flippikat
First Grade
- Messages
- 5,217
Soft !
Just reassess how attached you really are to her.
Yeah.. not gonna happen.
She's a keeper.
Soft !
Just reassess how attached you really are to her.
East Sydney was a suburb between the CBD and Kings Cross but the name seems to have been dropped these days. The Eastern Suburbs is that part of Sydney to the east and south east of the CBD as far as Maroubra. Eastern Sydney is that part of greater Sydney that is not Western Sydney. Confusing I know.What is east sydney anyways, 3 suburbs?, its basically south sydney, and just south of that is botany bay where the sharks are across of, there is no geographical reason "Sydney" needs a "Roosters" team pretending to represent them when we aready have another 8 team spread out in each corner of the city
East Sydney was a suburb between the CBD and Kings Cross but the name seems to have been dropped these days..
Again none of that changes the fact that they used revenue from their leagues clubs to invest in their other businesses (including other leagues clubs BTW).rubbish
they were in serious trouble , they only had the one leagues club at that point
( maybe they had Mawson too idk ) & it was doing ok only , on top of
no sponsors , no backing .. falling crowds & an inconsistent side on the field & general interest waning
the brumbies were firing
anyone who says they weren't in trouble knows SFA
they had a plan though , just because you have revenue doesn't mean you know how to use it well. Spreading out & investing in other financial interests delivering revenue streams separate from their licensed clubs etc.Again none of that changes the fact that they used revenue from their leagues clubs to invest in their other businesses (including other leagues clubs BTW).
You're also totally misinformed on the Raiders history in that time period (you seem to be confusing the early 00s with the early 10s for example), but honestly I can't be bothered arguing with you about it.
Again none of that changes the fact that they used revenue from their leagues clubs to invest in their other businesses (including other leagues clubs BTW).
You're also totally misinformed on the Raiders history in that time period (you seem to be confusing the early 00s with the early 10s for example), but honestly I can't be bothered arguing with you about it.
I've said it before but change Manly's name to Sydney and have them play at least 4 games at North Sydney Oval. They should be more ambitious than just calling themselves Manly. They should be marching in towards the Roosters territory before the Roosters march in on theirs.
It is strange to me that some of these clubs lack ambition.
you seemingly ignore 53 years of history between Manly & North Sydney & their bitter rivalry. Not many people from that area would have anything to do with Manly & it wouldn't matter what you call them , they're still Manly. It would Also just alienate existing Manly fans. That club wouldn't last 2 years.
I think that is in the ancient past and we need to be more focussed on the next few generations of fans. North Sydney has not had a rivalry with anyone in 25 years.
Now merging them with the Roosters & calling them Sydney & having them represent all of the north , east , that might work
Nobody said they weren't smart, however their being smart doesn't change the fact that they couldn't have achieved what they have without the income that they were making out of their leagues clubs (particularly Queanbeyan Leagues club), and therefore the vast majority of other regional clubs couldn't copy the Raiders model to sustain NRL teams because they don't have those initial funds to invest like the Raiders have.they had a plan though , just because you have revenue doesn't mean you know how to use it well. Spreading out & investing in other financial interests delivering revenue streams separate from their licensed clubs etc.
they landed a lazy 28 million profit from the sale of their bunnings warehouse in Sydney only a month ago .. $28 Million straight into their pockets.
All your yeah but this & yeah but that , doesn't detract from the fact they are a very smart club , very well run & that has not a lot to do with their licensed clubs, Most clubs have those , most aren't doing as well as the Raiders.
That article basically confirms exactly what I said...I'd also suggest its YOU .. who needs the history lesson
this story from 2012 indicates what it was like when they took back the club off news in 2002
they were F'd
anything else I can correct you on ?
Corporate Raiders | The Canberra Times | Canberra, ACT
March marked 10 years since The Canberra District Rugby League Football Club Ltd took full control of the Raiders back from News Limited with the club hemorrhaging up to $200,000 a month.
Nobody said they weren't smart, however their being smart doesn't change the fact that they couldn't have achieved what they have without the income that they were making out of their leagues clubs (particularly Queanbeyan Leagues club), and therefore the vast majority of other regional clubs couldn't copy the Raiders model to sustain NRL teams because they don't have those initial funds to invest like the Raiders have.
So yeah, stop trying to move the goal posts and just accept that you said something silly.
That article basically confirms exactly what I said...
You said both the football club and the leagues clubs were broke, I said no it was just the football club that was broke, and that's effectively what that quote says.
You're just moving the goal posts and not even addressing what I'm saying anymore...hahaha
it totally contradicts what you said
you said i got it ballsed up .. the history
i got it dead right
5 million a year they were losing in 2002 ... equivalent to probably 7.5 million in todays money
No leagues club grant is covering that , so they were in dire straits just like i said ,
they dug their way out with smarts rarely seen with NRL clubs because they darnwell had to !!
tell me ...how many NRL clubs with leagues club backing .. regional or otherwise pocketed 28 million dollars from one investment
they are not just a guide
they are ... THE .. model & like i said
all your but .. but ..but .. its the only thing silly being said here
underwrite them to a degree ?? lolYou're just moving the goal posts and not even addressing what I'm saying anymore...
I never claimed that the leagues club was totally covering the $5mil the football club was losing a year, however the leagues clubs (yes their were two, maybe even three I can't remember if they had Gungahlin by 02) weren't broke and the only reason that the footy club didn't fold is because of the fact that the leagues clubs were able to underwrite them to a degree... So it's pretty open and shut that you were wrong about the leagues clubs being broke.
And guess what happened after the Raiders Group got control over the club again; they reigned in New's crazy spending within a few seasons and there was no issue anymore.
BTW, you still haven't changed the fact that you can't copy the Raiders model without large amounts of start up funds to invest, which the vast majority of regional clubs (and even some NRL clubs) simply don't have.
you seemingly ignore 53 years of history between Manly & North Sydney & their bitter rivalry. Not many people from that area would have anything to do with Manly & it wouldn't matter what you call them , they're still Manly. It would Also just alienate existing Manly fans. That club wouldn't last 2 years.
You think 10-25 year olds give a sht? That’s who a northern sydney team needs to be marketing to!