In the interest of fairness

In the interest of fairness, the Long Range Planning Committee (LRPC) owe the menbers of TAC more information than is being disseminated.

Nowhere on the TAC website will one find any unbiased information on the alternatives to relocation to Takenawa. This is surely the design of the LRPC,its Chairman and their paid propaganda consultants Gavin Anderson.

One fact is abundantly clear: the LRPC has not presented alternatives for the simple reason that they don't wish the membership to think there are any.

So Gerald, 'fess up, what are ALL the alternatives and why haven't you presented them? In your profession I'm sure you understand the legal implications of non-disclosure or don't they teach that at Keio?

Enquiring minds wish to know! Over to you...

Follow the money!

A few years ago there was a discussion about redecorating the American room, a certain board member then being in the decor business offered to assist out of his good intentions and found an architect to do the job. The Club got charged a fortune, however the good samaritan failed to inform the general membership that the said architect was under contract with his own company and in fact paid him a commission on the job he got from TAC, of course all quite normal at TAC. Like the other board member that was also the supplier of food to the club...how about the recreation director that because he happened to be a veteran was buying liquor at the USA embassy at low prices and offering it to certain club members for profit. When I brought it up to the attention of the then GM, was told to take a flying f...., how about the board member that was also doing all the printing (maybe still doing it for all I know) for the club.

I am so impressed with all these GOOD samaritans supposedly looking after my personal interests in the club, maybe I should also give them my bank book and let them look after it.

Ladies and Gents, if you want to know who really gets to benefit from this project look for the contracts that have been signed by the subcontractors of the subcontractors of the subcontrators whom at the end of the line maybe a name of a person close to or even perhaps a family member of one of the individuals who happens to just be another GOOD samaritan.

If you want to know the truth, ask yourself why are members with a different opinion ostracized and treated with little respect at and after the meetings by the Good samaritans and even the foreign managerial staff of the Club whom after all are working for us?

Those managers should concentrate on the job they get paid to do. The service in the Club is horrible, the food is even worse and always we keep on seeing more and more foreign managers. The question then is, what do they all do? They walk around like gestapo around the Club, make the members feel uncomfortable, sometimes stand next to members listening to conversations. What do they all do? They should not be involved in any of the decision making regarding the go or not go ahead of the construction project.

After all, if it is such a sweet deal, why have to hire a PR company on behalf of the members to sell to the members the idea? Most of the members are managing companies in many fields and certainly are well above the average educational level of the average worker in the club. Good enough to check the facts and be able to make a decision without getting it hammered up the back side without vaseline.

I know that if I went to my HQ and suggest that we build a building while we rebuild our own and then move back into our buiding and destroy the other, well I think I would be out of a job before returning to Japan.

But then again, I am just a Portuguese man of war, what do I know?

The real question is - who REALLY benefits? (old saying "follow the money")

Take care everyone, all the best to the pros and cons of the deal.

Sincerely,
Paul Marques

Another astute comment given due focus

In the spirit of an earlier comment, here are some questions that might be adopted for future town hall style sessions, or else for addressing to iNTOUCH or countdown@tac. I stress that this a quick draft on one subject only - there are many more it seems, and other readers here may feel inclined to add their ideas.

THE VOTE

1. Define the voting process - who among the members may vote and what qualifications if any are applied ?

2. What constitutes a quorum for such a vote, and is this quorum exceptional in any way when compared with other voting occasions within TAC?

3.What constitutes a binding result - is it a simple majority either way [50% of votes counted plus or minus one vote] providing that a quorum has been obtained ?

4. What happens if a quorum cannot be obtained on the first or a subsequent occasion - is the decision delegated to a vote by another body e.g. Board of Governors, and, if so, would this be constitutionally correct or for that matter appropriate in the likelihood that any such other body would not have been put in place or elected to office on the basis of any professed opinion by its members of the proposed TAC redevelopment project ?

5. What is the methodology of the vote - at a special meeting by show of hands or yeas and nays, or by paper ballot by mail or drop ?

6. If voting will be or can be by paper ballot, will it be a true secret ballot or will the general manager and/or his staff be tasked to open ballots received by mail or drop in order to check off members' credentials - as was reportedly done in either or both the elections to Board of Governors in 2004 and 2005 [which ostensibly would suggest that members' votes could be unofficially recorded by name]?

7. Will the vote be audited by a truly disinterested neutral party [i.e. not TAC's current auditors, who - no professional offense intended - could not be construed to be disinterested, but presumably a qualified organisation having neither members at TAC nor a commercial relationship with TAC now or in the future]?

