Pastor Court

andrews [small a] has once again showed absolute disrespect for anyone who doesn't agree with his view of the world.  He referred to Margaret Court as 'that women' in a desultory and insulting manner just the same way he referred to Mr Kennett as 'that man'.  And, that is only the start of the insults.

Remember Mrs Court is a pastor of the Pentecostal faith and preaches those beliefs just as Muslims do and Catholics do and as do Evangelists.

andrew's foul mouth fails to understand that people achieve excellence in something but may be wanting in something else.  As are we all.  For example andrews achieved excellence by getting elected but has failed dismally in managing our state.  No question and non debatable.

Mrs Court got the gong for playing tennis - end of story.  She was best in the world - no argument and Australia decided to recognise those achievements in line with her male counterpart, Rod Laver.  Not hard to understand.

As an indicator of the stupidity of andrew's assertions imagine taking his logic one step further.  Perhaps we should ban all catholics from getting any Australia medal because they ignored child torture by the church and indeed covered it up.  Catholics gone, not matter what good they do.  Hand back the medals.

How about banning Muslims because their values are 'different' to ours as expressed in their holy works.  According to andrews thay are all evil, devoid of doing good and can never get a gong.

Pastor Court expresses her religions views for all to hear in our 'free speech' country.   You don't have to agree or disagree just as you don't have to agree or disagree with roman catholicism [inquisition, torture, child abuse] or the creationist fools who believe the earth popped out circa 10,000 years ago [40% of Americans despite science] or those who believe killing infidels cements a place in heaven with a gaggle of vestal virgins - no women's rights there!

Personally, I choose to listen to everything with an open mind and dismiss the lunatics and the purveyors of untruths.

What next?  A person gets a gong for say nuclear medicine but it turns out he once 'slapped' his son for being a little prick.  That's it - remove the recognition as he must be evil to the core for bothering to keep his child on the straight and narrow.

Stupidity reigns.

Discuss the controversial things [not mere conversation] but recognise the good.  We are all flawed!

Pastor Court SHOULD be honoured for her tennis.  End of story.

Andrews out of control

Our State Government is out of control - again.  Like 5 year olds having found the lolly jar and woofing without thought, the Premier has no fear about ruining Victoria’s heritage or spending what he doesn’t have plunging us once again into massive debt.

The iconic bathing boxes are but a further example of his lack of a history led vision. 

How about Andrews turning an internationally recognised St Kilda ‘go to’ icon into a tram stop.  Acland street has gone and so has the history because some idiot thought it appropriate to build a tram super stop  a hundred meters or so from the already existing super stop outside Luna Park.  This is lunacy and vandalism of our history. 

How about Andrews giving $10m to destroy the last inner Melbourne sand-belt ‘peoples’ golf course being Sandringham.  A public course for over 80 years and what should have been treated as a national icon and lauded as a traditional test of golf.  One of his excuses was that women couldn’t play golf on a normal course and needed a shorter course.  This in itself is sexist and demeaning.  The course should have been treated with respect and with professional grounds people creating excellence.  Not so.  Sandringham golf course is now bulldozed and another slice of our history gone with it. 

How about permits being issued from the State Government at odds with the local council to destroy 2 Victorian mansions at 23 Brighton Road St Kilda and replacing them with 17 by 2 story dog boxes thereby also creating access nightmares .  How about wasting $1.2b of our money by NOT building something being the East West link which will have to be built anyway.  This is lunacy!  And, where is the money coming from to fund all the spending?  This is a big question!!

History proved that Cain / Kirner sent us nearly broke and smashed our international credit rating  – “ Ms Kirner was, of course, a senior member of a deeply dysfunctional government [Cain] which presided over the Pyramid, Tricontinental, State Bank and Victorian Economic Development Corporation financial disasters which undermined the state’s economy and saddled the government with a significant debt burden.” [Australian] – The damage was massive and it seems nothing has changed.

The world wants to impeach Trump before he destroys it.  He is a laughing stock as is Andrews amongst anyone who actually thinks.  Neither are funny.  Perhaps we can impeach Andrews?

How about a proper parliamentary enquiry into ‘our’ finances? 

How about Heritage Victoria actually doing something to preserve our history and planning decisions being transparent before the event? 

How about so called ‘developers’ locked up for frenetic night time demolition of historic buildings? 

How about ‘real’ public debate on contentious issues not just so called consultation ‘after’ the event has been actioned?

Kennett had to rescue us the last time from an out of control government including their unions who were also at their dysfunctional worst.  Think how many tram strikes, power blackouts and sheer angst we had to put up with before Kennett.

Now, who is going to challenge Andrews?

I hope someone will step up.

Sigmund Jorgensen Ave atque vale amicus meus

Here is Sigmund 'at home' plodding around in his workshop at Montsalvat.

I first argued with Sigmund at his restaurant Clichy in the late 60’s [I think] for letting people smoke cigars whilst we were eating.  He just looked at me with his typical ignominious smile, almost said something and moved on, swanning between tables, as he did.

That smile didn’t change.  Indeed, for the past 16 years we have argued, sledged and shared life at Mon Ami restaurant maybe 1 or 2 times a week over most weeks.  That’s 500+ arguments all in good humour and friendship.  

How good is that!

Sigmund, always out there enjoying life and conversation and wine and food and memories.

Ave atque vale amicus meus

Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Paris

I took this picture circa 13 years ago of a Gargoyle on Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Paris.  I just added the red background for obvious and current reasons.
A poignant reminder of futility and history.
The gargoyle has resigned to his fate, 'Oh not again'.

