Wests Tigers Private Ownership is that the Answer?

[Lestronge]

If you are looking for action from the NRL and PVL...

The NRL will intervene to the minimum extent necessary to protect its own brand

ie; If the Wests Tigers boardroom drama, warring and politics starts to spill over and threaten the NRLs brand or public image, there will be minimum intervention necessary to restore that image. Hence the reinstatement of O'farrel, but no real structural change otherwise

..

Think of the LA clippers who were badly run by Donald Sterling for many many years.. It was only when he did something that threatened the NBA's brand image that he was extracted and dismissed from ownership...

🙏

Yep! It took a video recorded by his ex girlfriend where he called all his players the N word and referenced them to his slaves , that got him booted.
We are definitely the LA clippers of the nrl … only it’s even more poorly run as the clippers have zero fans and supporter base . We have by most metrics the top 5 in the game . It’s diabolical we are this bad …

 

[pawsandclaws1]

One of the uncomfortable issues for private ownership is the likelihood that a new owner would want her/his staff in major positions in the club - CEO, Chief financial officer, recruitment, pathways etc. It's their money!

 

[NT_Tiger]

I google AI'd why wt have remained poor over the past 15 yrs. The response:

The main reason the Wests Tigers have remained a poor side for 15 consecutive years without playing in the finals is deep-rooted off-field organizational dysfunction and severe roster mismanagement. Experts, players, and commentators attribute their prolonged failure to an unstable joint-venture hierarchy, constant executive turnover, and a fractured team culture

Who would have guessed?

This morning, once again, I google AI'd the following; "Given the above, what is the best way the fans could change this?" The response makes interesting reading but is very long so I'm not reposting it here. I would recommend anyone interested in this topic should google the 1st sentences followed by the second.
Im pretty sure Cochise is following up some of the recommendations already but part of the AI response recommends ramping fan base actions.

 

[Papacito]

Snippets cited by the NRL during various court cases involving the NRL. See below example:

It is the responsibility of the central sporting administration to manage and grow the commercial interests of the sport (the NRL had grown revenue from $20 million in 1990 to over $500 million in 2018)

It is in the interests of all participants – including clubs and players – for the commercial interests of the sport to be protected

The sport’s reputation and its commercial value are intrinsically linked

It could be argued the running of the club and governance issues has impacted the commercial interests of the NRL and/or the Wests Tigers reputation amongst it's own fans has now impacted the NRL's commercial interests - less members, less crowds, media drama, less merchandise sales impacting royalties etc.

The full participation agreement is not public and that is common k owledge...I'm sure you were trying to find a gotcha on that one, but the snippets the NRL has used to argue certain cases before are cited above. It's not my opinion.

Google tells me this was evidence in the Jack de Bellin case where he was fighting the automatic stand down rule?

This makes perfect sense. Putting guys on the field who are subject to sexual assault charges would damage the game commercially across the board and for every club.

Even if performance of a club is sub-par, it's unlikely to impact the commercial potential of the game as a whole.

 

[liltiger]

100%, but what a significant drop in attendance and viewership would do is put the pressure on the NRL to do something.

Wests ashfield members are also frustrated where their money is being spent.

Those two places are where the money comes from. Can't beleive these guys get to spend it with impunity.

NSW L&G need to grow a pair. If they deem this debenture structure is legal under current laws, then rewrite the bloody laws. If they mess around with the ex premier again, he may lean into his old Labor colleagues.

Personally only way to force change imo is to damage reveal the charachters on the HBG board in the media. Theyre that egotistical i dont think they could take it and would sell up if the scrutiny got too much. Take last year for example Burgess couldnt get off the Tigers board fast enough as soon as the "fan" run instagram account made it way into the media.

 

[liltiger]

How rich and successful do you think they are?
Business wise they are small fries. Losing money will certainly hurt them.

No it wont. To them its monopoly money. Its not their money and o matter how much they lose tucker whats tge worst that could happen. The debuntures just shufgle the deck chairs. Whos going to vote them off the board for losing money. Theyre totally insulated and protected. If they had HBG best interest at heart they would have scrapped the dibunture system long ago as a way to keep themselves in check by allowing members voting rights for the boardroom. If they perform poorly they theoretically could get voted off. They havnt though, cause they know theyre untouchable in the current system. The only ones who could force change would be the state govt perhaps through liquor and gaming. Though they would meed a reason and an appetite to do it, both of which they dont yet have unfortunitly. I cant see how a group as large with the holdings HBG have as a not for profit community group can exist without member voting rights on a total board make up. They could squander everything and the members are unprotected. How the state govt allow it is mind blowing. The members have no recourse to protect or insulate themselves from the boards decisions.

 

[weststigers]

Google tells me this was evidence in the Jack de Bellin case where he was fighting the automatic stand down rule?

This makes perfect sense. Putting guys on the field who are subject to sexual assault charges would damage the game commercially across the board and for every club.

Even if performance of a club is sub-par, it's unlikely to impact the commercial potential of the game as a whole.

I have never argued that performance would be the reason that damage would be done commercially. Why do you and others twist the point being made?

Specifically, I have always referred to a fan mutiny whereby fans pull all support financially. This directly impacts the NRL commercially and to what extent would be up for debate - at least there is some ground to mount an argument. As I have always said...it is a "last/only hope" for removing HBG or getting meaningful NRL intervention for suffering fans of this club.