There may be more questions on this single matter of voting.......see how suspicious this whole set of shenanigans is making some people, me included !

Now for a list of questions about project costs and who gets paid what and who has been paid already........

Well Said! - A comment given its due prominence

My experience and research of this matter is far from exhaustive, but all that I have heard or witnessed suggests that the club members holding office and/or volunteering their time toward the proposed new project do so honestly, with noble intentions and in the main for altruistic reasons.

Which does not mean that egos are checked in at the door, or that personal power-plays are excluded from the mix - all of them are human after all. While no conflicts of interest of a crudely commercial material variety may be apparent, there appear to be some who have come to regard this proposed project as, in effect, "my turf, my baby".

This is not healthy in a club where responsibility and liability appears to be very loose indeed, and the project in question is so vast and potentially significant to the very existence of the club.

It appears that the lengthy study and research phases of the various committees have, step by step and layer by layer, built up a broad concensus for the proposed rebuild project now being touted so strenuously by a well-oiled, costly P.R. machine : a concensus of the wise and well-informed that does not appear to have been challenged much.

Maybe it has, but there is little or nothing to indicate that committee A or team B disagreed on a key matter, and solved that impasse by way of documented fact finding or convincing recorded debate - the P.R. picture is one of continuous harmony and happiness.

This is, to say the least, most unusual in a project of such complexity as many might know from other experiences : also it is entirely normal for those who become involved and dedicate their spare time to believe very firmly in what they are doing, to the exclusion of considering a differing or questioning viewpoint. I say this from personal experience.

If indeed the various questions being raised anonymously in this forum are ill-founded and redundant, then the members of the Board of Governors and the LRPC owe it to themselves, to their own credibility - as much as to the membership - to set out exhaustively and in plain understandable language all that they have investigated and discussed, and how the decisions they have taken to advance matters as far as this are all well founded and sound.

The documents on the TAC website do not do this - they read like simplistic propaganda, all in support of a decision that appears to have been set in stone already.

Evidently it is up to the members - if they so wish -to challenge "the club within the club" on this project, and on a few other key aspects of the mismanagement of TAC that are being thrown up here.

It seems to me that all members should be encouraged to attend the upcoming town hall meetings, well armed with questions, whether or not they support the proposed project.

GET OUT THE VOTERS !

Speaking of Hits-Time to Focus

Judging by the continuing number of hits, it is now time to all gather around and focus on the key issues.




Even with a group of people with such diverse interests as the gathering pictured here, it must be possible to work together in the interests of the club.

The focus should be on addressing the key issues facing the club as it approaches the critical decision of redevelopment:

These are:

- Transparency
- Pro-active dissemination of critical information not subject to confidentiality agreements
- Realistic assessments of worst-case scenarios

In an all care but no responsibility environment, the process has to be FULLY inclusive and that means:

- using the PR agency for what it should be used for - selling the facts, all the facts and not a garnished selection
- more inclusive working sessions with various groups and interests within the club (and there are a number for sure)

As someone has commented, the LRPC has been at this for quite some years but there is still a large percentage of the membership that has no idea as to what has been going on. This may simply be an oversight which can still be addressed before it is too late

Why not be pro-active?

Secrecy and selective dissemination of facts breeds suspicion when perhaps none is warranted.

For everyone to buy into this, it needs to be shown that there is indeed a common objective and the process to achieve this objective has been inclusive, open and thorough.

As stated in an earlier post, this debate can be transferred to a club bulletin board whenever the offer is made.

The hits just keep on coming

In the short time this blog has been online, it has accumulated a surprisingly high number of hits. VERY surprising.

The lack of a BBS or open discussion forum on the TAC website has determined the need for this blog.

If the management at TAC install an uncensored, free discussion forum on their website, this blog will be taken down.

The current fora for discussion concerning the relocation are too few and far between. An online facility is the ONLY way to ensure all members have a voice and can express their opinions at a time that suits them, not at a time that suits TAC management or under an air of oppression, which is the prevailing atmosphere at Town Hall meetings chaired by the LRPC.

Who will own What?

If the redevelopment goes ahead as currently being proposed what will the club actually own at the end of the day?

Will it still hold title to the all the land, part of the land or simply the buildings and infrastructure on a portion of the land?

Cayman Islands payments

Let's not let this issue get away from the focus. We are looking at the relocation and the many flaws involved but this issue is equally dangerous.

I wonder how the Japanese government would view off-shore payments, the money must have come from Japan so how was it taken offshore and paid to certain management people? Interesting stuff.

The Road to Takanawa is paved with good intentions...

