Nathan Tinkler withdraws Knights offer

[Karmawave]

Well absurdity or not, at the end of the day, I think this is all very bad for the club - whatever the situation ends up, because ultimately whatever the outcome, it is dividing fans of the club, splitting fans against each other, and those fans who miss out on their desired outcome may POTENTIALLY give up on the club.

A good club is not a club divided, just ask Parramatta 2010.

The fans are divided right now, and greats of the club are being critical of Tew and Burraston.

It's not a very happy time right now is it to be a Knights supporter - whoever's ' side ' you are on, and I can't see it getting any better anytime soon, because if the Patrons Model kicks in, that doesn't change the perception of the club to rival players and free agents.

Tinkler has the advantage in that instance, because he can change the perception of the place by signing 2 or 3 big name players instantly, immediately winning over fans that may have been initially against him.

Would Snowden come to Newcastle with Burraston and Tew at the helm?

Would he come with Tinkler at the helm? I think the cancelled press conference answers that.

And he's a local junior with family here, so what chance Burro/Tew in attracting a non Novocastrian rep player?

The only losers in this are the fans at the end of the day. ( and probably Snowden and Idris back pockets )

 

[Big Tim]

How do we not know that the current business model, with cash backing from the Patrons Trust would not succeed? From what I recall we have never been a "rich" club with a healthy supply of cash to fall back on.

How do we not know that this 1 employee doing 3 jobs, suddenly becomes 1 employee per job as we now have access to the funds to make that happen? Hell, we may even head hunt guys for the right position, like we did with Burro, we just didnt offer him buckets of $$, we offered him a chance to come home.

I admit, the change will not be instant, but it will be better than what we are looking at right now.

 

[macavity]

Well absurdity or not, at the end of the day, I think this is all very bad for the club - whatever the situation ends up, because ultimately whatever the outcome, it is dividing fans of the club, splitting fans against each other, and those fans who miss out on their desired outcome may POTENTIALLY give up on the club.

agreed.

tin-foil hat conspiracy theories, and saying ridiculous things about a board that are trying to do the right thing by the club are not helping.

The fans are divided right now, and greats of the club are being critical of Tew and Burraston.

A number of "greats of the club" have big axes to grind mate. Interestingly even the one who is usually first to sink the boot in has agreed that the deal as presented in its "final" form is unacceptable.

It's not a very happy time right now is it to be a Knights supporter - whoever's ' side ' you are on, and I can't see it getting any better anytime soon, because if the Patrons Model kicks in, that doesn't change the perception of the club to rival players and free agents.

Great clubs generally aren't built through free agency. Certainly great regional clubs never are.

The only losers in this are the fans at the end of the day. ( and probably Snowden and Idris back pockets )

Agreed.

I think what gets lost in all this is that those who are sticking up for the board are just as upset as those laying the boot in - probably more so.

 

[Rusty]

From what I gather Burraston is dhead and nobody likes him, from the board members to the sponsors. I wouldn't be surprised if he tenders his resignation to be honest.

 

[Karmawave]

agreed.

tin-foil hat conspiracy theories, and saying ridiculous things about a board that are trying to do the right thing by the club are not helping.

You're right, I couldn't help myself, but I'd be lying to say it didn't cross my mind during today.

Speculating isn't helping, so yes, I will back off. We both know my arguments can be like a dog with a bone and I don't want to be influential ,plus I'd hate to feed the MS people more ammo :lol:

 

[Serc]

Yeah for one reason and one reason alone - they cut all spending to the barest of minimums - including employing the cheapest of staff, in the smallest possible numbers available.

Just to make this clear for everyone so nobody gets the wrong idea, they have avoided cost cutting as much as they can with the football department...but have cut spending to the barest of minimums for the rest as you say Karma.

 

[rnb11]

Hopefully it won't be too late to sign Snowden if this happens.

I read Tinkler asked him to hold off until the end of the year to sign anything. Unless something goes horribly wrong, we should end up with both Tinkler and Snowden by next season thanks to the members.

