Conway on 2HD Sports Show

[cram]

Ken Conway was on 2HD tonight on the Sydney based sports show that is on that network. Basically he was very indignant about the idea of private ownership of the Knights. He stated that the media had put it on the adgenda and no one else. Of course those of us that attended the AGM obviously misheard Michael Hill and Andrew Johns' piece in Sundays paper was obviously a fignant of our imagination.

The way he spoke is that they will go through the motions but will not seriously contemplate the idea. In the end I switched off because he was annoying me.

He did talk up the sponsorship issue of course giving the impression that the club was on the brink of signing someone. Have u heard that before?

He also talked about being heartned by phone calls of support and offers of sponsorship and loans for the club....yipee.

Apparently Constantine was also spoken to on the show. I did not hear this but am told that he said he wants the whole club...no partial privitisation.

The way I see things is their are a number of issues at the moment.

1. There are too many people with egos involved in the club who are hanging onto past issues.

These involve Wests and super league and there is no doubt that some fallout occurred between Constantine and the club several years ago.

2. The club is presently controlled by what could be best described as a vocal minority. If you check the voting figures, that is those who actually voted, compared to eligble voters and then the number of people who attended the AGM you will see what I mean.

I remember clearly posting on the Knights Forum several years ago that it was my intention to join the club to ensure that one day I could have a say in where the club was heading. I would urge everyone who is a member to make their voices heard and those that are not members and believe in privitisation join quickly so you can vote.

In relation to voting I am pretty sure that the three year exclusion period only relates to voting for the board.

 

[antonius]

I agree with everything you've said there cram. It was obvious when the six months was mentioned before the privatisation commitee got back to them that it was a pacifying smokescreen.

 

[Bring it home Knights]

just out of curiosity. If someone privatices the knights, what do they get out of it. They spend millions of dollars, but what is there reasoning for handing over the cash?

 

[Voice of Reason]

If it takes 6 months for a response Tony, the club will be "dead in the water" by then so whats the point? It is VERY simple. If the club does not secure SUSTAINABLE and IMMEADIATE financial support, there will be no club. The only avenue is bankrupcy. If the club goes into recievership then anything of dozen or more courses of action may occur. What about NewsLimited as the owner?? The options are very scary

 

[antonius]

just out of curiosity. If someone privatices the knights, what do they get out of it. They spend millions of dollars, but what is there reasoning for handing over the cash?

Run it as a successful buisness, Con Constantine is quoted as saying he thinks he would be making a return with in five years. The blokes running the show now have no idea how to run a buisness.

 

[macavity]

Conway :arrow:

I know we have signed some shockers at rediculous amounts over the years, but he would have to be the worst signing the club has ever made.

Is it any coincidence he has presided over our downward spiral?

I for one don't believe in coincidence.

Wasn't coincidental that the Workers and Mingara didn't want him...

While his best mate is chairman, we are stuck with him.

Prepare for bankruptcy, might be able to pick up some cheap shipping containers in the liquidation sale....

 

[cram]

I actually dont think that Conway is wholly to blame. I think this is the culmination of a number of factors that have been accumulating since 1997. You heard Hill say at the AGM if the Knights had not one the GF in 97 they would have been in serious trouble, the same happened in 2001.

You can not run a business day to day but this has been the lot of the Knights for years. Hill basically said thats how it has always been. I think he used a quote to the effect you cant drain the swamp and keep an eye on the alligators as well.

The club has gone cap in hand for money/loans for a number of years and eventually it has to catch up.

I believe that Hill knew the jig is/was up when he elected to stand down as chairman. Its funny that he puts privitisation on the agenda at a time when he is no longer at the helm.

The battle for sponsorship dollar is difficult. Our battle for it is compounded by the fact that our need for money comes at a time when our onfield performance is at its lowest ebb since our entry into the competition.

Basketball in this town has gone down the tubes twice in the past half dozen years, those clubs were privately owned, the Newcastle Breakers, privately owned also fell over. Privitisation does not guarantee financial success but its injection of funds for the Knights may assist in improving the structural items needed and also provide cash for players therefore improving on field success and attracting sponsorship dollars.

I reiterate that I don't believe you can lay all the blame on Conway for the current situation. I also think talks of bankruptcy at the moment are emotive and not based on fact. The club has walked this thin line before. I believe it will survive. The change I believe we are looking for is not merely survival it is ongoing stability and success.

 

[Jobdog]

Constantine was on KO this morning and said basically that his cheque book is open, everything is all signed on his behalf, all it takes is for the Knights to go to him and sign on the dotted line and bingo. I wasnt aware the state the Knights were in and as a result, has made me take my head out of the sand and realise this.

I,for one, do not know why privatisation is such a dirty word, its the times now that privatisation is the way to go. Constantine also said that the Knights will be gooooooorrrrrrrrrne by 2006, that prospect scares the hell out of me. The idea of not having a footy team to support .........

