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!

The Tinkler thread

Coastbloke

Bench
Messages
4,236
..And again we have the gang of Four having a go for the sake of having a go...

If you dopes think Tew and Burro are doing the right thing this time you have rocks in your head..

Not that I needed convincing..
 

cram

Bench
Messages
3,396
Ok so am I part of the gang of four because I think you are way off base on this one....
 

Alex28

Coach
Messages
12,226
Am I in the gang of four?

Just because you are too lazy to research what you are talking about does not mean you are being ganged up on. It means you are lazy and you aren't prepared to put any work or to justify your word.

That is why you have no respect around here. You sprout your mouth off but have no substance to back any of it up.

Companies don't take over other companies in a matter of weeks. It takes months to properly complete due diligence. Tinkler knows that. I do wonder why he wants to rush it through knowing that the board can not possibly complete proper due diligence...

Either way the Tinkler option is the way to go. I am more than happy (given the Board of Directors could quite easily be sued if they get it wrong) for them to take as much time as it takes.
 

Serc

First Grade
Messages
6,902
90% are of the opinion that Tew and Burro are not embracing this offer as enthusiastically as they should..

Sounds like one of those awesome dodgy stats that pollies use...everyone knows that 73% of stats are made up!

There's been enough time to nut down the finer points of the offer FFS, so why are they still dragging their feet..

All I can hear is "the papers told me that Tinkler is god and the Knights admin are satan reincarnated, so there is no excuse not to complete the takeover quick smart because the paper told me its like Macca's drive-thru!"

Don't have any business experience at all do you Coastbloke...

But...but...he has a Masters in reading the Herald!!!

Just because you are too lazy to research what you are talking about does not mean you are being ganged up on. It means you are lazy and you aren't prepared to put any work or to justify your word.

Always easy to regurgitate what the Herald spoon-feeds you!

Anyway back onto the more serious stuff:

Are you serious....McKay is in favour so lets just do it????

McKay is part of a horrible cancer known as NSW Labor,,, the fact she is in favour would good enough reason to run.

This is one of the reasons why I first posted "I think I smell a bit of a rat here" when both Tinkler and Hunter Venues plonked some bills on the front desk the day after Tinkler submitted his 2nd proposal. I still am in favour of it all...but as each week goes by and other things happen, I have to say my confidence is decreasing on what other deals may have gone on behind the scenes. Hopefully we don't get some undesirable people and undesirable outcomes happening further on down the track.

Companies don't take over other companies in a matter of weeks. It takes months to properly complete due diligence. Tinkler knows that. I do wonder why he wants to rush it through knowing that the board can not possibly complete proper due diligence...

This also makes me 'smell a rat'...Tinkler and Edwards and all of them would know that...makes you wonder even more if something fishy is going on!

I remember some contract work I did a few years ago for a company that had just been taken over by another...I was just a pleb filling the breach on the old companies computer system before it was shut down completely, but I did know that it took a good 6-8 months for them to sort everything out and completely absorb everything into the mob taking over! (and this would've been for a company that was at least as big as the Knights I'd imagine)
 

Bicey_18

Bench
Messages
3,021
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...-in-rugby-league/story-e6frexnr-1226008678204

Why Nathan Tinkler is the most feared man in rugby league


NATHAN Tinkler is the most feared man in rugby league. Forget Russell Crowe, David Gallop and even supercoach Wayne Bennett, the new force in the NRL is Tinkler. He can change the rules of engagement with one phone call.
He has become the code's modern-day Kerry Packer - and money talks.
Kade Snowden has had a first-hand taste of Tinkler's persuasive powers.
His Sharks team-mates will tell you his phone call from Tinkler came around midnight last Wednesday.
There wasn't so much an offer from one of the richest men in Australia, but a request.
"Just hold off signing until we speak," Tinkler is believed to have told Snowden.
Money wasn't even spoken about. Yet here we are a few days later with Snowden holed up with his parents in Newcastle pondering his next step.



That's power. And because of it, Tinkler has every NRL chief executive looking over their shoulder. And the burning question is: who is next on the mining magnate's shopping list?
Is it Jamal Idris, Michael Ennis, Darius Boyd?



