PRIVATE OWNERSHIP

[batboy]

I'm 40 odd years old and my favourite memories (Or my favourite ones) are supporting the Wests Tigers. As long as the Wests Tigers exist that will be the team I support.
I don't give a stuff who owns us, I am merely a customer…
As long as the best interest is in favour of Wests Tigers I'm all for it...
Balmain have been rotten for many, many years - That's what happens when footballers think they can run multi million dollar entities...
It's not 1975 anymore, I hope Ashfield does buy out Balmains' share, I hope they do pour a small amount of the profits into Wests Tigers. - It's our only hope!!

 

[magpiecol]

Why would Wests put all their money into a footy team and then have no say in how it is run?

No way would this happen.

I have got a feeling that we could be heading towards Perth in the not to distant future. Will this be a good or bad thing? It is open for sensible debate. I stress the word "sensible".

 

[Cosimo_Zaretti]

not sure why any rich/successful/smart people would wanna invest in a struggling nrl club- most nrl clubs make losses right?

So do most motorsport teams, racing yachts and piles of cocaine. Dem rich people always looking for fun ways to waste money.

 

[Black_n_White]

Why would Wests put all their money into a footy team and then have no say in how it is run?

No way would this happen.

I have got a feeling that we could be heading towards Perth in the not to distant future. Will this be a good or bad thing? It is open for sensible debate. I stress the word "sensible".

Im not understanding your proposition here?

If Wests buy out the Balmain portion, then they have 4 of the 7 seats, thus making the role of chairperson whom is also independent irrelevant in any decision making process. Wests could steer the ship where ever they wanted from that moment on without the NRL appointed members being able to do a damn thing about it.

Futhermore, by becoming the JV in the first place the club became immune to relocation pressures from the NRL. The original contract would be taken to the courts and would shine a very poor light on the NRL. I would assume Manly and St George would also be heavily invested in seeing the clause stand so as not to set a precedent allowing them to also be pushed out.

West Ashfield will pull off a near perfect bloodless coup if they choose to capitalize on the situation.

 

[cqtiger]

Why would Wests put all their money into a footy team and then have no say in how it is run?

No way would this happen.

I have got a feeling that we could be heading towards Perth in the not to distant future. Will this be a good or bad thing? It is open for sensible debate. I stress the word "sensible".

I don't know if Perth is in the mix for us or any other Sydney side Col?

What I suspect though, is that in 20 years time there will be less Sydney teams.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

 

[cktiger]

Why would Wests put all their money into a footy team and then have no say in how it is run?

No way would this happen.

I have got a feeling that we could be heading towards Perth in the not to distant future. Will this be a good or bad thing? It is open for sensible debate. I stress the word "sensible".

Im not understanding your proposition here?

If Wests buy out the Balmain portion, **then they have 4 of the 7 seats**, thus making the role of chairperson whom is also independent irrelevant in any decision making process. Wests could steer the ship where ever they wanted from that moment on without the NRL appointed members being able to do a damn thing about it.

Futhermore, by becoming the JV in the first place the club became immune to relocation pressures from the NRL. The original contract would be taken to the courts and would shine a very poor light on the NRL. I would assume Manly and St George would also be heavily invested in seeing the clause stand so as not to set a precedent allowing them to also be pushed out.

West Ashfield will pull off a near perfect bloodless coup if they choose to capitalize on the situation.

If there is no Balmain you would think there would be no need for those seats and the NRL would have the upper hand.

 

[Black_n_White]

If there is no Balmain you would think there would be no need for those seats and the NRL would have the upper hand.

To the best of my knowledge, Balmain forfeiting on their loan doent dissolve their share, it is to be revoked, with first option of purchase going to Wests Ashfield.

Furthermore, it would be an absolutely disgusting act on Balmains part, if they go down and take the ship with them, instead of exploring options with Wests Group to sell their stake on if possible, repay their debts, and open up cashflow to continue to function within the rugby league landscape. They have more responsibilities than just the WT, and have recieved alot of support in the mean time to keep those responsibilities running.

 

[diedpretty]

The only part I wouldn't like about the Wests Group owning the Tigers outright is that often the blokes on the board are selected from political allegiances and/or have little business nous. I'm not saying that about the current members, but it always has that possibility. They would have a controlling interest over the new NRL board members who have been selected on merit and skill set.