I want this privatisation idea to get off the ground, just so the Knights have some sort of financial viability. Another bonus of having Constantine in charge of the club is that we most likely would have a major sponsor very quickly cos he is a BUSINESSMAN, unlike those in charge now.

I will close in saying that I dont care who is in charge of the Knights as long as I will hav a footy team to support at home games evry 2 weeks and those "home games" are here, where they should be, in Newcastle.

 

[The_Joey_Show]

Constantine was in the paper yesterday, and his exact words were as such:

"If the Knights decide that they want to sell the whole club in the morning, I will have the deal signed by the same afternoon"

"I don't know how much money the Knights owe. But whether their debts are a dollar, a hundred dollars or a million dollars, they will be paid the day I sign the deal"

"I will inject three million dollars cash into the club, plus pay off the debts. I know I will see a return on this money within four years"

"I will then go up to the Cowboys to see what conditions and equipment their players have, and then make sure the Knights players have better. The Cowboys are a good model, they seem to be doing things right"

"I will then talk face to face with Joey Johns and his team-mates, see what they think the club needs, and go out and get it for them"

QUESTION FOR CONWAY / TYLER: Why do we NOT want this man involved with our club?

 

[UPTHEGUTSBUTTS]

Cram

I think youll find it was Tyler not Conway on the sports show...

My opinion is he needs media training , he seemed to come across as someone on another planet to everyone else on the current issues, almost arrogant. The interview seemed to be about privatisation yet he abruptly dismissed it and then tried to paint a rosy financial situation for the knights , he even said we would be able to enter the player market in June aggresively.

I think he is quite happy to survive from year to year. Talk is cheap and i think "lip service" will be this boards speciality.

And blaming the media 1 week into the job is a great way to attract prospective sponsors , who no doubt would want as much media exposure as possible if they ever attracted a sponsor!

Other point he mentioned it "takes time" to obtain a major Sponsor. Well we are in round 6 of a 26 round competition , ie 25% of the season is over - so what the knights have to offer prospective sponsors is already 25% less attractive. Mike Tyler should talk to the Richmond Tigers, they lost a Sponsor due to player behaviour , yet 2 weeks later they announce a new Major Sponsor.

 

[Jobdog]

Yeah TJS thats pretty much exactly what he said on the radio this morning. Plus he said also about the fact that the Knights wont survive past 2006. That is if they dont go the privatisation route.

Its beyond me why Conway and Tyler dont want Con involved in the club. It was quite obvious to me listening today just by what he was saying and how he was saying it that he is a very passionate man. Makes you wonder why Conway and Tyler arent in the same boat.

Maybe they want the club to almost go under b4 they confront Con............. The fans I dont think will hav a problem if the club is privatised. Would they??????? If anyone is like me, they just want a footy team to support who plays out of Newcastle.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

For the simple reason that they will be no longer in a position of authority I reiterate what I said before they care much more about their own standing then the well being of the club.

 

[Jobdog]

Well maybe its time for them to p!ss off with the whole ego thing and realise for the good of the club, LET THEM BE TAKEN OVA BY CONSTANTINE, the contract is on the table!!!!!!!

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

Indeed, they need to swallow their pride realise that their only going to f--k the club even more and hand it over to someone else before the situation is hopeless.

 

[The_Joey_Show]

Its beyond me why Conway and Tyler dont want Con involved in the club. It was quite obvious to me listening today just by what he was saying and how he was saying it that he is a very passionate man. Makes you wonder why Conway and Tyler arent in the same boat.

Here's my theory on why Tyler / Conway don't want Con involved. You gotta follow it logically.

1. Con is a man of passion and vision. He has big ideas, and the money and balls to follow them through. He has shown this with the United Jets.

2. Tyler and Conway are petty little men more concerned with their own inflated egos than with the success of our club (Notice I said 'our' club', not 'their' club as they would have us believe).

3. Con will not pay people who he does not think are doing their job properly. He is a results man, if you can't produce results, he will sack you and go and buy someone who will. Examples include Lee Sterrey, Ian Crook, and about three quarters of last years United squad.

4. Therefore, if Con takes over, Tyler and Conway join the dole queue.

MYSTERY SOLVED!

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

I couldnt agree with you more.

 

[Jobdog]

Well maybe they want the situation to be hopeless :roll: that way they can say "we tried everything we poss could". Absolute bullsh!t if u ask me, but thats what u will be getting out of their mouths.