The LRPC which is the driving force behind plans to rebuild the Club is comprised of well-intentioned members who truly believe they are working in the best interests of the Club and its members. They may be right. And they certainly have put in the hours, as unpaid volunteers. But what is puzzling and of great concern is: Why are the voting members not being fully and fairly presented with the pros and cons of renovating vs. rebuilding so they can make an informed decision? Call it propaganda, manipulation, poor judgment, or whatever, it seems wrong,inappropriate but above all -- dangerous, maybe perilous. There is a case to be made for both options: The rebuild has great merit but also great risk as the stakes are so high and unforeseen consequences usually abound. If TAC were a privately owned club, a smart owner(s) would probably not risk, at this time,"killing the golden goose", not when the eggs are solid gold and multiplying. A rebuild may result in a more (maybe too) expensive member club.This would be most undesirable. So why the rush to rebuild? Perhaps a Shakespearian character flaw(s), or simply bad business judgment, fostered by the committee system (successful businesses are not run by committees). But then there may be true vision in a new club, now. And it may be the way to go. But certainly the clarion call for transparency and correctness seems to be going unheard. A little Virgilian "pietas" is markedly lacking.

Fait Accompli?

Not from my standpoint & in fact far from it !!

I genuinely resent whoever are THE individuals behind presenting a
"proposed" TAC move in this way. Everything about the "possible" move is
misleading from the time one steps into the lobby at the Club & sees the
promotional pictures on display right thru to the various articles sent to
us.

I am far from convinced that TAC has to move at all from its current
location & , if we in fact have to, then there's no way I can agree with
the logic behind this "temporary" club nonsense. I cannot believe for one
moment that it is impossible to find another suitable location to build a
new club. Convince me please! But you're going to have to work hard to do
so.

What troubles me equally as much as the totally misleading way the "future
of TAC" is being portrayed is this unbelievably unacceptable under any
circumstances situation of putting the Club ( and therefore its members) in
a position that it is going to spend a hell of a lot of money to build
temporary premises, move to it, ultimately (I assume) knock it down & move
back to the existing location once the new building is completed. I may not
be the smartest person in the world but even I am smart enough to figure out
that this will be a chunk of money that will undoubtedly end up considerably
more than what is initially being estimated......ever built a new home &
come in on budget ?? Moving to & from a temporary location is a TOTAL
WASTE OF MONEY and those individuals who are responsible for promoting this
strategy should be removed from their positions of authority as rapidly as
possible.

I understand that most of the individuals involved in this farce consider
themselves intelligent & experienced business people. To those of the group
who may have their own businesses, I pose this question: " Would you agree
with this temporary club nonsense & throw so much money down the drain if it
was your own money?" The answer is obvious: NO !! To the members of the
group who work for companies & have to make proposals to management in
relation to spending much scrutinized shareholders' funds on future
investments, I pose the question: " Would you be politically stupid enough
to make such a career-limiting proposal to your management?". The answer is
obvious: NO ! If members of either group say they would proceed otherwise ,
then I suggest they're either lying or happen to belong to a hallowed group
of individuals who, sooner ( most likely) or later, will be unemployed !
This whole thing is ludicrous & wasting too many people's time.

My main concern as a loyal TAC member is that not enough members REALLY
understand what's going on & the true reality of the situation is NOT being
presented to them. Before they....and myself as well most likely....will
know it, TAC will gradually begin to enter into a spiral of increasingly
rapid decline, the end result of which will not be a pretty sight. I , for
one, will have stopped going to TAC long before that happens but I
definitely will be one of the increasing group of people who will sadly say:
" I told you so."

Let's stop this nonsense before it goes any further. The individuals should
admit that they haven't got a clue what they're doing & go back to Square 1
& forget the fantasy about moving to a temporary location . Get on
with doing what's necessary to upgrade the existing building OR find a
suitable permanent location for new premises and move there. Anything other
than this is lunacy & those involved in promoting such a farce should be
immediately TOLD by the members of the club to stand down from their posts
as they are bringing nothing but shame & potential doom to the fine Tokyo
American Club.


A Very Concerned Member

Spotted by Crocodylus Redevelopus

Important dates to note...

1. The Finance committee, the LRPC and the Board are to review the relocation/redevelopment project at the end of this month before voting on it in April, but we all know it will be passed, not enough common sense on any of those committees or the Board.

2. Project propaganda will be distributed to members by mail at the end of April. I'll bet Gavin Andersen are working overtime on that one. This will put any fascist propaganda machine to shame.

3. Town Hall metings are to be held on 10 & 13 of May. Best be there to ask the questions posed here.

4. A special General Meeting is scheduled for 23rd of May when the members will vote on the relocation/redevelopment project. This is the time to vote NO.

