Roy Masters on Saints and Wests Tigers Joint Ventures

sideline_eye

New member
WIN owner Bruce Gordon buys 50 per cent stake in St George Illawarra Dragons

Date
April 19, 2016 - 7:00PM

511 reading now
Be the first to comment

Roy Masters
Roy Masters
Sports Columnist

From SMH 19/04/16

The NRL's two remaining joint venture clubs will have phantom owners by the end of the month, with billionaire Bruce Gordon taking 50 per cent in St George Illawarra and the Magpies moving to 75 per cent equity in Wests Tigers, leaving the Tigers with a name but no equity in the franchise.

The Steelers, who joined the then NSWRL in 1982 and merged with the Dragons at the end of the Super League war, will also have no equity in St George Illawarra – Gordon holding 50 per cent and the Kogarah-based Dragons retaining 50 per cent – but Illawarra will have representation on the board.
Buying in: Bruce Gordon will buy half of the St George Illawarra joint venture.

Buying in: Bruce Gordon will buy half of the St George Illawarra joint venture. Photo: Photo: Rob Homer

The Balmain Tigers, a 1908 foundation club, will nominally exist in Wests Tigers, and their parlous financial state means they are unlikely to raise the $2.7 million to acquire a 25 per cent share of the club and board representation but will be given 5 years to do so.
Advertisement

The official announcement of the restructures, supervised by the NRL's Tony Crawford, will coincide with repayment of debt to the NRL, with Gordon paying between $6 million and $7 million and Wests Ashfield, the Magpies' successful licensed club, paying $2.7 million, which is half the outstanding money owed headquarters.

Wests Ashfield will have control of the board, constitution and all documents, and a veto over any new owner of the remaining quarter of the club.

Private equity of 25 per cent would relieve Wests Ashfield of some responsibility of covering future cost overruns.

Ashfield has also ruled out any possibility of moving to 100 per cent equity, because it would mean rebranding the club as the Wests Magpies and moving to Campbelltown.

Not only would this mean vacating a huge wedge of inner Sydney to the Bulldogs and Eels, it would also disenfranchise a new generation of rugby league fans who have grown up knowing the club only as Wests Tigers.

The Dragons are entitled to boast they have been the only enduring successful joint venture of the three formed at the end of the costly and brutal Super League war when the number of clubs was to be cut initially from 20 to 14.

Unlike the shotgun marriages of Wests Tigers and the short-lived Northern Eagles combination of traditional enemies Norths and Manly, the union of St George and the Steelers was a wedding where each partner had what the other wanted.

St George had history, while Illawarra had geography.

The usually successful Dragons were backed by its Kogarah-based licensed club but surrounded by an increasingly ageing, non-traditional rugby league demographic, while the Steelers had a rich nursery of talent but little money and tradition.

The not-negotiables in the original wedding vows of St George Illawarra – colours (red and white), emblem (Dragons) and location (St George and Wollongong) – will remain. Future decisions on where games are played – Wollongong, Kogarah, Allianz or ANZ stadiums – will be made by the new board.

The Magpies will control where future Wests Tigers games are played but the disappointing crowd at Leichhardt on Sunday, admittedly against Melbourne who drew few supporters, indicate a westward move to Homebush and eventually Campbelltown.

The NRL has set a time frame on the ownership structures of its four debtor clubs – Dragons, Wests Tigers, Knights and Titans – and has dictated all four will be treated the same regarding money owed.

While the Dragons are expected to be the first of the officially-announced new ownership structures, the lawyers working on the Wests Tigers reorganisation will complete details by the end of April.

Wests, the competition's paupers from the late 1970s when Ashfield's annual grant was only $50,000, have been effectively reborn from the late 1950s when it was known as the "millionaire club".

The Dragons, who are now the NRL's only perfect match of private equity and community ownership, can boast they have always looked ahead to the next twist of economic history.

While Souths refused to merge and were banished by the NRL, the Dragons embraced the Steelers and the NRL's $10 million merger dowry and have now followed the Rabbitohs in seeking a rich suitor of similar megabucks to James Packer and Russell Crowe, Souths' new owners.

Gordon's WIN Corporation is one of the most successful media corporations in Australia and the sport of rugby league, once shunned by the top end of town, can now claim some wealthy investors.

It can be argued the Steelers have retreated to their original position as a St George nursery, but the Wollongong club has contributed little finance to the costly operation of an NRL club. However, they will have savvy representation on the new board, and the Steelers administer the highly successful local Illawarra Coal League.

Wests Ashfield subsidises six junior clubs in the traditional Balmain district.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/st-george-illawarra-dragons/bruce-gordon-buys-50-per-cent-stake-in-st-george-illawarra-20160418-go9jzs.html#ixzz46H2juRGc
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook
 
Having just read this late at night I can't wait to wake up to all the Masters the dinosaur vitriol that is going to be written on this forum. I just hope all those who are going to call the article rubbish actually have some hard facts to do so.
 
Christ almighty Roy, give it a rest mate. Diedpretty I'm not going to argue Leichhardt vs Campbelltown or any of that because there are already threads for that. My beef is his shoehorning another spruik for Magpies onto a Saints story that has little to do with it a week after his last crack. He's hardly an unbiased neutral observer.
 
After last week's piece which was riddled with lies attacking Balmain, he has now backed it up with another dishonest article.

Time for old Roy to find a new hobby, preferably one that doesn't involve thinking or writing, two areas which are not his strong points.
 
Best to ignore Masters - just pushes his own agendas.

Used to have a lot of respect for Roy and his opinions in the old days.

Not any more. Think is time for retirement Roy and head for the nursing home.
A fibro one of course.
 