Campaign funding:

The labour party are in the enviable position of having both ABC radio and television continually supporting ‘labour’ through hundreds of hours of obvious bias.  This through innuendo, words, pictures and indeed even through somewhat blatant jaw dropping comments.  Just watch the nightly news when so called political reporters offer opinion after opinion without fear of retribution or even accuracy.  This is the ABC’s choice but I believe it must be made clear that the ABC is working for the Labour party and the full cost of those hundreds of hours need to be charged to the labour party.   

The ABC is supposed to be independent funded by ALL Australians to reflect proper unbiased ‘reporting’ and proper ‘discussions’ supported by real ‘well educated and life experienced journalists’ [not reporters] also without bias. 

Perhaps an independent analysis of the last say 6 months would identify bias toward any party and, to be fair, any time spent for one party over any other to be charged at commercial rates.

Everyone has opinions and beliefs which shape their delivery and that’s fine as long as the listener / viewer understands the bias.  I have always been a big fan of bringing back the ‘soapbox’ where people can express ANY view without fear except for perhaps a few rotten tomatoes. Gender sedition – fine!  Celebrate racial differences – ‘fine’!  The next Martian attack – fine!!  Global cooling – fine!  Quotas which treat women as less – fine!  People are smart and can decide for themselves and weed out the crap – even with euphemistic tomatoes. 

QANTAS - They offer platitudes without substance

Firstly ...

Prior to our flight with Qantas this time we were given two passes to the Qantas club as compensation for another Qantas flight which they screwed up.  That ‘honeymoon’ flight was somewhat ruined when our allocated seats were ignored and Qantas reallocated us rows apart.  After I complained to the desk crew they once again reallocated us but to the last row and by the time catering got to us they ran out of food.  Two passes was totally inadequate.  Qantas even said that even though one can book specific seats there is no guarantee that you will ever get them.  Misrepresentation and unfair terms all spring to mind when the ‘fine print’ denied responsibility for advertised benefits such as seat allocation.

Then ...

This time we had time to spare so we used our two passes and entered the Qantas club in Melbourne.

The only acceptable thing about the experience were the women on the front desk who were polite, respectful and helpful.

Picture a Coles cafeteria of the 1960’s awash with people and mess.  This is the sight which greeted us.  Down market is an understatement.  No available seats, piles of used plates and mess everywhere.  Still, our passes were now taken away and we persevered until someone left and we grabbed their table.

We thought that perhaps a glass of bubbly would be nice only to find just over a glass left in the self serve which was not replaced for the 45 mins we were there.  No staff!

Try breakfast.  There must have been over 100 people in the largish facility yet the hot breakfast options consisted of 6 getting cold tiny sausages, a small bowl of scrambled eggs which should have been replaced hours before and slices of warm tomato.  That’s it!

We then sought coffee but found a problem as there were no cups.  We scavenged the entire lounge for cups to find two and tried the machine coffee.  It was undrinkable and we left same.

An original Qantas screw up leading to this ‘compensation’ which proved well below any standard.  No bubbly, food we couldn’t eat, coffee we couldn’t drink and all in a dirty space. 

One has to ask just what Qantas are doing.  What sort of management lets this happen?  Obviously management were incompetent and needed help if not look for another job.

Move on a few weeks to Qantas club in Heathrow and the whole experience was vastly different.  Good front desk, good staff, a clean lounge, a snack buffet of fresh food and nice wines served by great staff.  Toilets immaculate as were the showers.  A good relaxing place my wife and I enjoyed during our forced 10 hour break between flights.

Pity Melbourne is managed so badly.

Then ...

Our actual flight from Melbourne to Singapore was barely above Neanderthal with extremely tight seats further disadvantaged by almost non-existent service.  Cabin crew are wait staff and as such bear a huge responsibility to make customers feel special and to cater for their every need.  Staff chatting in the back of the plane instead of looking after customers is offensive to paying guests. 

The catering offerings were as down market as the Qantas club.  The bread roll was inedible being nuked too long as was the so called pizza.  The blade ‘stew’ was below first year apprentice standard and the mash had the consistency of yogurt.  Absolutely awful.

Then ..

We were told our next flight from Singapore to London [QF1 on the 20th of December 2018] was running 3 hours late with no explanation.  This meant we would have missed all connecting flights to Helsinki et alia despite allowing a 2 hour window.  No reason or alternatives were given despite asking for same.  We found a Singapore flight which would have lobbed us into London with time to spare for the connection.  We asked Qantas to re-book us on that flight and they did but somewhat grudgingly.  We were glad to get rid of Qantas.

Qantas, just what are you doing?

Qantas, like some others, have developed a ‘commuter bus’ mentality rather than a ‘tourist coach’ mentality.  This also applies to the so called club at Melbourne.

Do Qantas care?  Definitely NO!  They offer platitudes without substance.

Myer

An open letter …

Mr Gary Hounsel CHAIR & Mr Nigel King CEO

Myer Holdings Ltd
PO Box 869J
Melbourne VIC 3001  Australia

CC:  Mr Solomon Lew - Premier Investments

Gentlemen,

As a bloke who grew up in Melbourne, was educated in Brighton, spent all my formative years in abject immaturity and wasted many many opportunities I should be the last person you listen to when it comes to your charge.  Indeed one of my burnt in memories was the Myer’s man delivering something for Mum the day JFK was shot.  The 22^nd of November 1963 was an important wake up call for the world.  In a couple of days it will be 55 years ago and we still haven’t learnt that respect and trust is a God given right.

I offer that rather banal insight into history because it helps define your store.  When Sidney Myer founded his department store it was inexorably linked to the person and, if I remember, that link followed through to Ken Myer before his death in Alaska.  A ‘family’ store where people connected with the ‘name’ despite not knowing them. 

