TOPIC:

My two penny's worth on this is that, this has been a debacle from day dot, probably feb this year.

The WAFC and WP should have talked more about their respective intentions and the progress of the negotiations for both the broadcast and the sponsorship. The WAFC as the controlling body should have made demand about all clubs sponsorship deals and progress given they were going to a commecial broadcaster. The issue there is that when we have amateurs running a 'business'then we all need to be careful. Perhaps the presidents needed to exercise some influence..

WP and raponi needed to be more aware of the issues at the time and understood that if their preferred broadcaster and sponsor did not get the gig then perhaps they need to have a plan b. Similarly the WAFC needed to have a plan b!

As for the recent issues again amateurs doing business and I include raponi in that comment, look for an outcome that stopped the damage to the WAFL. And they didn't they all stood on their collective values and forgot that in business you need to be ble to compromise to get an outcome that places the WAFL, an already damaged fruit, in a better light.

Is it a good result , perhaps and perhaps not. Time will tell when we have next season and who does the right thing.

If I was the president of wp I would be talking to nine about continuing the variety thing and suggesting that the broadcaster do something similar with their sponsorship with the telefon institute being the sponsorship of the wafl. Perhaps each club could pick a charity to wear as their sponsor.

Leedy wrote:

Clear-View wrote: West Perth were always going to back down. They'd backed themselves into a corner and had no way out other than to remove the 9 logo.

Raponi has made himself look like a fool.... and not for the first time.

Delusional dumb shit Clear View, why the fuck do you reckon the WAFC paid $25K toward Variety ????

A gesture of good will after WP's massive back down going from

1. We're not removing the 9 logo, to
2. We'll make it smaller, to
3. We'll remove it.

Talk about pathetic You need to remove your red & blue glasses to see what a dick your club has made of itself.

P.S. Be interesting to see if the commission cuts/reduces grants to WP next season.

Grump wrote: My two penny's worth on this is that, this has been a debacle from day dot, probably feb this year.

The WAFC and WP should have talked more about their respective intentions and the progress of the negotiations for both the broadcast and the sponsorship. The WAFC as the controlling body should have made demand about all clubs sponsorship deals and progress given they were going to a commecial broadcaster. The issue there is that when we have amateurs running a 'business'then we all need to be careful. Perhaps the presidents needed to exercise some influence..

WP and raponi needed to be more aware of the issues at the time and understood that if their preferred broadcaster and sponsor did not get the gig then perhaps they need to have a plan b. Similarly the WAFC needed to have a plan b!

As for the recent issues again amateurs doing business and I include raponi in that comment, look for an outcome that stopped the damage to the WAFL. And they didn't they all stood on their collective values and forgot that in business you need to be ble to compromise to get an outcome that places the WAFL, an already damaged fruit, in a better light.

Is it a good result , perhaps and perhaps not. Time will tell when we have next season and who does the right thing.

If I was the president of wp I would be talking to nine about continuing the variety thing and suggesting that the broadcaster do something similar with their sponsorship with the telefon institute being the sponsorship of the wafl. Perhaps each club could pick a charity to wear as their sponsor.

Grump at the time West Perth signed their sponsorship deal with Channel 9 the WAFL was being broadcast by the ABC and there was NO contract between the WAFC and Channel 7.

Clear-View wrote:

Leedy wrote:

Clear-View wrote: West Perth were always going to back down. They'd backed themselves into a corner and had no way out other than to remove the 9 logo.

Raponi has made himself look like a fool.... and not for the first time.

Delusional dumb shit Clear View, why the fuck do you reckon the WAFC paid $25K toward Variety ????

A gesture of good will after WP's massive back down going from

1. We're not removing the 9 logo, to
2. We'll make it smaller, to
3. We'll remove it.

Talk about pathetic You need to remove your red & blue glasses to see what a dick your club has made of itself.

P.S. Be interesting to see if the commission cuts/reduces grants to WP next season.

Clear-view have you provided the information Paul Douglas requested re your assertion ATO and WAFC assistance to Swans?

swan42 wrote:

Clear-View wrote:

Leedy wrote:

Clear-View wrote: West Perth were always going to back down. They'd backed themselves into a corner and had no way out other than to remove the 9 logo.

Raponi has made himself look like a fool.... and not for the first time.

Delusional dumb shit Clear View, why the fuck do you reckon the WAFC paid $25K toward Variety ????

A gesture of good will after WP's massive back down going from

1. We're not removing the 9 logo, to
2. We'll make it smaller, to
3. We'll remove it.

Talk about pathetic You need to remove your red & blue glasses to see what a dick your club has made of itself.

P.S. Be interesting to see if the commission cuts/reduces grants to WP next season.

