GI to the Broncos

[Raiders_Premiers]

Perverse has ruined it, what a self-important douche :lol:

He must be the authority on all things interwebz

 

[gregstar]

*sniffle*

can't we all just be friends?

 

[perverse]

"oh no he di uhnt"

Who said anything about nerds? And retorting with claims about self awesomeness, or editing your post in an attempt to appear to have pre-empted a response is not "out interneting" anyone..





'80s Coming of Age Movie slow clap.

i'm sorry, i paraphrased "webspeak savvy knowall" as "nerd". my mistake? perhaps that wasn't what you were implying.

i certainly did edit my post - but apparently you didn't read my post pre-edit... because i most certainly did pre-empt Raiders_Premiers' genius. no way for me to prove that, i suppose... i probably should have given that more thought, i can see how it looks. i should have quoted myself.

... and coming of age? are you suggesting i don't contribute opinions and discussion on these forums? are you suggesting that i didn't earlier in this thread?

more importantly, are you willing to accept and admit that you were completely wrong and 100% uninformed with your thoughts of the Newcastle Knights financial situation (which is the reason i'm in even in this thread to begin with)?

bantering with me makes it pretty easy to ignore how prematurely you ejaculated on that one.

 

[AuDragon]

i think i might actually change my tact a little for a moment and contribute to the subject at hand...

i don't really agree with macavity and his bronco hatred (well, off the field anyway... i'll always have a healthy amount of scorn for the broncos on the park). i think that they are generally a beacon of success in our competition as far as the off field stuff goes, and all other clubs should look to emulate their success. being a one-town-team should not detract too much from said success, because even in such a seemingly easy market, it can be executed poorly - as many clubs have illustrated in the past. as far as GI goes in all this, i certainly don't hold it against Brisbane for being successful - or players like GI wishing to be a part of that. once again it's a situation that all clubs should strive for... and in a salary cap age, it's just another one of the ways a club can distinguish itself from the rest. this situation is an example of that advantage.

if there is anything fishy at all about the deal, which i don't really wish (or have any desire) to speculate on, i'm sure it'll get picked up and dealt with eventually.

You are basically agreeing to everything most Broncos fans have been trying to say in this thread, and you seem quite able to discern the difference between a healthy rivalry, and senseless, stupid hatred. Yet you chose to enter the thread firing bullets at everything that moved and supports the Broncos. What gives? :roll:

 

[perverse]

You are basically agreeing to everything most Broncos fans have been trying to say in this thread, and you seem quite able to discern the difference between a healthy rivalry, and senseless, stupid hatred. Yet you chose to enter the thread firing bullets at everything that moved and supports the Broncos. What gives? :roll:

i don't have a problem with anything anyone said about the Broncos... especially if it was their opinion. i suppose if you just skimmed it, it may look that way.

i have massive problems with fans of other clubs trying to tell macavity all about our financial situation and ridiculing him, particularly when i know for a fact that they are very wrong, and he is very right.

i don't think you will find i've been shooting blindly, i haven't tried to discredit or disagree with anything any Broncos fans have said about their own salary cap situation... only about the financial situation of my own club and the credibility of a man i know is very well informed on the subject.

there is a difference between supporting macavity on the financial situation at the knights and agreeing with his general premise and opinion of the Broncos.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

more importantly, are you willing to accept and admit that you were completely wrong and 100% uninformed with your thoughts of the Newcastle Knights financial situation (which is the reason i'm in even in this thread to begin with)?

bantering with me makes it pretty easy to ignore how prematurely you ejaculated on that one.

No, my point stands. In it's original form it was a retort to a Knights fan claiming they are one of the poorest clubs financially, and that their premiership success over the last 15 years despite this "poverty" somehow trumps the Broncos premiership success over the same period. I responded with factual evidence suggesting that is far from the truth. A healthy (for a NSW NRL Club) profit. macavity rebuked my point, claiming that the Knights "scrimped and saved" their way to this position, and I responded with evidence that this is not so. Re-investment in the club appears to be main driver to their latest bottom line. Add to that the fact that (by their own admission) they along with the Broncos, are one of the most sponsored sporting clubs of the modern era.

It's pretty easy to rest on ones laurels as a dedicated fan, and claim that you are well acquainted with the financial position of a club by mentioning things like what the headquarters used to be, how spending is low, a lack of training facilities to rival the rest of the league, a one man marketing/ticketing/membership/merchandise division, and so on - all without reference.

But when information is out there (authorised information mind you - some of it even published in the club newsletter) contradicting many of these points, it's pretty easy to see through it as either exaggeration, or just pure sh*t talking.

I don't profess to know more about the Newcastle Knights than their fans, but I become annoyed when someone uses inaccurate information in order to have a dig at my club for their success, in the competition and the business world, by crying poor.

 

[macavity]

No, my point stands. In it's original form it was a retort to a Knights fan claiming they are one of the poorest clubs financially, and that their premiership success over the last 15 years despite this "poverty" somehow trumps the Broncos premiership success over the same period.

