HBG, Independent Directors Sacked

weststigers said:
For off-market businesses yes.

Not the only way you'll appreciate.

We found something you know about!
Click to expand...
How low are you willing to go to get what Wests Ashfield/Wests Magpies have and you won't accept as fact.
I appreciate atpit you are only being sarcastic, but the fact you would even think like this says a lot.
In fact, it's about the same level as Cochise's thread he titled "I hate Magpies", and at the time he said he was being sarcastic also.
But was he really?
 
BZN said:
How low are you willing to go to get what Wests Ashfield/Wests Magpies have and you won't accept as fact.
I appreciate atpit you are only being sarcastic, but the fact you would even think like this says a lot.
In fact, it's about the same level as Cochise's thread he titled "I hate Magpies", and at the time he said he was being sarcastic also.
But was he really?
Click to expand...
You're 95 years old. Time to grow up.
 
Rock Hopper Steve said:
We don't actually know who all the new board members are going to be, don't get a shock if there is NRL representation added, that will clear up if there was some kind of pressure to wake up to themselves.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree. I think the current set up of the board is almost like 'reverse discrimination'- it was too far one way, so to rectify it, it's now too far the other way.

I don't get why PVL would sign off on that, unless there is something more to it than we are being told. Most of the reasoning given- and a lot of it is quite reasonable- is still just a bunch of conjecture.

What does not make sense is the belief that PVL laid down the law....by allowing HBG to take control. Yes, independent board members were reinstated, and I think that was great. But it wasn't reinstated as before. Unless that Wests Magpies seat has to be someone NOT HBG affiliated perhaps?

The facts, as can be seen, are that PVL has given the control of the board to HBG after consulting with all sides. If there are three or zero independent board members makes no difference if they hold a minority- they can still be outvoted just as easy.

There must be something more.

It's just as easy to speculate/believe that Dennis Burgess removing himself was part of the agreement. (I'd be inclined to believe that myself) Is it clear that his Wests Tigers board position remains to be filled? Or do they reduce the board composition by 1? That would make it a 50/50 split if the Wests Magpies rep was HBG, or actually back in the control of independents if that position isn't aligned with HBG.

THAT solution makes much more sense.
 
weststigers said:
Can't understand your hate Kev. Just offering another "viewpoint".

Glad we've got you as our resident psychologist on here though. Thanks for the character assessment.
Click to expand...
There's no hate mate! No psychologist mate, just a good judge of character from many life experiences.
 
  • Love
Reactions: BZN
LiverpoolTiger said:
You seem very active on these topics I noticed lol, probably 100s of posts on the topic.

Anyway, I haven't noticed anyone diminishing Balmain's brand through the tigers or their history on here really, which is the way it should be.

But I have noticed Wests Magpies history denigrated and as I have mentioned previously many pushing for just a Tigers brand or a disconnect of the Wests brand from its traditional history, so I don't know what you referring to there..
Click to expand...
Was that meant to be an insult? lol

Anyway, I haven't seen anyone do what you accuse, yet you still say it. Diminished and denigrated are quite vague terms.

I'm sure you can't articulate what exactly you mean by that when you say what you say. God knows people have tried to get an answer but it's always followed by silence.

With 90% ownership, you'd think there would be no diminishment? Most struggle to see what on earth the problem is.
 
Fraze23 said:
Who is it owned by though? A bunch of dinosaurs who hold a $100 debenture and won't relinquish any control?

I get the club not being for sale line. But I'm not okay with it being controlled by a small group that aren't accountable to anyone other than themselves.
Click to expand...
I think it's disrespectful to call people older than yourself a dinosaur.

I'm nearly 80 yoa...and I feel I still think and spell just as well as most of you, and maybe even better than some.

So, drop the dinosaur tag please unless you know the people personally and know they are not functioning properly.
 
KevB said:
There's no hate mate! No psychologist mate, just a good judge of character from many life experiences.
Click to expand...
Good on you mate. I appreciate your input anyway. Particularly now that I know you're such a good judge of character through your life experiences.

Thank you once again.
 
weststigers said:
I haven't seen anyone do what you accuse, yet you still say it. Diminished and denigrated are quite vague terms.

I'm sure you can't articulate what exactly you mean by that when you say what you say. God knows people have tried to get an answer but it's always followed by silence.

With 90% ownership, you'd think there would be no diminishment? Most struggle to see what on earth the problem is.
Click to expand...
Think you'll find this poster is referring to a suggestion the club be named "Tigers" not Wests Tigers.

Which would diminish the Magpies brand.

And it was suggested on here. You just overlooked it.
 
  • Love
Reactions: BZN
The Chad said:
I don't disagree. I think the current set up of the board is almost like 'reverse discrimination'- it was too far one way, so to rectify it, it's now too far the other way.

I don't get why PVL would sign off on that, unless there is something more to it than we are being told. Most of the reasoning given- and a lot of it is quite reasonable- is still just a bunch of conjecture.

What does not make sense is the belief that PVL laid down the law....by allowing HBG to take control. Yes, independent board members were reinstated, and I think that was great. But it wasn't reinstated as before. Unless that Wests Magpies seat has to be someone NOT HBG affiliated perhaps?

The facts, as can be seen, are that PVL has given the control of the board to HBG after consulting with all sides. If there are three or zero independent board members makes no difference if they hold a minority- they can still be outvoted just as easy.

There must be something more.

It's just as easy to speculate/believe that Dennis Burgess removing himself was part of the agreement. (I'd be inclined to believe that myself) Is it clear that his Wests Tigers board position remains to be filled? Or do they reduce the board composition by 1? That would make it a 50/50 split if the Wests Magpies rep was HBG, or actually back in the control of independents if that position isn't aligned with HBG.

