Rumoured Signings and Even More Crap X

[emjaycee]

a) it's not difficult to determine where someone's salary lies in the age of collective bargaining agreements and the internet

For example, TrueEel makes the following:
http://www.glassdoor.com.au/Hourly-Pay/McDonald-s-Crew-Member-Hourly-Pay-E432_D_KO11,22.htm

b) NRL players (and sports figures in general) absolutely get paid from the public purse. Not by the government, but by the public who support their teams and watch their programs. They make money from interested parties, and if there is a salary cap system in place, interested parties love to know what kind of "bang for buck" they are getting out of a player, or how equitable the playing field really is!

Many American sports do not reveal actual contracts to the public, but information on deals is 'leaked' (by the head office?) so that fans can keep up with who is a bargain and who ought to be maligned. AND ALSO for the purposes of salary matching in trade agreements.

A site like this: http://data.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/index.jsp
displays NBA salaries, and their 'soft cap' system allows for trading between clubs based on salary, and a luxury tax on big spenders which is then distributed to those who do not overspend.



I'm a huge fan of a 'soft cap' (which we have in the NRL through the 'marquee player allowance and long serving player allowance anyway) and trades AND releasing information.
It gives the general public another aspect to be excited about in following their club.

eg: we're going terribly this year, would be fantastic if we could be dreaming about trading away some veterans to a team in contention to help 'stiffen them up' while clearing cap space to offer more to other players in future years, or stockpile young talent.

With all due respect OMC your point b) above is the same for every paid employee in any industry around the the world because at the end of the day the consumer and other interested parties foot the bill. The NRL as the governing body supposedly know the salaries of each individual player including 3rd party interests. Doesn't mean it needs to therefore be public knowledge, just as the customers of the company i work for don't need to know my specific salary... or do you think they should?

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Man we've missed out bigtime. If only we'd kept the old board! We're doomed now.

 

[Craig Johnston]

*sigh*....both NBA & MLB have salary caps but they are soft caps where teams that spend over the cap which are normally in larger markets have to pay a luxury tax which is spread amongst teams for various are under the cap to compete a competitive balance.

Even in the NRL's hard cap system there are teams that don't spend near the salary cap year in year out because quite frankly they can't afford to due to normally being in smaller market areas where it's more difficult to get new stadiums built or larger local television deals.

Out of the current 32 franchises ,14 haven't won a super bowl and only 12 have one multiple super bowls. The salary cap hasn't stopped the usual suspects winning the whole thing or throwing up new winners year in year out....

you can never guarantee or manipulate as even a competition as the nrl, evening the competition is just one objective of a salary cap, the main one is protecting the poorer clubs from going broke, and ending up with as you say only 12 teams in the comp.

the luxury tax is an example of that

 

[Tony Bongo]

Like I said, why don't you ring the new chairman now that you have a direct line with him and ask him or ask Edwards at the game this Friday on how are we going with regards to a new sponsor coming in.

Just for the record, I think Edwards is the best signing the club has made in recent times. A very smart operator who knows the business to well and we will benefit from his knowledge and professionalism

I don't have a direct line with the new chairman and even if I did my question relates to the previous chairman. You seem to know everything so what's your problem with answering the question? Why didn't the previous board sign off on it?

 

[mrt_spec]

Sure I'm privy to some info just like other people are, so I suppose you don't want me to post any signings, rumours or info that could better fellow eels fans on this site?

If you love the Eels as much as you claim to then I would expect that you would sit on any information that could hurt the Eels and not tell a soul. Other clubs manage to work through problems internally - why can't the Eels?

In this instance you have taken privileged (or made-up) information and presented it in a way to cause maximum damage to the Eels - just because someone else is leading the board now.

 

[Etu Uaisele]

With all due respect OMC your point b) above is the same for every paid employee in any industry around the the world because at the end of the day the consumer and other interested parties foot the bill. The NRL as the governing body supposedly know the salaries of each individual player including 3rd party interests. Doesn't mean it needs to therefore be public knowledge, just as the customers of the company i work for don't need to know my specific salary... or do you think they should?