Mum used to drag me along to shop at ‘Myers’, have lunch at ‘The Birdcage’ and have the days purchases either carried to a taxi or delivered to home.  The day two mink coats turned up at home was a watershed moment in understanding marital relations between one’s parents.  Myer’s had a soul and a true understanding of people and Mum was made to feel special.

Before forging into hospitality I spent too many years downsizing companies around the globe.  A bugger of a job made all the worse because it was my role to deal with the aftermath of bad board decisions which in turn necessitated disadvantaging too many people all through no fault of their own.  My memories are a bit vague but I seem to remember an imported CEO by the name of Dennis Eck totally missing the point that Myer [note – no ‘s’] was not Coles or Target where impersonal vertical marketing seemed at home but a caring ‘family’ company.  I also seem to remember Don Argus saved the day but I can’t be certain.  The point being that personality and ethos were removed and the business suffered.

Now it seems, personality has once again been removed and business is suffering albeit with Myer still in toxic denial mode.  Look at it from an objective viewpoint – untrained staff, rows of cheapish merchandise, staff who are impersonal and confused, a store undifferentiated [and all at once]and disassociated with their customer base.  The vision has either gone or been muddled to such an extent that customers are confused. For example, remember when the bargain basement was just run-outs and odd items?  I do but it seems the ‘bargain’ mentality has infected the whole store.  More confusion.  Now, it seems that the boxing day sale is a critical tool to bolster sales because people wait for it!  Low margins are the result.  Misery.

Feel free to tear this up right now if you like because I am going to offer an opinion.  In a couple of weeks time we are heading off to Scandinavia again for a month where we will eat in something approaching 100 restaurants researching and collecting ideas for our little bistro.  A bistro which already has multiple global awards yet we still very cognisant of continuing to source global trends, service and differentiating ideas.   

And, I believe that is the key – differentiation.  Let’s take Galeries Lafayette or Le Train Bleu [within Gare de Lyon] as examples in Paris both of which we have shopped and dined in many times and both of which offer a special experience yet both are flawed in many respects.  The point is that both have held their vision and communicated that vision and, as a result, do well despite the flaws.  Now look at your charge!!

The day we saw a dog fashion show at Galeries Lafayette or watched a waiter ‘strut’ a dozen bottles of Moet on a tray above his head at Le Train Bleu burned an image in our heads.  A positive image which overshadowed any complaints.

In my opinion you have 3 types of customers.  The so called upper middle class who want the finer things and experiences, the lower middle class who want to be seen and to be treated as though their elevated position is a natural state of play and all of us seeking a bargain.  This is a natural differentiation in the real world.

I opened this letter with comments about ‘respect and trust’ and this is what I remember most about Mum’s dealing with Myers’.  Because of Myer’s ability to make people feel special my mum, and thousands of others, spent an awful lot of money therein [see comment above on Mink].  But now Myer [no ‘s’] has turned into a jumble sale where no one feels special including I daresay the staff.

The upshot is that people [like me in a previous job] are forced to cut even more staff and amenities to save a bottom line.  Spiralling into misery! 

What should Myer[s] be known for?

McEwans had it with their Vision, ‘McEwans means a million things’ and Bunnings has it with lots of stuff and cheapest prices.  Both places where Eck would have felt comfortable with vertical marketing - but, not for Myer[s].

At the bottom, the bargain basement is a place where people can go and rabbit around looking for that ‘something’ to be bought on impulse.  Why?  Because bargains are not pre-planned.  See stuff, buy stuff.  Everyone likes to fossick.  This is not cheap imported for the purpose crap but real run outs, overstocks etc as anything else diminishes the image and is best left to Target etal.  A bargain is an item reduced to sell, not a cheap product brought in to mimic a real reduction!

In the middle I believe a huge albeit simple change is necessary to cater for modern ways of purchase.  Firstly, people want to try on or view something before purchase and secondly they want it pronto. Therefore there must be a try-on size range and then at purchase the staff member who must be able to say, ‘It’s on its way’ because as soon as the money has been accepted the message goes through to a store where it’s immediately dispatched and with a non-conditional return policy.  Indeed, there is also technology allowing people to see themselves with various garments on screen [?].  When I did my MBA in the 80’s I seem to remember a French knitwear company who started to knit the purchased garment as soon as the order was received and delivered same to the customer at the speed of light.  They were a forerunner indeed!  I think much better to sell say 1,000 lines of quality than 10,000 lines of rubbish with stacks of multiple sizes jammed into racks no one can see over.  Myer[s] did not offer rubbish but Myer does!!

At the top, people want an experience and providing that experience could be the vision and saving grace of Myer[s]!   Why not rekindle Sidney as the founder overseeing a new ethos where people are made to feel special and welcome in his emporium where the best is available, champagne bars abound, the ‘Birdcage’ makes a re-entry, the Mural hall has invited glamour events, dogs have fashion parades, chandeliers light the way, lots of upmarket accessories are on display, furniture is leather, staff are trained and plentiful and trust and respect are ingrained.  My Mum would have lived there because she was made to feel special and that is the image of Myer’s I remember in its halcyon days.

Lastly, this image must be created at the City store and then followed on elsewhere.  Why?  Because nowhere else has the history or has the Mural hall.  Vision and image go hand in hand.  Indeed, the ‘top level’ may only be available at the city store, the home of Sidney. Spooky, isn’t it.

Just a small example, the ‘Hopetoun Tea Rooms’ in the Block Arcade is immensely popular because they capture something of the past whereas their competition can only look on in envy.  Image and vision!

