The Board

[RedVDave]

Until these empty headed dumb f--ks are gone nothing at this club will change.

It makes little difference which players we have or the coach is. It's always a case of same old sh-t different day at our club for the last 12 years.

A lot of criticism has been directed at Ben Hunt and his huge pay cheque well who's to blame for that? He hasn't been the only one either remember Corey Norman? Was on almost 7 figures a year even though he never played rep football and only featured in 1 semi final game that was his resume and we give him close to a million a year. We have to overpay just to have people play here which translates to their hearts not in it.

We have accepted mediocrity not just on the field but also off it. We have played finals footy twice TWICE since 2012 we've been lapped by record scores on several occasions can anyone even remember when we won more than 3 consecutive games? The board continually asks us to hand over our hand earned pay cheques for memberships, yet what benefits are there to being a member? We rarely get emails about what's happening within our club or what our direction is going forward (obviously there isn't one) we don't have those members breakfasts anymore and haven't been told why, the board will happily take our money but yet not reward us for doing so. Hell the day THE DAY after we are beaten by the team coming last that ended any chance of being part of the finals they put out a post (with one game in hand) saying ah well onto next year we can have your money now for next year completely unacceptable.

Until we put a bulldozer through this joint we are going to continue to find ourselves in this position SOMETHING MUST CHANGE!

 

[Dragon David]

Don't hold your breath RedVDave. As you know, nearly every year since 2012 we have had a go at the Board. The usual thing is that they do not coach and they are not playing the game but they did keep us as a just a mediocre club with the wrong coaches for too long and that can be blamed for the poor recruitment abilities of those getting players and pissing others off.

I'm really hoping that the new major sponsor spokesperson has a say in things seeing that they are paying us to sponsor their business and they would want us being successful leagues club.

The problem is that for so many years we keep saying that there is always next year and its repeated over and over for years. Well I'm going to say there is not next year, blow the Dragons and see what happens.

 

[possm]

Until these empty headed dumb f--ks are gone nothing at this club will change.

It makes little difference which players we have or the coach is. It's always a case of same old sh-t different day at our club for the last 12 years.

A lot of criticism has been directed at Ben Hunt and his huge pay cheque well who's to blame for that? He hasn't been the only one either remember Corey Norman? Was on almost 7 figures a year even though he never played rep football and only featured in 1 semi final game that was his resume and we give him close to a million a year. We have to overpay just to have people play here which translates to their hearts not in it.

We have accepted mediocrity not just on the field but also off it. We have played finals footy twice TWICE since 2012 we've been lapped by record scores on several occasions can anyone even remember when we won more than 3 consecutive games? The board continually asks us to hand over our hand earned pay cheques for memberships, yet what benefits are there to being a member? We rarely get emails about what's happening within our club or what our direction is going forward (obviously there isn't one) we don't have those members breakfasts anymore and haven't been told why, the board will happily take our money but yet not reward us for doing so. Hell the day THE DAY after we are beaten by the team coming last that ended any chance of being part of the finals they put out a post (with one game in hand) saying ah well onto next year we can have your money now for next year completely unacceptable.

Until we put a bulldozer through this joint we are going to continue to find ourselves in this position SOMETHING MUST CHANGE!

We need someone like Twiggy to buy all the shares and then appoint professionals to the Board and to management positions within the Club.

 

[RufusRex]

How long after shaking the board up would you think real change in the club would take?

 

[Dragon David]

How long after shaking the board up would you think real change in the club would take?

How long is a piece of string Rufus? Not likely that the Board will be shaken up too soon. They appear to be untouchable and the way that things have been set up they run their own race. It needs a couple of the older heads to fizzle out, and I mean retire, so that more younger, dynamic guys become Board members who have the same desire as we do for more success and for that success to be everlasting.

I think that there are others on this Forum who can add their views as well.

The bottom line is, we need a Board that is seen to be doing something realistically more positive about improving this Club. Ryan Webb has not provided much useful information to fans. Maybe he might have sent stuff to members, I don't know but he needs to put more stuff on the website and provide some answers on several issues that we should be able to question him about.

 

[JohnnoMcJohnno]

West's Tigers blew up their board this year. Didn't help this year's performances. Will it result in long term improvements? Who knows.

 

[Sir Donald Reacharound]

There are many fine discussion opportunities in this thread. What does success look like? What is the best corporate Structure for a club? What is the actual role of a board and it's directors? Where are the weaknesses in our particular model?

