R. I. P. Balmain

I understand the vitriol for Elias, but at the end of the day it is the Board who is responsible for the Club's current position.

Elias brokered a deal to save the Club from going under, and slugged them a massive ongoing management fee for doing so. The club was under no obligation to accept the deal, or make any of their subsequent bumbling decisions, but did so anyway.

They had no plan B or C, and so when the development application fell over, just persisted with the same failing plan. That's on them, not Elias.
 
@ said:
I understand the vitriol for Elias, but at the end of the day it is the Board who is responsible for the Club's current position.

Elias brokered a deal to save the Club from going under, and slugged them a massive ongoing management fee for doing so. The club was under no obligation to accept the deal, or make any of their subsequent bumbling decisions, but did so anyway.

They had no plan B or C, and so when the development application fell over, just persisted with the same failing plan. That's on them, not Elias.

But who was responsible for the development applications, I thought it was the mob that Benny had got involved with? At face value they seemed to me to have buckley's chance of getting through. But didn't Benny campaign hard to get the deal up and running? Only from what I read he was getting signatures at fixtures, presumably using his good will and status.

There should have been accountants and lawyers on behalf of the Club consulting planning consultants to gauge what chance of success - did this occur? I think a high management fee should have been conditional on the development applications getting approved otherwise the Club is like on a hiding to nothing.
 
Hailing from central NSW I am genuinely interested in learning more about this and also have some other questions.

I've only just spotted this thread and haven't read any posts as of yet but since I saw something on Twitter last night I've been meaning to ask forum members if they could kindly give some background details.
https://mobile.twitter.com/MayorDarcy/status/1056325924050808832
https://mobile.twitter.com/MayorDarcy/status/1056531434859462657
My questions are:
Does this in any way impact the Wests Tigers Brand at all? What happens to the Balmain Rugby League Club (junior clubs also) and is it in anyway salvageable?
Thanks
 
@ said:
Hailing from central NSW I am genuinely interested in learning more about this and also have some other questions.

I've only just spotted this thread and haven't read any posts as of yet but since I saw something on Twitter last night I've been meaning to ask forum members if they could kindly give some background details.
https://mobile.twitter.com/MayorDarcy/status/1056325924050808832
https://mobile.twitter.com/MayorDarcy/status/1056531434859462657
My questions are:
Does this in any way impact the Wests Tigers Brand at all? What happens to the Balmain Rugby League Club (junior clubs also) and is it in anyway salvageable?
Thanks

My understanding is that Wests Ashfield are already assisting with the Balmain Juniors clubs, not sure how the funding structure of the WT currently works with Balmain RLFC not being able to fund their part. I would think that the club are working to a point where they do not rely on Ashfield or Balmain for any money, and any additional funding in the meantime is provided by Ashfield.

Happy to be corrected by anyone who knows better.
 
Lauren
Balmain's 25% is currently being funded by the NRL…

Should they default Wests Ashfield has 1st and Final offer to cover the debt...there is also the option for an independent party to take over the 25%...neither of these are the preferred option with the hope BDRLFCcan become viable...

As for Juniors Wests Ashfield along with RydeEastwood currently fund the program ...i believe that will continue...

As for the Wests Tigers brand..it stands alone..so no impact at all really...
 
Thanks guys. Was genuinely concerned about the impact of the Wests Tigers brand and whether this jeopardised the immediate future of our junior clubs. There is some very interesting stuff in this thread and it stirs up some feelings, that’s for sure. Only makes me think if I’m doing enough or whether I can help furthermore as a fan/supporter.
 
@ said:
Lauren
Balmain's 25% is currently being funded by the NRL…

Should they default Wests Ashfield has 1st and Final offer to cover the debt...there is also the option for an independent party to take over the 25%...neither of these are the preferred option with the hope BDRLFCcan become viable...

As for Juniors Wests Ashfield along with RydeEastwood currently fund the program ...i believe that will continue...

As for the Wests Tigers brand..it stands alone..so no impact at all really...

Forgot about the sunset date on the Balmain debt with NRL. Didn't realise RE were still funding juniors.
 
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
Imagine if you wanted to renovate your house and the council told you you had to buy other properties around you to make it happen, then the government told you they'd be bringing a train station in around the corner from your house.

And you spent all your money suring-up local property and preparing large renovation plans, ensuring you had ample parking and thinking about the new property values once the train station was completed.

And then the government asked you to move out whilst they started work on the station, and you'd be back in a jiffy.

And then the government changed, the station is cancelled, nobody wants to approve your plans, you can't get back into your house and you own these properties you don't need.

If you were to remove any major club from it's primary premises for a decade, whilst also blocking plans for a refurbishment, you'd put any one of them out of business.

I'll never really know whether or not Tigers' renovation plans were excessive or unrealistic, but considering they approved those monstrous Balmain power station developments a decade earlier, I can't understand how the council suddenly became so concerned about traffic and building heights.

The Balmain Shores land was zoned for high density, Victoria Road isn't. The developer put up plans that meant you couldn't move the cars out of the site.

Can council not zone whatever they like however they choose? Also I don't get how you can say Victoria Rd isn't zoned for high density, when Balmain Shores feeds onto Victoria Rd? It's like saying the Ryde Bridge isn't zoned for high density but you build 10,000 units in Rhodes.

I am sure the developers for the Leagues Club put up "aggressive" plans, but you are supposed to be able to negotiate the outcome.

The thing I'll never understand about the Rozelle area is owners and council trying to keep it as "village" as possible, despite it being a 10 minute drive from the CBD of a city of almost 5M people. High density is coming everywhere, it's the only way we can support the population growth.

I live 30 mins from the CBD and even in the last 5 years the number of units and duplexs going up in place of houses is striking. If you want the space and the lack of traffic, move to West or The Sticks, or the West of Sticks.

I used to live in a 12-storey building (120 units) that opened onto a main road - not such a big deal with traffic and you could only pull into the building from one side.

Don't quote me, but all councils have to submit a LED (Local Environment Plan)to the State Government.
Once submitted the council can't go and approve any development that contravenes this plan.
This happened at Bathurst a few years ago, where one councillor's father-in-law had a large rural block of land that was zoned Rural only.
The councillor snuck the de-zoning through in the middle of their budget papers (with the knowledge of his fellow councillors).
When this re-zoning was submitted to the NSW planning Dept., they knocked it on the head because it was against the LEP.
This would have turned his $500K block of land into $20m.
 
Back
Top