Gary_Bakerloo
New member
@TigerOfBankstown said:
There will be no one left.
"I'm so ronery….....So ronery......"
Wests Tigers need quick $1m to survive
- Thread starter innsaneink
- Start date
There will be no one left.
"I'm so ronery….....So ronery......"
S
system
Guest
You are a strange man or a bit of a troll
I mean we are Wests Tigers. We started as an merging of two clubs and that was difficult but now we are one club who need to move forward under our own banner with our own path to blaze.
2015\. 15 years after we began and we are squabbling about the same pointless shit at board level
I mean we are Wests Tigers. We started as an merging of two clubs and that was difficult but now we are one club who need to move forward under our own banner with our own path to blaze.
2015\. 15 years after we began and we are squabbling about the same pointless shit at board level
S
system
Guest
@Gary Bakerloo said:
Just a riddle ronery
Most of the inflows that keep Wests Tigers running are from the NRL (via TV rights etc), sponsorships ie Meriton, ANZ/Moore park and the fans …............ the Leagues Clubs don't contribute a huge amount in the scheme of things. I think it was debated on here a few years ago, the Wests Tigers could quite capably continue on independantly of Leagues Club funding.
Providing of course, the board and management know how to run the business which is highly debateable.
Providing of course, the board and management know how to run the business which is highly debateable.
tigermaniac
Well-known member
@TigerOfBankstown said:
Balmain bailed Wests, real classy shit. Never happened. More like you offered Benny the back door. Suck it up mate, I would love to return the favor, just tell me what it was.
_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
TigerOfBankstown
New member
@tigermaniac said:
1) Well the maggies were on there way to extinction back in 99, about to be kicked out of the comp
2)Balmain met the criteria hence was not required to merge
3) Balmain and Wests merged into Wests Tigers
4)Wests Tigers won a premiership in 2005
As for big bad benny, he can go and get fooked and the rest of the Balmain Tigers board, along with blockhead roach
All im saying is that tradition should be maintained 50/50.. no take overs… thats very dirty...
What are you expectations in regards to wests gaining more control?
tigermaniac
Well-known member
@TigerOfBankstown said:
I'm for keeping them together, but money issues are the constant in all of this. JV and take overs are always dirty, they never please everyone, but this can be overcome by finding funds. Clearly if what the NRL gives in funds is sufficient, we wouldn't have a problem. My expectations are, it is what it is. Nor you or me can do anything about it.
_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
@tigermaniac said:
What an absurd suggestion.
No Balmain won't accept it, and Wests Group wouldn't be stupid enough to propose it.
Can you imagine all the Magpies Directors sitting around the boardroom table thinking 'yeah let's throw away millions of dollars by dumping the most marketable logo in the NRL'…
Blackpearl
New member
@Abraham said:
absolutely spot on. without doubt ' tigers ' is the most marketable brand name in footy. clubs like parra,gold coast,melbourne and nth qld would be falling over themselves to get that name.
as mentioned already, three grades …. all weststigers
Mona_Lolesi
New member
This talk is outrageous.
If people can't get over Balmain vs Wests then that is ludicrous.
The JV is 13 years old. New generation of fans care about Wests Tigers. The club desperately needs this generation of fans/powerbrokers to take over the bias old heads who can't let go.
We identify and respect the heritage via appropriate matches each year.
To put a spin on those favoring Wests side and telling Balmain to stump up cash
The Meriton connection is due to former Balmain ties.
What happens then?
If people can't get over Balmain vs Wests then that is ludicrous.
The JV is 13 years old. New generation of fans care about Wests Tigers. The club desperately needs this generation of fans/powerbrokers to take over the bias old heads who can't let go.
We identify and respect the heritage via appropriate matches each year.
To put a spin on those favoring Wests side and telling Balmain to stump up cash
The Meriton connection is due to former Balmain ties.
What happens then?
@crusader said:
Garbage? I'm not the one who wants to return to 1999 champ…Try and read posts and put your brain into gear before you post. You'll embarrass yourself a lot less if you do.
$1 million dollars is not a significant part of the turnover of an NRL club. The NRL grant is easily the biggest proportion of NRL club funding. How long do you suppose Wests Ashfield could run a team without an NRL grant?
Going on 14years and the boys and girls are still infighting…...the brand is WESTSTIGERS and always will be . I suppose Balmain have to access where they are going moving forward,Personaly it looks pretty bleak for them to be honest financially . The board situation has to be resolved one way or the other for the club to finally move forward , with all these types of things every body will not be happy.
@Yossarian said:
It seems you would like to return to 1999\. As proven by your attempt to play down Wests contribution to Wests tigers. Yes of course the Nrl is every clubs major contributor. Thanks scoop. However that is not enough to survive as a competitive nrl club. There is still about a million dollars which us given from the leagues clubs. So what are we arguing about. Currently balmain hold the balance of power at board level and contribute zero dollars. Wests want a representation which befits their contribution. Why are you so irrate about that?
I couldn't give a toss, but if it helps keep the franchise intact , then I'm all for it. Balmain have had control till now and look where we are. Maybe change will do us good
_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
Out of curiosity, why are people saying Balmain has been in control up until now?
I may be ignorant as to the inner workings of the boardroom, but I'm pretty sure it's always been 50/50 in terms of numbers.
If some from the Wests Group sided with Balmain, that's due to the dysfunctional workings of the factionalised Wests Group, and not anything which Balmain has done wrong. I think it's more of an insult to the Wests guys that they couldn't get their house in order until a few months ago, rather than a stain of shame upon Balmain, like some are trying to portray.
I may be ignorant as to the inner workings of the boardroom, but I'm pretty sure it's always been 50/50 in terms of numbers.
