HBG Directors give themselves Pay rise

It’s been dubbed ‘the most chaotic board in NSW’. But Wests Tigers’ owners are pushing for a pay rise

By Chris Barrett

March 7, 2026 — 4.21pm
Wests Tigers’ owners are bidding to give themselves a pay rise three months after a shambolic episode in which they sacked chairman Barry O’Farrell and three other directors before backflipping at the behest of the NRL.

The Holman Barnes Group, which owns 90 per cent of the Tigers and holds the licence for the NRL team, has for the past year been embroiled in turmoil that has threatened to spill over into the football club.

Now, its board members are seeking a boost which would see them collect more than their counterparts at most other Sydney clubs with ties to NRL teams.

HBG is proposing that its chairman’s annual honorarium be lifted from $51,341 to $65,000, the deputy chair’s fee to be raised from $33,371 to $50,000, and all other directors to get $32,500 instead of $25,670. All would also receive an extra $5000 if they sit on a club committee.

The effective $70,000 payment per annum for the chairman would eclipse the amounts paid to those in charge at most of Sydney’s major NRL-affiliated leagues clubs, including those with much larger membership bases.

Parramatta Leagues Club, which owns the Eels and has 65,000 members, gives its president $30,000 a year and other directors $20,000.

The 60,000-member Canterbury League Club, which is strongly linked to the Bulldogs and backs them financially, allows for a total of $229,801 to be paid to its seven directors including the chairman – an average of $32,828, although the chair and deputy chair receive a greater share.

St George Leagues Club, which owns 50 per cent of the Dragons and has 25,000 members, hands its chair $16,000 a year and ordinary directors $12,000, plus $2000 for each committee they sit on.

HBG has 27,000 members and the proposed honoraria for its board are exceeded only by those at Penrith NRL team owners Panthers Group, where total revenue was nearly $180 million in 2025 and which has a membership base of 148,000. The Panthers’ chairman receives $80,000 a year, its two deputies get $40,000 each and the remaining directors pick up $20,000 per annum.

Like those at other clubs, the HBG board members can take advantage of other perks of the position such as food and drinks. At the club’s annual general meeting on March 21 members will also be asked to approve its chairman and deputy receiving $500 per month hospitality cards.

As Holman Barnes Group’s business has expanded, the workload and governance responsibilities placed on directors have increased substantially,” said HBG vice-chairman Frank Primerano, who also sits on the Wests Tigers board.

“The proposed adjustments simply bring board honorariums into line with the scale of the organisation and the time commitment required, particularly as directors are increasingly involved in committees and strategic projects during this period of significant growth and investment.”

A source familiar with the activities of HBG, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said: “How can the most chaotic board in NSW simultaneously become one of the highest paid?

“If the stipend for the board were based on performance then quite obviously these people would be getting a pay cut, not a pay day.”

HBG, which oversees venues including Wests Ashfield, returned a net profit of $11.9 million in 2025 after raking in $52 million from poker machines and recording overall revenue of $100 million, according to its annual report.

But the organisation has been plagued by dysfunction during the past 18 months, with several board members controversially removed and former NSW premier O’Farrell and three other independent directors then sensationally axed from the Tigers last December less than a year after they were installed following a governance review.

After concerns were raised by the NRL, HBG reinstated them days later and O’Farrell was Tigers chairman. But the club was forced into a costly payout to Tigers chief executive Shane Richardson, who resigned amid the boardroom chaos 18 months into a four-year contract, and settled out of court with former HBG director Rick Wayde, a key instigator of the Tigers review, after he was banned for eight years.

HBG, which owns the NRL team via its control of Wests Magpies, has since beefed up its representation on the Tigers board, giving it an effective majority.

While the Tigers are governed separately to their owners, NRL funding for the team flows through HBG.

According to its latest financial report, HBG received $20 million from the NRL in 2025 and owes $36 million to players and head coach Benji Marshall over the next five years.

HBG is unusual in that the balance of power lies with 20 so-called debenture holders, who choose the majority of its directors under a decades-old, undemocratic system.

Only two of nine board seats are directly elected by the wider membership and there will not be a ballot for those spots at this month’s AGM after one of the three nominations withdrew.

The two remaining are well known to HBG board members: Shannon Cavanagh, a director of Wests Magpies alongside HBG chairman Dennis Burgess and Primerano, and Aldo Di Mento, a director of APIA Leichardt FC – the inner-west soccer team in which HGB bought a stake last year and on whose board Primerano and HBG chief executive Daniel Paton also sit.
 
