A $6.5m sponsorship waiting in wings if Pirtek pulls pin on Parra ...

[eel4life]

http://www.watoday.com.au/rugby-lea...pirtek-pulls-pin-on-parra-20111022-1mdio.html



PARRAMATTA have a major sponsor ready to fill the breach with a massive deal worth $6.5 million over five years should Pirtek part company with the club.

The Sun-Herald has learned a current Eels backer is prepared to immediately up the ante in what would be the most lucrative deal in the NRL. Pirtek is contracted as Parramatta's major sponsor for a further two years, but its commitment is clouded after the company's boss, Glenn Duncan, resigned as an Eels director over the alleged misconduct of club chief executive Paul Osborne. Osborne says he has done nothing wrong and has welcomed the board's investigation.

It is understood Pirtek initially signed as an Eels sponsor at $350,000 a season, but that figure was boosted to $950,000 a year when the current board swept to power in 2009. ''Should an opportunity arise … and Pirtek decide this is not for them, [a new major sponsor] is hot on the spot to go,'' an Eels director said. ''This is worth about another $400,000 a year, so over five years that's worth an extra $2 million. We think [the sponsorship is worth more] given the publicity and air time that we get.''

The board member said Pirtek would be given every opportunity to fulfil its contract. ''Absolutely. Provided they are happy to continue. But if not, we've got some indicative arrangements.''
Osborne said he was hopeful Pirtek would honour its commitment. ''That's a decision for Glenn and Pirtek,'' he said. ''I would prefer for [parting ways] not to happen. But if it does, it does, and I'm sure we'll find a new sponsor.''

As recently as the May board elections, Duncan endorsed the incumbent directors, sending a letter to members encouraging them to re-elect the board in its entirety, saying they had the ingredients for a ''powerful recipe for success''.

''What the current board has achieved in such a short period of time [24 months] clearly demonstrates their ability to direct and assist senior management in meeting this [club's needs] well into the future,'' Duncan wrote.

The board responded to claims the club was in turmoil with a statement, which read: ''The issues relating to Mr Osborne were brought to the board's attention and are being dealt with. The issue involving a staff member has been investigated, and reported to the board fully. Confidential negotiations are continuing with that staff member. A number of the revelations … related to Mr Osborne are personal to him and apparently occurred many years ago.

''Board issues are discussed and resolved in cabinet. It is disappointing to find our deliberations not only leaked, but inaccurately leaked. For example, the fact the chairman had made a personal loan to Mr Osborne had been disclosed by the chairman to directors shortly after that loan was made. The chairman reminded the board of that fact during its deliberations concerning the chief executive and abstained from voting, in consequence. It is disappointing a director chose to resign before the issues of concern to him have been finalised by the board. The chairman asked him to remain in office, at least until that time.
''The board is confident that issues brought before it have, and are, being dealt with in a satisfactory and professional manner and all decisions have been in the best interest of the club. The board … is happy to be judged by the outcomes it delivers.''

The current board has helped the Parramatta club turn a $9.5 million loss into a $7.5 million profit since coming to power.

 

[tresurehunt]

The current board has helped the Parramatta club turn a $9.5 million loss into a $7.5 million profit since coming to power.

and that's the bottom line...........

 

[HIghlands Fling]

There may have been the profit last year but what had to be sold off to do so?

 

[Twizzle]

let them fight over us,

may the richest sponsor win

 

[HIghlands Fling]

It was floated a few years ago that contacts of the current board had lots of potential sponsors waiting to come on board, even to sponsor Parra Stadium, so it shouldn't be a problem with all their contacts.
Maybe we will become the Hillsong Parramatta Eels! They have plenty of dosh and we have some sould who need saving. At least that would help us get rid of singing Sweet Caroline before every game, but I suppose we would hear Amazing Grace instead.

 

[Stagger eel]

I'm treating every story coming out at the moment with caution and an open mind but I still think Osborne should stand down pending the findings of an investigation.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

This is great news. Let's get the new sponsor signed up asap.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

There may have been the profit last year but what had to be sold off to do so?

With most NRL clubs treading water until the new tv deal, why hold onto non-performing assets? Especially when the club has a cash-flow problem.

 

[MarkInTheStands]

With most NRL clubs treading water until the new tv deal, why hold onto non-performing assets? Especially when the club has a cash-flow problem.

The club does not have a cash flow problem. The NRL side lost money, not the leagues club. The clubs bank balance is still in the positive or at least it as last year. I guess we wait until April for the full figures.

