Gary_Bakerloo
New member
@smeghead said:
What other structures are available to us?
What other structures are available to us?
S
system
Guest
Leagues club funding for the minor shortfalls should see us through to the end of the upcoming TV Deal.
At that point we may be in a better position to know the best course. As it stands the JV arrangement, as troublesome as it can bee, provides a safety net in a time of flux.
After that I would imagine you could have either a private ownership model, incorporation, incorporation with a shares percentage made public (not very lucrative)
One of the more interesting posibilities would be setting up a independent Wests Tigers Leagues Club incorporating a function centre to ensure year round useability but that also depends on other developments.
There are many options but I think looking to the future, apart from finance, the most important change is to give members voting rights for the board elections or at least open up two extra seats to allow fan elected input.
Interesting times ahead though
At that point we may be in a better position to know the best course. As it stands the JV arrangement, as troublesome as it can bee, provides a safety net in a time of flux.
After that I would imagine you could have either a private ownership model, incorporation, incorporation with a shares percentage made public (not very lucrative)
One of the more interesting posibilities would be setting up a independent Wests Tigers Leagues Club incorporating a function centre to ensure year round useability but that also depends on other developments.
There are many options but I think looking to the future, apart from finance, the most important change is to give members voting rights for the board elections or at least open up two extra seats to allow fan elected input.
Interesting times ahead though
The point David Trodden makes is valid. The contribution of all the football and leagues clubs combined is a small percentage of the overall turnover of the Wests Tigers as a team/organisation. All this rubbish about one group (in this case Wests) taking over or the "demise" of Balmain is of some interest but overlooks the fact that the league club/football club operating model is on the way out. What matters these days are the 3 Ms - media revenue, membership, and merchandise. That we are the joining of two groups of course matters for a number of reasons - the rich history of both teams, the historic background of the supporters etc. This is why playing favouring one side over another doesn't work - as a club the Wests Tigers need to utilise everything in its favour. Moving fulltime to Campbelltown doesn't do this (IMO) nor does ignoring the Macarthur or letting the Campbo juniors go to seed. As much as the relics on the Magpies forum with their disgusting venomous comments can dream on, the fact is Wests needs Balmain. As much as old Balmaniacs talk about a culture of success (or whatever) the fact is Balmain needs Wests.
The reasons that led to the JV remain as valid today as they did in 1999\. I sincerely doubt either Wests or Balmain are capable of long-term success without the other.
The reasons that led to the JV remain as valid today as they did in 1999\. I sincerely doubt either Wests or Balmain are capable of long-term success without the other.
Benjirific
New member
@LaT said:
I think wtfl1981 missed the point there. Why would a new corporate governance structure change our history and its relevance to the club? Anyone with any business and sporting sense would see that it is vital to our brand and would continue to put an emphasis on it, but the 'split' system is holding us back, which is I think what Trodden was on about. I don't think he was saying just get rid of all involvement from Leagues Clubs and Football Clubs, he was just saying less reliance on it and more emphasis on the one club.
Just because he is a Tigers bloke does that mean everything he says is somehow tainted? Does it mean we need an independent person to tell us the same thing before we believe it? I can tell you for a fact that our situation regarding the chairman (where it rotates every year) is seen as amateurish by many other clubs. Some (not all) independent board members and an independent chairman should be the way to go for our club, or else we will remain split on almost every issue and go nowhere.
This is not a swipe at the Wests side as some people have taken it, it is the way forward for a club with over 200 years of history and the most exciting team in the competition.
When Trodden turned up Balmain had a Leagues Club and a football club. On his departure they now have neither.
Funny how he now wants to see the joint venture structure dissolved before Wests gain the upper hand, just as it was funny he never pushed this agenda when it was clear Balmain were in the box seat.
Funny how he now wants to see the joint venture structure dissolved before Wests gain the upper hand, just as it was funny he never pushed this agenda when it was clear Balmain were in the box seat.
S
system
Guest
Well it is a bit unfair to say what "agenda" he was pushing as none of us were at the meetings of the board or are privvy to discussions that took place at a senior level.
Once a person leaves a position they are more free to speak about their opinions outside the structure. It isn't uncommon.
As usual I don't want to get drawn into the usual mudslinging but I will say this about "power" and the "upper hand"
The only party which could be seen to have this is in fact Wests Ashfield. A organisation which has been nothing but supportive of the Wests Tigers as a brand and a organisation. If there were to be a buy out it would likely be Ashfield who have been behind every proposal of one brand, Wests Tigers. If anything a buy out would serve to make the Wests Football Club more redundant on the board then it already is.
Wests Tiger will continue, grow stronger and pull further away from the pipe dreams of fossils over the years to come
Once a person leaves a position they are more free to speak about their opinions outside the structure. It isn't uncommon.
As usual I don't want to get drawn into the usual mudslinging but I will say this about "power" and the "upper hand"
The only party which could be seen to have this is in fact Wests Ashfield. A organisation which has been nothing but supportive of the Wests Tigers as a brand and a organisation. If there were to be a buy out it would likely be Ashfield who have been behind every proposal of one brand, Wests Tigers. If anything a buy out would serve to make the Wests Football Club more redundant on the board then it already is.
