there are a few reasons why a flawed business model can still be worth money:
1. scarcity - you can't go down to woolies and buy an NRL club.
2. opportunity - a rosy horizon, big opportunity to walk in and play the hero with the whole NRL landscape changing in the next couple of years.
3. goodwill - another commodity that isn't easy to purchase.
the reason why they don't need to go through the members for the Patrons Model is that it isn't privitisation. the club stays as is, but has a bunch of invisible sugar daddies that hand out interest-free loans. we, the members, still own the club. there is nothing to put to vote.
i mean i do agree with you on the financial point, though. absolutely, it's probably the least important factor (although still relevant given that he has promised it). i wouldn't be concerned in the first 2 or 3 years that he would do anything less than dump cash into the place. it would be the proceeding 7 or 8 years i'm concerned about. if he loses interest in his plaything then he might just get bored and do something we all would regret, like selling us to Singo (as a pie in the sky, pulled out of the air extreme example). the fact is unless there's something on paper to stop him doing it, it's always an option for him, and he's a busy man.
i would totally buy into the trust model if Tinkler had given us reason to trust him, but he has done the complete opposite. it would only be a month ago that i was ready to suck the mans c**k clean off. much has changed in that month... and now we're talking about a period of 10 years with the guy (although the knights reckon it's 2, go figure).
so little real information... so many different interpretations of what has transpired thus far, and you know we're probably all wrong in many areas. this is why i demand clarification. none of these blokes have proven themselves trustworthy lately, and it is very unfortunate.