Nathan Tinkler withdraws Knights offer

[Serc]

Looks like our good friend macavity is on the scene (in the pic and interviewed in the article too)

Members unite to skittle Newcastle Knights board

• Barry Toohey
• From: The Daily Telegraph
• February 22, 2011 12:00AM
• 

Passion ... a Newcastle fan signs a petition to call an extraordinary meeting of Knights members to discuss the Nathan Tinkler deal withdrawal. Picture: Liam Driver Source: The Daily Telegraph

Newcastle fans sign a petition to call an extraordinary meeting of Knights members to discuss the Nathan Tinkler deal withdrawal. Picture: Liam Driver Source: The Daily Telegraph



FURIOUS Newcastle Knights members took to the streets and a local watering hole last night to voice their frustration after local mining magnate Nathan Tinkler walked away from his $100 million deal to buy the Newcastle club.

There was a mixed reaction in Newcastle yesterday to the news Tinkler had pulled out.

But television antenna fitter Mark York, a member for about a decade, has rallied fans who believe Tinkler's offer to buy out the financially stricken club is a no-brainer.

York went on local radio yesterday calling for Newcastle Knights members to support a petition to call an extraordinary meeting. He gathered 57 signatures of the 100 required at The Mark Hotel in Lambton.

"The members want to have their say on this and we believe both sides of the story should be told so that we can make our own judgment," York said.
"To us, Nathan Tinkler is not going to do the wrong thing by our club and to let him just walk away like they have without giving us an opportunity to see what he wants to do for the club is not something the board should be doing."

Tinkler walked into his office yesterday morning, sat down and simply said to himself: "This is just all too hard".

So he picked up the telephone, called Knights chairman Rob Tew and told him the deal was off.

Last night, he took a huge swipe at the current administration, claiming the Knights were being "managed into the ground".

"I wanted to pull out Sunday," Tinkler said.

"Given their attitude, I didn't want to stand there and go head to head with them over this.

"It's been like hitting your head up against a brick wall.

"I never truly believed they wanted to go down this path anyway and their actions over the past week confirm it.

"If the members want it and the community want it, it will happen. They will do something about it.

"My offer will still be here. But I'm not going to push it."

Make no mistake, the Tinkler deal is not dead yet.

The Knights are making other arrangements but it's the community that may have the final say on the club's future. Without pushing the point, Tinkler made that clear yesterday.

But what is clear is he will have no further dealings with the current administration.

"I love the Knights and will always love the Knights but what we have now with the current management is a shadow of the club it can be and should be,"he said.

"Ever since I put the money up, it has been all about the negatives to them. What about if he goes broke?

"Well I'm pretty comfortable, thanks very much.

"They just don't get it and they have been poorly advised during this whole process.

"It's sad to think they just can not see the big picture."

The head of the Knights' official supporter's group, Shane Spruce, claimed it seemed like Tinkler had "picked up his bat and ball and gone home".

"It started out as an oasis in the desert and ended up a mirage," Spruce said.

"The board's responsibility is to safeguard the club for our members and as far as I am concerned, that's what they are entitled to do."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...le-knights-board/story-e6frexnr-1226009716471

 

[Pedge1971]

Fine print is for the lawyers. Do you really thing Burro & Tew have time or will actually go through a detailed legal contract? They are acting and speaking on legal advice. This is and always has been in the hands of lawyers and a month is a long time in any transaction.

Monday's meeting will get us nowhere in terms of education on the situation if Tinkler's reps are not invited.

How complex can it be? The Knights board has decided not to take a risk. Tinkler would definitely be taking a risk in proposing to fund the Knights. This is not a proposed buy out. This is taking on a debt with no promised return on his side other than funding a community treasure.

If he was looking at a return he would buy another mine. Yes, his methods are questionable, but what is the alternative for us?

There does not seem to be a lot of transparency on either side and I don't think Monday will resolve that.....

 

[Pedge1971]

Article OOT, but funny given Perverse's great earlier break down. Newcastle people's greatest asset is their passion. But we need to look at facts on tnis one and forget personalities.

 

[Pedge1971]

Article OOT, but funny given Perverse's great earlier break down. Newcastle people's greatest asset is their passion. But we need to look at facts on tnis one and forget personalities.

 

[perverse]

at the end of the day i just want the members to be afforded an opportunity to make a properly informed decision. at the moment we still have little more than he said, she said.

Pedge you have raised some interesting points about takeovers and whatnot in big business in other threads. i also find Tinklers comments regarding the Knights legal respresentation being sub-par interesting. this would not surprise me. if Tew and Burraston have indeed taken incorrect legal advice on the proposal, then it will be another interesting twist in the saga.

i also find Tinklers comments in todays articles (i think it is the DT interview with Tinkler) regarding the way Tew and Burraston run the club to be extremely interesting... as i have heard similar whispers from other sources within the past few months.

what chance of us being able to get an indepedant 3rd party to help with this situation? we have to know what is actually in that f**king proposal... and the way both sides have conducted themselves, i honestly don't trust either of them.

 

[Pedge1971]

I don't know. But we need a strong Members Group that can and will push for transparency and not be led by the nose or biased by current mgt or the Tinkler Group. If we don't get this then the media circus will lead us in a merry dance.

There are some very strong personalities on this forum who are local and can lead from the front. If we put both Groups on the spot and take the bullsh!t out we can get the right transparency we need. Piggins proved it with Souths. The sorry part of that tale is we prob wasn't the right guy to take it fwd (though a hugely successful guy in business in his own right).