Wests Tiger will continue, grow stronger and pull further away from the pipe dreams of fossils over the years to come
Benjirific
New member
@galahs said:
Are you saying that it's his fault that the Leagues Club (and consequently Football Club) struggled? To be honest, it's hard to say the Football Club is struggling considering they won the Club Championship last year, had all of their teams in the semi-finals and have made the finals in the NSW Cup every year since Fletcher took over.
All of that aside however, are you against the idea galahs?
Yeah whatever Galahs… The fact you talk about "the upper hand" and "box seat" says everything. Even if Balmain got the leagues club approved and were making millions I'd feel the same way. Wests Tigers shouldn't be some see-sawing thing that changes depending on which of the football clubs supposedly has "the upper hand". This whole idea that things like jersey design, ground allocation etc is based on financial clout is just crazy. What percentage of WT revenue to clubs contribute? 5-10% and falling?
S
system
Guest
Not anywhere near 5%
Benjirific
New member
Just to add as well, I think the fact people seem to simply see an agenda attached to this idea further highlights the issue we have. Any idea which comes out of either side is only seen as something with an agenda or ulterior motive, so why not make it more independent so we can move forward?
S
system
Guest
@Benjirific said:
It does illustrate the point very well
tigermaniac
Well-known member
Wests group have gone about their business as a respectable JV partner. Not only have they meet all their commitments but stood strong in support of the WT when they were shafted to field a struggling team in the VB cup this year. Balmain through bad luck have fallen on hard times, yes it is unfortunate but they will get through this. Question, How would have Balmain reacted had their team been shafted? How would Balmain go about their business if the Wests group were financially screwed? Mmmm. It's brought up time and again that we are WT, yes very true, but it was Wests and Balmain that created the WT. They will always have input on how the club is run. Some people have to realize and listen in times like these. When things are running good, don't over do it acting as the dominant partner, it is 50/50\. Stop parading and using colors and legends, linking it in a roundabout way that we are better and we have the power.
I might see it differently, but on forums such as this, the fans act accordingly. One side always feels let down. Greed always leads you down this path, let's just hope things work out. Remember the stronger partner at the moment shouldn't get greedy either. Everyone should be able to have a say. And last word on the matter ( not intended for the loyal good Balmain supporters, but the rude pigs that have no time or respect for the voice of the Magpie supporters) time to get over it.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
I might see it differently, but on forums such as this, the fans act accordingly. One side always feels let down. Greed always leads you down this path, let's just hope things work out. Remember the stronger partner at the moment shouldn't get greedy either. Everyone should be able to have a say. And last word on the matter ( not intended for the loyal good Balmain supporters, but the rude pigs that have no time or respect for the voice of the Magpie supporters) time to get over it.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
G
Guest
Guest
@galahs said:
The first post you make on here in months and this is the agenda you push :unamused:
Hardly surprising though.
T
tigerbalm
Guest
@willow said:
Does he have a point though? If Trodden truly felt that way then why not purpose a plan last year outlining what he felt the club needed moving forward? Why not, 2 years ago, tell us that the wt need to re structure the way the ownership of the JV is handled?
His comments are reasonable so I can't see any reason why he couldn't of implemented at least some type of structure to move the JV away from wests/balmain if that's what he wanted. But instead he waits till he's going out and balmain is in its last days. Hmm.
\
\
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
Seriously, who cares? And, whoever does is part of the problem, not the solution. The only way you can "care" is if you are trying to preserve some superior or exclusive position of Balmain over Wests or vice versa. For what purpose? To strengthen your opportunity to ignore reality and live in the past?? If that's the case, wallow in the past and let the rest of us get on with the present and the future.
GNR4LIFE
Well-known member
Chunk and Galahs are perfect examples of Dinosaurs representing both side, yet only one cops criticism for his comments
G
Guest
Guest
@GNR4LIFE said:
I'll go on record and also say Chunk is out of line and also needs to pull his head in, as he generally only posts to take a dig at Wests which is uncalled for and creates more animosity on here which we can do without.
And he also had posts appropriately deleted in this thread.
happy_tiger
Well-known member
If only I had a $ for every thread that turned into a Wests V Balmain crapfest …....
Its definitely true that both sides have their dinosaurs with issues.
But its also true that the majority of dinosaurs (at least in here) seem reside on the Wests side. You could argue thats a result of years of feeling like the unloved step brother of the family.
I guess in the end both sides need to give a little, they each need to recognise the contribution and accept that we are now a single merged club.
And isn't that the whole point of Troddens comments?
But its also true that the majority of dinosaurs (at least in here) seem reside on the Wests side. You could argue thats a result of years of feeling like the unloved step brother of the family.
I guess in the end both sides need to give a little, they each need to recognise the contribution and accept that we are now a single merged club.
And isn't that the whole point of Troddens comments?
tig_prmz
Well-known member
not too qualified on this matter and i can only comment on what i've read on here, but i see people are thinking of splitting them from the grassroots.. the juniors. imo that's not the way to do it.
the changes need to be made from the top.. afaik the board consists of 5 Balmain and 5 Magpies which needs to be changed to 10 WT board members. that's where the changes need to be made if you wanna make the changes.
the other option is to not make any changes at all.. this process however could take years to give us an identity, but pretty sure in the end it will give us a WT identity.
the changes need to be made from the top.. afaik the board consists of 5 Balmain and 5 Magpies which needs to be changed to 10 WT board members. that's where the changes need to be made if you wanna make the changes.
the other option is to not make any changes at all.. this process however could take years to give us an identity, but pretty sure in the end it will give us a WT identity.
