Tinkler will slash the price of family tickets

[applesauce]

rubbish, we run at break even most years and only because we skimp on every possible area available to us. have you read the post from Pika speculating on what he'd like to spend some extra cash on? it's embarrassing, some of the areas we skimp in to make the bottom line bearable... and he didn't even take the front office/administration into account as he didn't know a lot about it (and it seems to be the main area we lack in).

we're not a strong club. we're viable, we're not strong.

You are one of only 4 clubs to post a profit last year, with a sh*t team and a half built stadium...:roll:

Do the math.

Can't wait to see what Tinkler will turn the place into, it will be another Broncos with some on-field success.

 

[perverse]

We are not a basket case Perverse. We are not broke. We are not needing to go into receivership or liquidation. We are a viable operation which - whilst we could certainly be doing things better - are stronger than other clubs in the competition.

The perception out there is that the Tinkler deal is do or die for the club and it simply isn't true. Yes it would be preferable and desirable, but it isn't essential.

do you, or do you not have a response to the fact that we skimp massively to be in this position? i didn't say that we're in a dire situation, but to claim that we are in a position of strength is equally, if not even more stupid. we're not strong, we hobble along with the bare minimum resources we can afford to use in front office and in many areas of football operations still. posting a marginal profit for a couple of years is insignificant compared to the risk of posting a couple more horror losses. tell me, how many years in a row posting the same marginal profits would we need to catch up to our accumulated losses and balance the books up?

You are one of only 4 clubs to post a profit last year, with a sh*t team and a half built stadium...:roll:

Do the math.

we can continue the way we are, yes. assuming our next administration does as well as the current one at cutting corners to tidy up the bottom line. we can be so much more, though.

 

[Alex28]

God this accumulated losses bullsh*t annoys me. They are losses from the past. They are paid up. There is no one to repay, there is nothing to catch up. It is done. It is a figure bandied around now to help Tinkler's cause and to convince all and sundry we are a basketcase. It is all crap.

If Tinkler does catch up our accumulated losses what it will mean is we have $2.5 Million in the Bank and then we get a further $3 Million in sponsorship this year from him - that is if he and Edwards suggest it really isn't a debt and not pay it (and they would be technically correct if they took this line).

We have had to skimp and miss out on a few things because we haven't had the cash agreed. It is called living within your means. Other clubs will have to do that soon enough if they have the best of everything yet lose money every year. Hopefully this won't be our problem in the future.

As applesauce pointed out we were one of four clubs to make a profit last year. We are a strong club - now - but the sky is the limit under Tinkler...

 

[aqua_duck]

I disagree on us being a strong club, a strong club is one that makes the finals regularly, a club where players want to play, a club with all grades doing well, a club with the best available resources and staff. We simply do not tick any of those boxes. Not even one, how you can define that as being strong is beyond me.
I mean sure we're not as bad as the sharks but at the moment we fall well short of teams like the dragons, broncos, titans, dogs, storm, etc in terms of resources. Some NYC teams get better supplements for example than our 1st graders get, we can only afford consultants for many crucial roles, and we have blokes doing multiple jobs because we can't afford a fulltime person.
Players talk to other players, I mean how are we possibly going to attract quality players if the word going around is that Newcastle has sub standard equipment, sub standard supplements, cant afford fulltime specialist staff and do things on the cheap. If I were a player I'd personally avoid the place if I knew those were the conditions.
What Tinkler's money will atleast provide is a chance for us to catch up to the top teams, maybe even surpass them, it will attract high profile players just because of who Tinkler is, and more importantly it'll open the door for more 3rd party deals, which again will allow us to catch up to teams like South and Brisbane.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

What I like most about the whole deal is the idea that it will be a local club again. Within five years I'd like to see a squad full of players from Newcastle, Hunter and Mid North Coast areas and only a few others, preferably still country NSW players. That's the way it should be. I hope that with money to spend this is still a priority and the temptation to chase other players doesn't get in the way.

