HBG, Independent Directors Sacked

gallagher said:
Any idea why we get a grant of $19.6 and the dogs get $18.2?
Click to expand...
yea i though that was strange as well - its the figures that were quoted in both financial statements. Would probably need a breakdown of the separate amounts within each grant to see where the difference is. It could be a one off grant all clubs receive that is accounted for differently - just guessing.
 
diedpretty said:
i thought that was the whole aim of Richo, HBG and WT board - to have WT a standalone financial entity.
Click to expand...
I don't think it was independent in that fashion, but independent in its ability to make decisions around strategy and its own budget. Making a profit to support itself I think was a way to demonstrate what competent business leadership can achieve.
 
diedpretty said:
not happy at all - but replacing one lot of poor administrators with another lot of poor administrators is not the answer.
Click to expand...
They are only nominated as interim on the PDF file, but from what actions the present clowns took before Christmas honestly could the next lot be any worse at making decisions for a football club, my only concern is how Wests Tigers are led.

Mate to be honest the whole politics side of the club bores me shitless I would rather be talking footy thank god it will be here soon, but these latest hair brain actions just made me see red.

You know what I wish, a new board gets elected and they decide that running Wests Tigers is beyond them and they sell it, but unfortunately that's when I wake up from my euphoric dream.
 
Last edited:
diedpretty said:
yea i though that was strange as well - its the figures that were quoted in both financial statements. Would probably need a breakdown of the separate amounts within each grant to see where the difference is. It could be a one off grant all clubs receive that is accounted for differently - just guessing.
Click to expand...
I made a comment about this earlier. From what I can see from some notes on the NRL pages, each club gets the same fixed amount, then the NRL tops up the grant which is flexible and is based on the local NRL nursery. Thus, WTs, Penrith and Souths for example get an elevated top up, as the "nursery areas" are bigger.

The Dogs don't have such a geographical reach and not as big a junior nursery.

At least, that's how I seemed to understand things. Maybe someone can either confirm this or explain where my reasoning from the NRL pages is not correct
 
Rock Hopper Steve said:
They are only nominated as interim on the PDF file, but from what actions the present clowns took before Christmas honestly could the next lot be any worse at making decisions for a football club, my only concern is how Wests Tigers are led.

Mate to be honest the whole politics side of the club bores me shitless I would rather be talking footy thank god it will be here soon, but these latest hair brain actions just made me see red.

You know what I wish, a new board gets elected and they decide that running Wests Tigers is beyond them and they sell it, but unfortunately that's when I wake up from my euphoric dream.
Click to expand...
My cynical take on what the HBG board did before Xmas... The wanted Richo gone as they saw he was doing things without consulting the board on some things and was breaching his remit. They hatched this little plan to see if he'd quit. And of course he did.

If that's what they actually did, it was poorly executed and not well thought out. But ultimately Richo has gone and, I'll be absolutely honest in my opinion, we have a better administrator with "youth" on his side who could be a long term solution in Mielekamp. If he does as well with Wests as he did with The Mariners, we are in for a good time!
 
cdinoz007 said:
My cynical take on what the HBG board did before Xmas... The wanted Richo gone as they saw he was doing things without consulting the board on some things and was breaching his remit. They hatched this little plan to see if he'd quit. And of course he did.

If that's what they actually did, it was poorly executed and not well thought out. But ultimately Richo has gone and, I'll be absolutely honest in my opinion, we have a better administrator with "youth" on his side who could be a long term solution in Mielekamp. If he does as well with Wests as he did with The Mariners, we are in for a good time!
Click to expand...
Then why did they say they back Richo in their statement sacking the board? Bunch of liars if that’s the case.
 
cdinoz007 said:
My cynical take on what the HBG board did before Xmas... The wanted Richo gone as they saw he was doing things without consulting the board on some things and was breaching his remit. They hatched this little plan to see if he'd quit. And of course he did.

If that's what they actually did, it was poorly executed and not well thought out. But ultimately Richo has gone and, I'll be absolutely honest in my opinion, we have a better administrator with "youth" on his side who could be a long term solution in Mielekamp. If he does as well with Wests as he did with The Mariners, we are in for a good time!
Click to expand...
So they damaged the reputation of the directors of the Wests Tigers to oust Richo while saying he had their full support?

