The Duke of Wellington Hotel

This true story is universally adored by the cohort. We have named the offending party and thank them sincerely for offering to contribute to our collection.

Background: The 'Duke', the oldest hotel in Melbourne, decided to hold a competition to drive traffic to their nicely renovated premises during one Melbourne Cup carnival.
Patrons had to bring in their winning ticket, from the course only, for the feature race on each or any of the four days into the 'Duke'. In exchange, the lucky winner would receive a bottle of Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin champagne to lubricate the festivities.
Two thirsty patrons are at Flemington on Cup day when the opportunity presented itself. Back each of the 24 runners in the Cup for the win at 50 cents each. Cost $12.50, less the future dividend because one ticket must win. They ensured that individual tickets are printed out at the machine. This included the winning Veuve ticket. A queue developed at the machine, adding to the drama.
Off to the 'Duke' - Less than $12.50 for a $90 bottle of French Champagne. Two in fact. Yum!
One of the lucky patrons enjoyed 4 Veuves themselves over a number of days. This whole saga is a Keogh moment.
Winners: We award and note as follows:
1. The Duke of Wellington Hotel of 146 Flinders Street Melbourne Australia. Melbourne's Oldest Pub established in 1853.
2. Nota Bene. Our Melbourne agent, W. Kent Schleede™, reports that the promotion has not been run again.

Comment: This just proves that the people running the hotel cannot think. They deserve to give away bottles of French Champagne to patrons who actually took delight in not buying anything else at the hotel. The patrons saw the opportunity to comply will all the terms and conditions. Oxor™ would love to know how many bottles were given away using this clever promotion.
They are still at it: "If everyone at your table orders within 2 minutes of each other, then all food will come out together."
The 'Duke' is owned by an outfit called the Australian Venue Co. run by a 'Paul Waterson'. A clever person, obviously.

-
 

The Magistrate

We have not identified the person and have obfuscated the location but the circumstances are absolutely true.

Background: Client "Benjamin Hearn" drove a vehicle that did not have an interlock and over 0.00%. The Magistrate's Court website (we are not lawyers, remember) indicates that it is mandatory for the magistrate to impose a minimum four year interlock condition after three .05 violations in 10 years which became the case. Mr. Hearn received a $900 fine and around $100 in court costs for being over 0.00%. Got off for driving the car with no interlock. This is a Keogh moment.
Winners: We award jointly the following:
1. Magistrate "Barry Palmer" - a 30 + year law veteran who cannot even impose a sentence. Now Mr. Hearn has to obtain fresh reports, attend another hearing to restore his licence knowing that it will now have a minimum 4 years on the Interlock. Another day wasted at the "Moe" Magistrates Court.
2. Solicitor "Clemente Beneventi" who did not advise Mr. Hearn that this is what he could expect given his record.
3. The Police prosecution resource who just read out charges with zero understanding of what they mean and did nothing to prosecute the case that a sentence was now mandatory which has to be done with a Licence Eligibility Order.

Comment: Who supervises Magistrates? When was the last assessment done? Who can Mr. Hearn complain to? Who is the boss? This laughable process is deplorable. If we were in charge, Mr. Palmer would be suspended for one year for giving no penalty for driving a car without an interlock when the licence had an Interlock Condition. Does this now mean that driving a car with no interlock when you have an Interlock Condition on your licence can now be done providing your breath is 0.00% using the principle of legal precedent? What a clown. Mr. Palmer is bringing the system into disrepute by negligent incompetence; unable to think. If it was a hot day, we would retire him.

-
 

The former British PM

We name Theresa May for obvious reasons.

From The Irish Times: "Having run an astonishingly inept campaign, she immediately demonstrated her utter lack of negotiating skills by declaring a deal with the Democratic Unionist Party before one had been agreed."
Comment: It is reassuring to comprehend that Australia still has common ties with The Mother Country, despite it being on its way to being a very Insignificant Island Country. Inept Prime Ministers to the front! - Rudd, Gillard, Turnbull, Morrison..... Meet the Keogh criteria.

-
 

The Americas Cup Boat Sinking

We name John Bertrand, the unnamed official who let the race proceed and the New Zealand Herald.

In 1995, the great man's boat broke in half in what was an embarrassment but could have been an accident with fatalities. It is clear that boundaries were being pushed, they were terribly unlucky, but the Keogh applies!

