Taylor has lost his job

[The Mad Hatter]

The deadline should be set for the halves imo not Tedesco and woods

Tedesco is pretty much irreplaceable and woods bleeds the club

With the talented list of off contract halves place a reasonable offer to Broses & if they don't comply in due time f**k them off.

More clubs need to do this to 'star' players.

Here's the contract. Here's where you sign by this date. Take it or leave it.

 

[big hit!]

4 players they consider integral to their squad all come off contract at the same time. f**kin masterstroke!

 

[no name]

4 players they consider integral to their squad all come off contract at the same time. f**kin masterstroke!

They'll probably sign each of the 4 to a 1 year deal......

 

[Tiger5150]

He is delusional. He is trying to save the supposed honour of Balmain's management. What's the point??? Lol.

Nope just exposing a lying try hard who claimed that they were in $20M debt at the time.

 

[Tiger5150]

It's always someone else's fault! Balmain had decades where they could have invested in property! Too bad, so sad!

Ummmmm they did. Thats why they had over $30M in assets. What did Souffs on Chalmers invest in? Whose fault was it that they went into liquidation still owing money to creditors and selling the building to the Salvos still wasnt enough? Souffs should have invested in property! Then they would at least have been able to pay creditors when they went broke!

Enough Alien, Im tired of this. You lied about Balmain being in debt, thats all I cared about, I called you out, proved you to be an ignorant liar throwing stones from the weakest of positions. For the sake of everyone, dont respond and lets keep this thread on track.

 

[Knight76]

I don't get your argument about the debt Tigers5150. You say they were not 20mil in debt and argue the point by saying they had 5 million in assets. So would it be accurate to say they were 15 million in debt?

Anyway, any coach coming there now, must demand full control of the management of the squad. The board if they have any serious intentions of turning their fortunes around has to relinquish their control. The coach should have that clause in his contract, that he has complete discretion to manage the roster as he sees fit.

The coach should come in publicly stating that this is the agreement so it is clear to all that this is the agreement.

If at any time the board reneges on that deal. Cleary should walk and leave the club to their mess.

The board should so this and appoint Cleary now, ASAP. Cleary then says signs teddy and woods and put the other two on notice that they are free to negotiate with other clubs, and they will revisit their position on signing them in 2 months time.

This gives them time to test their value, find out they are not worth what they think, bring them down to earth and get them focused on what they should be, their footy. If they aren't working out, get rid of them, don't prolong the pain any further.

 

[The Charlatan]

More clubs need to do this to 'star' players.

Here's the contract. Here's where you sign by this date. Take it or leave it.

Yeah I agree.

It'll only hurt them, they're playing like busteds at the moment, and will only hurt their chances of signing a good deal as their stock will continue to plummet while they play like shit. They're not the only off contract halves on the market.

 

[The Charlatan]

I don't get your argument about the debt Tigers5150. You say they were not 20mil in debt and argue the point by saying they had 5 million in assets. So would it be accurate to say they were 15 million in debt?

Anyway, any coach coming there now, must demand full control of the management of the squad. The board if they have any serious intentions of turning their fortunes around has to relinquish their control. The coach should have that clause in his contract, that he has complete discretion to manage the roster as he sees fit.

The coach should come in publicly stating that this is the agreement so it is clear to all that this is the agreement.

The board should so this and appoint Cleary now, ASAP. Cleary then says signs teddy and woods and put the other two on notice that they are free to negotiate with other clubs, and they will revisit their position on signing them in 2 months time.

This gives them time to test their value, find out they are not worth what they think, bring them down to earth and get them focused on what they should be, their footy. If they aren't working out, get rid of them, don't prolong the pain any further.

He is saying after liabilities and assets were considered, they were in front by $4.5m (net assets once liabilities were factored in.)

 

[alien]

Enough Alien, Im tired of this. You lied about Balmain being in debt, thats all I cared about, I called you out, proved you to be an ignorant liar throwing stones from the weakest of positions. For the sake of everyone, dont respond and lets keep this thread on track.