These incompetent people are who you want running our club?
 
cdinoz007 said:
My cynical take on what the HBG board did before Xmas... The wanted Richo gone as they saw he was doing things without consulting the board on some things and was breaching his remit. They hatched this little plan to see if he'd quit. And of course he did.

If that's what they actually did, it was poorly executed and not well thought out. But ultimately Richo has gone and, I'll be absolutely honest in my opinion, we have a better administrator with "youth" on his side who could be a long term solution in Mielekamp. If he does as well with Wests as he did with The Mariners, we are in for a good time!
Click to expand...
But who from a professional perspective sacks a well performing board to achieve that result, it's an us first mentality that looks to be the main catalyst as well as other blunders for the attempt to have them purged.

Hell, members from W.A. have had a gutful of them and want them gone on top of the majority of Tigers fans, if they had any integrity, they would realise their members have no confidence in them anymore and they would walk.

I know you don't like it, but their reign looks to be in jeopardy, as for Shaun jury's out as CEO of Wests Tigers.
 
Last edited:
Numbers for Parramatta Leagues Club FY2024:

NRL Grant - $19,442,250 (excl grant related to CoE)
Sponsorship and Hospitality - $12,346,565
Gate Revenue - $8,375,213

Exl any club money - Total Revenue = $40,164,028

All I can find in the annual report as to what the leagues club poured in is a note on page 14 which states "Paramatta National Rugby League - Over $1m"

But lets face it, with $40m in revenue from the NRL, sponsorship and gate money, they probably dont need the leagues club to tip money in.

The question here, with all that cash, why are Parramatta not always in the top 4 of the football clubs?
 
Rock Hopper Steve said:
But who from a professional perspective sacks a well performing board to achieve that result, it's an us first mentality that looks to be the main catalyst as well as other blunders for the attempt to have them purged.

Hell, members from W.A. have had a gutful of them and want them gone on top of the majority of Tigers fans, if they had any integrity, they would realise their members have no confidence in them anymore and they would walk.

I know you don't like it, but their reign looks to be in jeopardy, as for Shaun jury's out as CEO of Wests tigers.
Click to expand...
My question here... how do we know they were a well performing board? What exactly did this board do which we can had on heart say "performed well"??

Heresay from the club says that Richo wasnt consulting the board on many things and was making his own decisions - which suggests the board may have been largely ineffective.

And if Richo WAS doing things without consulting the board, and they knew he was signing docs he wasnt authorise to, does that make them a success? Or does that make them negligent in ignoring what was happening right under their noses?

And your second point.... I will wager less than 25% of the 25,000 WA members care about the Wests Tigers. The majority care that:
  1. The beer is cold
  2. Food is available
  3. The pokies are working
Most members care that the Leagues Club is making money. Some of them are happy that Wests Cricket is being funded, or Wests Apia Soccer is being funded.

Most members of WA actually dont want the board gone. The club is profitable. They have plans to extend the club building on Liverpool Rd over the car park.

Its only a few unhappy WTs fans who want the Ashfield board gone.
 
cdinoz007 said:
Numbers for Parramatta Leagues Club FY2024:

NRL Grant - $19,442,250 (excl grant related to CoE)
Sponsorship and Hospitality - $12,346,565
Gate Revenue - $8,375,213

Exl any club money - Total Revenue = $40,164,028

All I can find in the annual report as to what the leagues club poured in is a note on page 14 which states "Paramatta National Rugby League - Over $1m"

But lets face it, with $40m in revenue from the NRL, sponsorship and gate money, they probably dont need the leagues club to tip money in.

The question here, with all that cash, why are Parramatta not always in the top 4 of the football clubs?
Click to expand...
Goes without saying the rich clubs don’t need the hand outs. They aren’t constant contenders because of their awful junior retention.
cdinoz007 said:
My question here... how do we know they were a well performing board? What exactly did this board do which we can had on heart say "performed well"??

Heresay from the club says that Richo wasnt consulting the board on many things and was making his own decisions - which suggests the board may have been largely ineffective.

And if Richo WAS doing things without consulting the board, and they knew he was signing docs he wasnt authorise to, does that make them a success? Or does that make them negligent in ignoring what was happening right under their noses?

And your second point.... I will wager less than 25% of the 25,000 WA members care about the Wests Tigers. The majority care that:
  1. The beer is cold
  2. Food is available
  3. The pokies are working
Most members care that the Leagues Club is making money. Some of them are happy that Wests Cricket is being funded, or Wests Apia Soccer is being funded.

