innsaneink
Well-known member
Fiery why?
Some green lesbo lefties there?
Some green lesbo lefties there?
the leichhardt mayor (greens party?) was there but did not make a comment.
there was the waterloo st activist group who is pretty much anti any development but did raise some good points re the possible delay with the implementation of the metro. was mobbed by the crowd who blamed the group for delaying the approval for 3 years.
there was some nutter who just believed the entire elias family was corrupt. kept gibbering how elias dad is rich (good luck to him i say) made no sense whatsoever.
after the third person spoke against the development oldies were literally shaking their walking sticks in the air and shouting down opponents. hilarious.
overall though there were some very good comments made to amend the proposal to allow for greater transparency of the details surrounding the deal and perhaps even having an independent consultant verify that there was no conflict of interest with benny being on the board. the tigers management though was in a hurry to get this approved and shut the argument down quick smart. understandably given when you review the financials they have been absolutely bleeding money for months…
there was the waterloo st activist group who is pretty much anti any development but did raise some good points re the possible delay with the implementation of the metro. was mobbed by the crowd who blamed the group for delaying the approval for 3 years.
there was some nutter who just believed the entire elias family was corrupt. kept gibbering how elias dad is rich (good luck to him i say) made no sense whatsoever.
after the third person spoke against the development oldies were literally shaking their walking sticks in the air and shouting down opponents. hilarious.
overall though there were some very good comments made to amend the proposal to allow for greater transparency of the details surrounding the deal and perhaps even having an independent consultant verify that there was no conflict of interest with benny being on the board. the tigers management though was in a hurry to get this approved and shut the argument down quick smart. understandably given when you review the financials they have been absolutely bleeding money for months…
G
Guest
Guest
Benny Elias' Tiger survival plan gets support
By Byron Kaye From: The Daily Telegraph August 28, 2009 12:50AM
\
\
BENNY Elias was "over the moon" last night after Balmain members backed his controversial redevelopment plan aimed at saving the club.
After an emotional hour-long meeting of up to 300 members, the former Test hooker's proposal won the support of about 90 per cent of voters at the Victoria Rd premises.
It came as opponents complained they were shouted down, that the meeting was stacked and the plan did not have enough detail.
But Elias said he was acting in the interests of the century-old club that made him one of the game's biggest stars.
"I respect the people who were against [the plan]. But they were predominantly people living behind the club," he said.
"You can undersand their frustrations but it's a great thing for the club. We want to ensure that it goes forward for another 100 years."
Elias said his consortium could stop the club going broke by moving to temporary premises for five years while the site was redeveloped.
He has promised that the club, which is losing $100,000 a month, will emerge from the restructure debt-free.
But some Balmain members are sceptical whether the plan will work, and claim they were not given enough information before the proposal was carried.
"It was overridden by the directors," Colin Bailey, a member for 20 years who voted against the proposal, said.
"It was all emotion, no facts, no figures.
"There was not much in the way of substance. It's a titanic, it's going to go down."
Taffa, a member since 1983, said: "The whole deal has been hidden from members of the Balmain Leagues Club.
One member who voted for the proposal, who declined to give his name, said: "The club's been in the NRL for 100 years and I want to see my club in the competition for 100 years more."
By Byron Kaye From: The Daily Telegraph August 28, 2009 12:50AM
\
\
BENNY Elias was "over the moon" last night after Balmain members backed his controversial redevelopment plan aimed at saving the club.
After an emotional hour-long meeting of up to 300 members, the former Test hooker's proposal won the support of about 90 per cent of voters at the Victoria Rd premises.
It came as opponents complained they were shouted down, that the meeting was stacked and the plan did not have enough detail.
But Elias said he was acting in the interests of the century-old club that made him one of the game's biggest stars.
"I respect the people who were against [the plan]. But they were predominantly people living behind the club," he said.
"You can undersand their frustrations but it's a great thing for the club. We want to ensure that it goes forward for another 100 years."
Elias said his consortium could stop the club going broke by moving to temporary premises for five years while the site was redeveloped.
He has promised that the club, which is losing $100,000 a month, will emerge from the restructure debt-free.
But some Balmain members are sceptical whether the plan will work, and claim they were not given enough information before the proposal was carried.
"It was overridden by the directors," Colin Bailey, a member for 20 years who voted against the proposal, said.
"It was all emotion, no facts, no figures.