 

[Voice of Reason]

With all due respects Cram, I do disagree. It is NOT premeature to be talking about bankrupcy as it is a REAL possibility. Lets say no major sponsor, a couple of bad weather days to keep crowds away, ongoing declining merchandise and ticket sales and no 2005 prizemoney. In that scenario (very possible) the Knights would go into insolvency. Whatsay the NJC, who have lent them big $ to make second half of season player payments in the past as cash flow was inadequate, say in 2005 sorry boys cannot help you this year. I know we are talking "whatifs" but all of these things are possible. based on logic, bankrupcy is a REAL possible outcome. I have no conficendece at all in the CEO who history has shown to be inept and "liberal" with the truth. If he is saying now that finances are "sound" then that in itself is enough reason to beleive that the end is nighe!

 

[macavity]

4. Therefore, if Con takes over, Tyler and Conway join the dole queue.

MYSTERY SOLVED!

I'm pretty sure the board positions are unpaid, perhaps expenses are reimbursed. However the CEO is rumoured to be on around 200k pa...

Note to Knights: there are literally a thousand people in Newcastle that would do the job for 50k and the love of the club. And do a better job of it.

Finances aren't the reason, but of course Tyler doesn't want to lose his newly-won power.


I LOVED Constantine's call on KO this morn (JJJ has gone to shite in the morn since those morons from Frenzal Rhomb got the gig...) - (paraphrasing) "If the board loved the club so much, we know they aren't short of a dollar, why don't they chuck 1/2 a million each in? There you go, financial problems solved and the Knights stay as they are"

Well?

Come to think of it, some VERY successful organisations are represented on the board - the Shakespere group, Newcastle Port Authority, Turnbull Hill (and their large corporate clients by proxy...) - why are we having such trouble getting a sponsor again?

 

[macavity]

I actually dont think that Conway is wholly to blame.

I agree. But it is his job to further our club, not tread water or go backwards. We aren't going forward, therefore he isn't doing his job. All this talk of no-talkies with our football manager, etc, certainly doesn't paint him in the best light either. We aren't a huge, sprawling organisation. He has about a dozen or so non-football employees. In other words, his span of control isn't too large, and he should have a sound control over all facets. By the complaints on here re: membership, the marketing debacle, the Bathurst incedent, no sponsor.... the list goes on - it is obvious there are some problems in our club.

So WHO do you blame? No one? Just let it go on? Be happy with mediocrity, being sub-standard in every facet of out organisation?

You tell us mate.

I think this is the culmination of a number of factors that have been accumulating since 1997. You heard Hill say at the AGM if the Knights had not one the GF in 97 they would have been in serious trouble, the same happened in 2001

Yep. And yet even though everyone else has moved significantly forward, professionalising every aspect of their organisations, employing full staffs and spending what needs to be spent to do so, those in charge continue to advocate a capitalisation model that wasn't adequate in 1997, let alone 2006..... what do we make of that? Are they idiots? Their non-Knights experience suggests quite the contrary - so, what is it? What is it that makes them either a) happy with struggling (mascochists?) or b) believe that they can do things better than past boards....?

if it is b, then it doesn't make sense, given the very few changes to the board over our history...... so its either a, or they ARE idiots....

Maybe im missing something here. Intelligent, successful men should have intelligent, successful ideas and make intelligent, successful decisions. Makes sense to me, why isn't it working with our club?

You can not run a business day to day but this has been the lot of the Knights for years. Hill basically said thats how it has always been. I think he used a quote to the effect you cant drain the swamp and keep an eye on the alligators as well.

Almost worn like a badge of pride, isn't it?

Yes, we should be proud that our players have to pee in the bush, get changed in shipping containers, and get smacked by 40 points each game.

I believe that Hill knew the jig is/was up when he elected to stand down as chairman. Its funny that he puts privitisation on the agenda at a time when he is no longer at the helm.

If that is the case he could have picked his successor better.

Why stand down because something has to be done, and then support someone who has dismissed the idea outright?

Again, it doesn't make sense.

Basketball in this town has gone down the tubes twice in the past half dozen years, those clubs were privately owned, the Newcastle Breakers, privately owned also fell over.

Neither of these are our regions favourite sport, though. Point taken however. Thats why we MUST ensure we have an optimal structure, and the right partners.

Still, shouldn't be too hard. And surely shouldn't take SIX FREAKING MONTHS.

Privitisation does not guarantee financial success but its injection of funds for the Knights may assist in improving the structural items needed and also provide cash for players therefore improving on field success and attracting sponsorship dollars.

I reiterate that I don't believe you can lay all the blame on Conway for the current situation.

Agreed, but it is the most obvious place to start.

I also think talks of bankruptcy at the moment are emotive and not based on fact. The club has walked this thin line before. I believe it will survive.

wait a minute - you say its premature to be worried about finances, based on our previous poor financial position....?

how much retained loss do we need to post before we can worry? isnt nearly 1.5 mil enough?

I believe we will survive too. But I for one don't want to be bailed out by the NRL, or worse still, left with no options re: structure/ownership. You think we have trouble attracting quality (or hanging on to it) now - wait until its iffy whether they will get paid each month, then see how we go...