Clear-view have you provided the information Paul Douglas requested re your assertion ATO and WAFC assistance to Swans?

Hey Swannie what happened to your much vaunted ROT legal action if Wpfc had to remove their sponsors logo? Do you get your legal advice from Clive Palmer?

Clear-View wrote:

Leedy wrote:

Clear-View wrote: West Perth were always going to back down. They'd backed themselves into a corner and had no way out other than to remove the 9 logo.

Raponi has made himself look like a fool.... and not for the first time.

Delusional dumb shit Clear View, why the fuck do you reckon the WAFC paid $25K toward Variety ????

A gesture of good will after WP's massive back down going from

1. We're not removing the 9 logo, to
2. We'll make it smaller, to
3. We'll remove it.

Talk about pathetic You need to remove your red & blue glasses to see what a dick your club has made of itself.

P.S. Be interesting to see if the commission cuts/reduces grants to WP next season.

Clear View , has a clear view and is spot on.

25K a handy little tax deduction for the wafc! Which they probably donate every year anyway to charity and ch 9 get their logo removed ch 7 win the day.

How dumb are the numpties on here.

swan42 wrote:

Grump wrote: My two penny's worth on this is that, this has been a debacle from day dot, probably feb this year.

The WAFC and WP should have talked more about their respective intentions and the progress of the negotiations for both the broadcast and the sponsorship. The WAFC as the controlling body should have made demand about all clubs sponsorship deals and progress given they were going to a commecial broadcaster. The issue there is that when we have amateurs running a 'business'then we all need to be careful. Perhaps the presidents needed to exercise some influence..

WP and raponi needed to be more aware of the issues at the time and understood that if their preferred broadcaster and sponsor did not get the gig then perhaps they need to have a plan b. Similarly the WAFC needed to have a plan b!

As for the recent issues again amateurs doing business and I include raponi in that comment, look for an outcome that stopped the damage to the WAFL. And they didn't they all stood on their collective values and forgot that in business you need to be ble to compromise to get an outcome that places the WAFL, an already damaged fruit, in a better light.

Is it a good result , perhaps and perhaps not. Time will tell when we have next season and who does the right thing.

If I was the president of wp I would be talking to nine about continuing the variety thing and suggesting that the broadcaster do something similar with their sponsorship with the telefon institute being the sponsorship of the wafl. Perhaps each club could pick a charity to wear as their sponsor.

Grump at the time West Perth signed their sponsorship deal with Channel 9 the WAFL was being broadcast by the ABC and there was NO contract between the WAFC and Channel 7.

good post grump,


Keep repeating a lie and people will believe it, what part of option to renew don't you get swan, keep employing Clives tactics obfuscation and deception.

swan42 wrote:

Grump wrote: My two penny's worth on this is that, this has been a debacle from day dot, probably feb this year.

The WAFC and WP should have talked more about their respective intentions and the progress of the negotiations for both the broadcast and the sponsorship. The WAFC as the controlling body should have made demand about all clubs sponsorship deals and progress given they were going to a commecial broadcaster. The issue there is that when we have amateurs running a 'business'then we all need to be careful. Perhaps the presidents needed to exercise some influence..

WP and raponi needed to be more aware of the issues at the time and understood that if their preferred broadcaster and sponsor did not get the gig then perhaps they need to have a plan b. Similarly the WAFC needed to have a plan b!

As for the recent issues again amateurs doing business and I include raponi in that comment, look for an outcome that stopped the damage to the WAFL. And they didn't they all stood on their collective values and forgot that in business you need to be ble to compromise to get an outcome that places the WAFL, an already damaged fruit, in a better light.

Is it a good result , perhaps and perhaps not. Time will tell when we have next season and who does the right thing.

If I was the president of wp I would be talking to nine about continuing the variety thing and suggesting that the broadcaster do something similar with their sponsorship with the telefon institute being the sponsorship of the wafl. Perhaps each club could pick a charity to wear as their sponsor.

Grump at the time West Perth signed their sponsorship deal with Channel 9 the WAFL was being broadcast by the ABC and there was NO contract between the WAFC and Channel 7.

I understand that contracts were not signed but as I understand it there were discussions happening about broadcasting and all I am suggesting is that both parties would, should have shown some business sense, something that neither party did! The WAFC should have told WP no signing until the broadcast was finalised and wp if they had the wafl at heart would have given some thought to holding off signing with nine until they knew what the decision was and then worked it out.

Am I anti WP (that is cos I support EP) but on this I find their actions less culpable than the wafc's.

Grump thats exactly what the wafc did, they told wpfc not to sign, wpfc chose to ignore it hence the wpfc backdown.

Wonder if West Perth will do the right thing and donate all profits from the sale of the guernseys with the Variety logo to Variety or will they pocket those profits?