I still wonder if the corner lot has been sold. I understand the club bought property next to the club, the final flat in "the block" to now own it outright.

All in all, long time observers of this club, I think will be saying one thing this morning when they read this article.

Which Bank?

 

[Gronk]

With most NRL clubs treading water until the new tv deal, why hold onto non-performing assets? Especially when the club has a cash-flow problem.

What assets did they sell and how do you know they were non-performing ? Has the club published the figures somewhere ?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

What assets did they sell and how do you know they were non-performing ? Has the club published the figures somewhere ?

How do we know they sold any assets at all?

My point is, if we needed cash and we sold assets then why question it? The people in charge of the club know which assets to sell and which ones to keep.

Obviously if we were nearly ten million dollars in the red then assets needed to be sold rather than continuing to borrow money. And if those assets weren't helping keep us out of the red then they were non-performing.

QED

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Isn't it in the red?

Seriously, lol, that's what I've always thought. Red = bad, right?

 

[Maroubra Eel]

There's so much wrong with that Poupou I don't know where to begin.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Isn't it in the red?

Seriously, lol, that's what I've always thought. Red = bad, right?

Well spotted.

 

[bartman]

My point is, if we needed cash and we sold assets then why question it? The people in charge of the club know which assets to sell and which ones to keep.

Yep, why question anything? Blind faith in the previous lot sure got the club a long way... and blind faith in our nation's elected politicians is always a healthy thing... don't you reckon? Just obey your hierarchy and never question a thing - that's what membership is about ;-)

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Yep, why question anything? Blind faith in the previous lot sure got the club a long way... and blind faith in our nation's elected politicians is always a healthy thing... don't you reckon? Just obey your hierarchy and never question a thing - that's what membership is about ;-)

More importantly, bart, if you're in possession of all the facts then why not go and debate it with other people in possession of all the facts - like the board - and keep your insinuations off this public messageboard.

We come here to talk about football, not to air our bullshit political grievances.

 

[Gronk]

How do we know they sold any assets at all?

My point is, if we needed cash and we sold assets then why question it? The people in charge of the club know which assets to sell and which ones to keep.

Obviously if we were nearly ten million dollars in the red then assets needed to be sold rather than continuing to borrow money. And if those assets weren't helping keep us out of the red then they were non-performing.

QED

FMD so you have no idea really and we should simply trust them explicitly. Oh and by the way, if you question their methods, then you're simply a merkin with an agenda.

Do you actually read what you write ?

 

[Eels Dude]

How do we know they sold any assets at all?

My point is, if we needed cash and we sold assets then why question it? The people in charge of the club know which assets to sell and which ones to keep.

Obviously if we were nearly ten million dollars in the red then assets needed to be sold rather than continuing to borrow money. And if those assets weren't helping keep us out of the red then they were non-performing.

QED

The point is selling off assets to get yourself out of the red is hardly making a 'profit' as such. If you sell a brand new car for 30k and buy a 1993 year old used Commodore for 3k you might have an extra 27k in the bank, you can't call that profit.

 

[bartman]

More importantly, bart, if you're in possession of all the facts then why not go and debate it with other people in possession of all the facts - like the board - and keep your insinuations off this public messageboard.

No one's claiming to have all the facts PP. But just because no-one can possibly have all the facts, doesn't mean that people shouldn't be welcome to discuss what is in the public domain. You seem to have problems with people holding opinions other than yours, and regularly retreat to bully tactics, to try and close down discussions you may not like.

We come here to talk about football, not to air our bullshit political grievances.

Nah mate, we all come here for different reasons.... It's a forum about the Eels in all our facets - "the largest Eels forum online" as the tag says. You or I shouldn't make assumptions about why everyone comes here, or try and put limitations on what Eels matters can be talked about, and which cannot.

As for me I have no political grievances, merely opinions. If you don't enjoy reading Eels opinions that might be different to yours, and spend most of your time here telling other people to withhold their opinions (rather than discussing), then perhaps you should just make use of the handy ignore feature?

 

[Eels Dude]

Nah mate, we all come here for different reasons.... It's a forum about the Eels in all our facets - "the largest Eels forum online" as the tag says. You or I shouldn't make assumptions about why everyone comes here, or try and put limitations on what Eels matters can be talked about, and which cannot.

If Poupou had his way, all we'd talk about in this forum would be LBAs.