything they have done so far could be interpreted as either self-serving OR acting in the perceived interests of the club, depending on one's chosen bias. I see no solid evidence that either is the actual position, therefore I will stay in the wait and see camp for now.

desredandwhite
14th March 2003, 10:20 AM
I think I'm with TS on this one. They have provided all the "right answers". I don't think much can be intepreted here with what we've got. However it seems, I KNOW that SSI contains people who have their hearts in the right place. I am yet to be convinced that the methods etc are effective, but they're on a pretty clean slate with me for now.

Mike_B
14th March 2003, 10:39 AM
Agree with Des and tree. You can read into the responses in any way you want, and draw your own conclusions (that may support your initial feelings, or may not). But give SSI credit for at least being willing to provide some information, they could very easily have just refused (admittedly doing their credibility no good whatsoever in the eyes of many RWO'ers). Whether their responses are enough to satisfy everyone is another question.

As for me, I'm still yet to make up my mind as to whether what SSI is trying to achieve will be beneficial or divisive. I will just have to wait and see what happens as we go along.

One comment I would like to make though regards the current committee at SSI. I understand that this committee is only temporary and will be up for election soon, but feel that currently, with the group of people involved all being well educated and seemingly successful business people (judging by the response to one of the questions, but without knowing much about the people themselves), SSI really needs to be careful that they do represent ALL Swans supporters, and not just in constitution only.

Right now, to me, it looks a lot like the 'Chardonnay Set' that many people are critical of. While hosting a cocktail party for Paul Roos is a very nice gesture of support, IMHO, it may have exaggerated the feelings of those anti-chardonnay set-minded people.

bricon
14th March 2003, 01:21 PM
I still can?t see the point of SSI. Their main thrust seems to be to achieve a democratically elected board and they wish to be instrumental in shaping the decision ? the club and AFL (the current owners of the license) have stated that this will happen in due course, possibly by the end of this year; so what?s all the chest beating about?

The rest of their manifesto is really ?motherhood? stuff ? supporting the club, broadening the supporter base, building bridges, gathering member feedback, better deal for Victorian members etc. The club and coterie groups already perform all of these functions; that?s not to say that improvements could be made or that some of these matters may have been neglected by the club in the past.

To re-iterate; the Swans will become a true membership based club with a democratically elected board, probably within a year or two. The current owners will decide on the timing, the posturing of groups like SSI will have no bearing on that decision. The other stuff that they (SSI) spruik is really meaningless fluff ? they?re just a social group with pretensions of grandeur.

CureTheSane
14th March 2003, 01:43 PM
I got the answers I expected, and I did view them with an open mind.

But like bricon said, I don't see the point.

Thier objectives are already being dealt with by the club in some way, so one tends to look for other reasons for the existence of SSI.

Right now, they mean nothing to me, nothing more to say.
I'll just sit by and waych how it unfolds, but personally I expect them to pretty much flop.
I'd say that by this time next year they are pretty much gone.

That is the whole point.

They don't really have any objectives that won't be dealt with by the club, and people will realise this when they realise that becoming involved with SSI does not make them a better or more passionate supporter.

SWANSBEST
14th March 2003, 04:28 PM
A QUESTION FOR BRICON.

You mentioned that "THE CURRENT OWNERS "etc . It is my understanding that the Club is not owned by any one individual or private group and is a member based club with ultimate control residing in the hands of the AFL. ie the power to appoint Directors is with the AFL. I may be wrong on these points but maybe you or someone else could advise me .

bricon
14th March 2003, 05:01 PM
AFAIK the AFL currently owns all of the voting shares (and the license) of the SFC.

chammond
14th March 2003, 08:32 PM
I think bricon is pretty right. The Swans aren't privately held, but nor are they a member-based club. I believe they are directly owned and controlled by the AFL commission, and club management is directly answerable to them.

Anyhow, as far as SSI goes, I think it was unreasonable to expect anything but the responses we got. By putting the questions to a committee, it guaranteed that we would only get wordy rhetoric sent back.

However, they have been consistent in their objectives and in their approach. I'm still prepared to sit on the fence and wait and see what happens . . . as far as I'm concerned, words are cheap - it's actions that count.

Probably the most significant outcome is that SSI are now aware that they are being watched very closely by their "constituency". We should be prepared to applaud every positive outcome, and if we don't like what's going on . . . well we've got a ready-made forum for expressing our displeasure!

robbieando
15th March 2003, 02:38 PM
I'm happy with the answers but I don't like the fact thge group is trying to get its "own" on the club board. I'm all for member representation but a group for members with the aim to getting positions on the board doesn't sit well with me.