Best thing for Wests Tigers is for Wests to take over the club. I am starting to remind my 7 year old what the Magpie means on his Jersey. Prefer Balmain become financial otherwise I'd rather a Magpies takeover. Wests won't put up unless they get full say over the running of the club.
Marina Go - Members Q&A
- Thread starter Sabre
- Start date
Have any of you forumers heard how the Balmain club is going in terms of their financial position as it stands at the moment,mainly are they trading well in Five Dock and the other site which I have forgotten ?
They could be a big chance of paying back the money if they have good trading figures and Pokies turnover..I'm starting to think that maybe Uncle Harry may help in this sector of the Balmain side of things rather than the Rozzelle project..
Iam only assuming and have no real idea…they may not have any financials at all and could end up in oblivion,Iam only asking as there has been much speculation about what will happen come March 2016 .....either way I was curious..on the other hand I wouldn't mind the WESTS group take it over,some of their people are pretty well money savvy and wouldn't squander it....
They could be a big chance of paying back the money if they have good trading figures and Pokies turnover..I'm starting to think that maybe Uncle Harry may help in this sector of the Balmain side of things rather than the Rozzelle project..
Iam only assuming and have no real idea…they may not have any financials at all and could end up in oblivion,Iam only asking as there has been much speculation about what will happen come March 2016 .....either way I was curious..on the other hand I wouldn't mind the WESTS group take it over,some of their people are pretty well money savvy and wouldn't squander it....
diedpretty
Well-known member
@hammertime said:
The NRL is the major financial contributor to most clubs.
happy_tiger
Well-known member
As I have said previously , very few NRL clubs are actually making money
I would say 3-4 at most make actual profit
I would say 3-4 at most make actual profit
@Knuckles said:
In 1999 Wests were not broke in fact we're in a stronger financial position than Balmain , unfortunately that period was the time the major development was starting at Ashfield…the club asked if they could be given a couple of years grace until all the works was completed but kicked in the guts. We should get the facts right , now we all see who the power house is and how it was always going to be .
I am happy with what we have today ,although saddened with what has happened to Balmain. Next March will be D day for our club hopefully it will be positive .
hammertime
Well-known member
@Knuckles said:
re:Wests. Don't forget the current mess that we are in. Even though it was probably more so the Balmain side who think a bottle of grange is a normal gift to give. You just need to look at the basket case Parramatta to see how bad it can get - they are just lucky they have a tonne of money to throw away.
I'm really godsmacked that any of us would want to revert to a formula that has failed over and over and over again. Especially now when it seems like we are finally righting the ship.
There certainly needs to be a key place for club passion on our board, but not as majority share.
balmain boy
Well-known member
I wonder if people realise we don't have an NRL controlled board. We have 3 board members appointed by the NRL, as well as 2 wests board members.
The 3 independent board members may often vote together if its a decision based on prudent business decisions. That's why they're there as too often emotion has run our boardroom. But there is no guarantee that 3 independent people with no affiliation to one another would always vote together on all matters!
And they're certainly not controlled by the NRL. Do people think that Go gets on the phone with Dave Smith before every meeting and say this is what's on the agenda, what do you want me to do? No chance!
If the balmain side is financial (themselves or a 3rd party) then they would have 2 seats on the board too, bring tigers and wests to 4 and 3 independents. But at least there would be some acumen and common sense in the room before 'football' people go off and make stupid recommendations.
The 3 independent board members may often vote together if its a decision based on prudent business decisions. That's why they're there as too often emotion has run our boardroom. But there is no guarantee that 3 independent people with no affiliation to one another would always vote together on all matters!
And they're certainly not controlled by the NRL. Do people think that Go gets on the phone with Dave Smith before every meeting and say this is what's on the agenda, what do you want me to do? No chance!