I do not wish to spark a debate about the merger. Changing our structure in any way will only add new challenges. To survive, we used what thought at the time to be the best set-up available to us, and to thrive we will have to make the best of what we have. 2010 showed us that it can be done.

What does success look like?

We often see the Roosters Board upheld as a model for success, but can we ever expect a billionaire and long standing number one fan to take control of our club and use it for their own personal plaything with the support of a board full of successful businessmen and media types?

Stick Mark Bouris on our board of directors and does he make a difference?

That Roosters board is dominated by its Chair, and all decisions made are for the benefit and success of the Roosters football club.

What is the best corporate structure for a club?

There are 3 main corporate structures in the NRL today.

1. Member-owned clubs like the Sharks and Penrith.
The football club owns the club, and is the legal entity that holds the NRL licence. Football club is in change of operations, and makes money through broadcast deals and sponsorship. The football entity operates in combination with a leagues club entity, which operates as a non-profit, and generates most of its revenue from membership and hospitality facilities.
The leagues clubs’ revenues are fed directly into financial assistance for the footballing operations. These clubs rely heavily on revenue from their entertainment venues, particularly from poker machines.
This will make clubs with this particular setup particularly vulnerable to any changes in gaming legislation. St George Leagues club's 2023 financial report has annual revenue at $35M, and poker machine duty expensed at $8.5M. If that's how much duty is paid on gaming, it can be assumed that the revenue attributed to gaming is by far the club's highest earner, dwarfing Membership fees, investments, and other entertainment services.

2. Privately owned like the Warriors and Brisbane (a unique model publicly listed). Majority owned by a private entity. For these private clubs, the aim is to maintain financial stability from footballing operations alone, through sponsorship, merchandise, ticket sales and the NRL grant.

3. Hybrid ownership model like Souths, Manly (majority private, leagues clubs minority), and Dragons (50/50)
Equity ownership split between private investors and a sport focused entity.
This more complex ownership model may give rise to a divergence of shareholder interests.

That last sentence may give clues to the weakness in our own model.

The role of the board

From the Australian Institute of Company Directors...

In performing its role, specific responsibilities commonly reserved to the board either in its constitution, its board or governance charter (or by cultural practice) include:
• Providing strategic direction to the organisation and deciding upon the organisation’s strategies and objectives in conjunction with the CEO;
• Monitoring the strategic direction of the organisation and the attainment of its strategies and objectives in conjunction with the executive;
• Monitoring the operational and financial position and performance of the organisation generally;
• Driving organisational performance so as to deliver member value or benefit;
• Assuring a prudential and ethical base to the organisation’s conduct and activities having regard to the relevant interests of its stakeholders;
• Assuring the principal risks faced by the organisation are identified and overseeing that appropriate control and monitoring systems are in place to manage the impact of these risks;

Each line of that description is a discussion point on it's own, and I will call a few out now.

Where are the weaknesses in our particular model?

I go back to the point that a complex ownership model may give rise to a divergence of shareholder interests. Can we honestly say that every Director on the board has the same drive and focus towards organisational goals, or are they obliged to protect the interests of one side of the ownership model, over another. Our Chair Andrew Lancaster is a CEO at WIN. A strong-willed public figure as Independent Chair, who is also a super fan and demands football department success over all other factors, may be just what we need to pull the board of directors into line.

Driving organisation performance through strategic direction and making people accountable is (I believe) another weakness. Making decisions about contracts for key roles in the football department is complex, especially if the only candidates available are a choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich. I'm willing to be lenient on the board in that respect, as many clubs have similar issues. But the choices that have been made to extend the contracts of under-performing football department roles are highly questionable. Either the board is accountable for these errors, or the board should be making the CEO accountable.

And lastly we can't discount that any changes in gambling legislation represent a significant risk for the leagues club's ability to channel money into the football department. Do we have the board in place that can navigate risks like this, and do half the board even care?

Thanks for the interesting thread topic.

 

[getsmarty]

...

 

[Dragon David]

There are many fine discussion opportunities in this thread. What does success look like? What is the best corporate Structure for a club? What is the actual role of a board and it's directors? Where are the weaknesses in our particular model?

I do not wish to spark a debate about the merger. Changing our structure in any way will only add new challenges. To survive, we used what thought at the time to be the best set-up available to us, and to thrive we will have to make the best of what we have. 2010 showed us that it can be done.

What does success look like?