Most members of WA actually dont want the board gone. The club is profitable. They have plans to extend the club building on Liverpool Rd over the car park.

Its only a few unhappy WTs fans who want the Ashfield board gone
Click to expand...
They were up on literally all metrics for the club. And secured funding for both grounds which looked almost impossible at one point. Again, this didn’t all happen by accident. If they weren’t being effective PVL wouldn’t of reinstated them himself.
 
cdinoz007 said:
My question here... how do we know they were a well performing board? What exactly did this board do which we can had on heart say "performed well"??

Heresay from the club says that Richo wasnt consulting the board on many things and was making his own decisions - which suggests the board may have been largely ineffective.

And if Richo WAS doing things without consulting the board, and they knew he was signing docs he wasnt authorise to, does that make them a success? Or does that make them negligent in ignoring what was happening right under their noses?

And your second point.... I will wager less than 25% of the 25,000 WA members care about the Wests Tigers. The majority care that:
  1. The beer is cold
  2. Food is available
  3. The pokies are working
Most members care that the Leagues Club is making money. Some of them are happy that Wests Cricket is being funded, or Wests Apia Soccer is being funded.

Most members of WA actually dont want the board gone. The club is profitable. They have plans to extend the club building on Liverpool Rd over the car park.

Its only a few unhappy WTs fans who want the Ashfield board gone.
Click to expand...
So it was only the independents that were at fault?
 
cdinoz007 said:
My question here... how do we know they were a well performing board? What exactly did this board do which we can had on heart say "performed well"??

Heresay from the club says that Richo wasnt consulting the board on many things and was making his own decisions - which suggests the board may have been largely ineffective.

And if Richo WAS doing things without consulting the board, and they knew he was signing docs he wasnt authorise to, does that make them a success? Or does that make them negligent in ignoring what was happening right under their noses?

And your second point.... I will wager less than 25% of the 25,000 WA members care about the Wests Tigers. The majority care that:
  1. The beer is cold
  2. Food is available
  3. The pokies are working
Most members care that the Leagues Club is making money. Some of them are happy that Wests Cricket is being funded, or Wests Apia Soccer is being funded.

Most members of WA actually dont want the board gone. The club is profitable. They have plans to extend the club building on Liverpool Rd over the car park.

Its only a few unhappy WTs fans who want the Ashfield board gone.
Click to expand...
I want them out of Wests Tigers decision making as they have shown that they are incapable in that area.
 
cdinoz007 said:
My question here... how do we know they were a well performing board? What exactly did this board do which we can had on heart say "performed well"??

Heresay from the club says that Richo wasnt consulting the board on many things and was making his own decisions - which suggests the board may have been largely ineffective.

And if Richo WAS doing things without consulting the board, and they knew he was signing docs he wasnt authorise to, does that make them a success? Or does that make them negligent in ignoring what was happening right under their noses?

And your second point.... I will wager less than 25% of the 25,000 WA members care about the Wests Tigers. The majority care that:
  1. The beer is cold
  2. Food is available
  3. The pokies are working
Most members care that the Leagues Club is making money. Some of them are happy that Wests Cricket is being funded, or Wests Apia Soccer is being funded.

Most members of WA actually dont want the board gone. The club is profitable. They have plans to extend the club building on Liverpool Rd over the car park.

Its only a few unhappy WTs fans who want the Ashfield board gone.
Click to expand...
If only 25% of W.A. are interested in Wests Tigers what's the point of even owning it, let someone else who is a 100% invested in it have it.

I'll say it one more time considering you won't listen the first time I don't give a rats about what goes on over at Ashfield, just want the best for the footy club.

Look you seem to want the existing board and most of the forum don't, let's leave at that, it's like a dog chasing its tail.
 
Rock Hopper Steve said:
If only 25% of W.A. are interested in Wests Tigers what's the point of even owning it, let someone else who is a 100% invested in it have it.

I'll say it one more time considering you won't listen the first time I don't give a rats about what goes on over at Ashfield, just want the best for the footy club.

Look you seem to want the existing board and most of the forum don't, let's leave at that, it's like a dog chasing its tail.
Click to expand...
Some people support HBG like it is a sporting team. Blind faith.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 366 (members: 2, guests: 364)
Back
Top