Never said it's the silver bullet. Only that hoping HBG suddenly works out how to run a successful club should be last on the list of options and fans need to take things into their own hands if they want to advocate for change.

The last chapter of the slow destruction of this club showed that HBG didn't care about fan protest at all. If you remember, we had some hope where a review was called for and they obliged, which was a great sign things could work out in the long term, however 18 months in, they doubled back and blew it up. Waiting for HBG to do anything positive for this club is a path to nowhere. It's time fans drew a line in the sand.

 

[weststigers]

No it wont. To them its monopoly money. Its not their money and o matter how much they lose tucker whats tge worst that could happen. The debuntures just shufgle the deck chairs. Whos going to vote them off the board for losing money. Theyre totally insulated and protected. If they had HBG best interest at heart they would have scrapped the dibunture system long ago as a way to keep themselves in check by allowing members voting rights for the boardroom. If they perform poorly they theoretically could get voted off. They havnt though, cause they know theyre untouchable in the current system. The only ones who could force change would be the state govt perhaps through liquor and gaming. Though they would meed a reason and an appetite to do it, both of which they dont yet have unfortunitly. I cant see how a group as large with the holdings HBG have as a not for profit community group can exist without member voting rights on a total board make up. They could squander everything and the members are unprotected. How the state govt allow it is mind blowing. The members have no recourse to protect or insulate themselves from the boards decisions.

I think the Liquor and Gaming path has been well trodden and HBG have broken no laws. If the system allows it, you can't be upset at the people that use it legitimately.

Sadly, the HBG structure means a few debenture holders weild a massive proportion of power over the many. In most organisations, you could topple that or it would simply go bust, but power is so deeply protected by the structure, it becomes impossible to get any change.

If fans want to rock a new polo, hat and keyring every year, the status quo will remain. It's that simple. There is no legal route to removal or change.

 

[TheKhan]

I think the Liquor and Gaming path has been well trodden and HBG have broken no laws. If the system allows it, you can't be upset at the people that use it legitimately.

Sadly, the HBG structure means a few debenture holders weild a massive proportion of power over the many. In most organisations, you could topple that or it would simply go bust, but power is so deeply protected by the structure, it becomes impossible to get any change.

If fans want to rock a new polo, hat and keyring every year, the status quo will remain. It's that simple. There is no legal route to removal or change.

There is, its just hard. The fiduciary duty of HBG is legally binding, regardless of the crazy corporate buisness structure they have in place. The problem is unless theres someone willing to cover the cost to prove deliberate criminality and not just obscene incompetence nothing will happen out side of L&G waging a finger at them.

 

[Chunk]

Well look at the last 15 years of results. It’s been atrocious. The fans don’t deserve it but it’s such an unprofessionally run organisation and is a constant blight on the game.

And what do you mean the CEO is trying to bring them together? He’s trying to ensure the board and HBG, and the footy club are working with each other not against?

if that’s the case it just shows how moronic and toxic HBG are and that they don’t have the best interests of the club at heart.

In governance structures a CEO reports to the board and receives strategic direction from the board. It’s the CEOs role to implement and operationalise that strategic direction. If they’re having to play peacemaker with the board it shows serious fractures in the organisation.

And what job are HBG doing? An independent review found they were incapable of running an NRL club yet they’ve chosen not to implement the review.

Yes, I understand all that and what you say is obvious and correct but what ideas do you have as a solution?

I was suggesting or hoping that the CEO, Barry and the independents may be able to persuade HBG to be more open to helping the football club in any number of ways.

In one of his interviews, the current CEO said that all boards are having regular dinner together now. This might not be much but it may be a sign of what his end goal is.

Now considering the recent history, I think this is good news, it helps to focus on human connection, shared mindsets/ideas, and builds mutual trust.

 

[weststigers]

There is, its just hard. The fiduciary duty of HBG is legally binding, regardless of the crazy corporate buisness structure they have in place. The problem is unless theres someone willing to cover the cost to prove deliberate criminality and not just obscene incompetence nothing will happen out side of L&G waging a finger at them.

Well yeah that's what I'm saying. All directors have fiduciary duty in Australia, but you need to prove wrongdoing and I don't see anyone coming forward with any concrete allegations. There needs to be something of substance, not just disgruntled fans that want to force change.

 

[Pringle Gold]

Yes, I understand all that and what you say is obvious and correct but what ideas do you have as a solution?

I was suggesting or hoping that the CEO, Barry and the independents may be able to persuade HBG to be more open to helping the football club in any number of ways.

In one of his interviews, the current CEO said that all boards are having regular dinner together now. This might not be much but it may be a sign of what his end goal is.

Now considering the recent history, I think this is good news, it helps to focus on human connection, shared mindsets/ideas, and builds mutual trust.

The only option would be to boycott anything that brings revenue to HBG. That includes merchandise, memberships, game day tickets and probably a boycott of HBG venues.

I say HBG venues knowing that a lot of members and fans probably don’t visit anyway.

It might make HBG more open to selling to a private owner but there’s no way forward with HBG. If we want the club to be successful they can’t be involved.

The only other option would be to destroy the debenture system. This won’t happen because liquor and gaming have already looked into complaints and there’s been zero change.

The CEO has to put forward a business case to three seperate boards and that is farcical. It’s a convoluted governance structure and I couldn’t care less about them having dinner. Making strategic decisions in the best interests of the club should be a prerequisite of any board member. It’s quite literally the bare minimum requirement.

The fact the CEO needs to cultivate this among board members and HBG is problematic.