I would far prefer that the NRL board members maintained the majority vote. Otherwise I feel we could fall into Parramatta territory at any point.

No business whether it be Wests Group or John Smiths Auto Wreckers is going to take the full financial burden of running an NRL club and allow the NRL to hold the majority vote on how the club is run. If and its a big IF Wests Group do take on Balmains share they will only do so with full control of the running of WT.

 

[Wimpy's Well]

Why do people think the "tigers" brand is so special?

I never understood that argument. Do you mean as an animal it's cool or as a club with loads of NRL history it's special?
\
\
Look at the bunnies…it's a rabbit. They seem to be doing ok.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

When u think of Magpies in Aussie sport generally go to Collingwood. Tigers with the history & 05 premiership, also the animal is s good brand to use

 

[Tigerspirit]

Why do people think the "tigers" brand is so special?

I never understood that argument. Do you mean as an animal it's cool or as a club with loads of NRL history it's special?
\
\
Look at the bunnies…it's a rabbit. They seem to be doing ok.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

When u think of Magpies in Aussie sport generally go to Collingwood. Tigers with the history & 05 premiership, also
the animal is s good brand to use

The tigers brand is one of the highest marketable branding in the NRL thats why it is an important item the JV has.
If we were able to organise our management and recruitement correctly and a winning culture our branding would do the rest… The youth would flock to the tigers....

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

 

[glebe_tiger]

Why do people think the "tigers" brand is so special?

I never understood that argument. Do you mean as an animal it's cool or as a club with loads of NRL history it's special?
\
\
Look at the bunnies…it's a rabbit. They seem to be doing ok.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

I don't know what it is either but when a school mate of mine was studying marketing at uni this same topic came up for most recognisable sporting teams in Australia and the tiger brand(rugby league variant) was in the top 3 or 4 i think from memory.

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

If there is no Balmain you would think there would be no need for those seats and the NRL would have the upper hand.

Not sure that would be the case. I am no corporate genius, but in the instance of Balmain defaulting, would they go into administration or simply give up the seats to the NRL?

If they go into administration, wouldn't those seats be deemed an asset with some notional value that would form part of the bankruptcy process? In that instance, they would be sold at some discount (x cents in the dollar). Then it comes back to the terms of the JV agreement, does Wests Ashfield have first call?

There are a million unknowns in these scenarios.

Regardless, despite Balmain's issues, I like the current ownership model. As a supporter and I can go to either Leagues club and know the money I put over the bar goes into the club I support. Our leagues clubs also support local communities. Think of Souths fans…..they have to go see Rusty's movies to get the same effect. I know what I would rather do....

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

Why do people think the "tigers" brand is so special?

I never understood that argument. Do you mean as an animal it's cool or as a club with loads of NRL history it's special?
\
\
Look at the bunnies…it's a rabbit. They seem to be doing ok.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

When u think of Magpies in Aussie sport generally go to Collingwood. Tigers with the history & 05 premiership, also the animal is s good brand to use

I could never understand that either.
The only people who care whether a team is called the Tigers, or the Dragone etc. is their supporters, and as has been shown with the JV's already formed, even their supporters( except a small minority, get used to the new name, and continue the club. Sponsors are more interested in their name being on TV , not what their name is.
A winning team is more important than a name
There's a tigers and a Magpie team in most of the competitions in most of the areas where Leagues played. It's not unique.
A team could be called, the greater Western Guppies, and if they were winning, they'd still attract sponsors, fans and Money.

 

[MacDougall]

I just don't get the leagues club thing. It's 2015 and the sport is worth billions a year. The leagues clubs should be left as a historic reminder and have the responsibility of funding taken off them all of the clubs. If anything was done right the NRL or Wests Tigers should have been wealthy enough to support Balmain as a gesture of good will to the community. Not having the club damaged by the misfortunes of a fraking drinking establishment.

The Tigers should be taken over by the NRL. Set up strong. Sold off to the right buyer as a profitable business and the leagues clubs will be better for it.

I feel like the NRL don't give the clubs enough money. The clubs need to go down the NFL route. The NRL should be owned by the 16 clubs and they should all be privately owned. It needs to be smarter business.