In my book overcoming adversity trumps bullying everyone to secure unfair advantages and taking advantage of those unfair advantages. But that is just me I guess. I don't rate Chelsea's or the Yankees' successes that highly either, because when you have double or triple the cash of most of your rivals, you bloody well should win.

A healthy (for a NSW NRL Club) profit.

Because we are tremendously careful with our dollars. Would you like to have a look at the leagues club grants other clubs get? Bar the Sharks, other NSW clubs don't need to be as careful with their cash because they have a safety net. We don't. They can afford to spend big and lose money on paper, because they have a licensed club (or sugar daddy) picking up the tab. We don't.

macavity rebuked my point, claiming that the Knights "scrimped and saved" their way to this position, and I responded with evidence that this is not so.

You responded with a 2 year old article stating that we spent more on our football team - more on our core business. Yes, we did, and we continue to spend more than we previously did - but we still spend far far less than most clubs. It is the non-core business where we really scrimp - everything we do is based on maximum income for minimum cost. But whatever makes you sleep at night princess.

Re-investment in the club appears to be main driver to their latest bottom line.

Appearances can be decieving when you have NFI what you are on about. Cutting non-football costs, improving sponsorships and better catering arrangements have largely been responsible for the improved bottom line.

Add to that the fact that (by their own admission) they along with the Broncos, are one of the most sponsored sporting clubs of the modern era.

Yes, because we have to be. No licensed club, no sugar daddy, terrible stadium deal and retained debts from previous poor decisions mean we rely heavily on attracting good sponsorship.

We are very lucky to have C&A in a community partnership with our club - before they came on in 2005 we were months, maybe weeks, away from insolvency - and were probably technically engaging in insolvent trading for a little while.

It's pretty easy to rest on ones laurels as a dedicated fan, and claim that you are well acquainted with the financial position of a club by mentioning things like what the headquarters used to be, how spending is low, a lack of training facilities to rival the rest of the league, a one man marketing/ticketing/membership/merchandise division, and so on - all without reference.

I don't feel the need to justify myself to some broncomerkin any further than I have. I am kicking myself for even engaging with you tbh.

However I do love the irony of you asserting that I have asserted inside knowledge of the Broncos finances (which I have not done) and then yourself asserting intimate knowledge of the Knights finances, based on one 2 year old article. But of course you do that and then say "oh, but I'm not saying I know what is going on", so that makes it ok...... :lol:

 

[gregstar]

Falling In Love Again

 

[AuDragon]

i don't have a problem with anything anyone said about the Broncos... especially if it was their opinion. i suppose if you just skimmed it, it may look that way.

i have massive problems with fans of other clubs trying to tell macavity all about our financial situation and ridiculing him, particularly when i know for a fact that they are very wrong, and he is very right.

i don't think you will find i've been shooting blindly, i haven't tried to discredit or disagree with anything any Broncos fans have said about their own salary cap situation... only about the financial situation of my own club and the credibility of a man i know is very well informed on the subject.

there is a difference between supporting macavity on the financial situation at the knights and agreeing with his general premise and opinion of the Broncos.

Fair enough!

On the other hand, it's clear to me that arsecavity's opinions of my club and supporters, bring a bit of animosity towards him...:sarcasm:

 

[Frank_Grimes]

In my book overcoming adversity trumps bullying everyone to secure unfair advantages and taking advantage of those unfair advantages. But that is just me I guess. I don't rate Chelsea's or the Yankees' successes that highly either, because when you have double or triple the cash of most of your rivals, you bloody well should win.

Quoted for later.

Because we are tremendously careful with our dollars. Would you like to have a look at the leagues club grants other clubs get? Bar the Sharks, other NSW clubs don't need to be as careful with their cash because they have a safety net. We don't. They can afford to spend big and lose money on paper, because they have a licensed club (or sugar daddy) picking up the tab. We don't.

In 2009 Newcastle Knights received just under $3.5m in grants from the NRL. In 2008 this was a little over $3.3m.

You responded with a 2 year old article stating that we spent more on our football team - more on our core business. Yes, we did, and we continue to spend more than we previously did - but we still spend far far less than most clubs. It is the non-core business where we really scrimp - everything we do is based on maximum income for minimum cost. But whatever makes you sleep at night princess.

From the Newcastle Knights 2009 P & L:

• Membership expenses 2009: 106,884 - 2008: 105,162
• Football expenses 2009: 9,872,298 - 2008: 10,179,398
• Stadium expenses 2009: 1,013,967 - 2008: 1,960,144
• Marketing & Sponsorship Expenses 2009:3,932,483 - 2008: 3,601,444
• Ticketing expenses 2009: 296,130 - 2008: 246,090
• Administration Expenses 2009: 1,237,008 - 2008: 1,033,770
• Amortisation, Depreciation and Loss on Sale of Assets 2009: 225,626 - 2008: 233,024
• Finance Costs 2009: 14,381 - 2008: 15,739

From the above figures, the only considerable decrease in spending (other than the football team, in direct contradiction to your point that the Knights are only spending more on football – they’re actually spending less on football) is the stadium expenses. Every other facet of the business has seen a significant increase in expense.