Any takers?

 

[slotmachine]

Regardless of the Tinkler situation, I can say without any doubt in my mind that while we've won premierships under our slapdash management approach in the past - it won't happen again.

We won those two premierships due to the good fortune that a certain A. Johns was born in Cessnock.

 

[slotmachine]

Yes, his methods are questionable, but what is the alternative for us?

I would say we will struggle on as always.
The club will still exist but onfield success will remain elusive.

The Sharks members approved their big development last night so we will probably be the poorest NRL club.

 

[Pedge1971]

Get off the forum u d!ck. Why are u mis-quotng me? When did I post the quote u last responded to?

 

[slotmachine]

Was that aimed at me?
If so, perhaps you have been drinking.

Fine print is for the lawyers. Do you really thing Burro & Tew have time or will actually go through a detailed legal contract? They are acting and speaking on legal advice. This is and always has been in the hands of lawyers and a month is a long time in any transaction.

Monday's meeting will get us nowhere in terms of education on the situation if Tinkler's reps are not invited.

How complex can it be? The Knights board has decided not to take a risk. Tinkler would definitely be taking a risk in proposing to fund the Knights. This is not a proposed buy out. This is taking on a debt with no promised return on his side other than funding a community treasure.

If he was looking at a return he would buy another mine. Yes, his methods are questionable, but what is the alternative for us?

There does not seem to be a lot of transparency on either side and I don't think Monday will resolve that.....

3:01AM today.

 

[slotmachine]

For the last couple of years I have rolled a bit of my loan over as sponsorship so they can claim they are making a profit.

Interesting, if true.

 

[Pedge1971]

Unfair! You're talking to an old guy.....Yep, a few too many. My apologies Slotmachine....see you in my morning your afternoon in Oz folks.

I think this is still (in some way) a big opportunity for our club.

 

[slotmachine]

Unfair! You're talking to an old guy.....Yep, a few too many. My apologies Slotmachine....see you in my morning your afternoon in Oz folks.

Apology accepted :lol:

 

[cram]

This is going to get messy and the local ABC Radio is reporting this morning that some board members are not happy with Tew and Burraston. On top of that I heard Leigh Maughan yesterday afternoon on Talking Sport and he basically indicated that all he knew was that Tinkler had walked away and that he had not been on the committee looking at the proposal and did not really understand all the legal jargon.

No matter what the outcome IMO the positions of TEW and BURRASTON are now untenable for the club to move forward, in what ever direction that is.

 

[jonno_knights]

either the TSG have completely fudged the paperwork, or i believe it to be a blatent lie.

i still do consider that the Knights may have not even had the time to correctly assess the entire proposal - i have heard it is quite extensive and large - but that just adds further doubt around the bid as Tinkler is rushing the Knights. i would also consider this the remote possiblity at this stage, very remote. i think Tew and Burro are shooting straight on this one, i see no incentive for them to do otherwise. worried about their own jobs is absolute bollocks, none of them have much to gain financially from their positions at the Knights.

something this complex obviously requires far more respect than Tinkler is treating it with. i think everyone would be interested to know exactly how long the Knights have even had the full proposal in their possession. we know when they got the letter of intent, but nothing beyond that.

the only beneficial solution, the only way forward i perceive there to be, is the extraordinary meeting of members next Monday, where the members will be informed on the black and white's of the 2 proposals. the facts as they are in documentation - which is all that actually matters here. it's the only way we can make an informed opinion. we are at a very interesting juncture in our clubs history, and we now need the facts.

Wednesday evening. They had their legal team look over it on the w/e.

 

[Newie is God's Country]

This is going to get messy and the local ABC Radio is reporting this morning that some board members are not happy with Tew and Burraston. On top of that I heard Leigh Maughan yesterday afternoon on Talking Sport and he basically indicated that all he knew was that Tinkler had walked away and that he had not been on the committee looking at the proposal and did not really understand all the legal jargon.

No matter what the outcome IMO the positions of TEW and BURRASTON are now untenable for the club to move forward, in what ever direction that is.

Hopefully common sense will prevail but i doubt it. Tew did what he thought was best but i think was naive in the way he went about it. Naive in so far as he is dealing with a very powerful individual who is notorious for getting what he wants how he wants. I think Tinkler will still get the club regardless. There are no accidental billionaires. He won't deal with Tew or Burraston. This is what this is about right now.

 

[macavity]

Fine print is for the lawyers. Do you really thing Burro & Tew have time or will actually go through a detailed legal contract? They are acting and speaking on legal advice. This is and always has been in the hands of lawyers and a month is a long time in any transaction.

:lol::lol::lol:

Are you a lawyer? If not, I suggest you don't comment on things you have NFI about.

At any rate, they were expected to give unanimous support less than a week after recieving the "final" documents. Absurd bully-boy tactics.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

If that bit RE funding is true, Burraston and Tew regardless of if it was a misunderstanding or if they were misinformed must resign immediately. Black and white as its either lies or gross incompetence.

 

[Alex28]

Wednesday evening. They had their legal team look over it on the w/e.

If that is true the bid was doomed from the start. No organisation can assess a takeover bid in 4 days. You could never ever do your due diligence in that time. Absurd.

 

[Nuffy]

If that is true the bid was doomed from the start. No organisation can assess a takeover bid in 4 days. You could never ever do your due diligence in that time. Absurd.

Not sure this is totally true in the commercial world, but to get it done takes mega resources and plenty of cash, neither of which the club has.