This merger and all it's stupid issues

[Abraham]

We should pack up and move to the Central Coast. Great ground. Great Leagues Club. Great Fans (they really love the Weststigers).

Not far for us City folk to travel for a game. Win Win.

So that makes 3 games at Leichhardt, 3 at Campbelltown, 3 at SFS, and 3 at Bluetongue.

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_

 

[mtd]

We should pack up and move to the Central Coast. Great ground. Great Leagues Club. Great Fans (**they really love the Weststigers)**.

Not far for us City folk to travel for a game. Win Win.

I think it was more everyone hates manly

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_

 

[slick]

Agree 10000 percent- the only side of the deal getting the better of it from what I can see is the magpies side and btw the closest leagues club to concord is Wests Magpies Ashfield not any of the balmin side but a wests club

Wests Ashfield are in bed with WT, and WT is highly influenced by the "Balmain Brigade"…

 

[slick]

One idiot CEO that says one thing out of line in 2013 doesn't all of a sudden justify the vitriol that Magpies fans have spewed for years. Balmain have been ended by this merger and not a peep from fans or media about it.

Most Balmain fans see WT as their team. It's often called "Tigers", often it's associated with former "tiger" players etc. It's a highly Balmain influenced club. Balmain officials aren't complaining about the merged NSW Cup side cause they heavily influence it. But, changes are a coming, as Balmain has no financial clout anymore. It's a result of their errogance over the years that will be their demise in the joint venture power balance. You reap what you sow…

 

[Yossarian]

Agree 10000 percent- the only side of the deal getting the better of it from what I can see is the magpies side and btw the closest leagues club to concord is Wests Magpies Ashfield not any of the balmin side but a wests club

Wests Ashfield are in bed with WT

What are they thinking?? Imagine being closely linked to the NRL team you've got an interest in…

 

[MightyMaggy]

I think I am correct in pointing out the coming together of Balmain and Wests was a **joint venture** and not a merger. This is the part of the problem with the "them and us" seen by SOME among Wests Tigers supporters.

A joint venture is an association of persons formed for the purpose of pursuing a particular business objective together. It involves a level of integration between the participants which is less than would amount to a merger. The term 'joint venture' does not have a settled common law meaning in Australia, reflecting the fact that joint ventures can take various forms. A joint venture may be undertaken through a partnership or some other form of unincorporated association or through an incorporated body. A joint venture is usually undertaken to pursue a single project and is often intended to last for a limited period. The relationship between the participants in a joint venture is usually governed by a joint venture agreement.

The set up for Wests Tigers is made more complex, because we have an equal number of Directors from Wests and Balmain with a alternating Chairman, who is elected by the Wests Directors for a period, followed by one elected by the Balmain Directors for the next. As far as the Joint Venture is concerned, there is a Balmain-controlled period followed by a Wests-controlled period.

The time has come to "fix" this arrangement, so that we do not perpetuate the Balmain versus Wests problem. When, and maybe only, when a better arrangement is finalised, the feeling of bias of some of the Wests Tigers supporters may be eradicated.

 

[innsaneink]

I think I am correct in pointing out the coming together of Balmain and Wests was a **joint venture** and not a merger. This is the part of the problem with the "them and us" seen by SOME among Wests Tigers supporters.

A joint venture is an association of persons formed for the purpose of pursuing a particular business objective together. It involves a level of integration between the participants which is less than would amount to a merger. The term 'joint venture' does not have a settled common law meaning in Australia, reflecting the fact that joint ventures can take various forms. A joint venture may be undertaken through a partnership or some other form of unincorporated association or through an incorporated body. A joint venture is usually undertaken to pursue a single project and is often intended to last for a limited period. The relationship between the participants in a joint venture is usually governed by a joint venture agreement.

The set up for Wests Tigers is made more complex, because we have an equal number of Directors from Wests and Balmain with a alternating Chairman, who is elected by the Wests Directors for a period, followed by one elected by the Balmain Directors for the next. As far as the Joint Venture is concerned, there is a Balmain-controlled period followed by a Wests-controlled period.

**The time has come to "fix" this arrangement, so that we do not perpetuate the Balmain versus Wests problem. When, and maybe only, when a better arrangement is finalised, the feeling of bias of some of the Wests Tigers supporters may be eradicated.**

Only one way to do that?

Privitisation?

 

[Goose]

Yes the club cant always control it.. Why is that WT are only accidentally called Balmain and never accidentally called Magpies or Western Suburbs?

A.Ignorance by media and the perception to most (non WT fans) that WT is a just a re-badged Balmain.

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_

not true, they are occaisionly refered to as Western suburbs and Magpies, prob less often (especially magpies), but it happens.

Ray warren semi regularly does the western suburbs thing.

dont take it personal when it happens.

A mate of mine who is a tigers(balmain side) fan in the early days used to blow up everytime they banged on about the Fibros thing, especially when we played Manly, but never noticed when they reminised about the 89 grand final being the last comp "we" won.

If you look for the things to be wrong you'll always find them and people are always more aware of the compromise they are making, less so about the compromise the other party is making