I have been and still am at the pointy end and the coalface of business in highly competitive industries [hospitality etal] and in the past have been stupid enough to delve into so called corporate rightsizing which is about as depressing a job as you can get.  These days we run a little bistro and consult globally when I believe we can add value.

My ‘opinions’ are not mere puff but based on too many years experience.  I really felt for Myers when Mr Eck was CEO because of the diminution of a Melbourne icon to foreign standards.  Likewise when the Mexican triumvirate hit Telstra.  Why do we allow this to happen?

A department store is an icon of the past, present and future because it allows many faces within a constructed ‘life’ ethos.  An ethos which saw Myer’s rise and rise and a now a lack of ethos which foreshadows misery and failure.

Montsalvat

PRESERVE MONTSALVAT AS THE ICONIC ARTS COLONY

Yesterday we had occasion to visit the iconic Montsalvat to interview Mr Sigmund Jorgensen for news publication. 

During this period we could not help but notice the deplorable state the buildings and grounds are currently enduring.   Weeds on steps, grass unmown, moss on tiles, render falling off buildings, a filthy inappropriate pool fence and a palpable feeling of neglect.

This current board and management are failing in their duty to preserve Montsalvat.  Have a look at Heidi, or indeed, any reasonably run art institution, and note the differences.  

Unfortunately, Mr Jorgensen had been voted off the self elected current board and since thwarted by them in his attempts to revive the arts colony.  

I doubt that the paying public will want to look at an unkempt ruin remembering Montsalvat circa 70’s used to be vibrant and alive when Mr Jorgensen was running the show yet now it feels like a place in its death throes.

The current board and management without Mr Jorgensen have failed in their duty to protect and nurture Montsalvat and therefore as an act of good faith should resign forthwith.  Indeed, Montsalvat’s constitution at section 9a demands board member skills and experience appropriate for the company which would obviously exclude skills and experience such as local government, academia and anything not focused on the business that is Montsalvat.  Unfortunately most of the board and management fall into this exclusion zone and it shows.  Terrible management decisions are prevalent such as outsourcing revenue streams for a fraction of their worth because of an inability to manage.

Montsalvat needs professional intervention to survive starting with the reinstatement of Mr Sigmund Jorgensen as the live in doyen and founder.

The risk is losing the history that is Montsalvat.

ACLAND STREET DOWNGRADE

Since when does PTV dictate what happens on our streets?  Is it lawful for PTV to demand the inclusion of so called tram ‘super-stops’ especially where it is obviously not in the best interests of Melbourne’s history or tourist nature and serves little benefit?

For example, PTV has managed to ruin Bridge Road in Richmond, Fitzroy Street in St Kilda and Bourke Street in the city with the inclusion of the concrete behemoths commonly known as ‘superstops’ and now they want to add another lump of concrete in the middle of Acland Street St Kilda only 100m or so away from the from the existing super stop outside Luna Park.

The stupidity of this is amazing.

Acland Street is a go-to spot for any and all local, national and international tourists because it is somewhat quirky with frenetic bustling people fighting for room with cars and trams.  It is this chaotic mix in a grung-ish setting which makes it unique.  Parking’s free, if you can get one, and trams rattle through dodging tripped out tripped off or tripped up peds.  Add the odd Ferrari or bikie and the picture is complete.  All things for all people.  The cruisers, the diners, the rubberneckers, the locals and the transient homeless all cohabitating.

Fantastic.

Now some closed eye bureaucrat wants to plasticise the street into yet another boring as bat-shit foreign inspired mall.  The same as any other grassed in plastic have-a-nice-day space. Has Melbourne lost the plot [pun intended] in as much as we seem to want to destroy our icons in the name of stupidity.

Why not build a 'vintage' tram line between St Kilda and Port Melbourne instead and increase the tourist potential instead of destroying it?

Think what will put Melbourne on the map in 50 years and it will not be super stops!

MONTSALVAT

Montsalvat - Australia is extremely lucky to have Montsalvat.  Make no mistake, this ‘artist’s colony’ built through the vision of Justus Jörgensen early last century has survived to this day and is a place people go to marvel at just how a French Gothic village could be created on a hillside in Eltham.  Not just a French low-line thatched affair but grand architecture inclusive of a great Baronial hall, a beautiful chapel, a delightful pool and some of the best ‘balanced’ architecture one could hope to see.  We are still lucky enough to have residing at the property the man who helped build this icon with his father, Mr Sigmund Jörgensen as patriarch, arts advisor, multi-hat-restaurateur and board member.

It is approaching 50 years ago, when I first stepped onto the property marvelling at the community feel by just wandering aimlessly around dodging killer geese and surly peacocks and stopping to watch artists at work perhaps to buy their wares. 

In my mind, Montsalvat must be both protected as a national icon and cherished by celebrating its history and making sure it continues in the manner visioned by Justus Jörgensen all those years ago.  In this way a zillion new people over the next 80 years can go and gawk and admire and experience a slice of living history without Walt Disney like exuberance. 

Ethos discomfort - But now, Montsalvat seems to be in some degree of ‘ethos-discomfort’.  Whilst the buildings remain and are most certainly worth a visit or ten, I am concerned that the current board and management do not understand the raison d'être behind Montsalvat and are failing to manage critical business aspects and heritage responsibilities.

As the saying goes, there is no free lunch!  To preserve Montsalvat requires vision and money and focus and clear strategies all leading to informed decisions by a coherent and transparent board.  Decisions which ensure working capital for infrastructure maintenance and development.