Lol, of course you don't want me to respond, because you want the last word!

Balmain Leagues Club: It’s now a sad and lonely ghost

THE former home of one of Australia’s most vaunted sporting clubs has been left to rot – literally – while arguments continue about the future of the site.

This year marks seven years since the Balmain Leagues Club was sold for $1 in exchange for its buyer inheriting the club’s $22million-plus debt.

But a series of shocking photos captured by Sydney photographer Brett Patman shows just how far the once-proud building has fallen into disrepair.

Squatters have taken up residence, floors are rotting from water damage and almost every wall has been covered in graffiti.

Meanwhile, the wrangling continues over what is to become of the site and who is to blame for its condition, with developer Ian Wright blaming Leichhardt Council, Mayor Darcy Byrne blaming Mr Wright and angry residents just wanting it all to come to a resolution they can live with.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...t/news-story/bfb8e91628bfd7debb7ee2cebe7a8a05

 

[Tiger5150]

I don't get your argument about the debt Tigers5150. You say they were not 20mil in debt and argue the point by saying they had 5 million in assets. So would it be accurate to say they were 15 million in debt?

No. At the time Balmain Leagues had ASSETS of $ 31,201,147 and liabilities (debts) of $ 26,671,549 which is a NET ASSET of $4,529,598. If it was the other way around they would have been in debt. Is that clearer? They werent producing enough income (cash) to service the liabilities and so had to develop the assets in order to try to produce more income. Through a series or unfortunate events, they are screwed but struggling on.

Regret bringing it up now as it has derailed the thread but couldnt stand Alien making shit up for his own self gratification.

 

[Tiger5150]

Lol, of course you don't want me to respond, because you want the last word!

Balmain Leagues Club: It’s now a sad and lonely ghost

Balmain Leagues Club is an extremely sad and lonely vision. Its disgraceful what happened. But were Balmain in debt $20M in 2008 you lying merkin?

Answer that simple question correctly and you get the final word.

 

[Knight76]

Thanks for clearing that one up. I don't think it is too off topic. Taylor sacked and the mess the club is in is all fairly on topic.

Just to clarify though as I really haven't followed the Balmain leagues club stuff.

If they were 26 million in debt. Your argument is they had assets to cover that debt so were not actually in debt.

From where I sit the argument is semantics. If I am 20k in debt, but own a 5k car, I am not 15k in debt. I am still that same 20k in debt. I could sell the car but how would I drive around then?

Similar to the Balmain club, if 26mil in debt with assets to cover it, they are still in that debt aren't they? Can't really sell the leagues club and leave themselves with no club.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Alien loves AFL too.

Tells you all you really need to know about 'em.

 

[alien]

Balmain Leagues Club is an extremely sad and lonely vision. Its disgraceful what happened. But were Balmain in debt $20M in 2008 you lying merkin?

Answer that simple question correctly and you get the final word.

I can call it "liabilities" if you'd prefer. The point is they couldn't pay it without selling their leagues club.

 

[Tiger5150]

Thanks for clearing that one up. I don't think it is too off topic. Taylor sacked and the mess the club is in is all fairly on topic.

Not knocking you Knight but I actually think the opposite. This rubbish about Balmain got dragged into this thread and the discussion because of Benny's musings on who should be brought it to fix things but Balmain now has no voting rights. The extension is that by most peoples here and the medias reckoning, this is all the fault of our "disfunctional" board. Our board was recently completely revamped to replace the previous (totally disfunctional board was disfunctional due to the two factions. The current board is majority independent. For mine this current board hasnt really made any errors and has had to make some tough decisions for the betterment of the club. This mob mentallity to lynch "the board" isnt based on any reality. Everyone is calling for a "clean out" all the while the board is doing exactly that.

It is led by Rothfield because he doesnt like Marina Go. His smoking gun evidence that she is no good is that she didnt know who Laurie Daley was. Marina Go is the Tigers Chairperson of the board, not Football Director.

The board has gotten rid of some trouble in the ranks and has now got rid of a poor coach that was taking us nowhere but down. Their hand was forced.