I’m an elite athlete.

I’ve had to deal with incompetent club and association boards and have even joined my own club one to get them headed back in the right direction and have found a minor position within the association for something else. The problem is they are ALL over the age of 50 and predominantly 70+.

A large portion of them don’t adequately adapt to the ever changing nature of the sport and make poor decisions in organisation of events, teams and direction.

It hasn’t necessarily affected my performance within the sport in a way I can quantify it, but it has caused me a lot of unnecessary stress, energy and time which has heavily impacted other areas of my life.

I personally am able to block these things out when I compete and train but for an NRL Squad of 36 players, it’s ludicrous to think none of them will be affected by what’s going on. It’s also particularly harmful to signing/retention because players are unsure of the clubs stability, managers are unsure of the clubs stability so if someone else with a solid administration offers a similar deal it’s hard to see why you’d pick us.
Well said and amazing first-hand account Charred.
 
More like he feels alienated or he doesn't have a friend in the room you fool, hope your clown mates are hatching a plan to try and remove him and PVL finally acts.
Once again, thanks for your cordial correspondence (following yesterday’s lovely message - see attached)

As a long time documentary photographer, I would suggest that Barry has most likely been caught unbeknownst - missing the “smile for the camera” directive. Despite my playful assertion regarding a bottle of red, Barry’s expression should in no way be interpreted as proof of a negative mental state.

The camera is often guilty of capturing a moment that runs counter to the context from which that split second is drawn.

Happy to help
 

Attachments

  • 03274FD5-E2B4-4CFC-992F-C357A5B8A506.jpeg
    03274FD5-E2B4-4CFC-992F-C357A5B8A506.jpeg
    160.2 KB · Views: 13
Once again, thanks for your cordial correspondence (following yesterday’s lovely message - see attached)

As a long time documentary photographer, I would suggest that Barry has most likely been caught unbeknownst - missing the “smile for the camera” directive. Despite my playful assertion regarding a bottle of red, Barry’s expression should in no way be interpreted as proof of a negative mental state.

The camera is often guilty of capturing a moment that runs counter to the context from which that split second is drawn.

Happy to help
Maybe if you didn't post stupid or aggravating things that are annoying you wouldn't cop ridicule.

You forget that this isn't an exclusive Wests only forum and your sometimes one-eyed view draws attention you don't like.
 
Once again, thanks for your cordial correspondence (following yesterday’s lovely message - see attached)

As a long time documentary photographer, I would suggest that Barry has most likely been caught unbeknownst - missing the “smile for the camera” directive. Despite my playful assertion regarding a bottle of red, Barry’s expression should in no way be interpreted as proof of a negative mental state.

The camera is often guilty of capturing a moment that runs counter to the context from which that split second is drawn.

Happy to help
Are the media photos of D B from your portfolio?
 
HBG should be encouraged to be involved. Worked with. Even....respected for what they DO actually do.
Do you not think it's concerning that a review which was conducted by people independent to the club found that HBG were deemed unfit to govern a Rugby League club? That the Wests Tigers needed true corporate governance & to be seperated from the HBG board. As soon as these changes were enacted WT's started to see progress & positive action happen for the first time in a long time. I don't think it's a coincidence that the 2025 season for the Wests Tigers organisation as a whole (players, coaches, members, fans, employees) was the best one in a very long time. We had begun to see genuine progress & a clear direction as to where the club wanted to go & the steps it was taking to land there. Richo & the board even managed to get funding for Leichhardt & Campbelltown which no previous regime had managed to do. Then they blew it all up over what exactly? because there were communication issues even though HBG representatives were on the board? or how about how they sacked the independent directors & had to walk it back because there was no real justifiable reason for them to do so (otherwise why would they hire them again.)

The only reason why this club had seen itself move in a positive direction is because HBG had less involvement in the decisions being made and then they blew it all up for what reason exactly? because the reason they put out was taken down from their website over how stupid they looked. So telling people on here that HBG should be respected for what they do is just a load of rubbish because what have they actually achieved for the Wests Tigers organisation over the last 15 years that garners any sort of respect?
 
Once again, thanks for your cordial correspondence (following yesterday’s lovely message - see attached)

As a long time documentary photographer, I would suggest that Barry has most likely been caught unbeknownst - missing the “smile for the camera” directive. Despite my playful assertion regarding a bottle of red, Barry’s expression should in no way be interpreted as proof of a negative mental state.

