Blair_Battalion
New member
@gallagher said:
I think the NRL grant is about 8 million a year, so it's effectively advanced payments for the 2014 grant. That's the way I see it anyway, I'm no expert lol.
_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
Meriton could drop major sponsorship
- Thread starter azsportza
- Start date
I think the NRL grant is about 8 million a year, so it's effectively advanced payments for the 2014 grant. That's the way I see it anyway, I'm no expert lol.
_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
@gallagher said:
The way I see it, this is basically a last resort. We have had over a decade of dysfunctional effort, we need to get things sorted. If that means an independent board with the NRL holding seats, I'm all for it.
Maybe we should set a time limit for a review, say a 5 yearly reassessment to determine how much we still need the NRLs involvement. Or maybe once the debt is repayed the NRL agrees to backout a few seats?
fibrodreaming
Well-known member
@Abraham said:
Thanks for setting me straight on that Abraham. In view of your advice, I am left wondering why it might be regarded as such a good deal for the WT. It appears that we are simply getting an advance on the money we were going to receive anyway.
gallagher
Well-known member
@smeghead said:
Thats a boody big if. The nrl will be wanting $8mill worth of a say.venues wiil be a start. I can't see the independent and western suburbs directors wanting anymore than one game at LO per year. I can tears ahead.
S
system
Guest
It will be what it will be.
We need stable leadership who know how to run a football club and the only certainty is that the pack of pathetic malcontents currently tasked with the job have failed time after time after time.
As I stated previously I would assume that relocation, jersey design & use of traditional home grounds will be made a condition of any agreement with the NRL
We need stable leadership who know how to run a football club and the only certainty is that the pack of pathetic malcontents currently tasked with the job have failed time after time after time.
As I stated previously I would assume that relocation, jersey design & use of traditional home grounds will be made a condition of any agreement with the NRL
gallagher
Well-known member
The NRL have already indicated thst they want clubs to go to stadiums. I cant see us getting all that money and get to stay at LO.
The NRLs stadium policy wouldn't automatically preclude us from playing at LO.
The details would need to be negotiated of course, its not like we are asking for the NRL to bend us over and have their way with us. But that said, obviously we will need to be flexible if the NRL loans us money.
The details would need to be negotiated of course, its not like we are asking for the NRL to bend us over and have their way with us. But that said, obviously we will need to be flexible if the NRL loans us money.
S
system
Guest
I can see us playing two at CSS & two at LO with the remainder at Homebush including an agreement to use the state of the art training facilities in complex. Base our offices there as well
Tim Sheens
Well-known member
@smeghead said:
I could cope with that. Hate the stadium, but we can't rely on our young talent alone, and need to get with the times training wise to compete.
fibrodreaming
Well-known member
@gallagher said:
But if, as Abraham has explained, all we are receiving is an advance of the NRL grant, why should we give them the most positions on the board.
Moreover, I'm still worried about how we will repay it. It is all very well to say that it will be withheld from future payments - that is a lot of money to be withheld.
Sounds a bit like voodoo accounting to me. Somehow the three NRL aligned board members will turn our team into a positive cash flow operation to the extent that we can forgo $8m in grants at some point in the future. I'll believe that when I see it.
S
system
Guest
It isn't NRL control though.
If the partners can work together the NRL members will essentially be experienced administrators acting as free advisers to the board.
It isn't about only our debt it is about the future.
For all the jokes we make about rearranging the gym and the like the fact is our facilities are almost a decade behind the top tier teams and serious money is needed.
If the partners can work together the NRL members will essentially be experienced administrators acting as free advisers to the board.
It isn't about only our debt it is about the future.
For all the jokes we make about rearranging the gym and the like the fact is our facilities are almost a decade behind the top tier teams and serious money is needed.
Gary_Bakerloo
New member
To quote Roy from today's herald in reference to Cronulla:
_"The backflip by the new board led to the resignation of interim chief executive Bruno Cullen, whose salary was funded by the NRL. **The old board feared that, by mortgaging its future with the ARLC, it could be shifted to Perth.** This possibility is still on the table and, if the Sharks club is ultimately punished, it's unlikely to be with a fine."_
This is the concern of appointing NRL "independents". They will have a say in the direction of the club and to think otherwise is ignorant. As per another article in the herald this morning, **we can** pay our bills and in comparison to other clubs, we are a drop in the ocean (we just need to input $1m into the business - other clubs are well over $3m per year). We should control our own business and this idea of NRL independents is rubbish.
