HBG, Independent Directors Sacked

[rex2ce]

Pretty spineless interview given no one pressed him about a HBG rep being on the board... if Richo is gone on Monday that's me gone with him

There will be many of us gone if he goes

 

[hammertime]

No worries. Can you point out which section of the Registered Clubs Act you believe Holman Barnes Group is breaching?

Untouched from Google Gemini

The core issue that gives Liquor & Gaming NSW (L&GNSW) authority to act against Holman Barnes Group (HBG) is the recent sacking of the four independent directors from the Wests Tigers board.

The relevant authority is the Registered Clubs Act 1976 (NSW).

L&GNSW's authority focuses on:

1. Failure of Effective Governance: The public boardroom turmoil and director dismissals suggest the board may have ceased to be an effective governing body for the licensed club (Wests Ashfield), which is a breach of compliance standards.
2. Director Suitability & Fiduciary Duty: L&GNSW can investigate whether the actions taken comply with directors' fiduciary duties (acting honestly in members' best interests) and whether directors meet the "fit and proper" person test.

Potential L&GNSW Actions:

• Disqualify/Remove individual directors from holding office.
• In severe cases, appoint a statutory Administrator to take over the club's management

There is more than enough public evidence for both of these, let alone what an investigation would turn up

 

[Tom Shines]

Laundy is 84 … this sport definitely needs an injection of youth !

Not necessarily he is from Balmain and comes from a family of Tigers supporters.
By Richo holding out until Monday you would think there is something in the pipeline he is hoping eventuates, whether it be this or the PVL outcome.

Is the team for sale ? If it was would they sell it to Mr Balmain here?

 

[tigahhh]

so wasn’t clickbait. i accept your apologies

 

[coivtny]

Hooked a few already.

Not sure it’s a hoax at all. The story’s running in The Australian. Apparently old man Laundy is a lifelong Balmain supporter. Now wouldn’t that be funny if Laundy bought out HBG and reinstated the Balmain Tigers if the NRL let him.
Imagine the current outrage (such as it is) switching to joy and the current joy (such as it is) turning to despair.
Would love to read the forum for a few days if that happened.

 

[Batmans Parents]

View attachment 30534

As long as we stayed Wests Tigers, go for it.

 

[Tom Shines]

so wasn’t clickbait. i accept your apologies

Yes I do apologise ..it’s a genuine story and he has been quoted…

Unfortunately , even if he is genuine … the chances of this happening are minimal …. The NRL would have to force it through

 

[coivtny]

Jesus get a grip dick head.

Don’t know what he said but glad I put him on ignore months ago.

 

[weststigers]

I’m sorry but if you think Sydney Tigers or even the JV are equivalent things to changing to bring the Wests Magpies, you are way off the mark. As it was the JV saw a lot of Balmain fans walk away but most, like myself, saw it as a new entity with a strong Balmain element. The Magpies are not that. They weren’t my club, they aren’t my club, they wouldn’t be my club. I’ve got nothing against the Magpies but basically you’re asking me and others to support a new team.

I wouldn’t do it, a lot of others would feel the same. Would a Wests Magpies team gather fresh fans over time? Probably. But how long if ever do you replace the number they’d lose?

I can hear all 300 fans at the newly upgraded Campbelltown stadium now. The echo is cathedral like.

 

[Papacito]

Untouched from Google Gemini

The core issue that gives Liquor & Gaming NSW (L&GNSW) authority to act against Holman Barnes Group (HBG) is the recent sacking of the four independent directors from the Wests Tigers board.

The relevant authority is the Registered Clubs Act 1976 (NSW).

L&GNSW's authority focuses on:

1. Failure of Effective Governance: The public boardroom turmoil and director dismissals suggest the board may have ceased to be an effective governing body for the licensed club (Wests Ashfield), which is a breach of compliance standards.
2. Director Suitability & Fiduciary Duty: L&GNSW can investigate whether the actions taken comply with directors' fiduciary duties (acting honestly in members' best interests) and whether directors meet the "fit and proper" person test.

Potential L&GNSW Actions:

• Disqualify/Remove individual directors from holding office.
• In severe cases, appoint a statutory Administrator to take over the club's management

There is more than enough public evidence for both of these, let alone what an investigation would turn up

Mate, which specific section of the Registered Clubs Act do you believe the Holman Barnes directors have breached by removing directors from Wests Tigers Pty Ltd?

 

[cktiger]

View attachment 30534

Tigers supporter originally.

 

[Vicious]

we want the Wests Tigers & Wests Tigers only... he can get effed with the Balmain chat

It sounds like it will be very Balmain orientated if Laundy buys the club.
Not ideal for me, not ideal for a lot of people, but I reckon HBG will sell for 50 million and at the end of the day HBG knew it wasn’t going to go down well dismissing 4 independent board members some very close to the CEO, so if they sell and the Wests Tigers become very Balmain favoured, it is what it is.
Being smart business men I think they would still want strong ties with the MacArthur region so that won’t change.

 

[Crucible]

too much orange !!

For a Magpie perhaps but not a Tiger !!!!

 

[Jedi_Tiger]

And there it is. You’re really just another bitter old geriatric Magpie fan with a huge chip on his shoulder, blaming everyone and everything else for the fact that your dead club is widely regarded as a joke.

The day can’t come soon enough for the Wests Tigers becoming their own entity and the Magpies franchise, along with their colostomy-carrying bingo loving fans like you, are nothing more than a bad memory.

a bitter old magpie indeed

balmain tigers are dead

wests tigers for the last 25 years that is the club playing out of campbletown and leichardt

 

[weststigers]

Can someone give these guys a call? [perhaps not, they're Queenslander's 😛]

https://bosslawyers.com.au/understa...ights-and-remedies-for-minority-shareholders/

Shareholder oppression is a significant issue that can leave minority shareholders vulnerable to unfair treatment by majority stakeholders or company directors. If you find yourself excluded from key decisions, denied access to financial records, or unfairly stripped of your dividends, you may be experiencing shareholder oppression. Understanding your legal rights and the remedies available under Australian corporate law is essential to protect your interests.