Board and management have failed - As I watch events unfold, monitor blog and change sites, read publicly available documents, watch everything and listen to all and sundry it seems to be increasingly clear that the current board and management are failing in their primary duty to make sure Montsalvat is protected, cherished and financially sound.  Unfortunately, there are many board and management decisions seemingly incongruous to these three very basic visions leading to profit diminishing year on year thereby curtailing infrastructure repairs let alone being able to take advantage of any ongoing strategic initiatives. 

Directors are required to make informed and independent judgments on decisions put to them [AWA Ltd v Daniels (t/as Deloitte Haskins & Sells) (1992) 7 ACSR 759] and are required to place themselves in a position to guide the company and monitor its management but Montsalvat seems to have a board riven with infighting whilst making questionable [even ultra vires] decisions in possible breach of the Corporations Act [2001] S180 etal. All board decisions seem to be treated as confidential subject to secrecy provisions inserted within the constitution. The result being the ‘self elected’ board only answers to itself with no members other than the actual board members - so there are no checks and balances.

Just a cursory look at the 2013 financial reports indicates problems like consultant’s fees, employment expenses and professional fees amounting to around 87% of gross profit, non current liabilities increased by $103,000 and the loss of a $600,000 revenue stream through gifting the popular albeit badly managed restaurant to a third party by tender for a fraction of its worth as that revenue stream. As directors have a lawful duty to be informed of the companies actual financial affairs [Statewide Tobacco Services Ltd v Morley (1990) 2 ACSR 405], how can this happen?

Just three examples:

Deliberate sacrifice of a major revenue stream - Money was and is critical to the survival of Montsalvat but revenue streams are limited.  A few years ago we worked with Mr Sigmund Jörgensen to reinvigorate the restaurant establishing a vision, mission, strategic directions, strategic objectives, change plans, spatial changes, and cuisine changes all financially documented with timelines.  We estimated a nett profit to Montsalvat from the restaurant of some $3,000 to $4,000 per week and, based on later published turnover of up to $14,000 per week, they should have easily achieved that profit and more - providing it was properly managed.  Unfortunately, management did not take any of our advice apart from some spatial changes [since destroyed] resulting in losses roughly equivalent to profits foregone in as much as $300,000 per annum was lost to forecast.  That’s a lot of maintenance and marketing money just gone.  Management must have actually budgeted for wages etal  near 90% of gross profit and a cost of sales well above industry norms to screw this up.  Much worse, instead of fixing the problems, as a board and senior management should, and given they had all the information we gave them, decided instead of actually managing the restaurant to profit, to lease the space out for a fraction of its worth as a revenue stream for Montsalvat.  How can that be acceptable?  These are not the actions of a competent board and/or management given that under the Corporations Act each and every director must exercise their power and discharge their duties with the degree of care and diligence that any reasonable person would exercise.

Wasted marketing opportunities - Mr Jörgensen had just written a book on Montsalvat launching it a couple of weeks ago at Montsalvat itself.  This major event should have been embraced by board and management, but no.  Sigmund had to do his own marketing, beg entertainment, seek his own speakers and believe it or not the entry doors remained locked until after the advertised start time leaving guests outside in the dust for no reason. I was there, being extremely underwhelmed by the board and management in their conduct towards the launch and Mr Jörgensen but far far worse, their ambivalence if not rejection of the huge marketing opportunity this launch could have provided for the future benefit of the property they purport to direct and manage.  It is shameful as this conduct seems to be driven by board dysfunction and infighting to the detriment of Montsalvat.

Destruction of heritage - An example which really strikes at the heart of Montsalvat.  When Justus Jörgensen designed and built Montsalvat he designed a beautiful pool gated from the outside world and surrounded by artist accommodation and galleries.  This pool is an integral part of the ethos of Montsalvat as are the pools at Ripponlea and Mooramong.  Indeed we were at the National Trust property, Mooramong, a little while ago enjoying afternoon tea around the unfenced pool and have enjoyed many a visit to Ripponlea around their also unfenced pool which they use for functions and receptions. These heritage pools are unfenced for heritage reasons with no requirements by council or anyone to fence same.  Yet the board and management at Montsalvat decided to erect a glass fence [which they can’t afford to pay for] around their heritage pool.  This they are doing against significant objections [change.org] and no lawful imperative or need [no council requirement].  It is public information that the Board even lied to protect their decision to erect the fence by stating there was indeed a lawful requirement.  Heritage aesthetics are ignored and a vital part of Montsalvat’s ethos is being ripped away by a board who just doesn’t understand Montsalvat.

There are many more such examples - Montsalvat has lost its direction.

Three things need to happen starting right now to ensure Montsalvat’s protection and survival:

Stop - The current riven and dysfunctional board along with senior management must resign forthwith apart from Mr Jörgensen who, pursuant to Montsalvat’s constitution as a family member, must remain. 

Assess - An independent administrator / chair / chief executive needs to be appointed for a period of 12 months to instigate a totally independent assessment of all finances and decisions for the last 5 years.

Plan -  Develop a proper strategic plan.  During this time the board needs to be rebuilt with appropriate people after which senior management need to be appointed. 

As I said, I am very concerned about Montsalvat and its future.

Jon Langevad MBA

The farce with a sad end that is Fitzroy Street St Kilda.

AN OPEN LETTER TO PORT PHILLIP CITY COUNCIL

Concerning Fitzroy Street ...

In my opinion the Councillors for the City of Port Phillip, PTV and Vic Roads should have to personally reimburse the 18 or 20 businesses which have turned up their toes and given up in Fitzroy Street.  If it had been that just one or two failed then one could possibly blame the operators but being there are so many who have gone broke it would seem that there is more to it than just an incompetent operator or two.  From top end to plebeian, they have all failed to meet their owners expectations lost money and had to just close.

