What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Privatisation? Hill says maybe...

Alex28

Coach
Messages
12,005
http://www.smh.com.au/news/League/H...atising-Knights/2005/04/06/1112489562000.html

Newcastle board member Michael Hill says privatisation is an option the Knights have to at least consider if the club is to become a major force again.

Hill said if the Knights didn't consider several possible strategies they would sit back in the pack of NRL clubs.

The former Knights chairman, who stood down from that position before last night's annual general meeting but who was re-elected a board member, indicated privatisation wasn't necessarily his favourite option.

But in an interview published in today's Newcastle Herald he discussed Newcastle's financial dilemma and said the club owed it to the Knights' fans to examine every way to solve the problem.

Asked whether it was time for privatisation, Hill replied: "During my time as chairman I had a public stand against privatisation. What I'm saying, though, is that given where we are, and for how long we've been surviving, it's my view that survival in itself is not enough. We'll slip further and further behind, and it's not for us to limp along the bottom.

"Our supporters expect more and our supporters are the lifeblood, anyway, because they pay through the gate. What that more is, or what it could be, is not for me to say.

"But what I'm saying is that the board has no alternative other than to examine all those options, take advice, look at the different things that could be done with an open mind, then come back to their members and discuss it."

Hill's comments are interesting as another Newcastle board member - former Knights captain Paul Harragon - was quoted in a story last Saturday as opposing privatisation. "And I would not expect it to be on the agenda," Harragon said. "We are looking at new people and new ideas, not privatisation."

Hill was re-elected to the board along with Michael Tyler, Allan McKeown and Harragon. Ron Robson was also elected and Peter Corcoran stood but missed out. Mike Nesbitt did not stand for re-election. Tyler was elected chairman and Corcoran deputy chairman, while Hill received life membership of the club at the meeting.

Newcastle have walked a financial tightrope since they were admitted to the competition in 1988. They have never had the financial backing of a leagues club and have survived on sponsorship, gate receipts, competition prizemoney and the sale of merchandise. They have clawed their way out of tight financial corners before but now face their biggest financial challenge.

The Knights have not found a replacement for the $575,000-a- year QantasLink deal which ended last year.

Newcastle, who have lost all three of their games this season, missed the finals last year for the first time since 1996, which contributed to an operating loss for the year.

Apart from their sponsorship problems, merchandise sales are down and they are still waiting to start playing home games again after the construction of a State Government-funded grandstand on the eastern side of EnergyAustralia Stadium.

Newcastle's financial situation has made it increasingly difficult for the club to retain promising junior players coming through below the first-grade squad.

Other clubs have been able to offer youngsters more money than the Knights could hope to pay them to stay, meaning Newcastle have lost players they would have liked to have kept.

Among those who slipped through the net were Anthony Tupou, Paul Franze and Greg Bird, who are now playing first grade for Sydney Roosters, Penrith and Cronulla respectively.


Interesting...maybe they are on the right line of thinking...
 

Voice of Reason

Juniors
Messages
359
I just heard Tyler interviewed on radio and I am sorry to say guys- we are in big trouble.

He has said that privatisation is NOT ON THE AGENDA. He is still babbling on with this old often trod out line that Newcastle is a "peoples club" and it "belongs to the mum and dad supports who lines up outside the gate 2 hours before the ground opens before a game" etc....Complete and utter bs Mike!!!!!! If you go on believing that this group of people can keep your club afloat then you are as farr off the beam that Hill was.

He also said that they had "many" options to explore with financial backers and sponsors (one would ask why we are in the $ position that we are now if this is true), he "knows of no talks ever held with John Singleton regarding him buying in" and denies that the Knights are only 3 months away from not being able to pay their players.

We have gone from an autocratic, dictatorial leader who has lead us the the brink of bankrupcy to a new leader who seems to have his head up his a..s. TOUGHER times ahead ASSURED :cry: :x
 

Misanthrope

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
47,627
Jesus, I love the fact we're a 'people's club' but it's clear that the support of a town isn't enough to sustain a professional football club. I respect guys like Harrogan for what they've done, but to rule out privitisation because they don't like it is just a suicidal move. The Warriors have benefited immensely from being bought out and remodelled. Newcastle could use a similar makeover.
 

rourkster

Juniors
Messages
102
I was watching NBN news last night & they showed the new fitness centre at Club Phoenix. They spoke to Kevin MacDougall who is on the Wests Newcastle Leagues Club board (owners of Club Phoenix for those not from Newcastle) about Wests getting involved with the Knights. He made a comment along the lines of "They certainly need some help at the moment and we're interested, but they've got to offer us something in return. We need to get something back from them."
If there was ever a way of Wests getting on board with the Knights then the Knights' financial future would be assured. The money that is generated from Wests and Phoenix is huge & I can't understand the politics behind the 2 not getting together. Maybe someone here can fill us in on the history.
 

Nuffy

Bench
Messages
4,075
I'll give you a simple reason...........................self interest, if Wests came on board they would want to have a few seats on the board if not a controlling interest. You would hope that the board would put the clubs interest first but i'm not sure.

Wests make a greater profit each year than the entire turnover of the Knights, its a match made in heaven, if only people could look beyond their own self interest.

The new chairman of the Knights should have already made an appointment to meet with the board of Wests, if he hasn't then they aren't serious about fixing the clubs
 

~bedsy~

First Grade
Messages
5,988
I have no probs with Privatisation. Look how well Manly is at the moment.

I also heard on the radio that Tyler is looking at government places for sponsers.
 

Nuffy

Bench
Messages
4,075
I guess its like the AFL clubs, lots of their senior sponsors are VIc government depts like TAC.

I'd be leaning on the Knights patron, Costa and see what he can do.

I've done a fair bit of research on membership in the AFL and its a huge issue for them and critical to a successful club. I've got a few thoughts which I will share.
 

Kaz

junior
Messages
6,376
bedsy said:
I have no probs with Privatisation. Look how well Manly is at the moment.

I also heard on the radio that Tyler is looking at government places for sponsers.

Would have to be Local Government.


What about being sponsored by a Job Network place, then if a player is garbage, you can advertise with the Job Network & get a replacement. :p
 

Alex28

Coach
Messages
12,005
Souths have Arrive Alive as a sponsor - thats is virtally the RTA. The AFL has the TAC as major sponsors for a number of clubs - thats the equivalent body in Victoria...
 

mat_parsons

Juniors
Messages
489
bedsy said:
I have no probs with Privatisation. Look how well Manly is at the moment.


Exatcly. However it'd need to be person or business that loves the club (Delmege like). Have a look at Manly they are at top of the ladder.
 

Andy

First Grade
Messages
5,050
It doesn't even need to be someone that loves the club. Just someone who is rich and stupid.
 

stuke

Bench
Messages
3,727
mat_parsons said:
bedsy said:
I have no probs with Privatisation. Look how well Manly is at the moment.


Exatcly. However it'd need to be person or business that loves the club (Delmege like). Have a look at Manly they are at top of the ladder.

Con Constantine?

though that option may have been burned by the board a few years ago.
 

Voice of Reason

Juniors
Messages
359
Maybe Paul Haveadollar could buy the club himself with some of the hugh dollars he got, and continues to get, from the Packers due to SuperLeague??????
;-) He has not made his money with his brains quite obviously. If he is anti-privatisation then he is no better than Hill and I say he does not represent the interests of the majority of the supporters and the club itself. The board, although Hill is not chair, is no different than it was before yesterday, and to make it worse, they voted themselves in for two instead of one year. The only ways to shed this board now are a takeover, bankrupcy or via privatisation. Which is the best option?????? #-o
 

Latest posts

Top