WT Ownership, The Board & Senior Management - MEGA Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Buttface said:
Another piss weak supporters thread.

Member up instead I say..
Click to expand...

Telling off other fans for venting frustration at the same time as saying membership is the answer is so flippant and crude. The only thing you have done is undermine current members.
 
BUGSY MALONE said:
No I was a 36 year Wests Magpies supporter (until joint-venture) who spent years watching them play at both Pratten Park and Lidcombe Oval. I was devastated when the then NSWRL governing body removed them and Newtown from the competition in 1983 only to be reinstated after the Pies took them to court. I was very pleased when Balmain accepted the Magpies as a joint-venture partner in 1999 as I believed both clubs were a great fit. In my opinion both Balmain and Wests were correct in rejecting Parramatta and Canterbury as partners. Sadly I now believe joint-ventures don't work and would love to see both clubs once again stand alone (though financially Balmain would struggle). I understand how life is tough and we need to accept change but the current Wests Tigers set-up just doesn't work (IMO). I would love nothing more than be proved wrong and eat humble pie but if the club continues to exist then they need to pour a lot of their funds into Juniors from the Campbelltown region.
Click to expand...
The best thing would be new private ownership.

Frankly sacking the board only to re-hire Romero and Burgess in power positions is laughable.

@cochise did they ever agree to a chat?
 
weststigers said:
The best thing would be new private ownership.

Frankly sacking the board only to re-hire Romero and Burgess in power positions is laughable.

@cochise did they ever agree to a chat?
Click to expand...
If you were in Barnier’s position now, would you be happy about that outcome? I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see him reconsider his club donations?
 
twentyforty said:
If you were in Barnier’s position now, would you be happy about that outcome? I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see him reconsider his club donations?
Click to expand...
What about him?

He put a one-off $100k donation into the club to be part of some foundation 13 group, which he himself describes as a lifetime membership of sorts.

The biggest problem with our admin is we can't vote them out, so there's no accountability. New ownership would hopefully provide a platform to vote for members.

While simultaneously killing off the Balmain/Wests shareholder split.
 
weststigers said:
What about him?

He put a one-off $100k donation into the club to be part of some foundation 13 group, which he himself describes as a lifetime membership of sorts.

The biggest problem with our admin is we can't vote them out, so there's no accountability. New ownership would hopefully provide a platform to vote for members.

While simultaneously killing off the Balmain/Wests shareholder split.
Click to expand...
I see, Barnier’s donation was a ‘once off’. Too late to reconsider that then 😂
We all missed out when HGB refused Harry’s offer, instead of flippantly suggesting he buy the Balmain 10%.
 
twentyforty said:
I see, Barnier’s donation was a ‘once off’. Too late to reconsider that then 😂
We all missed out when HGB refused Harry’s offer, instead of flippantly suggesting he buy the Balmain 10%.
Click to expand...
Donations are donations. Are you suggesting there is some expectation of ownership if one donates?

Why would he pull further donations if the ownership changed?
 
weststigers said:
Donations are donations. Are you suggesting there is some expectation of ownership if one donates?

Why would he pull further donations if the ownership changed?
Click to expand...
You’re reading too much into it. LOL How can a donation be anything but what it is.
Simply suggesting after presenting the report on the review of governance and being told the club would implement all recommendations, Barnier would not be pleased to see no action. I mean other than some HBG directors withdrawing from the WT board.

Why would he pull further donations if the ownership changed?
I have no idea? What makes you think he would?
 
bigsiro said:
Telling off other fans for venting frustration at the same time as saying membership is the answer is so flippant and crude. The only thing you have done is undermine current members.
Click to expand...
Bullshit.

Suggesting the club should fold because of on field struggles it is trying to fix is piss weak and a waste of everyone's time.

No one who loves or supports a club would ever suggest they fold. Ever.

We don't need people like that here or in the club at large.
 
Harry T is to smart to come anywhere this mess.

Bugsy you wrote this
but the current Wests Tigers set-up just doesn't work (IMO). I would love nothing more than be proved wrong and eat humble pie but if the club continues to exist then they need to pour a lot of their funds into Juniors from the Campbelltown region.
This is so correct if the club was run properly when we first merged than what a great club we would have, 17,000 at the last game proves the fans are there ready and willing.
 