 

[Alex28]

It has never ever been that way and shouldn't be in the future. If someone comes up that fills the position that we need and they come from QLD or NZ, why shouldn't we sign them? Rob O'Davis is one our best ever and he came from QLD. We have a history of importing in when we need to. The team shouldn't be weakened to fill some ridiculous target or brief.

 

[Noname36]

^ Exactly. Local or not, I'm completely happy with the squad we have at the moment (apart from a couple of nuffies like Ciraldo and McDonnell who Id love to offload). Yes we still need a quality prop and a centre for when Mad Dog retires, but I couldn't give a sh*t where they come from as long as they're good.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

Then it won't be a local team and just like every other mercenary Sydney club. Might as well get Brian Smith back as coach. This is where the Knights have gone wrong. The fans there are not like they used to be. They are just fair weather, glory hunters like all the Sydney clubs and it has destroyed the culture of the place. Get the locals back and build the club around them. No one said have the whole team local, but at the moment it isn't at all. Rebuild the culture of the club to what it was and the true fans will stick with it no matter what. The glory hunters might disappear if they lose a few, but that is bound to happen at times anyway and it's better to do the right thing by the real supporters like the club used to have than the fair weather brigade. What they don't realise is the club had a winning culture when it had a mostly local team, it has ruined that culture and now is destined to be mid table at best. Yet some people want to keep that mediocre mercenary culture that the club has now. Except pay more money to get them. It won't work. It doesn't work at Souths and it won't work at Newcastle. You have to have a strong, successful culture at a club.

 

[Alex28]

If you take a look at the Knights Best Of team at the 20th Anniversary you'll find that around 40% of the squad comes from outside of the area. O'Davis, Hagan, Stewart, Kennedy, Butterfield... The clubs history is full of guys that come from outside of Newcastle and become club heroes.

This "all local" thing is a myth. Always has been.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

40%? 40% would be a significant reduction on today's team.

The club had little choice but to import in the first few years when Stewart was running around. And blokes like O'Davis were one club players who came as a youngster, not from another club, and stayed. We don't have players like that anymore either.

The locals we produced over the years are better than those players anyway, save for maybe a fullback. The Johns boys, Harragon, Sargent, Muir and any number of others. Where are those local players now? They formed the basis of our best teams. But they don't exist in the current culture of the club. The only locals are all pre-Smith era players who survived his cuts. It's not a myth that the club was doing much better on the field and drawing much better support from the community when it was a mostly local side. Newcastle is growing and so are most of the satellite towns and cities and yet the crowd numbers continue to drop well below the 20,000 mark that was achieved virtually every year in the past, even in the years when the team was towards the bottom. This is no coincidence.

 

[aqua_duck]

Hang on, Smith cut locals sure but at the time those locals were not performing, guys like Reegan Tanner, Todd Lowrie, an unmotivated Josh Perry, Brad Tighe, etc. I'm more than happy with the contribution of players like Zeb Taia, Isaac DeGois, Junior Sau, Matt Hilder, and Mad Dog.

Of our current squad, we have about half a dozen juniors in our best 17 each week, that number will rise when guys like Ethan Cook, Chad Redman, Josh Ailaomoi, Pete Matautia, Zane Tetevano and Tyrone Roberts start filtering through into 1st grade.

The juniors last few years just haven't come through, it happens at every club, we had a lean period of juniors after are very strong period that included Uate, Paterson and Mullen

 

[aqua_duck]

40%? 40% would be a significant reduction on today's team.

The club had little choice but to import in the first few years when Stewart was running around. And blokes like O'Davis were one club players who came as a youngster, not from another club, and stayed. We don't have players like that anymore either.

The locals we produced over the years are better than those players anyway, save for maybe a fullback. The Johns boys, Harragon, Sargent, Muir and any number of others. Where are those local players now? They formed the basis of our best teams. But they don't exist in the current culture of the club. The only locals are all pre-Smith era players who survived his cuts. It's not a myth that the club was doing much better on the field and drawing much better support from the community when it was a mostly local side. Newcastle is growing and so are most of the satellite towns and cities and yet the crowd numbers continue to drop well below the 20,000 mark that was achieved virtually every year in the past, even in the years when the team was towards the bottom. This is no coincidence.