If the balmain side is financial (themselves or a 3rd party) then they would have 2 seats on the board too, bring tigers and wests to 4 and 3 independents. But at least there would be some acumen and common sense in the room before 'football' people go off and make stupid recommendations.
diedpretty
Well-known member
@Balmain Boy said:
It seems everyone has totally missed the point I was making and that is if come March the NRL debt is repaid either by Balmain or some other entity and the club return to 100% ownsership why should the NRL have any say in the makeup of the board - they fund 16 teams and will continue to do so - so why don't they have a say on the makeup of all boards of all clubs. The 2+2+3 independents is fine by why should the NRL appoint them - maybe i'm just paranoid but I don't trust the NRL, Dave Smith or Todd Greenberg.
balmain boy
Well-known member
@diedpretty said:
Why? Because the muppets both Balmain and Wests keep selecting have driven this club to the mess its in now. There have been way too many amateur members of boards who dumb decisions have cost us dearly in the past.
The independents are their to ensure we have some intelligent people, who are capable of running successful organisations, to help make key business decisions which will ultimately determine the success of the club.
hammertime
Well-known member
@diedpretty said:
I think the question is why would you trust a setup that has failed us in the past? The NRL is independent and has far more effective governance structures in place that makes it less corruptible than other options. The other option would be that Wests/Balmain vote in the board members, which would leave us in the same predicament which has failed us for over a decade.
The thing is too, I think Balmain and Wests would be the first to put their hands up and say it hasn't worked.
Don't forget also, that structure also provides accountability back to the NRL if the other 4 members see actions they don't like. So even if you don't trust Dave or Todd, they won't have the rule of the roost.
If Balmain could get there two votes back it would give the club a little more security. If the league decided it was time to make a big decision, the combined Magpies/Balmain directors could veto whatever it was they wanted to do. Until then we are in the hands of the NRL ….. which doesnt worry me because if they wanted to say relocate us, it just opens the door for GWS to get a stronger foothold than it already has. I don't dont think the league would be silly enough for that.
I think Balmain have to do more than pay back the loan to get there board seats back, they have to show some financial plans/guarantees for the future or we will be in the same mess again shortly.
Coming originally from the Balmain part of the joint venture, it pains me to say this, but they have no visible means of paying their way, so the best thing for WT is a West Group buyout to get some financial stability in the club, then we may have buckets of cash like the Eels
Coming originally from the Balmain part of the joint venture, it pains me to say this, but they have no visible means of paying their way, so the best thing for WT is a West Group buyout to get some financial stability in the club, then we may have buckets of cash like the Eels
gallagher
Well-known member
@rex2ce said:
It won't be Perth. Thatcould actually work. We'll relocate to Coffs Harbour or some other country town. Maybe Hobart.
diedpretty
Well-known member
@rex2ce said:
From what i have been told it was said at Wests Ashfield last AGM that they weren't interested in acquiring anymore interest in WT.
@diedpretty said:
The biggest risk we have is Wests don't want the WT RLC. That said their CEO Cook I believe is on the WT Board and I'm not sure what else he/they can say. If they said Wests Magpies will take control it would cause an open division with Balmain.
I believe the NRL is running the entire Club at the moment without reference to either Balmain or Wests group.
happy_tiger
Well-known member
What's the exact date Balmain need to meet their financial obligations ??
Members online
- Tigerwould
- Criz
- pawsandclaws1
- Rooly2
- Westoz
- Speed2burn
- BKS
- StarswithStripes
- Merlot
- watersider
- Hbom
- loklok
- Illek
- getagrip
- Suzie-Q
- Jux
- GNR4LIFE
- WhiTe Tiger
- Buttface
- jstigers
- Tom Shines
- Tiger4life43
- supercoach
- Enmore_Tiger
- Betterdays22
- twentyforty
- Chunk
- Demps
- marzie
- Canadian Club
- TigerJunior4
- Jimmy
- Invergowrie_Tiger
- orange&black
- Donny Brasco
- cktiger
- das tigers
- bptiger 0
- Telltails
- BrissieTiger67