Kelce68 said:
Bullshit.

Suggesting the club should fold because of on field struggles it is trying to fix is piss weak and a waste of everyone's time.

No one who loves or supports a club would ever suggest they fold. Ever.

We don't need people like that here or in the club at large.
Click to expand...
On field struggles?
There are many fans who wish that was the problem we‘re confronting, but truth is it’s just a symptom of a far greater issue which needs addressing, and we all know that if we sweep it under the carpet it doesn’t improve by itself.
 
I really don't like this thread !
I don't think Abdo &Co need too much encouragement
So much talk about PNG ,Perth ,2nd NZ team ,Bears ,Central Coast etc etc
4 or 5 spoons in a row then look out !!
Our Club is our Club infinitum that's it !
What the club must do ?
Fix it !! Get a better roster , coach better ,Train harder
Make us proud again asap !
 
twentyforty said:
You’re reading too much into it. LOL How can a donation be anything but what it is.
Simply suggesting after presenting the report on the review of governance and being told the club would implement all recommendations, Barnier would not be pleased to see no action. I mean other than some HBG directors withdrawing from the WT board.

Why would he pull further donations if the ownership changed?
I have no idea? What makes you think he would?
Click to expand...
Apologies. I read your previous responses in a way you probably didn't intend. This one clears it up.

I think the recommendations have been implemented to a degree. It's just the Romero/Burgess return to power that is concerning.

A functioning club allows its members to vote the administration in and out. We simply don't have that.
 
Nothing in the review called for members voting directors in or out.

Nothing in the review recommendations called for private ownership.

Nothing in the review recommendations stipulated that Romero & Burgess could not be reappointed to represent HBG or the Magpies. If indeed they are reappointed.

Nothing to say alternative private ownership would deliver superior on field results.

Nothing to say that the so called Wests/Balmain factions are so problematic that they are indeed the cause of the clubs poor recent on field performance.
 
There is zero hope of a stand-alone re entry by the Magpies and Balmain.

Zero.

Take a look at the demographics.

In the old Wests area Homebush to Summer Hill, the whole area is practically a gentrified Asian area now......most arriving post JV.

What about Balmain’s traditional areas.

Look at Leichhardt. Walk down Norton St. It's basically derelict.

What about Ryde, West Ryde etc. Basically new migrants there now.

You will battle to find someone to talk RL in any of the above including WA.

And Campbelltown has massively changed since 20000.

Restarting Wests or Balmain in any of the above would be like setting up a new club in non Rugby League area.....perhaps with a small exception in the south west.

Forget it. Wests and Balmain live on in the JV and that's the way I want it to stay.

Unless somebody has a time machine taking us back to the 70s, 80s or 90s.
 
Magpie_Magic said:
Nothing in the review called for members voting directors in or out.

Nothing in the review recommendations called for private ownership.

Nothing in the review recommendations stipulated that Romero & Burgess could not be reappointed to represent HBG or the Magpies. If indeed they are reappointed.

Nothing to say alternative private ownership would deliver superior on field results.

Nothing to say that the so called Wests/Balmain factions are so problematic that they are indeed the cause of the clubs poor recent on field performance.
Click to expand...
Have you seen the report from the review?
 
cochise said:
Have you seen the report from the review?
Click to expand...
Not in its entirety.

Just going off what has been publicly discussed.

In any case the club wasn't under any obligation to commission a review, its recommendations are just that recommendations, and non binding.

I might add the general jist of the recommendations are a separation of powers from HBG to the WT board, so they are not totally directly involved.

Furthermore. HBG are it appears acting on these.

And I'd add while I agree with the general theme of the recommendations there is nothing to say they will lead to improved on field performances on their own.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BZN
twentyforty said:
On field struggles?
There are many fans who wish that was the problem we‘re confronting, but truth is it’s just a symptom of a far greater issue which needs addressing, and we all know that if we sweep it under the carpet it doesn’t improve by itself.
Click to expand...
None of that has anything to do with suggesting the club should fold.

Anyone suggesting that should happen is an idiot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

... and 11 more.
Total: 611 (members: 61, guests: 550)
Back
Top