Is you company governed by a salary cap ? If so then yes we should all know what you're paid.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Anderson reached the GF in his first attempt with the Eels. What more should he have to do.

He should do more than turn up and have some luck with a team some other merkin built.

He also had early success with the Warriors before they fell to shit.

More propaganda. How the f**k would you know what his plan was? He got rid of Mateo and Inu because they were lazy. Guess what ? they are.

I agree getting rid of those two was a good decision, but it's hilarious how the Anderson lovers who say it was a bad decision blame Osborne.

Coming from a Kearney apologist. LOL!!!

Well mate, if Sticky is hamstrung by taking over Kearney's team then Kearney was certainly held back by taking over Anderson' team.

And besides, however poorly we went after Anderson left is no justification for having kept him. In fact it proves how much he let the club fall apart.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

mateo WAS lazy he certainly didnt seem to be shirking his work last night

Players that don't put in every week (like Mateo) are either inexperienced or lazy.

 

[hineyrulz]

Players that don't put in every week (like Mateo) are either inexperienced or lazy.

And Mateo is not inexperienced.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

My point is why didn't the previous board agree on it and just sign it a couple of days before? Surely they would have got some good leverage prior to the election if they had really signed a new sponsor on a massive deal. Wasn't the AGM the day after the election? Are you saying that this new deal came to hand only hours before it? Amazing timing if true.

Maybe the sponsor was waiting for the election results?

 

[gustarny]

Maybe we all need to have pizzas at Hindys.Are we all fighting for the same cause here or what.:roll:

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I don't have a direct line with the new chairman and even if I did my question relates to the previous chairman. You seem to know everything so what's your problem with answering the question? Why didn't the previous board sign off on it?

Could have been the sponsor that was waiting to sign off on it.

 

[Gronk]

Maybe the sponsor was waiting for the election results?

Could have been the sponsor that was waiting to sign off on it.

Unlikely however merkin. Marketing decisions are not made by multi-nationals on a whim and the changing of the guard would hardly matter, (provided that it does not bring more instability).

If we encounter a problem in replacing Pirtek it's because the former board have failed to promote the club in a positive light. Suggesting that their absence places us in a worse position is just spin.

 

[Twizzle]

I don't have a direct line with the new chairman and even if I did my question relates to the previous chairman. You seem to know everything so what's your problem with answering the question? Why didn't the previous board sign off on it?

this is not the place to seek an answer for that Tony, any response would be unsubstantiated and pure speculation which as you know we wont allow

 

[Tony Bongo]

this is not the place to seek an answer for that Tony, any response would be unsubstantiated and pure speculation which as you know we wont allow

Fair enough Twiz. I wasn't expecting an answer anyway.

 

[Tony Bongo]

Could have been the sponsor that was waiting to sign off on it.

It could have been or the sponsor might not have been so close to committing as has been suggested, that's assuming they even existed of course. It could also have been (if the sponsor exists) that they thought the former chairman and board had the support of the majority of our members, but they found out that was not the case.
My guess is that they tuned into Ray Hadley and he talked them out of it.

 

[Gronk]

Dragons have dropped Soward.

 

[hineyrulz]

Maybe the sponsor was waiting for the election results?

Why wouldn't they be confident in dealing with a plumber????

 

[Gronk]

Why wouldn't they be confident in dealing with a plumber????

How come it's the CEO at every other club that organises sponsors etc, yet at our club everyone seems to think that it's the Chairman ?

Ken Edwards is a good operator and we're in good hands.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Unlikely however merkin. Marketing decisions are not made by multi-nationals on a whim and the changing of the guard would hardly matter, (provided that it does not bring more instability).

Key point in bold.

If we encounter a problem in replacing Pirtek it's because the former board have failed to promote the club in a positive light. Suggesting that their absence places us in a worse position is just spin.

The fact they've been recently replaced could (and probably does) mean that the club is much less stable right now. The shitstorm surrounding the place is certainly heavier than usual.

Anyway, I think this lost sponsor is bullshit. I'm just explaining why it might not be.

Because unlike most of you merkins I try to look at things objectively. If it appears I am arguing from one side it is because the other side is already well represented.

You might call me an argumentative troll but I prefer to see myself as the enemy of groupthink.