WT Ownership, The Board & Senior Management - MEGA Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Man they really misreprent Tony Andreacchio. "Andreacchio is the principal of Raine and Horne Real Estate"

No! He is just a real estate agent, in charge of the ashfield branch which has 4 people! Even the media takes the spin. I've run bigger private enterprise than that and don't believe I'm qualified for the board.
Almost sounds like it’s Tony doing all the talking regarding the article.
Me thinks Tony needs to go!
 
Almost sounds like it’s Tony doing all the talking regarding the article.
Me thinks Tony needs to go!
The challenge is we'll just get another HBG muppet. There needs to be structural reform. Let's see if they can put the community first over self interest... They can still vet the nominees and keep control, but to succeed, they need to be able to cast the net to more talented business people.
 
The challenge is we'll just get another HBG muppet. There needs to be structural reform. Let's see if they can put the community first over self interest... They can still vet the nominees and keep control, but to succeed, they need to be able to cast the net to more talented business people.
Yes we need structural reform, but the bare minimum is to remove the current board, they have proven they can't make good decisions, can't plan strategically, can't stick to a plan for more then 2 years, can't stop leaking information to the press etc. Someone new appointed from HBG may just possess the skills and experience required, they may not, but any change brings about the possibility of positive growth that we currently don't have
 
Last edited:
I actually tried applying a week ago. It's old school, you can apply online but you then need to physically show up. No way for me to be a member overseas.
It is, and yeah it's embarrassing that a club like Wests Ashfield is so backwards. I had to go on in person to renew my membership which lapsed during lockdowns. It's just absurd that there is no online application process, other than due existing and current members wanting to extend.
They only want a handful of locals being members, probably just so those who are members are the ones who gamble and drink there, whereas those with an interest in the footy too will find it too cumbersome to get there. So without much opposition they can do what they want
 
It is, and yeah it's embarrassing that a club like Wests Ashfield is so backwards. I had to go on in person to renew my membership which lapsed during lockdowns. It's just absurd that there is no online application process, other than due existing and current members wanting to extend.
They only want a handful of locals being members, probably just so those who are members are the ones who gamble and drink there, whereas those with an interest in the footy too will find it too cumbersome to get there. So without much opposition they can do what they want
First world problems.
 
The challenge is we'll just get another HBG muppet. There needs to be structural reform. Let's see if they can put the community first over self interest... They can still vet the nominees and keep control, but to succeed, they need to be able to cast the net to more talented business people.
Yes there does need to be structural reform, which should include less involvement from HBG and a stronger more disciplined approach on director appointments with priority given to those who have demonstrated strength in objective focussed management.
It’s not hard to fix if they have the will.
 
Yes we need structural reform, but the bare minimum is to remove the current board, they have proven they can't make good decisions, can't plan strategically, can't suck to a plan for more then 2 years, can't stop leaking information to the press etc. Someone new appointed from HBG may just possess the skills and experience required, they may not, but any change brings about the possibility of positive growth that we currently don't have
I get what Hammertime is suggesting though.
And yes I understand it is a business but to what benefit does the Wests Tigers club have from 3 Wests Ashfield board members being a large share of the board?
Wouldn’t it be beneficial for all if we had 1 representatives from each of our owners make up part of the board.
That is 1 Balmain Leagues / football club rep.
1 Wests Magpies rep
1 Holman Barnes rep on a six way board with 3 independents.
 
I get what Hammertime is suggesting though.
And yes I understand it is a business but to what benefit does the Wests Tigers club have from 3 Wests Ashfield board members being a large share of the board?
Wouldn’t it be beneficial for all if we had 1 representatives from each of our owners make up part of the board.
That is 1 Balmain Leagues / football club rep.
1 Wests Magpies rep
1 Holman Barnes rep on a six way board with 3 independents.
I wouldn't mind a structure like that, Balmain Leagues doesn't exist as a separate entity anymore so would have to be a Balmain football club rep.

Looking forward to the recommendations of the review.
 
I get what Hammertime is suggesting though.
And yes I understand it is a business but to what benefit does the Wests Tigers club have from 3 Wests Ashfield board members being a large share of the board?
Wouldn’t it be beneficial for all if we had 1 representatives from each of our owners make up part of the board.
That is 1 Balmain Leagues / football club rep.
1 Wests Magpies rep
1 Holman Barnes rep on a six way board with 3 independents.
No

What you have missed is you get a 3-3 split. You don't want a 3-3 split on a board.
You want a 7 member board that forces a majority decision. Although you may not have included Lee H in the numbering above.

Tweeking the numbers above:
That is 1 Balmain Leagues / football club rep.
1 Wests Magpies rep
1 Wests Ashfield Rep - to represent the club.
1 Holman Barnes rep on a 7 way board with 3 independents.
 
No

What you have missed is you get a 3-3 split. You don't want a 3-3 split on a board.
You want a 7 member board that forces a majority decision. Although you may not have included Lee H in the numbering above.

Tweeking the numbers above:
That is 1 Balmain Leagues / football club rep.
1 Wests Magpies rep
1 Wests Ashfield Rep - to represent the club.
1 Holman Barnes rep on a 7 way board with 3 independents.
The Holman Barnes Group and Wests Ashfield are the same thing essentially.
 
No

What you have missed is you get a 3-3 split. You don't want a 3-3 split on a board.
You want a 7 member board that forces a majority decision. Although you may not have included Lee H in the numbering above.

Tweeking the numbers above:
That is 1 Balmain Leagues / football club rep.
1 Wests Magpies rep
1 Wests Ashfield Rep - to represent the club.
1 Holman Barnes rep on a 7 way board with 3 independents.
That board you have described is heavily slanted.
 
I wouldn't mind a structure like that, Balmain Leagues doesn't exist as a separate entity anymore so would have to be a Balmain football club rep.

Looking forward to the recommendations of the review.
If they have any common sense, part of the review outcome recommendations would be for the vast majority of fans to mind their own business and stop assuming they know all about the decisions and happenings at board level and that’s regardless of whether or not there are changes to the current board,
 
If they have any common sense, part of the review outcome recommendations would be for the vast majority of fans to mind their own business and stop assuming they know all about the decisions and happenings at board level and that’s regardless of whether or not there are changes to the current board,
That is why the review was important, there is obviously something very wrong at the club. We all have our opinions on what that may be, but it is important to know what is wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top