 

[Serc]

Quest for Knights members' signatures continues
22 Feb, 2011 05:19 PM

Lambton man Mark York said he would keep circulating petitions until he had the 100 signatures needed to force an extraordinary general meeting of the Knights membership.
Mr York said the next pub meeting was planned for the Gunyah Hotel at Belmont tomorrow night.
He was planning another meeting on Thursday or Friday at Cessnock or Maitland.
Although the Tinkler group had withdrawn its bid for the Knights, Mr York said the Tinkler camp had emailed him today saying it welcomed the chance to debate Knights chairman Robbie Tew and chief executive Steve Burraston ‘‘in front of the members’’.
Knights chairman Rob Tew talked to Knights players this afternoon about recent developments before a training session.

http://www.theherald.com.au/news/lo...hts-members-signatures-continues/2083863.aspx


This is interesting...

 

[Serc]

Legend Joey backs Tinkler and hits out at directors

• Barry Toohey and Dean Ritchie
• February 23, 2011 12:00AM

NATHAN Tinkler last night gained a powerful ally in his push to take over the Knights when the club's greatest player, Andrew Johns, took aim at Newcastle's directors.
Having missed this week's dramatic showdown in Newcastle while on a surfing holiday in Fiji, Johns said he could not believe passionate Knights fan Tinkler was not already on board as club owner given what his financial clout would mean to the cash-strapped club.
"I'm stunned the deal hasn't already been done," Johns said.
"What the hell are they doing? We don't want Greg Bird playing for Gold Coast. We don't want Kade Snowden at Cronulla. We don't want Dane Tilse playing for Canberra.
"They're our boys and they should be playing for the Knights.
"As far as I can tell, that's what Nathan Tinkler wants to do. Bring as many locals home as he can.
"He's doing this for the community, for Newcastle and the Hunter. Why is it so hard to believe?"
Johns' comments came as former Newcastle premiership-winning coach Michael Hagan said he feared for the club's future unless Tinkler's bid was accepted. It appears a group of angry Knights members could have enough signatures by tonight to force an extraordinary general meeting, which could overthrow the current board.
The Daily Telegraph also understands several more former Newcastle stars will come forward to publicly support Tinkler. Mining magnate Tinkler has told friends he is "hurt" that his honesty has been questioned by Newcastle management.
Former Knights coach Hagan said he hoped members would be given an opportunity to make up their own minds about Tinkler's offer, saying the Newcastle board had an obligation to take the deal to a members meeting.
"I don't think the process has been handled particularly well and to allow someone like Nathan Tinkler to walk away without giving the members an opportunity to hear what he has to say is pretty disappointing," Hagan said.
"To pass up the size and nature of the offer that's been talked about and continue with a model that we've had for 22 years and which is not going to sustain the club into the future is not the right path.
"If the board is concerned about the shortcomings in the deal, they should be pointing them out to the members at a meeting."
High-profile Newcastle fan Jack Newton weighed into the debate again last night, saying: "It's not the Steve Burraston and Robbie Tew show. This has dragged on and on.
"It's about time they went to the members and they make the decision, not them [the two officials]."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...out-at-directors/story-e6frexnr-1226010361767

 

[Serc]