"There was not much in the way of substance. It's a titanic, it's going to go down."
Taffa, a member since 1983, said: "The whole deal has been hidden from members of the Balmain Leagues Club.
One member who voted for the proposal, who declined to give his name, said: "The club's been in the NRL for 100 years and I want to see my club in the competition for 100 years more."
kind of agree. i voted in favour of the proposal on the basis that really the club needs to move quickly. (financially the situation is dire as the last few annual reports have shown). we are however, putting a great deal of trust in the board and benny without being able to see all the facts…
as far as i understand it the club gives up the rights to all its property and its land in exchange for its liabilities being paid out. what the developer makes out of the complex is purely theirs. the club removes debt and gets a 60year lease at market rate for a much bigger and better premises.
fingers crossed it comes off... wish it would be built sooner than 3 - 8 years!
as far as i understand it the club gives up the rights to all its property and its land in exchange for its liabilities being paid out. what the developer makes out of the complex is purely theirs. the club removes debt and gets a 60year lease at market rate for a much bigger and better premises.
fingers crossed it comes off... wish it would be built sooner than 3 - 8 years!
I've been chatting to a few people about this and after reading comments in the paper this morning it seems a good portion of the public do not understand the arrangement.
**Balmain Tigers Football Club** (the team, the juniors, the game, the balls, ect.) is a club owned by memember which gets it primary revenue from its revenue raising enterprise **TIGERS Leagues Club** in Rozelle (Balmain Tigers Leagues Club). Last night, members voted to sell the property to **Rozelle Village** who would redevelop the site into a new, profitable building.
Now I might have a few of the specific arragements out of order or what not, but generally that's the setup of the organisation.
So, contrary to some comments, Benny Elias does not and will not own even 1% of the football club.
He will, however, own it's primary asset, revenue stream and ability to operate.
**Balmain Tigers Football Club** (the team, the juniors, the game, the balls, ect.) is a club owned by memember which gets it primary revenue from its revenue raising enterprise **TIGERS Leagues Club** in Rozelle (Balmain Tigers Leagues Club). Last night, members voted to sell the property to **Rozelle Village** who would redevelop the site into a new, profitable building.
Now I might have a few of the specific arragements out of order or what not, but generally that's the setup of the organisation.
So, contrary to some comments, Benny Elias does not and will not own even 1% of the football club.
He will, however, own it's primary asset, revenue stream and ability to operate.
softlaw
Well-known member
@smeghead said:
It sounds like they've been trying for an arms length tender for some time & all options fell through because noone has any money atm. ie. the tender process failed. Onya Bennie for standing up! I'm sure there is something in it for him but what's the problem with that? There's enough smart business fellas on the board to keep a reasonable rein on this you would hope.
Also thanks to those who've given a rundown on what happened at the meeting. I was wondering what the opposition they were talking about in the paper was so thanks for the clarification!
Gary_Bakerloo
New member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2009
- Messages
- 2,553
@Geo. said:
All 3 leagues clubs have a loyalty to their members, not the joint venture and some could even argue, to their respective football club (ie Wests and Balmain). None of the leagues clubs provides any funding for the JV, they only contribute to their respective football clubs to assist with the State Cup and junior teams.
All revenue for the Wests Tigers comes from the NRL, gate receipts, memberships and merchandise.
So does that mean the club will not make a cent from any of the profits of the re-development? We are simply selling our land to pay off our current debt. (how much is this?)
I though the entire redevelopment was about securing a revenue stream for the club for years to come.
I though the entire redevelopment was about securing a revenue stream for the club for years to come.
@clontarfkid said:
It's not that simple. Balmain have had a plan in place to sort this out for some time now and it has involved "arms length" tenders & quoations to develop the property. It was going ahead with Reed Property Group headed by the Lehmann brothers but when the Global Financial Crisis hit, the Lehmann brothers went bust, REed had to pull out and in a suddenly difficult market and climate, there are no other developers wanting to step into the breach.
I too wondered how it got to this stage but it isnt as it appears. To me it appears to be a mixture of Benny making a $$$ (as any developer would and should in this case) but also being genuine in his desire to help the club as he is stepping in when others wont.