We were hardly ever towards the bottom, and let's not kid ourselves, the reason we were strong on the field back in those days was because of the bloke with the number 7 on his back each week. It had nothing to do with how many locals, sure it's good to have a few locals but look at locals like Josh Perry and Clint Newton, they were cancers who though being locals entitled them to not put in an effort at times yet expect decent money. If we had Johns in our current team I guarantee you we'd make the top 8, and when you took Johns out of those GREAT teams you all saw what happened.

Sure the crowds have been down but I attribute that to a lean period for the club after the Johns era, it was to be expected, and other scandals haven't helped at all like Bathurst gate, the Wicks thing, etc

Tinkler talks about having a team of locals but at the end of the day, you can only have so many locals before the quality suffers. I'd love to see Snowden back, but I'm more than happy with the rest of our team, if we give them the best resources and staff, it can only make them stronger

 

[Alex28]

The plain truth is, that even though we had Johns in both premiership teams, that we wouldn't have won 1997 without O'Davis, and we wouldn't have won 2001 without Ben Kennedy. Both imports, both club heroes.

For your info, Mark Sargent played for the Bulldogs first mate. Not the Knights. Another import.

The Brian Smith thing was unfortunate however was necessary for the long-term future of the club. Those players that were cut took the club and their position in it for granted. We are stronger across the board today than we were back then (bar Johns who retired soon after any way). A kid like Kade Snowden needed to get out of the Hagan culture to discover how good a footballer he could be. Sad truth.

Good things are coming out of all that pain.

I want nothing more than a team full of locals too, but only if there are the absolute best option for each particular position. If there is a better option out there and they aren't a local, then they should be considered. Just like we always have.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

How good was bubba in 2001, seriously brillant.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

All I know is I don't care about the Knights as much as I used to because the club has lost its culture. And there are bound to many, many more who feel the same. That's why crowds are down. The glory hunters might show up more often if we win a few more games but if we're a club built on that type of fan we'll just be like the rest of the Sydney clubs like Parra and Souffs who get good crowds when they win a few and get dire crowds if they lose. We used to get good crowds even when we were crap. The culture has changed to one all about winning, and we're still not anywhere near winning the comp. And if the club is not going to develop local talent the way it used to it deserves to continue to lose local fans.

 

[RHCP]

I'd love to see a team full of locals. It feels as if the players so much more connected to the community, because they were born and bred here.

But that is a dream that will never be attained if we also want to be successful. We have to keep the very best youngsters we produce (Mullen, Pato, Gidley) and let those who are good but not quite good enough to go and try their hand elsewhere (Luke Walsh, Luke Burt, Michael Ennis). Then we supplement that with imports and find the right balance.

There's also outside influences. Newcastle is right up there with any region as far as producing brilliant League products, it's impossible to retain every single one of them.

 

[aqua_duck]

Every team goes through peaks and troughs in terms of the level of their juniors, it's just how it goes, our crop of the last 3 years has been a disappointment, that's had a major impact on juniors coming through, it's just the way it goes

 

[chrisc101]

Am I the only one that has reservations about making it free to go to the footy? Should a rich owner make it more accessible and cheaper to go, for sure, but should they make it basically for free, no way. It dramatically cheapens the brand and the worse thing is is that you won't sell out each game.

 

[Johns Magic]

Am I the only one that has reservations about making it free to go to the footy? Should a rich owner make it more accessible and cheaper to go, for sure, but should they make it basically for free, no way. It dramatically cheapens the brand and the worse thing is is that you won't sell out each game.

Cheapens the brand?

The point is that it's not a brand, it's a community football club that everyone should be able to participate in and embrace. That's exactly what Tinkler is trying to say.

 

[Noname36]

am i the only one that has reservations about making it free to go to the footy? Should a rich owner make it more accessible and cheaper to go, for sure, but should they make it basically for free, no way. It dramatically cheapens the brand and the worse thing is is that you won't sell out each game.

wtf?