The camera is often guilty of capturing a moment that runs counter to the context from which that split second is drawn.

Happy to help
It's funny B2T. Your quote in your footer seems to be a reply from a Facebook page that around 10% of WT supporters want to remove the magpie from the state cup.

Now, that makes sense from a business perspective to unify the brand. But I don't think people really will die on that hill. Keeping the magpies is fine - but at least unify under one. It's smarter for us to have 1 brand, 1 pathway. That's all that argument is.

That post completely misses the point about what the majority are upset about. We are upset with poor leadership, one that is inexperienced and feels the need to insert itself constantly rather than letting WT be led by experts. That's it. We want to win, and HBG directors can do that, but they need to acknowledge their own shortcomings.
 
I appreciate your stance.

I disagree- I don't think the players really care for board members of the financial backing of any club- unless it results with more in their pocket.

I'm yet to hear any player say "I signed on because the guys paying the wages were really nice to me".

Actually- no. I've heard some players praise Nick Politis. So there might be occasions.

But I think players sign, or don't sign, mostly due to the coach & the players around them. Respecting old guys that get voted onto a board would, in general, have very little impact on the team.
If players dont care, why did benji reference in his december press that he had spent that last two weeks doing alot of player management? Why did jarome reportedly go out of his way to meet with HBG?

They cared..
 
If players dont care, why did benji reference in his december press that he had spent that last two weeks doing alot of player management? Why did jarome reportedly go out of his way to meet with HBG?

They cared..
Can someone do a survey and see how many of our players know the names of the board members that were removed and not including Barry O’Farrell who is now back on deck ?
A few of them probably know the name of the bloke who owns Organica as they often eat there, but I highly doubt they would know any of the others.
If they cared so much they would know their names.
 
Can someone do a survey and see how many of our players know the names of the board members that were removed and not including Barry O’Farrell who is now back on deck ?
A few of them probably know the name of the bloke who owns Organica as they often eat there, but I highly doubt they would know any of the others.
If they cared so much they would know their names.
Wow, what a suprise. You have ignored first hand quotes from the head coach and are telling us that you know better.

Seeing as though theoretical surveys are now the source of truth, lets run one and see what tigers and nrl fans think of HBG shall we? 😀😁😅
 
Wow, what a suprise. You have ignored first hand quotes from the head coach and are telling us that you know better.

Seeing as though theoretical surveys are now the source of truth, lets run one and see what tigers and nrl fans think of HBG shall we? 😀😁😅
You stated our players know and care about ALL our board members?
Maybe you should run the survey so you can obtain some factual information, rather than the assumptions you regularly make.
In other words you already know that barely any of our players would know the names of the board members that were removed.
 
You stated our players know and care about ALL our board members?
Maybe you should run the survey so you can obtain some factual information, rather than the assumptions you regularly make.
In other words you already know that barely any of our players would know the names of the board members that were removed.
Given surveys are the flavour of the month How about we run a survey of all NRL supporters and commentators and ask who is the most dysfunctional club.
 
Genuine question. Do the 20 debt holders take any money out of the profits of HBG (not WT)?

Im assuming they would.

Wouldn't in general be better for them to elect people on to the Board so that they can put people in charge who actually know how to run a football team as well as a leagues club?

The current Board Members would miss out on their $50k a year but having better people in charge would increase the profits and get rid of this entire in fighting, the merry go round etc?

They can then just sit back and collect profits without putting in much work.
 
Genuine question. Do the 20 debt holders take any money out of the profits of HBG (not WT)?

Im assuming they would.

Wouldn't in general be better for them to elect people on to the Board so that they can put people in charge who actually know how to run a football team as well as a leagues club?

The current Board Members would miss out on their $50k a year but having better people in charge would increase the profits and get rid of this entire in fighting, the merry go round etc?

They can then just sit back and collect profits without putting in much work.
They don't mate. It's a club, so they don't own squat and therefore don't take any profits. They are custodians, nothing more.

Unless it's through their wages - which I have no idea how this works. How can 20 debenture holders decide to put more members' money in their pockets without a member's vote? Surely that can't be decided by the debenture holders themselves.
 
Reguardless of any ability or previous decisions the numbers in the article just make them seem greedy and sit in the same category of a council raising rates by 50%
If they are worried how they will be perceived by their constituents it won’t happen . Have to wait and see
Whose the deputy who is copping a massive increase compared to others out of interest?
 

Staff online

Members online

Back
Top