Gravity of it all lost on Knights, says Newton
Greg Prichard
February 23, 2011

NEWCASTLE sporting legend Jack Newton has attacked the Knights for not accepting Nathan Tinkler's money, saying chief executive Steve Burraston and the board are responsible for the club being in a downward spiral.
Newton said that if the club's members eventually got the chance to vote Tinkler into ownership they would be mad if they didn't, and urged them to put pressure on the board to stand down with a no-confidence vote at an extraordinary meeting if one was called.
''I don't get what is happening here,'' the former champion golfer told the Herald. ''I don't know Nathan very well, I've only met him once, but, personally, I think if the members don't go for this they've got rocks in their heads.
''I don't see anything else that compares with what Tinkler is offering, and the club is heavily in debt, so I can't see any negatives. The other option that they're talking about now, the patrons' trust, isn't remotely in the same league as the Tinkler offer financially.''
Newton said that before Tinkler began showing interest in the Knights the club had been guilty of wasting an opportunity to build a long-term association with multi-millionaire John Singleton, and Burraston had managed to get offside with high-powered people in Newcastle.
He also remains adamant the club made a big mistake employing Brian Smith as coach from 2007-09, saying the Knights lost their way during that time and were yet to find it back.
''Burraston is a mate of mine, but he's got no PR sense,'' Newton said. ''He's not doing the joint any favours, and he's offside with [Minister for the Hunter] Jodi McKay and [general manager of Newcastle newspapers] Julie Ainsworth, among others.
''I introduced John Singleton to the club, but they didn't know how to make that work. He put money into the club through his Bluetongue beer, but the association broke down. There were issues on both sides with that, but at the end of the day the guy is a multi-millionaire, and money attracts money.
''Burraston couldn't see that, and he [also] felt he had Tinkler in his pocket. How the tide has turned. The current board has been there for two terms, apart from a couple of changes, and they are seeing the club go to rack and ruin. They let [Brian] Smith take over and he totally disregarded our market, which is local juniors.
''Josh Perry went to Manly and won a comp. My son, Clint, went to Melbourne and won a comp. Kade Snowden left and went on to play Origin, for Cronulla.
''We've still got a foot in the old chook raffle days, where politics on the board has reigned supreme since year dot. In league, I can't understand how some of the people who get on boards manage to do so. The club doesn't look after its sponsors and fans as well as it should.''

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...st-on-knights-says-newton-20110222-1b44k.html

hehehehe...I was waiting for old uncle fairway metal to weigh in on this...especially to bring out the good old Brian Smith/2007 player cleanout hatchet!

 

[Joker's Wild]

Ha ha Clint going to Melbourne and winning a comp....well except for that whole salary cap issue Jack

 

[otori]

We all know why Newton has a bone to pick with the Knights but he made some good points. The media hasn't been showing any pro-Burraston/Tew stories/support that I've seen. All the players, Jodi McKay and the misc. other figures (e.g. Newton) have all sided with Tinkler. It's dangerous territory for the board now as they look like they're stalling and doing nothing (even though they've just done their job). Ahhh the power of the media.

 

[Serc]

Tinkler group slams talk of takeover 'mirage'
JAMES GARDINER
23 Feb, 2011 04:00 AM

TINKLER Sports Group executive chairman Ken Edwards has ridiculed assertions by Knights management that Nathan Tinkler’s $100million takeover offer was a ‘‘mirage’’.
Knights chairman Rob Tew said Tinkler’s revised offer, received last Wednesday, was a ‘‘pale imitation’’ of the original deal tabled on January 17 which guaranteed $10million annual sponsorship for 10 years.
Principal to the Knights’ argument was that, they claim, Tinkler had tried to change the definition of sponsorship revenue to include all revenue, encompassing the annual NRL grant of almost $4million, other than ticket sales and membership fees.
Tew said the Knights would receive more than $10million from sponsorship and NRL grants in each of the next two years, meaning TSG would not be required to contribute. Edwards rejected that last night, describing that interpretation as ‘‘misleading and mischievous’’.
‘‘The NRL grant was never included,’’ Edwards said.
‘‘If you read our offer, it states we will underwrite $10million sponsorship and corporate hospitality. They tried to change the definition from sponsorship and corporate hospitality to sponsorship and corporate hospitality associated with sponsorship.
‘‘They said if you do that and count all corporate hospitality, not just corporate hospitality associated with sponsorship, that gets the figure up around $8.9million. We asked them to show us the detail, and for the purpose of drafting we left the offer as it was while we were waiting for the due diligence to come through.’’
Edwards hit back at suggestions Tinkler was trying to rush the deal through, and that many of the differences could have been resolved at a meeting between the parties scheduled for Monday afternoon.
‘‘The detailed discussions have been going on for a month, back and forth between the lawyers,’’ Edwards said. ‘‘In the end Nathan took the view that they had reached the decision that they did not want to do a deal and there was no point continuing on.’’
Edwards said yesterday that Tinkler had ruled out further dealings with the current Knights board.