We often see the Roosters Board upheld as a model for success, but can we ever expect a billionaire and long standing number one fan to take control of our club and use it for their own personal plaything with the support of a board full of successful businessmen and media types?

Stick Mark Bouris on our board of directors and does he make a difference?

That Roosters board is dominated by its Chair, and all decisions made are for the benefit and success of the Roosters football club.

What is the best corporate structure for a club?

There are 3 main corporate structures in the NRL today.

1. Member-owned clubs like the Sharks and Penrith.
The football club owns the club, and is the legal entity that holds the NRL licence. Football club is in change of operations, and makes money through broadcast deals and sponsorship. The football entity operates in combination with a leagues club entity, which operates as a non-profit, and generates most of its revenue from membership and hospitality facilities.
The leagues clubs’ revenues are fed directly into financial assistance for the footballing operations. These clubs rely heavily on revenue from their entertainment venues, particularly from poker machines.
This will make clubs with this particular setup particularly vulnerable to any changes in gaming legislation. St George Leagues club's 2023 financial report has annual revenue at $35M, and poker machine duty expensed at $8.5M. If that's how much duty is paid on gaming, it can be assumed that the revenue attributed to gaming is by far the club's highest earner, dwarfing Membership fees, investments, and other entertainment services.

2. Privately owned like the Warriors and Brisbane (a unique model publicly listed). Majority owned by a private entity. For these private clubs, the aim is to maintain financial stability from footballing operations alone, through sponsorship, merchandise, ticket sales and the NRL grant.

3. Hybrid ownership model like Souths, Manly (majority private, leagues clubs minority), and Dragons (50/50)
Equity ownership split between private investors and a sport focused entity.
This more complex ownership model may give rise to a divergence of shareholder interests.

That last sentence may give clues to the weakness in our own model.

The role of the board

From the Australian Institute of Company Directors...

In performing its role, specific responsibilities commonly reserved to the board either in its constitution, its board or governance charter (or by cultural practice) include:
• Providing strategic direction to the organisation and deciding upon the organisation’s strategies and objectives in conjunction with the CEO;
• Monitoring the strategic direction of the organisation and the attainment of its strategies and objectives in conjunction with the executive;
• Monitoring the operational and financial position and performance of the organisation generally;
• Driving organisational performance so as to deliver member value or benefit;
• Assuring a prudential and ethical base to the organisation’s conduct and activities having regard to the relevant interests of its stakeholders;
• Assuring the principal risks faced by the organisation are identified and overseeing that appropriate control and monitoring systems are in place to manage the impact of these risks;

Each line of that description is a discussion point on it's own, and I will call a few out now.

Where are the weaknesses in our particular model?

I go back to the point that a complex ownership model may give rise to a divergence of shareholder interests. Can we honestly say that every Director on the board has the same drive and focus towards organisational goals, or are they obliged to protect the interests of one side of the ownership model, over another. Our Chair Andrew Lancaster is a CEO at WIN. A strong-willed public figure as Independent Chair, who is also a super fan and demands football department success over all other factors, may be just what we need to pull the board of directors into line.

Driving organisation performance through strategic direction and making people accountable is (I believe) another weakness. Making decisions about contracts for key roles in the football department is complex, especially if the only candidates available are a choice between a giant douche and a turd sandwich. I'm willing to be lenient on the board in that respect, as many clubs have similar issues. But the choices that have been made to extend the contracts of under-performing football department roles are highly questionable. Either the board is accountable for these errors, or the board should be making the CEO accountable.

And lastly we can't discount that any changes in gambling legislation represent a significant risk for the leagues club's ability to channel money into the football department. Do we have the board in place that can navigate risks like this, and do half the board even care?

Thanks for the interesting thread topic.

A really great submission by you for this Forum Sir Don, thank you. Explains so much and shows that running Clubs can be very difficult indeed especially as you say that a complex ownership model, like ours could give rise to a divergence of shareholder interests.

Do you think that our CEO, Ryan Webb has been doing a good job or not. What should he be accountable for?

 

[RedVDave]

West's Tigers blew up their board this year. Didn't help this year's performances. Will it result in long term improvements? Who knows.

I know they finished last this season but they have plenty of upside for mine they have signed some great talent for next year (something we clearly can't muster) they are a young team with an inexperienced coach will Benji Marshall be a great coach? Maybe not but only time will they showed glimpses of being a really dangerous side this year. Not all coaches can be an instant success. But they've definitely taken some steps in the right direction for success I mean look at Newcastle a few years ago to where they are at now.