 

[Tiger5150]

Just to clarify though as I really haven't followed the Balmain leagues club stuff.

If they were 26 million in debt. Your argument is they had assets to cover that debt so were not actually in debt.

From where I sit the argument is semantics. If I am 20k in debt, but own a 5k car, I am not 15k in debt. I am still that same 20k in debt. I could sell the car but how would I drive around then?

Similar to the Balmain club, if 26mil in debt with assets to cover it, they are still in that debt aren't they? Can't really sell the leagues club and leave themselves with no club.

This is exactly the situation the club faced and they dealt with it as follows. Lets use your car analogy.

You are in $25K debt.
You own a car worth $30K
You could sell the car and put the $5K in your pocket for bus fare because you arent driving anywhere.....

OR....

You could turn your $30K car into a taxi (or uber) and start earning additional income from it and use that additional income to pay off the debt. in the end you would be debt free and be left with a car that earns more income than you did before...onwards and upwards.

This is the same as Balmain. Had $30M in assets (not all of it was Rozelle premises) and $25M liabilities. They started a development of the Rozelle premises that would include a new leagues club, three floors of retail & commercial and a metro station in the basement. Wont bore you with how it went wrong but it did badly. Some Balmains fault, most not.

 

[sensesmaybenumbed]

I can call it "liabilities" if you'd prefer. The point is they couldn't pay it without selling their leagues club.

and in exchange they would have secured new premises and acquired additional investments while strengthening their position.

Then the GFC, the state govt and the local council all created the perfect shitstorm to move the goalposts. Completely unforeseeable and not the fault of the club

 

[Vic Mackey]

Thanks for clearing that one up. I don't think it is too off topic. Taylor sacked and the mess the club is in is all fairly on topic.

Just to clarify though as I really haven't followed the Balmain leagues club stuff.

If they were 26 million in debt. Your argument is they had assets to cover that debt so were not actually in debt.

From where I sit the argument is semantics. If I am 20k in debt, but own a 5k car, I am not 15k in debt. I am still that same 20k in debt. I could sell the car but how would I drive around then?

Similar to the Balmain club, if 26mil in debt with assets to cover it, they are still in that debt aren't they? Can't really sell the leagues club and leave themselves with no club.

but if they sell the site the leagues club is on another will be built with the other commercial and residential units that will go up. its win/win.

even if balmain do go completely bellyup and wests have 100% control of the JV it will always be the Wests Tigers, this will never change. the NRL would rather bring in another QLD team or perth based side then have the Magpies back in.

 

[Clifferd]

This is exactly the situation the club faced and they dealt with it as follows. Lets use your car analogy.

You are in $25K debt.
You own a car worth $30K
You could sell the car and put the $5K in your pocket for bus fare because you arent driving anywhere.....

OR....

You could turn your $30K car into a taxi (or uber) and start earning additional income from it and use that additional income to pay off the debt. in the end you would be debt free and be left with a car that earns more income than you did before...onwards and upwards.

This is the same as Balmain. Had $30M in assets (not all of it was Rozelle premises) and $25M liabilities. They started a development of the Rozelle premises that would include a new leagues club, three floors of retail & commercial and a metro station in the basement. Wont bore you with how it went wrong but it did badly. Some Balmains fault, most not.

You make too much sense..

Therefore alien will post the same article over and over.

Just ignore him dude

 

[Tiger5150]

but if they sell the site the leagues club is on another will be built with the other commercial and residential units that will go up. its win/win.

even if balmain do go completely bellyup and wests have 100% control of the JV it will always be the Wests Tigers, this will never change. the NRL would rather bring in another QLD team or perth based side then have the Magpies back in.

Originally they werent selling the site but developing it in conjunction with a developer. It was only after the NSW government pulled out and the GFC hit and (I think) Balmain had already (prematurely) moved out that Balmain got stuck with repayments. Thats when white knight Benny rode in to "save" us, buying the assets and liabilities with the intention that Balmain would move back in on a leasehold.