Reported by Carryanis and Read Dec 1
HBG video was posted Dec 1 also but youtube description says Dec 2
HBG, Independent Directors Sacked
- Thread starter BlackWhiteGold
- Start date
HBG video was posted Dec 1 also but youtube description says Dec 2
Tucker
Well-known member
Possibly. I think this was likely orchestrated to get Richardson to walk away.
Jedi_Tiger
Well-known member
shame
with this clown show running it not much hope of success
Rock Hopper Steve
Well-known member
Imagine the euphoria among the army of Wests Tigers supporters, it would be celebrated like the New Year's Eve 1999.
liltiger
Well-known member
Give the muppets running the joint enough rope to cause the joint more problems and your right it wont be a sale, the N.R.L will just disband the board and appoint an administrator. It will happen eventually, HBG are too stupid and arrogant not to.
Neither was Venezuela. But whatever helps you sleep at night, mate.
The Chad
Well-known member
I don't know. Honestly- I've said this quite a lot- I don't know why they have done some of the things they have.
Tucker might have the right of it- more a PR exercise as they were getting roundly berated at the time.
Maybe they felt responsible to explain to fans why they were changing it BECAUSE they were looking to change something largely driven by fan requests?
What I will say is, despite taking O'Farrell back, at no point have HBG changed that statement/given a new one. So, on face value of it, they felt, as a group, that they were left out of significant financial decisions at a board level.
How that came about is open to speculation.
What I believe/suspect is- with the way HBG shifted gears on the board members post the Richardson resignation- having Richardson out of the club eased the situation.
Read into that what you like, but the two things together, combined with O'Farrell & Richardson signing off on the ground allocations.. I imagine this is the focal point.
If I was a betting man, my guess would be that HBG felt Richardson (and to a lesser degree O'Farrell/independent board members) was making decisions that HBG felt should have been run past them as the main financial partner of the Wests Tigers (not including grants etc).
The Chad
Well-known member
No need- apologies if it offended.
king_sirro
Well-known member
So are you saying Richardson and O'Farrell were signing off on major things without board approval therefore breaking the law?
The Chad
Well-known member
I'm saying HBG felt they were not being consulted on things in the way they felt they should have been.
Again, I don't KNOW anything. People want to run with speculation- that's my version of speculation.
king_sirro
Well-known member
But Legally the board has to sign off on things so how didnt they know things?
The Chad
Well-known member
No idea.
What's the timeline between the Wests Tigers board putting forward a motion & signing off, to the 2 HBG members sitting in front of HBG & getting the HBG board to agree with it?
Could a few decisions have been pushed through, signed off by the Wests Tigers board, but the HBG board members NOT sitting on the Wests Tigers board didn't agree? But before their concerns were heard, the motion is passed & actioned?
Don't know.
Good old Chad doesnt know anything when defending HBG's actions but defends them consistently as the aggressors, but when it comes to Richardson and OFarrelll still doesn't know anything but comes up with a theory to discredit them.
king_sirro
Well-known member
Chad i admire your calmness in discussing things and your obviously more eloquent than they likes of me, however I sort of feel like your calling people out for speculating, but in a way your doing the same speculation, just throwing in the odd "no one knows" line to deflect away your point of view and opinion that you are pushing.
king_sirro
Well-known member
I didn't see this before I wrote my last post, basically what I said, glad your picking up on that as well
The Chad
Well-known member
Haha- thank you.
I speculate ONCE & I'm tarred with being an avid speculator.. Haha.
Honestly- what I'm suggesting is- if we want to run with speculation AGAINST HBG, you can just as easily run with speculation FOR HBG if you try to.
king_sirro
Well-known member
So by that theory the HBG wanted a board that just did what they said
My theory is Chads on HBGs PR team