http://www.theherald.com.au/news/lo...up-slams-talk-of-takeover-mirage/2084050.aspx

 

[Apey]

''Burraston is a mate of mine, but he's got no PR sense,'' Newton said. ''He's not doing the joint any favours, and he's offside with [Minister for the Hunter] Jodi McKay and [general manager of Newcastle newspapers] Julie Ainsworth, among others.

jeez, never realised that :sarcasm:

 

[adamkungl]

http://www.theherald.com.au/news/lo...ens-to-resign-from-knights-board/2083996.aspx

FOUNDATION Knights director Leigh Maughan said he would resign from the board if chairman Rob Tew and chief executive Steve Burraston tried to ‘‘ram through’’ the patrons’ trust funding model without putting it to members. Maughan insisted that the patron’s trust was a loan, and he expected the model to be put to tonight’s regular monthly Knights board meeting .
‘‘I’m going to refuse to vote for it,’’ Maughan said.
‘‘It’s a prick of a deal because you wind up with a debt that has to be repaid with interest.
‘‘They can talk about different versions but the copy that I have been given, which was distributed through the board, talks about paying back the money.
‘‘If there are four or five people and each puts in half a million [dollars] or a million a year over five years that could be $20million plus interest. It’s ridiculous.’’
Maughan said the board was split on the patrons’ trust model but he feared it would get up by a slim majority - perhaps by the chairman’s casting vote – if it went to the board.
‘‘Nathan Tinkler’s a bloke worth almost a billion,’’ Maughan said.
‘‘I don’t see a bloke spending millions to get in the door of the club then not spending more money to make things worthwhile. People whose opinions I trust say I’m wise to give them some room to move. We need the bloke in the door and to jam the patrons’ trust in, just to keep him out, is extremely bad form.
‘‘If it comes to a vote tomorrow night I feel very strongly about it and I will march outside the board and become Joan of Arc. I’m not the only one, others are of the same mind.’’
Maughan said Tinkler’s reasons for wanting to back the Knights were not that important.
‘‘If he spends the money he invests as a benefactor of course he might want political favours – that’s fine by me – but we’re not involved with playing politics. If his image is lifted and he can get favours in the business world good luck to the bloke but it’s not a pay-back situation. We won’t owe him a penny but the patrons’ trust is a loan.’’
Maughan said the club was not the only party at fault in this week’s events.
He put Tinkler’s telephone call to former Knight Kade Snowdon as a ‘‘lack of experience’’.
‘‘This sort of thing goes on but coming out of the blue when the fella is just about to walk into a press conference [to announce a new deal with the Sharks] just shows a lack of experience and judgment but have no doubt it goes on.’’

well is it a loan or a donation? This whole thing is very messy

 

[macavity]

Leigh Maughan is wrong, mate. It is a donation.

 

[Jobdog]

Why do we, the supporters, know more about the facts of this Patron's Trust than people such as Leigh Maughan and what seems like every single journo between Newcastle and Sydney? What's wrong with this picture :crazy:

 

[perverse]

Why do we, the supporters, know more about the facts of this Patron's Trust than people such as Leigh Maughan and what seems like every single journo between Newcastle and Sydney? What's wrong with this picture :crazy:

it doesn't make Burro and Tew wrong, it just means the board is uninformed at this stage, which isn't a good look either i might add.

 

[Medievalknight]

Something smells fishy

 

[Jobdog]

And now just to make things even more confusing, we've got TSG coming out and saying:

The Tinkler Sports Group says it would consider recommencing discussions with the Newcastle Knights if they were asked to address members.

Seriously. W.T.F.