Glenn
the club does not profit from the re-development unless the re-development exceeds what was expected (this is difficult to clarify).
what the club does do is sell its property worth $25M for payment of its $25M debt (there or thereabouts). it does not make money from the sale or lease of the properties developed on the land as it will no longer own the land or the buildings.
what the club does get is up to a 60 year lease (at its option), at market rate increased at 4% every year, for a much larger and more efficient premises. (they could sub-lease space if possible). so we get the removal of the non-current assets and long-term liabilities, which is the main aim - i.e. the bank is knocking on the door…
just to clarify the club did not run a formal tender process. it held discussions with developers but did not issue a public nor a private request for proposal (RFP). when these various discussions fell through then benny's offer was made, i.e. after all other options were exhausted. this is where the alleged conflict of interest emerges because benny was on the board and involved in the previous discussions he would in all likelihood have full knowledge of the financial offer made by the other developers as well as knowing that the club needed an agreement urgently.
i don't think anyone has a problem with benny making money as long as the club is also accounted for. as a balmain stalwart the view is he wouldn't sell the club out but that was the argument of the opponents to the motion. i personally voted in favour of the proposal.
what the club does do is sell its property worth $25M for payment of its $25M debt (there or thereabouts). it does not make money from the sale or lease of the properties developed on the land as it will no longer own the land or the buildings.
what the club does get is up to a 60 year lease (at its option), at market rate increased at 4% every year, for a much larger and more efficient premises. (they could sub-lease space if possible). so we get the removal of the non-current assets and long-term liabilities, which is the main aim - i.e. the bank is knocking on the door…
just to clarify the club did not run a formal tender process. it held discussions with developers but did not issue a public nor a private request for proposal (RFP). when these various discussions fell through then benny's offer was made, i.e. after all other options were exhausted. this is where the alleged conflict of interest emerges because benny was on the board and involved in the previous discussions he would in all likelihood have full knowledge of the financial offer made by the other developers as well as knowing that the club needed an agreement urgently.
i don't think anyone has a problem with benny making money as long as the club is also accounted for. as a balmain stalwart the view is he wouldn't sell the club out but that was the argument of the opponents to the motion. i personally voted in favour of the proposal.
B
Bashir
Guest
People that have a bone to pick with Benny and his motives have no idea about developments. Benny has taken a big risk with this project. 23mil is rather expensive for this thing 
pen_mouth: , if he doesn't get approval for higher density, he could lose a heap! He is taking a big risk IMO
pen_mouth: , if he doesn't get approval for higher density, he could lose a heap! He is taking a big risk IMOBalmain_Bug
New member
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2009
- Messages
- 2,484
Benny will become a very very wealthy man from this.
I cant see how it will benefit Balmain Tigers Leagues Club. He will own it Whats the point?? Keeping the name alive under someone elses private ownersship ??
I cant see how it will benefit Balmain Tigers Leagues Club. He will own it Whats the point?? Keeping the name alive under someone elses private ownersship ??
@Gary Bakerloo said:
Did that change…..I thought the Leagues clubs tipped something into the joint venture at one stage or another....?
Surely they don't just provide the Wests Tigers Board of Directors....?
Gobbs
New member
Leagues club grants still apply to assist NRL clubs financially. However, Wests Tigers receive a reduced amount compared to their rivals as they generate more revenue and profit from commercial ventures _(ANZ/SFS Deal's)_, sponsorship, gate receipts and merchandise.
AmericanHistoryX
Well-known member
this is where the yawning emoticon come in handy. we've got bigger chickens to fry right now. the prince is on to us.
@Gobbs said:
Thanks Gobbs….I knew they tipped something in....obviously not as much as other Sydney Clubs
Makes me wonder why if they could afford it...given current financial pressure on Leagues Clubs they couldn't tip more in...On top of the commercial ventures etc
Might be able to spend up to the Cap then....
weststigers
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2009
- Messages
- 3,297
@Balmain Bug said:
Well put simply, and I'm sure there is much more to it, but there seems to be around $25 Million worth of debt which is being carried by Balmain Leagues. That costs the Leagues Club a hell of a lot of interest and repayments every month. They are losing $100,000 PER MONTH. Technically, the Leagues Club doesn't even own the land, the bank does! The deal is that Balmain Leagues walks away debt free in exchange for the land. Don't you think they will become immediately more profitable since they're not paying any $25 Million loans back anymore?
As far as choosing who will own the land. You have 2 choices:
1\. Benny's consortium
2\. The bank
I'll go with Benny….
Staff online
-
DempsModerator