How do you stop a bloke used to getting his own way? How do you stop a multimillionaire who plays by his own rules?
At 34, Tinkler is the richest man in Australia under 40 with $610 million.
He owns the Newcastle Jets A-League team, the Patinack racing empire, a share in Dick Johnson racing, beachside mansions and a garage full of cars.
Within a month, he could own the Newcastle Knights.
And he plays hard ball. Tinkler has threatened to pull his $100 million offer to buy the Knights because of delays in the process. These bully tactics are nothing new. His aggression at the negotiating table has proven a popular talking point in recent days.
"He's young, loaded and knows exactly what he wants - it can lead to a certain amount of ignorance," one leading player manager said.
It's been said that Tinkler was overseas when he first learned that Snowden, a Knights junior, had accepted a deal to stay at the Sharks.
The White Whale erupted. "If we can't get a former Newcastle junior back to Newcastle, then what hope have we got?" he supposedly roared.
Gallop wasn't willing to comment on Tinkler, but he rejected suggestions the NRL was powerless to stop people like Tinkler from tearing apart the game's pillars such as the salary cap.
"At the end of the day there's still a salary cap for clubs to work under," Gallop said. But One leading club CEO isn't so sure.
"I think the NRL really needs to make a clear decision on where the game is going with private investors like Tinkler," he told The Sunday Telegraph last week on the condition of anonymity.
Yesterday, the Knights released a statement from chief executive Steve Burraston reiterating their position on the Snowden saga.
They withdrew their offer to Snowden on February 9 and any offer after that date was made by a third party unknown to the club.
Burraston also said the pursuit of Snowden would "cause significant cap issues for the club". Time will tell if that means anything to Tinkler.

All of a sudden we could become the Silvertails of the NRL..... How many years have we struggled and struggled to attract any high profile players and coaches to our club??? Its our turn now
 
Last edited:

Coastbloke

Bench
Messages
4,236
Yeh but Bicey, read the posts..

The Gang of Four says Tew and Burro have the right to keep us as the Hunter Fibros..

Tinkler might be up to no good, don't you know..
 
Messages
4,482
Yeh but Bicey, read the posts..

The Gang of Four says Tew and Burro have the right to keep us as the Hunter Fibros..

Tinkler might be up to no good, don't you know..

Now I'm pretty sure that I'm not a part of the Gang of Four (unless you are as bad at counting as you appear to be at every other basic human skill), but I must say that NO-ONE on this forum said this, or anything even like this.

What many people have said is that Burraston, Tew et al have every right to take as much time as is needed to perform their job with due diligence. If you don't understand this, you are a moron.

If you wish to have a better understanding of exactly what the board are doing during this time, read this release from Rob Tew http://www.newcastleknights.com.au/?s=article-display&id=33666

Of course, if you don't wish to understand the matters at hind, feel free to keep p!ssing and moaning like a spoilt primary schooler.
 
Messages
2,729
And then reality of Tinkler's "offer" hits home...


http://www.newcastleknights.com.au/?s=article-display&id=33666

Knights confident of securing good deal for members

newcastleknights.com



20/02/2011 5:22:55 PM



The Newcastle Knights Board today said it was confident it could successfully negotiate the outstanding issues related to the proposed privatisation of the Knights when negotiations resume on Monday.
Knights Chairman Rob Tew said there were a number of key issues which need to be resolved for a deal to be finalised and he was optimistic an agreed proposal could be negotiated.

The Knights board received detailed legal documents in draft form on Wednesday and today issued comments on the documents to the Tinkler Group in advance of a meeting on Monday.

There are a number of key commercial elements which we still need to be satisfied on, all of which were clearly enshrined in the proposal received and considered by the board on the 19 January and which we were prepared to endorse in-principle at that time.


1. $10m guaranteed sponsorship per annum over 10 years

The first and overriding issue the Board has in relation to the current offer on the table is that it represents a significant departure from the $100 million dollar proposal guaranteed to be paid over ten years that was announced by The Tinkler Group last month.


Currently, the offer consists of a commitment to underwrite the difference between $10 million annually and income generated via sponsorship and sponsorship hospitality each year.


The offer also includes a one-off up-front payment of $3 million (the accumulated debts).


The present offer does not commit to a 10 year period.


The offer of guarantee at present is for a period of 2 years and does not commence until 31 March 2012.


In order to progress this proposal a number of matters need to be agreed between the parties including


• The definition of the sponsorship sum.
• The commitment to 10 years.
• An ability for our members to enforce the guarantee


At present the Tinkler Groups offer to underwrite the difference between sponsorship and $10mil each year has included calculating all revenues (excluding ticketing and membership) into the definition of Sponsorship income. On that basis the total is already as high as $10mil and therefore the contribution by the Tinkler Group would be zero.


At present – in the event of a sale of the company within the 10 years – there is no obligation upon a future purchaser to commit to the guarantee and other conditions for the remainder of the 10 year period.


At present there is no ability for our members to enforce the guarantee on the guarantor. That is as a consequence of the company structure as is proposed by the Tinkler Group.


2. Ability to fairly buy back the club if something goes wrong

Separately, The Tinkler Group can sell the Knights to another party – including another Tinkler entity – and the only ability the Members have to stop this and buy the Club back is to pay the combined cost of $3 million (the accumulated debts) plus the unknown combination of the total of all Tinkler Group contributions per annum.


We are seeking to:


• Identify a stated buyback sum at the outset of the agreement or
• Include an ability to enforce the obligations of the guarantee and other conditions upon an incoming purchaser for the remainder of the 10 years.