If some from the Wests Group sided with Balmain, that's due to the dysfunctional workings of the factionalised Wests Group, and not anything which Balmain has done wrong. I think it's more of an insult to the Wests guys that they couldn't get their house in order until a few months ago, rather than a stain of shame upon Balmain, like some are trying to portray.
S
system
Guest
Correct.
Wests Campbelltown often voted with Balmain but now it is 50/50 with the chair having the deciding vote in a tie
Wests Campbelltown often voted with Balmain but now it is 50/50 with the chair having the deciding vote in a tie
@Abraham said:
It's funny how you start by saying that you are ignorant and then continue to make silly claims about what you think is fact.
Balmain have had 4 board members to Wests 3, so that's how they have had the balance of power in their decision making.
Why do you think that Wests have only had their "house in order" in the last few months???
For Wests tigers sake, I hope that balmain can get their development approved. I have contributed to lobbying , I was a member of balmain leagues until it was shut, I am involved in a junior balmain club now, I would do anything for them but I can't stand when people talk crap about Wests or balmain for the purposes of causing division or undermining their worth.
Do you support Wests tigers???? Then pack your balmain /wests jersey away
_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
TigerOfBankstown
New member
@crusader said:
I support Wests Tigers
http://www.weststigers.com.au/about-us
Wests Tigers Rugby League Football Pty Ltd is a company, limited by shares, established under a joint venture agreement between the Balmain Tigers DRLFC, Western Suburbs DRLFC and Western Suburbs Leagues Clubs at Ashfield and Campbelltown.
The Constitution of the company provides for a shareholders’ agreement between the two parties, with 50% equity entitlements held by Balmain and 50% by the Wests Group.
Both parties to the shareholders agreement provide five Directors of the company plus a Company Secretary who is also the CEO of Wests Tigers, who hold office for a period of three years. The Chairman of the company is provided, in the first term of 12 months, by Balmain Tigers, and the second term by Western Suburbs Magpies. They then alternate.
The Board of Directors is required to meet as and when required, and has established a monthly cycle.
Black_n_White
New member
Just about everyone who has posted in this thread needs to go back to the first page, read the thread end to end, then take a step back and think about how petty most of it is.
To break the OP down to nuts and bolts is very easy…. Our club isnt running at a profit but a loss, needing consistant top ups financially from the current shareholders. With our current structure, these current shareholders have to take responsibility for their own mismanagement and stump up the cash to keep us afloat. These payments are to be, and always have been to be split between the shareholders, at a percentage relevent to their ownership stake.
Unfortunately for a while now we have a partner in financial troubles of their own, and has been struggling for a while now, with no real options to turn it around.
What is pathetic though, is how many who have taken the time to vent their bias... and that I doubt most who have, probably dont realise they are doing so.
Why do we need an external investor, we have surety guaranteed by Ashfield for a mere board position (and as it seems not permanantly but until the outstanding balance is corrected, which is an extremely fair deal) . Ashfield has a plan, they are and have been putting it in motion, buying out Magpies share, now chasing a Balmain seat as well, thus breaking the boardroom deadlock and gaining the ability to steer the club... the result is decision rather than division... Its a plan in motion...
People are crying out for an independant board... honestly, as a faction, Balmain should consider the option very carefully. No truly independant and competent board would allow Balmain to fail financial obligations for too long. As I understand, the stake holders must first offer their shares to other stake holders... instead of losing a seat temporarily, they may well be forced to sell.
I have read many of the "its one club, JV rules" crowd, show their real colours in this thread. Think of the whole entity for a second, not old allegiances, and its pretty easy to see how easily all this could go away, and the dream of a club with a semblance of direction is really on a platter right now.
To break the OP down to nuts and bolts is very easy…. Our club isnt running at a profit but a loss, needing consistant top ups financially from the current shareholders. With our current structure, these current shareholders have to take responsibility for their own mismanagement and stump up the cash to keep us afloat. These payments are to be, and always have been to be split between the shareholders, at a percentage relevent to their ownership stake.
Unfortunately for a while now we have a partner in financial troubles of their own, and has been struggling for a while now, with no real options to turn it around.
What is pathetic though, is how many who have taken the time to vent their bias... and that I doubt most who have, probably dont realise they are doing so.
Why do we need an external investor, we have surety guaranteed by Ashfield for a mere board position (and as it seems not permanantly but until the outstanding balance is corrected, which is an extremely fair deal) . Ashfield has a plan, they are and have been putting it in motion, buying out Magpies share, now chasing a Balmain seat as well, thus breaking the boardroom deadlock and gaining the ability to steer the club... the result is decision rather than division... Its a plan in motion...
People are crying out for an independant board... honestly, as a faction, Balmain should consider the option very carefully. No truly independant and competent board would allow Balmain to fail financial obligations for too long. As I understand, the stake holders must first offer their shares to other stake holders... instead of losing a seat temporarily, they may well be forced to sell.
I have read many of the "its one club, JV rules" crowd, show their real colours in this thread. Think of the whole entity for a second, not old allegiances, and its pretty easy to see how easily all this could go away, and the dream of a club with a semblance of direction is really on a platter right now.
@crusader said:
You know what's REALLY funny? The fact that you can operate a keyboard all by yourself.
1\. The board had always been 50/50, and NOT skewed in Balmain's favor. Only the chairman rotates each year. A simple glance at the JV website would have confirmed that before you embarrassingly stated that Balmain have more board members than the Magpies.
Boy you must feel silly right about now.
2\. The 'house in order' statement was in reference to Wests Campbeltown giving up their seat on the board to Ashfield. Thereby enabling Wests Group to vote as a single block.
3\. If you can't respond sensibly to legitimate posts, then go and PMS elsewhere. There is enough hysteria and false information on here already without you adding to it.