Who’s to blame?  The overriding answer is simple – people are in public authority positions of power wherein they can make decisions about which they have little expertise, historic perspective or strategic view.  This describes the Port Phillip City Council, senior city management, PTV and Vic Roads.  As far as the council are concerned, a bunch of people elected on some criteria far removed from what should be essential skills. There are many examples proving this point such as at least 18 years of no action on the Port Melbourne foreshore despite having an acceptable urban design framework for the whole period.  Examples such as the stupidity surrounding the original design for the triangle site which thankfully, due to public force, was eventually withdrawn but still cost us millions of wasted dollars.  Another example is the cost of car-parking.  A 10 year old reading ‘statistics for dummies’ could analyse usage [read tourists], rates against time and costs and see that there is a correlation between high costs of parking and empty spaces.  Drop the costs and people will come and nett profit for the council would remain as is.  Simple but too hard for some people to digest.

A fourth example is Fitzroy Street and its destruction as a must-go-to destination for both Melbournian’s and tourists.  This is a direct result of a weak council failing to recognise what Fitzroy Street was all about and acquiescing to minority groups and statutory authorities by allowing these groups to create urban havoc all without a feel for the area, its history and its future.

When there are 18 vacant shops in one smallish street, with past tenants ranging from high end restaurants to boutique businesses - just closing down - there can be no escape from the fact that there are major issues with the street itself.  Traders across all levels walking away from millions of dollars says quite clearly that the street is the problem and not the traders.

Given the inescapable fact that the street is the issue then what’s happened?  Once again the answer is simple Fitzroy Street has become a throughway but in fact it should all be about recognising that not every street in every suburb needs to transformed into a super fast tram route with channelled traffic and dedicated bike lanes.  This is because some roads deserve to be slow and visual so the strolling rubberneckers can see, taste and enjoy.  Not every street needs a few more tons of concrete to create unneeded and unwanted super fast throughways for cars, trams and bikes.

St Kilda is ‘Melbourne quirk’ and that’s what people expect and want to see and be a part of whilst being kept safe away from the disaffected. 

Changes to Fitzroy Street have destroyed its character which in turn means that it has lost the ability to attract both tourists and normal Melbournians.  It does however attract the bottom end of society and the drug affected.  With the ‘ice’ epidemic it has now become seedy and dangerous.   Take the Gatwick Hotel for example – it is a dangerous place.

The solution is unfortunately not simple.

Firstly, and in the immediate short term, the disaffected have to be removed.  CCTV is but one of the critical tools to make that happen.  Councillor Touzeau said, whilst recently voting against the installation of CCTV,  ‘everyone has the responsibility to make the sort of world we want to live in’.  This is just plain stupid and far removed from the real world.  Especially so given the Council created the problem in the first place. 

Secondly, Fitzroy Street needs to be made a ‘slow’ destination street by creating a streetscape for both pedestrians and destination visitors through creative parking.  There is no need for a somewhat dangerous bike lane and there is no need for any tram super-stops other than at the beach end [already installed] and St Kilda station end [already installed].  The middle bit needs rethinking.

There is need to remove the dangerous and little used bike path and replace it with 60 degree free parking because car parking correlates to visitors.   Then add lots of mature trees breaking down the long visuals, large quirky sculptures and more non-food retail.  Then add public seating in the middle of the road under the canopy of shade trees where people can just sit and watch the slow trams and the streetscape; after mandatory facia regeneration. 

We need the development of a ‘tourist’ precinct where wandering becomes an art form instead of a dice with dropkicks.

I personally remember the days when we ventured to dinner at Tolarno’s [since closed as Mirkas - once again] wandered around after dinner and absorbed some of the quirkiness of the street before returning to our dormitory suburbs. Successive councils have destroyed this ambience.

This council has to make a decision.

Are they going to recreate Fitzroy Street by removing the disaffected, recognising that Fitzroy Street is not a speedway for trams, cars and bicycles and spend some of our money creating a streetscape which will attract tourists and locals alike seeking a quirky but safe immersion experience.

This is a no-brainer – YES.

And with a properly designed triangle site and Acland Street precinct we have a chance at creating a world class tourist area.  Let’s not wait another 20 years.

Say thirty million dollars over 3 years is absolutely nothing in terms of the financial return and the benefits to all Melbourne.

Why are we so stupid? A CONTINUING CONVERSATION

PROBLEM

We dig stuff up and sell it to foreign buyers so they can add value and sell it back.

We sell off our country to foreign buyers so they can profit at our expense.

We sell management rights to others because we are unable and stupid.

Indeed, we sell our heritage to others.

We will eventually be leasing someone else’s country.

Why?

Now, the Premier of Victoria wants to sell the leasing rights for our ports to some management company believing that we are so stupid that we can’t manage the facilities ourselves.

Simple finance 101 says that if anyone is willing to pay megabucks for management rights then they must be able to return a healthy profit on that investment.  Therefore, the question is, if someone is willing to pay for that opportunity then why aren't we reaping the same profit?

Stupid people outsource management because they can’t do it themselves.

Smart people make the most of their assets.

We must be stupid.

RESPONSE

I agree not wishing to be political as I know both parties do it but it was the Liberal party that started it with the sales of government run assets. I have often argued, using the SEC as an example - prior to its sale the profit from the monopoly was ploughed back into maintenance and improvements to the service. Once it was sold off the maintenance was cut and the profits from sales distributed to the shareholders

FOLLOW UP
Unfortunately, Kennett had little choice but to sell off utilities with unions running riot destroying what little productivity we had.  This is easily proven by records - just look at the number of public transport strikes prior to the sales and strikes after.