Memberships fooey. Season tickets, supporter packages, non gameday events, better marketing, better and more varied merch, birthday skype calls for 20 bucks, off season tour matches. Memberships as a KPI is dumb.

Become a business not a club.

 

[jctiger]

Why do people think the "tigers" brand is so special?

I never understood that argument. Do you mean as an animal it's cool or as a club with loads of NRL history it's special?
\
\
Look at the bunnies…it's a rabbit. They seem to be doing ok.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

When u think of Magpies in Aussie sport generally go to Collingwood. Tigers with the history & 05 premiership, also
the animal is s good brand to use

The tigers brand is one of the highest marketable branding in the NRL thats why it is an important item the JV has.
If we were able to organise our management and recruitement correctly and a winning culture our branding would do the rest… The youth would flock to the tigers....

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

Yeh, the sales for kids pj's would go thru the roof
:unamused:

 

[Jerry_Seinfeld]

A winning team is more important than a name
There's a tigers and a Magpie team in most of the competitions in most of the areas where Leagues played. It's not unique.
A team could be called, the greater Western Guppies, and if they were winning, they'd still attract sponsors, fans and Money.
\
\
\
\
Interesting.I played lot of junior footy and I must say There always seamt to be a tigers or magpies team in every comp.Probably the two most used mascot names in club football out of all the team names used from the NRL.Tigers and magpies a good merge. :sign:

 

[Sabre]

Why do people think the "tigers" brand is so special?

I never understood that argument. Do you mean as an animal it's cool or as a club with loads of NRL history it's special?
\
\
Look at the bunnies…it's a rabbit. They seem to be doing ok.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

I don't know what it is either but when a school mate of mine was studying marketing at uni this same topic came up for most recognisable sporting teams in Australia and the tiger brand(rugby league variant) was in the top 3 or 4 i think from memory.

I believe when the merger happened Balmain got a big offer from the Eels because they really wanted the Tiger branding. I guess it's got something to do with young kids picking a team.

As for Leagues Clubs are they really THAT good a source of income?
There's only so much money you can make from beer, steak and schnitzels. I know there are pokies too but clubs surely need to become self-sufficient .

 

[cqtiger]

Why do people think the "tigers" brand is so special?

I never understood that argument. Do you mean as an animal it's cool or as a club with loads of NRL history it's special?
\
\
Look at the bunnies…it's a rabbit. They seem to be doing ok.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

I don't know what it is either but when a school mate of mine was studying marketing at uni this same topic came up for most recognisable sporting teams in Australia and the tiger brand(rugby league variant) was in the top 3 or 4 i think from memory.

I believe when the merger happened Balmain got a big offer from the Eels because they really wanted the Tiger branding. I guess it's got something to do with young kids picking a team.

As for Leagues Clubs are they really THAT good a source of income?
There's only so much money you can make from beer, steak and schnitzels. I know there are pokies too but clubs surely need to become self-sufficient .

Obviously if you support another NRL team then the Tiger brand means nothing. But … If you are young and impressionable and looking to support a team - do you choose an eel or a tiger?

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

 

[Sabre]

Why do people think the "tigers" brand is so special?

I never understood that argument. Do you mean as an animal it's cool or as a club with loads of NRL history it's special?
\
\
Look at the bunnies…it's a rabbit. They seem to be doing ok.

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

I don't know what it is either but when a school mate of mine was studying marketing at uni this same topic came up for most recognisable sporting teams in Australia and the tiger brand(rugby league variant) was in the top 3 or 4 i think from memory.

I believe when the merger happened Balmain got a big offer from the Eels because they really wanted the Tiger branding. I guess it's got something to do with young kids picking a team.

As for Leagues Clubs are they really THAT good a source of income?
There's only so much money you can make from beer, steak and schnitzels. I know there are pokies too but clubs surely need to become self-sufficient .

Obviously if you support another NRL team then the Tiger brand means nothing. But … If you are young and impressionable and looking to support a team - do you choose an eel or a tiger?

_Posted using RoarFEED 4.2.0_

Exactly.
For that reason the Dragons and Bulldogs probably also have good, marketable mascots/brands.
I'm sure that's what determines what team a fair amount of kids choose to support.

 

[gallagher]

Kids go to winning teams. My 7 year old turned to the rabbits two years ago. No family or friends go for the rabbits but that's who she picked.