What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Another D-Day looms for besieged Bunnies

Messages
14,937




Four Simple Steps to Making Your First Spot Forex Trade. Start Here.



Drought ... on-field success for the Rabbitohs has continued to prove elusive since Russell Crowe and Peter Holmes a Court took control. Photo: Getty Images

South Sydney may be up for sale in June, but chairman Nick Pappas insists high-profile owners Russell Crowe and Peter Holmes a Court won't walk away. Adrian Proszenko and Daniel Lane investigate.
South Sydney could be up for sale on June 7 next year.
When Russell Crowe and Peter Holmes a Court swept to power at Redfern in 2006, buying 75 per cent of the club for $3 million, the biggest question their critics posed was: how long they would stick around? The Sun-Herald can reveal that, should they wish to walk away, they could do so halfway through next season.
In March 2006, Holmes a Court issued a press release titled ''Setting the record straight'', in which he addressed concerns and inaccuracies regarding their proposal to buy the Rabbitohs. Regarding assertions the club could be on-sold or shut down, he wrote: ''There are clear restrictions on any change of control of the Supporter Company [BlackCourt League Investments]. In addition, there will be a six-year prohibition on Supporter Company selling its shares in the Football Club and after that period, there is a first right of refusal in favour of the Football Club on any transfer of those shares. As for the Football Club being 'shut down', clause 10.7 of the Deed clearly states that if Supporter Company at any time proposes that the Football Club be placed into voluntary liquidation or that an external administrator be appointed, then Supporter Company must transfer all of its shares to Member Company for a total of $1.''
Advertisement: Story continues below

Dejected ... the Rabbitohs re-group after a try is scored against them. Photo: Getty Images

The release effectively gives Crowe and Holmes a Court permission to sell the club to whomever they like should the football club opt not to exercise its right to buy them out. The only stipulation is that, should the multimillionaire businessmen want out, they cannot leave the Rabbitohs in a worse financial state than when they assumed control of the club.
Souths chairman Nick Pappas told The Sun-Herald he would be extremely surprised if Crowe and Holmes a Court sold their shares in the club next year. ''There was a moratorium on the date by which they could sell if they wanted to sell, but that's a very different proposition to them actually selling,'' Pappas said.
''There's two different issues [here]. The arrangement that was entered into at the time - it was put to the members in a vote back in 2006 - provided a limit, or what we call a moratorium, on which they could sell the club or sell their interests in the club.

Souths hail Clive Churchill during the club’s glory days.

''That's got nothing to do with their desire to sell the club, and they have no desire to sell their interest in the club, I can assure you. You've heard that from the horse's mouth.''
If the Pride of the League, a foundation club boasting a record 20 premierships, went on the open market, it would be the realisation of a fear held by Souths patriarch George Piggins, who strongly opposed privatisation to prevent such a scenario. ''It's something [members] should have looked into and understood properly,'' Piggins said. ''No one knows where Souths will finish in the long run. Hopefully it will be where it is today, in the South Sydney district, but even playing at Homebush takes a lot of that gloss off it.
''I think they thought that the club wasn't being run properly and they could do a better job. I would have loved to have had their money at my disposal and see the results that I could have got … They don't have a leagues club and haven't had one for nearly five years. They probably made moves which they thought were right. Unfortunately, the reality to me is that they haven't worked. It's a lot harder than what they think.''
Crowe has previously spoken of the financial burden that South Sydney has become. In an interview with ABC Radio in 2008, the Gladiator star said: ''It's gone from being a passion to something more of a great big lead weight around my neck. It's far more time consuming than I could have ever possibly imagined. It's definitely in a place in my life now where it occupies, in a relative sense, way too much time.''
In a Christmas video message to Rabbitohs members later that year, he said: ''… But I will tell you this, though, I won't continue to put the type of cash I've had to into Souths forever. The business has to begin to stand on its own feet. And to be quite sure that is not an emotional issue for me. It is what it is.''
On-field success has continued to prove elusive since Crowe and Holmes a Court took control. The Rabbitohs are the only team in the NRL to miss out on the finals over the past four years despite a playing roster boasting Greg Inglis, Sam Burgess, Dave Taylor, Michael Crocker and Roy Asotasi. The only coach to guide them to the finals in more than two decades, Jason Taylor, was sacked over his role in a Mad Monday incident.
Despite the biggest membership base in the league, the Rabbitohs operated at a small loss for the recently completed season.
Earlier this year, it was reported that Holmes a Court is owed $4.5 million and Crowe $1.65 million by the football club. The pair are legally able to call in the debts on September 30, 2012.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...ged-bunnies-20111105-1n0zt.html#ixzz1cso2LFGi
 

Big Sam

First Grade
Messages
8,976
Bullshit article. We laugh at the Telecrap and their sensationalism but the Herald's just as atrocious. The idea that HaC and Crowe would sell without any on field success given the millions they've put in is ridiculous. And also given that they've turned the club around from one that was hemorrhaging millions to one that made just a small loss in 2010-11 with the biggest supporter base in Sydney makes the club very attractive for any other buyer. We have nothing to worry about.

''I think they thought that the club wasn't being run properly and they could do a better job … They probably made moves which they thought were right. Unfortunately, the reality to me is that they haven't worked.''

Confirmation of George Piggins' senility.
 

Aaron_sfas

Juniors
Messages
1,957
the above quote from Piggins is just insane. The fact we still exist proves Rusty and Phac have done a better job
 

rabbs

Juniors
Messages
995
Here's Peter Holmes-a-Court's response to the article via Facebook today:


"Less chance of the Rabbitohs being for sale than us winning last year's premiership. Support of the Club is as strong as ever; on and off field teams are stronger than any time in last 6 years;

Membership campaign on track; season draw as good as can be hoped for (given that there are another 15 teams who want things their way too); and first trial 84 days away against big pommy mob. Don't believe everything you read. I am a long way from Sydney, but never far from email if jouno would like to ask me a question. "
 

muzby

Village Idiot
Staff member
Messages
45,712
what i don't get is these two statements, they seem to be conflicting:

The release effectively gives Crowe and Holmes a Court permission to sell the club to whomever they like should the football club opt not to exercise its right to buy them out. The only stipulation is that, should the multimillionaire businessmen want out, they cannot leave the Rabbitohs in a worse financial state than when they assumed control of the club.

Earlier this year, it was reported that Holmes a Court is owed $4.5 million and Crowe $1.65 million by the football club. The pair are legally able to call in the debts on September 30, 2012

surely if they call in over $6m in debts, this would leave the club "in a worse financial position"?
 
Messages
14,937
what i don't get is these two statements, they seem to be conflicting:





surely if they call in over $6m in debts, this would leave the club "in a worse financial position"?

Not sure,but the answer maybe on the main board in the Souffs threads.
 

RAB-161

Juniors
Messages
176
what i don't get is these two statements, they seem to be conflicting:





surely if they call in over $6m in debts, this would leave the club "in a worse financial position"?
Well spotted Muzby. Nothing in this article makes any sense at all.
It reads like it has been dictated by someone with an axe to grind to an exrremely tame "journalist".
 
Top