The worst part is that Roy used to be really insightful and varied in his topic coverage.

Now… just clear one-eyed agendas and grumbling, you read it for a bit and then say "geez this is terrible".
 
We all have prejudices, but perhaps step back and see that he actually answers some strategic questions that have been raised on this forum, in particular, the strategic decision to retain Balmain's equity nominally at 25%.
 
@Gary Bakerloo said:
We all have prejudices, but perhaps step back and see that he actually answers some strategic questions that have been raised on this forum, in particular, the strategic decision to retain Balmain's equity nominally at 25%.

It probably depends on what Bruce Gordon actually wants for his money spent Gary and whether he is long term committed to the Dragons

I think the major difference is that the Steelers were basically gone once the Dragons took over , apart from the token games at Win Stadium every year , many younger fans wouldn't know that they even existed
 
If he could, even occasionally write something which doesn't' resort back to pro magpies or anti balmain it would be nice. He just can't help himself.
 
Let me start off by saying anyone complaining about bias should go read some old Ray Chesterton articles and read his views on the JV.

The hysterics in this thread so far is ridiculous. It might be an article reporting on the Dragons ownership, but the comparisons with us are pretty relevant with us also being a JV whose ownership has been a major talking point of late. As far as old Roy being pro Magpies and anti Balmain, maybe he is, but maybe he's just talking about the Magpies role in the JV the same way the media have talked up Balmain's role for the last 16 yrs as the dominant partner with the spiritual home ground being LO, constantly being referred to as the Black and Golds, and Balmain legends constantly being wheeled out when you need a quote from an ex player.

So I know from experience how out of joint your nose would get reading stuff like this, but just keep in mind this is how a lot of Western Suburbs people have felt for yrs. a lot have even walked away.
 
@GNR4LIFE said:
Let me start off by saying anyone complaining about bias should go read some old Ray Chesterton articles and read his views on the JV.

The hysterics in this thread so far is ridiculous. It might be an article reporting on the Dragons ownership, but the comparisons with us are pretty relevant with us also being a JV whose ownership has been a major talking point of late. As far as old Roy being pro Magpies and anti Balmain, maybe he is, but maybe he's just talking about the Magpies role in the JV the same way the media have talked up Balmain's role for the last 16 yrs as the dominant partner with the spiritual home ground being LO, constantly being referred to as the Black and Golds, and Balmain legends constantly being wheeled out when you need a quote from an ex player.

So I know from experience how out of joint your nose would get reading stuff like this, but just keep in mind this is how a lot of Western Suburbs people have felt for yrs. a lot have even walked away.

Oh, so that makes it right, then?
 
Didn't say it made it right, just stating how it's been in the past. If I was to be brutally honest I'd say the shoe has been on the other foot since the talk of Wests taking majority ownership started in regards to complaining and talking about conspiracies. People whinging that Wests were going back to the Magpies without any evidence etc. Even articles like this are examples of things old Magpies would be accused of being dinosaurs for complaining about and would get told to move on.
 
Let's just see how things turn out.
There's a lot of speculation going on lately.

But tbh, who really cares where the money is coming from, as long as we have a team it's all good. Income sources shouldn't really matter to Average Joe, it's not their millions that are being invested.
 
While I understand the article is uncomfortable for Balmain diehards because it talks about Balmains diminishing role in the Wests Tigers ownership; where has Roy blatantly pushed his own agenda?
 
@Patts said:
While I understand the article is uncomfortable for Balmain diehards because it talks about Balmains diminishing role in the Wests Tigers ownership; where has Roy blatantly pushed his own agenda?

It's his ongoing bias from a supposedly 'serious journalist' that is irritating to people.
All good things to say about one side of the joint venture and nothing good to say about the other.
Needs a slap in the face and a kick up the rear.
 
@GNR4LIFE said:
Let me start off by saying anyone complaining about bias should go read some old Ray Chesterton articles and read his views on the JV.

The hysterics in this thread so far is ridiculous. It might be an article reporting on the Dragons ownership, but the comparisons with us are pretty relevant with us also being a JV whose ownership has been a major talking point of late. As far as old Roy being pro Magpies and anti Balmain, maybe he is, but maybe he's just talking about the Magpies role in the JV the same way the media have talked up Balmain's role for the last 16 yrs as the dominant partner with the spiritual home ground being LO, constantly being referred to as the Black and Golds, and Balmain legends constantly being wheeled out when you need a quote from an ex player.

So I know from experience how out of joint your nose would get reading stuff like this, but just keep in mind this is how a lot of Western Suburbs people have felt for yrs. a lot have even walked away.

Who cares what Masters or Chesterton write, they are both "dinosaurs" living in the past. Even now the shoe is on the other foot as you like to put it you old magpies should be happy instead of still complaining about the last 16 years. The unfortunate thing is that the only way all this magpie and Balmain banter will ever go away is when all the ex magpie and Balmain diehards are no longer around to support the Wests Tigers(should only take another 30 odd years for the last of us to kick the bucket). I come from the Balmain side of the JV and I'm not butt hurt that Wests are taking majority ownership and now hold the upper hand so you magpie guys shouldn't be butt hurt over the last 16 years. Just remember it's the media that thinks like this not the majority of Wests Tigers fans. As I've said before I don't care who owns us or what the media want to write about us as long as we are moving in the right direction to put some much needed success into this club. At the end of the day that's what we all want isn't it? For the Wests Tigers to one day be a powerhouse in the NRL
 
And even though Wests Ashfield are taking majority ownership I still think the same way I have for the last 16 years that we should move on and get over it and try to unite both sides as one
 
Back
Top