HBG, Independent Directors Sacked

Merlot said:
Case closed - out with hbg
Click to expand...
Just re-reading the Financial Report for the Dogs:

Sponsorship to CB Bulldogs from Leagues Club - $6,150,000 (WTs $1,700,000)
NRL Grant - $18,190,000 (WTs $19,652,102)
Gate Reciepts - $6,028,754 (WTs $3,308,751)
Sponsorship & Corp Partnership - $10,567,848 (WTs $7,079,682)

Thats where the cash has come from

Total Football Club Operating Monies: $40,936,602 (WTs $31,740,534)

Source: (they have 2x financial reports)



So, to match the Bulldogs, we need a benefactor not only to plough in $50m to buy the football club, but also $10m a year.

Now, @Jolls made a useful and helpful post about our game day revenues from the CEOs forum:

Jolls

Thread 'CEO Forum 20 Jan 26 - Hotwash Part 1'

Hi Team,

This is a long read so strap yourself in for the ride.

I drove up to the Interim CEO’s forum yesterday. It was a worthwhile event despite the fact that there were some attendees that thought it was more about them and their issues than an opportunity for constructive discussion. I’m sure from Shaun and his team’s point of view it was a first-hand opportunity to get a feel for the angst in the fan base.

Barry O’Farrell was in attendance for most of the session; but, unfortunately he ducked out early so I didn’t get a chance to catch him over the bite to eat we had post the...
  • Like
  • Love

I will highlight his quote from Shaun Mielekamp:

Sold out Leichardt at the end of 25 bought in $385K in ticket sales and $60K in corporate $
A not sold out Commbank bought us in $860K in ticket sales and $120K in corporate $

So replicating this across all 7 games played at LO/CT moving to Commbank:

Tickets: Extra Revenue - $3,325,000
Corporate: Extra Revenue - $857k

There is $4m of lost revenue without winning a single new game, without being in the finals.

That takes us within $5m of the Bulldogs operating revenue. This is what the Dogs chose to do however. Forego their heritage and move games to Accor Stadium. This is where they were able to generate a significant chunk of cash. Now, am I suggesting we do the same? No. But we have to mindful when comparing apples and apples that we are making decisions to make the fans happy, but not the club financials.

Question is... where do the Dogs spend that extra $10m the club has? Is it more staff to support the football team? Do they get better hotels when on the road (doubtful, as the NRL negotiates the hotel deal). Do they go up to an away game earlier to prepare for a game, and therefore dont travel so late to a game?

That would be the interesting question to find the answer to
 
Rock Hopper Steve said:
How could he be any worse than what HBG has now, with the pathetic decisions made to destroy the Tigers board that was making the difference, so unprofessional, that just made no sense at all surely you can't be happy with them running the place.
Click to expand...
not happy at all - but replacing one lot of poor administrators with another lot of poor administrators is not the answer.
 
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 7,512 (members: 20, guests: 7,492)
Back
Top