Crocodylus Redevelopus Spotted

The Cayman Islands

In regard to accountability, there is a rumor that certain members of management are paid through accounts in the Cayman Islands.

Can anyone shed light on or substantiate this? If this is true, transparency needs to be in play and the members need to know.

Shadan Hojin or Kabushiki Kaisha

Since the club bought Azabu Towers and now is involved in a major property development, the current status of shadan hojin could conceivabkly be compromised.

Does anyone have any undertanding of this issue.

Over the years the board and management of the club has shown the acumen required to achieve the non-profit objective by skillfully re-distributing accumulated wealth but are these the skills that can navigate effectively through a major financial project such as the proposed redevelopment plan?

Should the club re-constitute itself as a kabushiki kaisha?

Comment:
The Azabu Towers and the plan to rebuild do not pose a problem to the Shadan Hogin status of the club. This status exempts certain activities from tax but not all.

Premier Club in Asia-Definition Please

One of the catch phrases for the re-development is that it will create the premier international club in Asia.

I haven't seen any elaboration on what that actually means.

- premier infrastructure?
- premier service?
- premier cost?
- premier value?

Does anyone have a definition?

Will the re-development give the club a chance to significantly reduce the cost of labor?

Will the re-development reduce costs to members and make it competitive in the F&B area with outside competition?

Premier is kinda like nice...it needs a little elaboration.

Only your INTEREST can protect your INTERESTS

I have no idea who sent me this blog site but democracy works in mysterious ways.

The TAC Magazine will not publish anything controversial and indeed fails to address the need for creating transparency. It is the logical forum for discussion of important issues relating to the club, its financial health and its future but is, at best, a bland and expensive presentation of the the irrelevant.
In various discussions on the re-development project, no-one has really addressed the issue of the vested interests.

I believe the Board has integrity.

Less clear is the role of the management and whether their interests are aligned with those of the members on this issue.

With this in mind one must understand that management has, in effect, now taken control of what is being trussed up as a fait accompli.

It also appears that a majority of members have no personal financial interest in the process as their membership is part of an ex-pat package and not perceived to be relevant to their own pocket.

Why rock the boat and why raise issues when it could well become a career limiting move.

All that is required for approval of the re-development plan is a majority of a quorum, worst case about 301 votes from a required 20% quorum of about 600.

With indifference the normal state of affairs, a carefully targeted presentation by a skilled PR agency (which you are paying for) can finesse the result.

I do believe, however, before the inevitable happens that there are a few points of order that need addressing in some sort of democratic forum...which by the way, TAC is not.

The first goes back some ten years when the Club was first diagnosed with cancer.

‘Your Club is in a bad way’...the consultants said.

The primary source of this illness was (and still is) salaries. 

Let’s take 1983 as the base 100 year. 

In 1983:

Salaries: Yen 1.3 billion
F&B: Yen 1.27 billion
Membership: 2,604
F&B/Mbr: Yen 488,000

Let's follow these figures:

1990: 168/129/129/100
2000: 177/118/130/92
2005: 153/86/137/63
2006 Budget: 168/89/138/64

In this financial year your club has budgeted for salaries to climb back to 70% of operating revenue.What is happening?

Average salary per permanent worker is Yen 10 million. More like yen 6 million inflated by ex-pat packages that are actually not fully disclosed in accounts because a lot of cost is deferred and paid off-shore.

How many of the members can retire after working in company for 5 years with a USD 1 million payout, on top of a very reasonable package. Not many I suspect. But that has been and is the reality with the last 3-4 managers of your club, and will be the reality for the next retiree from the post.

The point of all this is that the interests of the members are not necessarily those of the employees.

Should the tail to be wagging the dog?

The club re-development is a major project and should it go wrong, the financial implications are beyond the comprehension of most members.

While there is any chance that this could go wrong, spectacularly wrong, the call for total transparency and analysis of worst-case scenarios should grow stronger.

Perhaps this forum may help to get more members involved in the discussion before the vote…and remember that 51% of a quorum of 20% of the members can decide the fate of the club.

Unlock BBS for easier commenting?

Unlock TAC - makes it easier to comment and thread - maybe easier or a supplement to this blog?

Fait Accompli?

Reading the PR material that Gavin Anderson produces for the Club at the direction of management, one could be forgiven for thinking that the move to Takanawa is a fait accompli. We know, however, that this is not the case and it must be voted on by the membership.

What are your views on the move? Can we really afford such an extravagant luxury? Will it bring TAC down?

Post your comments.