Don’t be afraid to use a little factual information to back up your argument princess.

Appearances can be decieving when you have NFI what you are on about. Cutting non-football costs, improving sponsorships and better catering arrangements have largely been responsible for the improved bottom line.

You mean cutting non-football costs by spending $331,039 more on marketing and sponsorship? The only point you could appear to be correct on is the catering arrangements as they will likely fall under the stadium expenses, but you had to land a hit somewhere didn’t you?

But again, I made the point that re-investing in the business appears to be improving the bottom line, but you seem to think spending more on sponsorship is not re-investing in the business?

Yes, because we have to be. No licensed club, no sugar daddy, terrible stadium deal and retained debts from previous poor decisions mean we rely heavily on attracting good sponsorship.

We are very lucky to have C&A in a community partnership with our club - before they came on in 2005 we were months, maybe weeks, away from insolvency - and were probably technically engaging in insolvent trading for a little while.



I don't feel the need to justify myself to some broncomerkin any further than I have. I am kicking myself for even engaging with you tbh.

However I do love the irony of you asserting that I have asserted inside knowledge of the Broncos finances (which I have not done) and then yourself asserting intimate knowledge of the Knights finances, based on one 2 year old article. But of course you do that and then say "oh, but I'm not saying I know what is going on", so that makes it ok......

Irony is the fact that you’re happy to claim that the Broncos bully their way in business, take unfair advantages, and have knifed RL in the back, all without reference or facts, but will cry foul when an analysis supported by factual information about the Knights is presented to you.

I called you on your silly little viewpoint about the Knights being the misers of the NRL. The reality is – all clubs scrimp and save where possible. It’s called running a business. The Knights are no different to any other club looking to maximise its margins and minimise its expenses, without diminishing efforts in any area of the business. If you got upset about that then I am sorry.

 

[macavity]

they’re actually spending less on football

You have taken 2 years in isolation to comment on long-term trends.

We are still spending more on football than we were in 2007, which was my point.

all of the other expenses are within a typical range of fluctuation, particularly given increases in sponsorship usually comes with increase in costs to service those sponsors. 9% increase in sponsor costs (about $300k) for a 9% increase in sponsorship (about 550K) .

But congrats on the post, at least you had a dig.

but you seem to think spending more on sponsorship is not re-investing in the business?

Of course it is.

You seem to think my assertion is that we are reducing costs every year - that isnt the case. Our business, like all NRL clubs, is growing. My point is that _comparatively_ we don't spend much on non-football costs for an NRL club - and we also can't hide some of those costs on leagues club / thoroughbred p+l statements, either.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

You have taken 2 years in isolation to comment on long-term trends.

We are still spending more on football than we were in 2007, which was my point.

all of the other expenses are within a typical range of fluctuation, particularly given increases in sponsorship usually comes with increase in costs to service those sponsors. 9% increase in sponsor costs (about $300k) for a 9% increase in sponsorship (about 550K) .

But congrats on the post, at least you had a dig.




Of course it is.

You seem to think my assertion is that we are reducing costs every year - that isnt the case. Our business, like all NRL clubs, is growing. My point is that _comparatively_ we don't spend much on non-football costs for an NRL club - and we also can't hide some of those costs on leagues club / thoroughbred p+l statements, either.

Let's just re-visit your first post on the matter:

by scrimping and saving on EVERYTHING.

If uncle bruno can lecture clubs how to "maximise" the salary cap, our CEO could certainly show them how to live within their means.

Maybe he should start with Melbourne.

We've certainly come a long way from there haven't we?

So you've either altered your point through my probing this ridiculous statement, or you failed to articulate your thought process.

Either way, my unanswered point remains:

The reality is – all clubs scrimp and save where possible. It’s called running a business. The Knights are no different to any other club looking to maximise its margins and minimise its expenses, without diminishing efforts in any area of the business.

Mods: It seems that a "yo mama" joke is deemed fit for removal, but this:

it's good to see you sticking to the consumption of copious amounts of phallus. focus on your strengths and you'll go far.

if only your mothers explored options like birth control or pregnancy termination... or were hit by buses whilst carrying you two.

..is not?

Got hypocrisy?

 

[Raiders_Premiers]

Everyone knows Newcastle are dirt poor. Why else would their players resort to dealing drugs

 

[macavity]

So you've either altered your point through my probing this ridiculous statement, or you failed to articulate your thought process.

If anything, you have validated my statement.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

If anything, you have validated my statement.

Whatever gets you through the night.

Reminds me of what I said earlier in the thread - the depths some will go to in order to validate their hatred.