I also must say that Cain Kirner left Victoria in a very parlous state which forced Kennett to sell off the management rights to get money and protect our credit rating.  This is also easily proven by Records.

Personally, I would have preferred that this hadn't happened but unlike Cain Kirner, Kennett didn't walk around with his head in the sand whilst Victoria was sinking.

In this instance, with our ports, we have another Cain Kirner look alike with Andrews.  He has already thrown away circa $700+ million of our money by 'not' building a 'strategic' link for the future of Victoria which would have already produced thousands of  jobs but instead - has achieved nothing.  This stupid 'retrospective' decision has cost us dearly in terms of international reputation, possible investors and our strategic future.

Now he has to sell our strategic future in Melbourne's ports to fund basic domestic maintenance such as level crossings which have zero to do with the future growth of Victoria.  This Government are fools focusing on minutia, the same as every other labour Government, whilst Victoria loses its future.

Indeed, only stupid people outsource management unless there is no choice.  Kennett had no choice but Andrews does.
 

Andrews has made me-me political promises which he can't keep, is currently achieving nothing and is still making more promises for projects in forward estimates decades away.  He seems to have run our coffers dry and is now desperately seeking money by selling our future to fund basic maintenance, to be seen to be doing something and to try and keep political power.

Where is his vision with basic business 101 strategies leading to our future?

Perhaps I am asking too much of a minutia focussed labour Government.

I am concerned about Montsalvat, the way it’s managed and its future.

Montsalvat - Australia is extremely lucky to have Montsalvat.  Make no mistake, this ‘artist’s colony’ built through the vision of Justus Jörgensen early last century has survived to this day and is a place people go to marvel at just how a French Gothic village could be created on a hillside in Eltham.  Not just a French low-line thatched affair but grand architecture inclusive of a great Baronial hall, a beautiful chapel, a delightful pool and some of the best ‘balanced’ architecture one could hope to see.  We are still lucky enough to have residing at the property the man who helped build this icon with his father, Mr Sigmund Jörgensen as patriarch, arts advisor, multi-hat-restaurateur and board member.

It is approaching 50 years ago, when I first stepped onto the property marvelling at the community feel by just wandering aimlessly around dodging killer geese and surly peacocks and stopping to watch artists at work perhaps to buy their wares. 

In my mind, Montsalvat must be both protected as a national icon and cherished by celebrating its history and making sure it continues in the manner visioned by Justus Jörgensen all those years ago.  In this way a zillion new people over the next 80 years can go and gawk and admire and experience a slice of living history without Walt Disney like exuberance. 

Ethos discomfort - But now, Montsalvat seems to be in some degree of ‘ethos-discomfort’.  Whilst the buildings remain and are most certainly worth a visit or ten, I am concerned that the current board and management do not understand the meaning behind Montsalvat and are failing to manage critical business aspects and heritage responsibilities.

As the saying goes, there is no free lunch!  To preserve Montsalvat requires vision and money and focus and clear strategies all leading to informed decisions by a coherent and transparent board.  Decisions which ensure working capital for infrastructure maintenance and development.

Board and management have failed - As I watch events unfold, monitor blog and change sites, read publicly available documents, watch everything and listen to all and sundry it seems to be increasingly clear that the current board and management are failing in their primary duty to make sure Montsalvat is protected, cherished and financially sound.  Unfortunately, there are many board and management decisions seemingly incongruous to these three very basic visions leading to profit diminishing year on year thereby curtailing infrastructure repairs let alone being able to take advantage of any ongoing strategic initiatives. 

Directors are required to make informed and independent judgments on decisions put to them [AWA Ltd v Daniels (t/as Deloitte Haskins & Sells) (1992) 7 ACSR 759] and are required to place themselves in a position to guide the company and monitor its management but Montsalvat seems to have a board riven with infighting whilst making questionable [even ultra vires] decisions in possible breach of the Corporations Act [2001] S180 etal. All board decisions seem to be treated as confidential subject to secrecy provisions inserted within the constitution. The result being the ‘self elected’ board only answers to itself with no members other than the actual board members - so there are no checks and balances.

Just a cursory look at the 2013 financial reports indicates problems like consultant’s fees, employment expenses and professional fees amounting to around 87% of gross profit, non current liabilities increased by $103,000 and the loss of a $600,000 revenue stream through gifting the popular albeit badly managed restaurant to a third party by tender for a fraction of its worth as that revenue stream. As directors have a lawful duty to be informed of the companies actual financial affairs [Statewide Tobacco Services Ltd v Morley (1990) 2 ACSR 405], how can this happen?

Just three examples:

Deliberate sacrifice of a major revenue stream - Money was and is critical to the survival of Montsalvat but revenue streams are limited.  A few years ago we worked with Mr Sigmund Jörgensen to reinvigorate the restaurant establishing a vision, mission, strategic directions, strategic objectives, change plans, spatial changes, and cuisine changes all financially documented with timelines.  We estimated a nett profit to Montsalvat from the restaurant of some $3,000 to $4,000 per week and, based on later published turnover of up to $14,000 per week, they should have easily achieved that profit and more - providing it was properly managed.  Unfortunately, management did not take any of our advice apart from some spatial changes [since destroyed] resulting in losses roughly equivalent to profits foregone in as much as $300,000 per annum was lost to forecast.  That’s a lot of maintenance and marketing money just gone.  Management must have actually budgeted for wages etal  near 90% of gross profit and a cost of sales well above industry norms to screw this up.  Much worse, instead of fixing the problems, as a board and senior management should, and given they had all the information we gave them, decided instead of actually managing the restaurant to profit, to lease the space out for a fraction of its worth as a revenue stream for Montsalvat.  How can that be acceptable?  These are not the actions of a competent board and/or management given that under the Corporations Act each and every director must exercise their power and discharge their duties with the degree of care and diligence that any reasonable person would exercise.