1. Safety. No evacuation drills were ever done; the crew appeared not to be wearing yellow life jackets and one crew member could not swim.
Ignoring what the regulations might say, this is pushing the boundaries and is a reflection of management attitude. This is safety on an ocean going boat. If someone had been killed, the coroner would have these issues spelt out in block capitals.

2.Design. The unnamed designer / builder told this (with some edits): " A design flaw? In a way yes and no. It only had two bulk heads. Mast bulkhead and a keel bulkhead and both were merely ring frames and not full bulkheads. But that wasn't the true problem in my opinion. The boat was as hollow as a drum. It sure was cutting edge but it had NO longitudinal strength. No beams running for and aft to stop it breaking in half. I brought this up three times but the big fella (Iain Murray) told me I wasn't being paid to think. All I wanted to do was put two short longitudinal beams running maybe a few metres for and aft of the keel box."

3.Weight. The hull weighed 1.1 tonnes and the keel 17. Obviously this caused the boat to sink quickly.

There were a series of events that ganged up on them. The weather was foul but the official gave the okay to start as the wind was 20 knots (the limit); Bertrand reported it was 30 at the top of the mast; no one pushing design limits would allow for a 50% buffer; the main winch had failed and they used the aft winch - the report said this was the equivalent of breaking a stick with your hands in the middle compared with holding each end; the waves were 6 feet; the boat had hit a submerged object in the days before; they were behind in the race. They were very unlucky.

We have assessed John as Inspirational, the No. 1 risk taker of all patterns, as backing the safety protocols and the decision on not installing the beams as the designer wanted. John was the captain and the key person behind the oneAustralia Bid. The design was outside the usual comfort zone, of which the Inspirationals are so fond, until it drowned in it as there were circumstances that turned out to be very unusual. Inspirationals do not appreciate people who fixate on nitty-gritty details as they often seem to think that this is wasting time.
We do not know the official but he took an enormous risk and may well be Inspirational as well (an Oxor guess) in starting the event. That was irresponsible but, then again, the other boat did not break in half when it was in front.

The next day the New Zealand Herald ran a full page advertisement. It featured a large photograph of oneAustralia sinking, with the Fosters logo on the sail just visible above the waves. The headline ran: "Only one thing goes down quicker than an ice cold Steinlager."

Comment: The video says it all. Click here.

We have never met John Bertrand, but would like to. This event meets the Keogh criteria. The NZ Herald even more so. That is incompetence and cunning in tandem!

-
 

Melbourne Cricket Club and CorpVote

We name these dreadful outfits.

In a Committee election, members were advised: "You will only be able to vote once and your vote will be registered anonymously."
Comment: So how the hell do they know who has voted or not? Is this a method to promulgate traditional orchestrated outcomes of their 'elections'? Or do they mean 'selections'? Or is this merely 'Guided Democracy'?

-
 

Myki and the Minister for Transport of Victoria

We name this hopeless system and the equally hopeless government.

Kaitlyn Bradfield had separated from Calem Bradfield. Calem was the account holder and a cardholder; Kaitlyn had a card, embossed with her name, on Calem's account. Kaitlyn wanted to be an account holder for her own card. Not possible - referred to Head Office - get back in 10 days as she was already registered and could not even purchase a new card.
Comment: Kaitlyn was told by a customer service officer that a way around this was to give a false date of birth. Meets the Keogh criteria.

-
 

Australia Post outlet

We name this location - 117 Glenferrie Road Malvern Victoria.

This site used to have two post boxes on wheels at the entrance of the shop. The Postmaster withdrew them from service as they became "too heavy".
Comment: What a loser. A very worthy winner of the Keogh Award. No names disguised here!

-
 

Posthumous Winner

From a long time ago.

This predates the patent for the wheel initiative by a long way. It's 1983 and the National Property Manager for Caltex was the capable, yet ultra eccentric, the late Kevin W. Braitling. He knocked back a proposal to give a dealer owned outlet an Interest Free Loan to undertake some capital works for mutual benefit. "We don't give interest free loans", said Kevin. The proposal was resubmitted with a minor alteration proposing an Interest Bearing Loan at zero interest. Kevin approved the proposal.
Comment: This circumstance forms part of Caltex folklore and the dealer's volume was secured for a further three years. Yes, this most definitely a true story.

-