HBG, Independent Directors Sacked

weststigers said:
They didn't put any money in. Not one of those guys has any financial stake in the club.

They are a non-profit licensed club owned by members.

Why do you persist with this narrative?

If they were privately owned, ala Russell Crowe and Souths, I'd be the first to agree with you.

This is not ownership. This is a protection racket on power and control.
Click to expand...
He said HBG have put money in not the individual debenture holders and only a fool would argue that that is not the case.
 
Vicious said:
Not your I’m more focused on what a good job Shaun Mielenkamp is doing.
A CEO who communicates what is happening, what a breath of fresh air,
Click to expand...

When this whole thing kicked off, you painted this picture of yourself as being "open minded". Here I am trying to engage with you, also with an open mind.. and every time I ask you direct questions, you refuse to answer them

You keep saying that the voices of a few within HBG don't represent the entire organisation... So I gave you the definition of what the role of a CEO and role of a director are.

So I will ask you again...

Are you of the opinion that the HBG CEO and board do not represent its members?

Because the HBG board are the ones who voted the independent board members out...

A follow up question is - if they don't represent the best interest of the JV/hBg, then who are the people that do represent HBG? Are they simply not in power?

I Understand you have the most open mind here and are open to discussion, so I appreciate you will not avoid the questions I have posed.

Thank you in advance..
 
Last edited:
liltiger said:
Of the money being put in HBG only put in about less than 10% of the money annually. If HBG put in 1.2 million a year and the N.R.L throw in 13.5 million a year then the N.R.L would be over 90% owners like H.B.G keep saying and could do as they wish as majority owner. Other thing is in the big scheme of things HBG and all other owners throughout our history have left us massively underfunded. There are clubs who spend more than 1.2 million just in their scouting and youth systems.
Click to expand...
that is ridiculous - the NRL fund all the clubs the same amount so by your logic they are the majority owner seperately of all 17 clubs. Over the last 3 financial reports HBG have funded Wests Tigers $5 mil in total, Wests Magpies $750k and Balmain RL $500k. How about you give us a list of the amounts the owners of each club is funding on top of the NRL grant - I bet you can't but you are happy to throw some media BS about what clubs are putting in.
 
diedpretty said:
that is ridiculous - the NRL fund all the clubs the same amount so by your logic they are the majority owner seperately of all 17 clubs. Over the last 3 financial reports HBG have funded Wests Tigers $5 mil in total, Wests Magpies $750k and Balmain RL $500k. How about you give us a list of the amounts the owners of each club is funding on top of the NRL grant - I bet you can't but you are happy to throw some media BS about what clubs are putting in.
Click to expand...
Canterbury Leagues provided the Bulldogs with a $7.3m grant in 2024.

They don't own the Bulldogs though.
 
TigerNeddyK said:
Also , other successful teams have lower and junior grades with systems and plays that run all through the club to Matt’s even.. when the lower teams wear the same jersey and the juniors and reserve grade have a clear pathway that is symbolised by wearing the same uniform as the NRL team it is good for morale and club unity and gives a sense of belonging to the players and the fans .. it is obvious and I believe that any one that cannot admit this is either being disingenuous or is just too stupid and ignorant to debate with .. WeSts Tigers , a United club .. #HbgOut
Click to expand...
Who is Brisbanes reserve grade side. Whose Melbournes reserve grade side been for the last 25 years. Whose Newcastles - its pretty obvious thats its not a pre requisite for success that your reserve grade side should be the same name as the NRL side.
 
GNR4LIFE said:
The comment that @Suzie-Q shared wasn’t anything out of the ordinary. They’re a dime a dozen. Could only imagine the waffle that’s being said in their FB group. However, they have zero influence. They certainly don’t warrant getting triggered over. I’m more inclined to laugh at them. The chest beating they do regarding the Magpies being owners, having all the power and Balmian having nothing is all a front. The reality is it burns a hole in them that the Magpies don’t receive more recognition. To them, that is everything. They talk a big game, but they are insecure as hell.
Click to expand...
You should see the one about the Wests Tigers launch of the CoE at WSU!!
 