Wasted marketing opportunities - Mr Jörgensen had just written a book on Montsalvat launching it a couple of weeks ago at Montsalvat itself.  This major event should have been embraced by board and management, but no.  Sigmund had to do his own marketing, beg entertainment, seek his own speakers and believe it or not the entry doors remained locked until after the advertised start time leaving guests outside in the dust for no reason. I was there, being extremely underwhelmed by the board and management in their conduct towards the launch and Mr Jörgensen but far far worse, their ambivalence if not rejection of the huge marketing opportunity this launch could have provided for the future benefit of the property they purport to direct and manage.  It is shameful as this conduct seems to be driven by board dysfunction and infighting to the detriment of Montsalvat.

Destruction of heritage - An example which really strikes at the heart of Montsalvat.  When Justus Jörgensen designed and built Montsalvat he designed a beautiful pool gated from the outside world and surrounded by artist accommodation and galleries.  This pool is an integral part of the ethos of Montsalvat as are the pools at Ripponlea and Mooramong.  Indeed we were at the National Trust property, Mooramong, a little while ago enjoying afternoon tea around the unfenced pool and have enjoyed many a visit to Ripponlea around their also unfenced pool which they use for functions and receptions. These heritage pools are unfenced for heritage reasons with no requirements by council or anyone to fence same.  Yet the board and management at Montsalvat decided to erect a glass fence [which they can’t afford to pay for] around their heritage pool.  This they are doing against significant objections [change.org] and no lawful imperative or need [no council requirement].  It is public information that the Board even lied to protect their decision to erect the fence by stating there was indeed a lawful requirement.  Heritage aesthetics are ignored and a vital part of Montsalvat’s ethos is being ripped away by a board who just doesn’t understand Montsalvat.

There are many more such examples - Montsalvat has lost its direction.

Three things need to happen starting right now to ensure Montsalvat’s protection and survival:

Stop - The current riven and dysfunctional board along with senior management must resign forthwith apart from Mr Jörgensen who, pursuant to Montsalvat’s constitution as a family member, must remain. 

Assess - An independent administrator / chair / chief executive needs to be appointed for a period of 12 months to instigate a totally independent assessment of all finances and decisions for the last 5 years.

Plan -  Develop a proper strategic plan.  During this time the board needs to be rebuilt with appropriate people after which senior management need to be appointed. 

As I said, I am very concerned about Montsalvat and its future.

Jon Langevad MBA

CAR INDUSTRY

When do we start taking the initiative and look outside political and media driven doom and gloom? 

When do we start to believe in our own Australian expertise and stop flailing about in discontinuous rage as another ‘foreign’ company withdraws ‘hurt’ when the going gets tough but after profiteering for years on uneven playing fields at the expense of our country?

When do politicians stop trying to assure the yet to be unemployed that they are trying to create new jobs through all sorts of ill-thought-through initiatives to make themselves look important and to be seen as doing something? 

Instead  …..  why don’t we bite the bullet and produce our own cars and other vehicles?

We will soon have 3 newly vacated plants which do and can produce cars.  Why don’t we produce our own world leading new-design taxis, government cars, town cars, military vehicles, scram jets, super tractors, planes, farm bikes, fun cars [Moke-a-like] or any other vehicle which is useful for us as a country and can be sold elsewhere?  And no, don’t call any the Kangaroo or the Wallaby or the bloody Dingo!!

I am really sick of the prevailing oh-woe-is-me attitude where we import expertise [because we are so backward, stupid and don’t have any talent] only to find the imports are wanting [EG. The Mexican triumvirate at Telstra or multiple managers at Coles Myer or several Australian icons currently in trouble with imported management].

We have sold our soul to foreign manufacturers who can’t manage a decent profit other than the ‘incentive fees’ we pay them [Ford worldwide a couple of years ago].  And, we accept foreign management just because they are foreign and must therefore be much better than us.

This is utter bullshit!

Abbot and Shorten – how about working together with an Australian collective spirit and foster/create/allow the creation of something special?

We are really that good!!

Yes?

How about starting by immediately enforcing Australian only isles at supermarkets?

Opera [house] in Melbourne ..

I wish to thank the Sydney Opera House Trust from a Melbournian’s perspective for their decision to downgrade and make Bennelong restaurant more 'accessible'. 

That pesky Frenchman created a beautiful multi-hat restaurant called Bennelong within our national icon.  A first class affair befitting its status.  Guillaume Brahimi, being  that pesky Frenchman, sought to create something special in the space as has Ducasse who leads the restaurant Jules Verne within Paris’s Eiffel tower.  Little compromise in either ‘wonders of the world’.

However, Australians it seems, according to the opera house trust, want an ‘accessible’ venue similar to the dozens of cafes and restaurants in the immediate vicinity. 

The Utzon hating Ryan Committee of yesteryear seems reborn – ‘don’t bother to create something really special because us Australian’s just want pub tucker – no need for that smancy stuff – just give us another café/bar’.

Nothing special or world leading, just average so us average people can go there and feel, well, average.

As Sydney does not seem to appreciate how to deal with ‘first class’ I wonder if we could shift the opera house to Melbourne where we would indeed laud the brilliance of Utzon and create a world class experience decidedly away from average.

This is not a slight on the successful van Haandels and we wish them well but my question remains, ‘Do we want yet another café / bar and importantly, do we want it in our one-off wonder of the world?’

My thanks, as a Melbournian, to the trust for downgrading Sydney.