3. Junior Development

The Newcastle Knights have accepted responsibility for junior development in Rugby League in our Region for some 23 years. It is written into our constitution as such and we have excelled in this area over that time.
In the current offer, the Tinkler Group have removed the commitment to Junior Development from the documentation.


We understand the financial commitment to development is substantial however, we require an iron clad commitment guaranteeing a minimum expenditure on development in the region to ensure we do not lose the benefit of the excellent work undertaken by generations of Knights operatives thus far.


Clearly these outstanding items would be as much of a concern to Members as they are to the Board, it is imperative they be resolved as quickly as possible.


We are optimistic that we can reach an agreement on the above items as they were all within the scope of the original offer proposed by the Tinkler Group in January.


Rob Tew
Chairman

It's good that we're 'confident' of a deal, but the reality is Tinks is obviously not offering as much as he's willing to tell everyone about.
 

perverse

Referee
Messages
27,291
Hi, Coastbloke. How are you today, friend?

thanks for the link, TJS... and the c&p DMC. really glad the club has finally released some info on the deal. so, what can we take from this new info?

in effect, Tinkler stands to spend the same amount of money as in his first offer if he maintains the club at the current status quo. that is, $10mill. it disturbs me that he is spouting a 10 year commitment and offering a 2 year commitment on paper - and the Knights are rightly pursuing the full 10 years he's claiming in the media.

there seems to be conjecture about which income streams are to be included in the underwritten $10mill, as per the clubs request to properly define the sponsorship sum. this absolutely needs to be sorted out, and the Knights should be scraping for every penny in this part of the negotiation. i don't know how much bargaining power we really have in this, probably not a great deal.

and the third issue the Knights raise - an ability for the members to enforce the guarentee, is important, too. if Tinkler sells us a few years down the track, we want to make sure we still get what we voted for. there needs to be something in place to ensure that the members can hold any owner to the guarentee.

the Knights are saying they are confident they can reach resolution on these issues. the greatest service Burro ever does to the Knights may well be using his business acumen to get this deal right. i'm just sort of worried that he's being rushed out of that opportunity.
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,729
I'm not sure what the funniest thing of the offer is. The offer for control for 2 years is obviously the biggest joke, but holding a gun to everyone's head and saying "do it by Monday!!!" when he takes over more than 13 months away just makes him look like a fool.

Still, there'll be people saying we have to rush it through now. The message is out there. Doesn't matter if it was the truth or not.
 

roopy

Referee
Messages
27,980
A few new things in that - but basically anyone who can read and think always knew that the "100 Million dollars" of Herald headline fame was always a figure that he would never have to pay unless the world's economy were to collapse and all our sponsers went broke simultaneously.
Tinkler has always been planing to be out of pocket by as little as possible, which could mean nothing if he gets the business pumping.
As Knights fans, it really makes no difference how much Tinkler has to dip into his own pocket. It just matters that he is planing to spend up to 3 million a year more than we are now - where he gets the 3 million is his business.

Those things about the exit strategy are a bit more of a worry. If he wants to walk away, we shouldn't have to reinburse him for any poor decisions he might make from now on. He should walk away and take whatever loss he makes on the chin if he mucks it up.
 

perverse

Referee
Messages
27,291
exactly roopy, it's not about the dollar figure so much, i agree. i am happy enough that the financial strength of our club is secured for 10 years. if the club can fix up the grievances surrounding the guarantee and the period of commitment, then the deal still looks solid to me. the junior development commitment is also important, but Tinkler would be shooting himself in the foot if he didn't invest significantly into grass roots stuff in the area, so i don't think it should be too hard to get a commitment to that written in. at least, i wouldn't think so.
 

roopy

Referee
Messages
27,980
and the only ability the Members have to stop this and buy the Club back is to pay the combined cost of $3 million (the accumulated debts) plus the unknown combination of the total of all Tinkler Group contributions per annum.

In effect, that means Tinkler can come in and make a decision that costs a fortune, like tring to set up another licensed club or costing us a multi million fine for salary cap breaches or whatever - and we have to pay for that if we want the club back.
 

Spot On

Coach
Messages
13,910
I'm most disappointed with the omission of the commitment to junior development. For mine, this was the most attractive "promise" of the bid (with a view to the long term). The short term impacts are already playing out ie Snowden. The big man has clout, he is impatient and he will want instant success. That does worry me a little as he can't sack NRL coaches and players as often as he has booted his horse trainers. I was hoping he was going to fund a world class junior development system capable of producing top line players who will be ready to step into grade when needed with us having first pick of them. I thought this may have been the vision he would try to sell to Bennett. And who better to have around for the first three years of its planning and implementation. We must have a guarantee from the Tinkler Group that junior development will be nurtured. It's a must if clubs have to abide by a salary cap.
 

macavity

Referee
Messages
21,025
I won't lie to you guys. I do not know who to believe in this one but Tinkler is either trying to treat us all like idiots or Tew and Burro are shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.

How on earth do you think Tew would get away with bare faced lying about what documents say?
 
Top