nrlsurvivor said:
Why are we still calling this a joint venture? My company merged with another just three years ago and we’ve since moved on as a united force.
Click to expand...
There is a difference between a joint venture and a merger. A JV is formed so that both parties remain as independent entities rather that one new entity. The JV probably should have been dissolved when Balmain went belly up and the single entity being Wests Tigers should have been reinvented with a whole new constitution and governance.
 
diedpretty said:
that is ridiculous - the NRL fund all the clubs the same amount so by your logic they are the majority owner seperately of all 17 clubs. Over the last 3 financial reports HBG have funded Wests Tigers $5 mil in total, Wests Magpies $750k and Balmain RL $500k. How about you give us a list of the amounts the owners of each club is funding on top of the NRL grant - I bet you can't but you are happy to throw some media BS about what clubs are putting in.
Click to expand...
Not my logic, it's the logic of all the HBG dinosaurs. If HBG throw in the cash the claim is as 90% owner they can do as they please. I clearly showed even by your numbers HBG chip in about 1.5 million a year. If you think the ammount HBG have been chipping in is close to what other leagues clubs and owners are your mistaken. It is no secret all owners of the Tigers not just HBG have left the Tigers running on the smell of an oily rag from day dot. We have always been underfunded. Plenty of people has discussed it it's not new news.
 
So what are we saying, even if 2026 is a successful season, we hear of no further boardroom issues, Wests Tigers finally make the top 8, we will still have some supporters unhappy and threatening not to support Wests Tigers just because our reserve grade team is called Wests Msgpies ?
Anyone who fits that description is not a true supporter.
 
mtd#2 said:
When this whole thing kicked off, you painted this picture of yourself as being "open minded". Here I am trying to engage with you, also with an open mind.. and every time I ask you direct questions, you refuse to answer them

You keep saying that the voices of a few within HBG don't represent the entire organisation... So I gave you the definition of what the role of a CEO and role of a director are.

So I will ask you again...

Are you of the opinion that the HBG CEO and board do not represent its members?

Because the HBG board are the ones who voted the independent board members out...

A follow up question is - if they don't represent the best interest of the JV/hBg, then who are the people that do represent HBG? Are they simply not in power?

I Understand you have the most open mind here and are open to discussion, so I appreciate you will not avoid the questions I have posed.

Thank you in advance..
Click to expand...
One question makes it easier to answer.
No I don’t believe all Wests Ashfield members or HBG debenture holders of HBG board members wanted to dismiss the Wests Tigers independent board members.
I am very confident the vast majority of Wests Ashfield members who have no say in the matter, but closely follow Wests Tigers would have much preferred it never happened.
As for the HBG debenture holders and board members, I don’t have any concrete evidence on this, but like most other boards there is always going to be internal power struggles and disagreements and I don’t believe all were in favour of dismissing the Wests Tigers independent board members.
 
Bus 2 Terrigal said:
Suzie, you seem to love hanging about in the Western Suburbs camp.
You do realize there are extremists on every side of an argument.
Cherry picking incendiary stuff like this and presenting it as typical, is little more than dog whistling and IMHO not worthy of an admin.

But I'm sure you'll get the desired result
Queue ... outrage !!!
Click to expand...
The ‘extremist’ in this case just happens to be a director of HBG though.
Supposedly with the interests of WestsTigers as his priority.
You think those words reflect that?
 
Jim Halpert said:
You're right but you're wrong.
The prevailing feeling is that the Magpies were too passive in their ownership.
This time around there's a different attitude intent on stamping the Magpies ownership on the club.
The first symbolic step was the football staff meeting the Wests Ashfield staff, which had never happened previously.
They'll never admit it but having the team run around in what is basically a Balmain jersey in '26 was seen as Richo and mates giving the owners the middle finger.
It was by all measures a terrible misjudgement.
Click to expand...
So they lied when they said it wasn't about the jersey... it was about communicating

If a jersey that sells out in a few weeks of release is a misjudgemnt then i dunno what their priorities are

People constantly bring up the money HB tip in... but if mercandise going gangbusters and helping in us making a profit as in this year... then why is it a misjudgement, id have thought they'd be pleased with that outcome
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 893 (members: 3, guests: 890)
Back
Top