_Wests Tigers\
\
As has been widely reported, the problem for the Wests Tigers is not so much its financial clout but the unravelling ownership structure. The club is owned in equal parts by the Balmain Tigers and the Western Suburbs Leagues Clubs at Ashfield.\
\
The Balmain Tigers' financial woes are well documented and they have recently failed to meet their financial commitments to the football team. The Tigers are under severe financial strain with operating losses and negative assets. The group has about $9.5 million of debt and desperately needs to find a way to develop its property at Rozelle to pay this down. At the moment, though, the Tigers have a severe cash-flow problem.\
\
Meanwhile, the Wests side of the ledger looks sturdy with strong cash flows and significant property assets.\
\
Balmain are hoping the football team will be self-funding once the NRL grant is increased on the back of a new five-year $1 billion telecast deal. This will place the football team under pressure as other teams will rapidly spend the increased funding on new playing talent.\
\
A more likely outcome, given the penchant to remain competitive, will be for Wests to take control of the joint venture._
\
\
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/moneyball-how-is-your-club-placed-20130830-2swhv.html#ixzz2dVFwI1b3
_"The backflip by the new board led to the resignation of interim chief executive Bruno Cullen, whose salary was funded by the NRL. **The old board feared that, by mortgaging its future with the ARLC, it could be shifted to Perth.** This possibility is still on the table and, if the Sharks club is ultimately punished, it's unlikely to be with a fine."_
This is the concern of appointing NRL "independents". They will have a say in the direction of the club and to think otherwise is ignorant. As per another article in the herald this morning, **we can** pay our bills and in comparison to other clubs, we are a drop in the ocean (we just need to input $1m into the business - other clubs are well over $3m per year). We should control our own business and this idea of NRL independents is rubbish.
_Wests Tigers\
\
As has been widely reported, the problem for the Wests Tigers is not so much its financial clout but the unravelling ownership structure. The club is owned in equal parts by the Balmain Tigers and the Western Suburbs Leagues Clubs at Ashfield.\
\
The Balmain Tigers' financial woes are well documented and they have recently failed to meet their financial commitments to the football team. The Tigers are under severe financial strain with operating losses and negative assets. The group has about $9.5 million of debt and desperately needs to find a way to develop its property at Rozelle to pay this down. At the moment, though, the Tigers have a severe cash-flow problem.\
\
Meanwhile, the Wests side of the ledger looks sturdy with strong cash flows and significant property assets.\
\
Balmain are hoping the football team will be self-funding once the NRL grant is increased on the back of a new five-year $1 billion telecast deal. This will place the football team under pressure as other teams will rapidly spend the increased funding on new playing talent.\
\
A more likely outcome, given the penchant to remain competitive, will be for Wests to take control of the joint venture._
\
\
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/moneyball-how-is-your-club-placed-20130830-2swhv.html#ixzz2dVFwI1b3
S
system
Guest
Go to Concord and then go to any other club.
Equipment, coaching, high performance and sports science departments are all drastically behind the times and a decade behind the top clubs.
A million isn't anywhere near enough.
That is the point
Equipment, coaching, high performance and sports science departments are all drastically behind the times and a decade behind the top clubs.
A million isn't anywhere near enough.
That is the point
Black_n_White
New member
@smeghead said:
So if the proposal is an $8M cash injection, with repayments drawn from our yearly Grant from the NRL, then I fail to understand how we are better off?
Wouldnt the WT be better off accepting Wests Groups offered loan at present, and then being able to stay inline with the rest of the competition per year with full NRL payments to work with? For example, couldnt they just take out a bank loan against the guaranteed yearly grant to develop the facilities themselves? Wouldnt cost them $8M to do so. The NRL proposal isnt worth squat if as a club we dont have the business skills to manage it, which we obviously dont at present.
If we would have to run for many successive years with a lower NRL yearly grant due to repaying a cash injection, then once again we will be behind in the long run. We are not a club known to run at a profit, so to keep inline with the rest of the competition we will need both Wests Group and Balmain to top up the coffers… that is unless you believe in fiarytales and think that we will immediately begin to run at a profit, neverlone a profit large enough to cover the gap to at very minimum bring us back to on par, still not putting us in front.
S
system
Guest
We need a big injection to update facilities and we can afford to ween down the grant after that to repay the loan from my view on it.
One successful season in the next two and we are back in a positive position to repay and have some coffers available as well. Not all $8 million would be used straight away. There would be a war chest kept to lessen the impact of grant reduction as well.
It is actually something I really trust Mayer to do with his background and the Seas Eagles and GWS
One successful season in the next two and we are back in a positive position to repay and have some coffers available as well. Not all $8 million would be used straight away. There would be a war chest kept to lessen the impact of grant reduction as well.
It is actually something I really trust Mayer to do with his background and the Seas Eagles and GWS
S
system
Guest
If Wests Ashfield's members vote for an $8 million interest free loan in exchange for greater representation I would be up for that too.
However I have reservations about the ability of anybody either side appoints ability to govern a NRL club properly
However I have reservations about the ability of anybody either side appoints ability to govern a NRL club properly
Gary_Bakerloo
New member
Some food for thought:
http://investmentmagazine.com.au/2013/09/the-virtues-of-board-independents-disputed/
I think this to be the key quote:
_"…..that the only known way of improving governance was to focus on skills and process, rather than tests of independence."_
http://investmentmagazine.com.au/2013/09/the-virtues-of-board-independents-disputed/
I think this to be the key quote:
_"…..that the only known way of improving governance was to focus on skills and process, rather than tests of independence."_
