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 repeat, IF they really care they would know the names of the removed board members and you know as well as I do that barely any of our players would know their names except Barry O’Farrell who has since been reinstated and the owner of Organica as plenty of our players eat there.
huh? That's nuts. You can care, even when they are faceless. Players had to front the board if you remember, when they didn't meet the standard. How did they feel discussing standards when they saw dennis, who can't even keep himself tidy?

Or how about we go beyond? Nick and Bouris are heavily involved. Souths have Rusty as an owner, along with Atlassian co-founder, Penrith has Greg Alexander. These are names that draw people in. Much like Barry for us, or Charlie V who would have helped the lads get connected financially.

HBG tried to kick Barry out, and Charlie isn't returning. They would have no respect from the playing group.
 
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.
I’m pretty sure Roosters Board members would organise a meet & greet with players and offer them any support they may need in terms of the Board members area of expertise, be it legal, financial, business etc.

I wonder how much work Nathan Cleary had to do to set up his beer label, tipping that was a business connection.

I hope our Board take an interest in the players. Would seem pretty important to me.
 
Last edited:
I’m pretty sure Roosters Board members would organise a meet & greet with players and offer them any support they may need in terms of the Board members area of expertise, be it legal, financial, business etc.

I hope our Board take an interest in the players. Would seem pretty important to me.
Of course if a board member might be able to help them in some way they may take more of an interest, hence the owner of Organica that I keep mentioning.
But at the end of the day they are rugby league players, who are purely focused on getting themselves prepared and playing games to the best of their ability, they have no time or interest in backroom politics.
 
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.
So simplistic

Id doubt theyd know the names ...but headlines like "WTs board sacked" would cause concern no doubt
 
Of course if a board member might be able to help them in some way they may take more of an interest, hence the owner of Organica that I keep mentioning.
But at the end of the day they are rugby league players, who are purely focused on getting themselves prepared and playing games to the best of their ability, they have no time or interest in backroom politics.
If someone can advance their position financially or post-career, they would be all ears.
 
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.
Just read up on the debunture holder system a bit more.

It does sound like a pretty good system tbh.

The more I read into it, the more I scratch my head in trying to figure out what WT can do get out of this perpetual failure.

I hope our new CEO Shaun does a very good job at getting HBG to invest into WT and show them how this could leave to long term growth of WT investing back into the community represented by HBG.

The debt holders have nothing to gain on paper from HBG but the shrewd operators would ensure the contracts that go out to companies (maintenance, cleaning etc), there might be kickbacks from that. I doubt anything like that is audited.

Below the belt but even if Shaun can convince them that please invest $5m into WT, we will give you a kickback of $50k.

Getting desperate here, but trying to understand how their system actually works.

Further to all this, they may not be receiving any money off the profits, but from what I understand, they can still borrow against whatever they're owed if the company goes into liquidation.

Would love for someone with more knowledge to enlighten me in this.
 
There’s a challenge to HBG Board members, who no doubt want to improve their reputation with fans.

What can you do for our playing group (obviously without earning us a cap penalty).
Well well know the Roosters board offer their players plenty, so yes it would be nice if we have some people involved on our board that can offer similar fringe benefits.
I think that is what our old mate Lee Hagi was proposing before his departure,
 
If the players managers don't buy what we are selling or who is selling it, whether the players know every board member or not makes little difference - hence the reference I'm leaving it in the hands of manager.
It is well known which clubs are well run and which ones are not without having to name individual board members. They should be faceless if a club is run well - the results do the talking. We want to know who ours are because we want accountability for years of poor results and unstable governance - that we fans have no control over but suffer for through allegiance. Players are transient - fans are mostly not.

We are well known for being poorly run on the back of instability and our results reflect that. No assuming, possibles, or probables that is a fact and the very reason why our recruitment and retention is always a matter for concern for managers and why they have been known to steer players away from WTs.
 
Do players think twice when coming to the dysfunctional wests tigers? You already know the answer to that.
What were Sione Fainu and Alex Twal thinking to re-sign with such a dysfunctional club ?
Sione in particular would have had many other offers, but he chose a dysfunctional club ?
 
Last edited:

Members online

Back
Top