THAT solution makes much more sense.
Click to expand...
It's all puzzling but you can bet that someone on the board is going to have the NRL on speed dial or wearing a wire lol.
 
LiverpoolTiger said:
You seem very active on these topics I noticed lol, probably 100s of posts on the topic.

Anyway, I haven't noticed anyone diminishing Balmain's brand through the tigers or their history on here really, which is the way it should be.

But I have noticed Wests Magpies history denigrated and as I have mentioned previously many pushing for just a Tigers brand or a disconnect of the Wests brand from its traditional history, so I don't know what you referring to there..
Click to expand...
This won't get called out so long as you are in the majority.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BZN
LiverpoolTiger said:
You seem very active on these topics I noticed lol, probably 100s of posts on the topic.

Anyway, I haven't noticed anyone diminishing Balmain's brand through the tigers or their history on here really, which is the way it should be.

But I have noticed Wests Magpies history denigrated and as I have mentioned previously many pushing for just a Tigers brand or a disconnect of the Wests brand from its traditional history, so I don't know what you referring to there..
Click to expand...
You've been able to observe that in just 5 days, total rot.

Another debenture holder has joined the forum.
 
The Chad said:
Think you'll find this poster is referring to a suggestion the club be named "Tigers" not Wests Tigers.

Which would diminish the Magpies brand.

And it was suggested on here. You just overlooked it.
Click to expand...
I saw it. But it's made out like it's the defining thought of the forum. Nobody agreed with that post.
 
BZN said:
I think it's disrespectful to call people older than yourself a dinosaur.

I'm nearly 80 yoa...and I feel I still think and spell just as well as most of you, and maybe even better than some.

So, drop the dinosaur tag please unless you know the people personally and know they are not functioning properly.
Click to expand...
Out of everything the guy said, you chose to engage with one word you didn't like instead of the central point he was making?
 
Rock Hopper Steve said:
It's all puzzling but you can bet that someone on the board is going to have the NRL on speed dial or wearing a wire lol.
Click to expand...
I mean, it's possible.

The independents, I can't imagine there's any way they agree to return to a position on a board that isn't of some use.

I wonder if the reports from those independents to PVL prior to their reinstatement don't paint the same story as we believe?

The only position NOT to be include as part of the PVL intervention was the return of Richo.

Barry O'Farrell's mate.

That doesn't ring true, does it? You'd think Barry would have been 100% behind a Richo return?
 
The Chad said:
I mean, it's possible.

The independents, I can't imagine there's any way they agree to return to a position on a board that isn't of some use.

I wonder if the reports from those independents to PVL prior to their reinstatement don't paint the same story as we believe?

The only position NOT to be include as part of the PVL intervention was the return of Richo.

Barry O'Farrell's mate.

That doesn't ring true, does it? You'd think Barry would have been 100% behind a Richo return?
Click to expand...
I think the stark distinction is the board members were dismissed, whereas Richo resigned.
 
The Chad said:
I mean, it's possible.

The independents, I can't imagine there's any way they agree to return to a position on a board that isn't of some use.

I wonder if the reports from those independents to PVL prior to their reinstatement don't paint the same story as we believe?

The only position NOT to be include as part of the PVL intervention was the return of Richo.

Barry O'Farrell's mate.

That doesn't ring true, does it? You'd think Barry would have been 100% behind a Richo return?
Click to expand...
I think Richo was sick of banging his head against a wall, that video that came out suggested that he was trying to bring in more investment to enable us to grow and they wouldn't have a bar of it.

Without it his hands were tied, no other way to improve the club beyond what he had already achieved their paranoia put the brakes on.
 
innsaneink said:
The riot squad was there...along with a.lot of cops...wests ashfield raised concerns with the local cops...wating their time and taxpayers money
Click to expand...
If they wheeled out the riot squad and police for 900 well mannered supporters today then with 10,000-plus attending Round 2 can we expect sniffer dogs, Polair, water cannons, rubber bullets and pepper spray? Why not lock out supporters completely so the HBG Board can be escorted by police to their "owners" box for free party pies and warm beers without having to see a single orange jersey.
 
The Chad said:
That could explain it, for sure.

Why would you think 3 independents would agree to walk back onto a board they hold no power over?
Click to expand...
I honestly think they are one step removed from NRL administrators. I think their job is to report to the NRL.

It's an opinion. I have no factual basis for it.

It's the only way I can see them accepting a situation that is frankly untenable. Particularly given how they were so publicly terminated and smeared.
 
Rock Hopper Steve said:
I think Richo was sick of banging his head against a wall, that video that came out suggested that he was trying to bring in more investment to enable us to grow and they wouldn't have a bar of it.

Without it his hands were tied, no other way to improve the club beyond what he had already achieved their paranoia put the brakes on.
Click to expand...
Again, that is possible.

The 'complaints' levelled at the very beginning of the whole mess by HBG were about transparency on some business level decisions. They ousted board members.

Those board members are reinstated after PVL intervention, and they agree to come back.

But PVL also spoke to HBG, so he must have heard about their complaint as well.

Richo was integral to gaining investment & organising stadium agreements.

Is it possible HBG believed the board had been involved, but got that wrong & were convinced to take them back- but the blame of the complaint has now been shifted toward Richo?

There is still the shadow of the investigation on Richo, despite everyone believing it's a trumped up charge.

For mine- and I'm just looking at it from what is happening- I can see a possibility that PVL agreed that HBG should have had more say & could understand where the conflict comes from.

Everyone is convinced this is about board control.

The only thing we KNOW from HBG is that they complained they were not consulted on business decisions.

Board control- their desire for it- is something we are willing to believe, but it's still speculation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 705 (members: 17, guests: 688)
Back
Top