At Boss Lawyers, we specialise in representing oppressed shareholders and ensuring they receive fair treatment. In this article, we explore what constitutes shareholder oppression, legal protections under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), and how you can take action to safeguard your investment.

What Is Shareholder Oppression?​

Shareholder oppression occurs when those in control of a company engage in conduct that is unfairly prejudicial or discriminatory towards minority shareholders. This can manifest in various ways, including:

• Exclusion from Management – Being shut out from key business decisions despite holding shares.
• Financial Misconduct – Misuse of company funds or excessive payments to directors at the expense of shareholders.
• Dilution of Shares – Issuing new shares unfairly, reducing the ownership stake of existing shareholders.
• Withholding Dividends – Unjustifiably refusing to distribute profits while directors receive high salaries.
• Denial of Information – Preventing access to company financial records or key decision-making processes.

If you are facing any of these issues, legal action may be necessary to ensure you receive fair treatment.

Legal Protections for Oppressed Shareholders​

Under Section 232 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), the court can intervene when a company’s affairs are conducted in a manner that is oppressive, unfairly prejudicial, or discriminatory to a shareholder. If shareholder oppression is proven, the court has broad powers to grant remedies under Section 233, including:

• Forced Buyout – Ordering majority shareholders or the company to buy out the oppressed shareholder’s shares at a fair market value.
• Company Winding Up – As a last resort, the court can order the company to be dissolved.
• Regulating Company Conduct – The court may impose rules on how the company should operate to prevent further oppression.
• Constitutional Changes – Altering the company’s governance structure to protect minority shareholders.

Seeking legal advice early can help determine the best course of action in your specific situation.

Case Study: How Courts Value an Oppressed Shareholder’s Interest​

A landmark case in Australia, Russell v Lee Holdings Pty Ltd [No 3] [2020] WASC 346, provides important insights into how courts approach shareholder oppression claims.


In this case, the Supreme Court of Western Australia was asked to determine the fair value of an oppressed shareholder’s stake. The court rejected attempts to apply discounts for lack of control or marketability, ensuring the minority shareholder received a fair price for their shares.


This case highlights the importance of obtaining professional valuation advice when negotiating a buyout and seeking court intervention if necessary.

Steps to Take if You Are Being Oppressed​

If you believe you are being subjected to shareholder oppression, consider taking the following steps:

1. Document Everything – Keep records of all actions that you believe are oppressive, including financial statements, meeting minutes, and correspondence.
2. Seek Legal Advice – A lawyer experienced in corporate disputes can assess your situation and advise you on potential legal remedies.
3. Negotiate a Resolution – In some cases, a negotiated buyout or settlement may be preferable to litigation.
4. File Legal Proceedings – If negotiations fail, court intervention may be necessary to enforce your rights and secure fair compensation.

Trust me, this is not the path to go down. The minority is usually forced to sell their share, not the other way around. This would be the final nail in the coffin.

On a side note, did you know if HBG decide to list on the ASX, they can force Balmain to sell their stake because they own 90%.

We want a forced sale instigated by the NRL under threat of non-renewal of licence. This is the only path forward.

ASIC, Liquor and Gaming, legal action and protests might create minor inconvenience to HBG, but the problem will remain.

 

[Jedi_Tiger]

Not sure it’s a hoax at all. The story’s running in The Australian. Apparently old man Laundy is a lifelong Balmain supporter. Now wouldn’t that be funny if Laundy bought out HBG and reinstated the Balmain Tigers if the NRL let him.
Imagine the current outrage (such as it is) switching to joy and the current joy (such as it is) turning to despair.
Would love to read the forum for a few days if that happened.

as long as he keeps.it as wests tigers, good move

 

[jadtiger]

Not sure it’s a hoax at all. The story’s running in The Australian. Apparently old man Laundy is a lifelong Balmain supporter. Now wouldn’t that be funny if Laundy bought out HBG and reinstated the Balmain Tigers if the NRL let him.
Imagine the current outrage (such as it is) switching to joy and the current joy (such as it is) turning to despair.
Would love to read the forum for a few days if that happened.

Mate i was as big a Balmain supporter as you could find but i do not want the return of Balmain or the return of the Magpies either,however i do want good governance at WT and that is something that HBG has never delivered.If and it's a big IF someone (like Laundy) came along and bought those DS HBG people out i would welcome it with open arms but we would have to be called WT as we have been for 25 years now.
HBG have been a disaster just as they were at the Magpies when they won 17 wooden spoons.

 

[WesternSuburbsBoy]

It sounds like it will be very Balmain orientated if Laundy buys the club.
Not ideal for me, not ideal for a lot of people, but I reckon HBG will sell for 50 million and at the end of the day HBG knew it wasn’t going to go down well dismissing 4 independent board members some very close to the CEO, so if they sell and the Wests Tigers become very Balmain favoured, it is what it is.
Being smart business men I think they would still want strong ties with the MacArthur region so that won’t change.

“It’s not a harmonious set-up. Wests would be better off without Balmain and Balmain would be better off without Wests.”
Sounds a lot to me like he wants sack off Wests & bring in Balmain as a sole entity.

 

[Terry T.Nuts]

As long as we stayed Wests Tigers, go for it.

Totally, if it stays Wests Tigers then this would be a hell of a lot better than having bickering parties.

 

[wonka]

Laundy is exactly what we need he will pump heaps of $$$ into football operations.
He will only hire the best people, We will finally be a destination club for players.