Tinkler makes his final offer

[Alex28]

So Rusty and B-Dos...still want to give away the clus for a Mill a year?

;-)

 

[Rusty]

Haha...

wouldn't have mattered whether he gave 10 million or 100 million fellas he would have done a whole lot better than what the clubs doing now. I assure you...our club is incapable of running website for ffs. Thanks to Tinkler we will now be able to draw big names to the club ala Russell Crowe. Thanks for bumping guys. I'm elated that our club will no longer be run like a lemonade stand by a bunch of clowns with no business sense whatsoever

 

[Alex28]

But you would agree that Tew and Burraston have done better by holding out for a minimum of $10 Million in sponsorship per year rather than the $1 Million per year (no matter if we actually lost more sponsorship than that) he initially promised?

Sometimes we just need to have a little faith in who's making the decisions at the club...

 

[Rusty]

I want the club to be privatised...that is all. All the things that people are stating in other threads such as wanting a high profile coach/players, will now be possible with Tinkler on board. I have stated previously in this thread that it would happen if Tinkler took ownership. At the time of this thread, it felt the club dismissed the proposal to soon. I was concerned that Tinkler would not offer another proposal. In the end yes they held our for a better offer but I have no doubt that even without the higher offer, Tinkler would have taken us to the top.

 

[Yosh]

So when will the results be out?

 

[cram]

Whoa back Yosh, board has to endorse it and then call a meeting of members for a vote...so you may get the boards endorsement or otherwise by weeks end and then another week for the meeting.

 

[perverse]

well, i was reading in another thread that Tinkler wants the boards answer by Friday. that sounds pretty unreasonable to me... but tbh if the board is meeting wednesday then you would anticipate that is enough time to make a decision - although maybe not long enough for a legal team to go over it. honestly, i'm not really sure on that one. if the board approves it, it then can be put to a vote by the members, in which 75% of the vote must be affirmative to the sale.

once that is done, it's done bar the red tape (which is extensive i'm sure). honestly, i've never sold a football club before. i don't really know how long this could take. if things get drawn out it'll probably struggle to be done before the season starts. on the other hand good things take time, great things happen in the blink of an eye.

 

[macavity]

well, i was reading in another thread that Tinkler wants the boards answer by Friday. that sounds pretty unreasonable to me... but tbh if the board is meeting wednesday then you would anticipate that is enough time to make a decision - although maybe not long enough for a legal team to go over it. honestly, i'm not really sure on that one. if the board approves it, it then can be put to a vote by the members, in which 75% of the vote must be affirmative to the sale.

once that is done, it's done bar the red tape (which is extensive i'm sure). honestly, i've never sold a football club before. i don't really know how long this could take. if things get drawn out it'll probably struggle to be done before the season starts. on the other hand good things take time, great things happen in the blink of an eye.

It will be preschool stuff if they put a one page proposal to the members.

An undertaking to put together governance documents for presentation to the members might be possible by Friday.

But putting something so vague to members is a recipie for disaster.

 

[Alex28]

I want the club to be privatised...that is all. All the things that people are stating in other threads such as wanting a high profile coach/players, will now be possible with Tinkler on board. I have stated previously in this thread that it would happen if Tinkler took ownership. At the time of this thread, it felt the club dismissed the proposal to soon. I was concerned that Tinkler would not offer another proposal. In the end yes they held our for a better offer but I have no doubt that even without the higher offer, Tinkler would have taken us to the top.

You just can't bring yourself to say "Yep...the board did the right thing by rejecting the original offer" can you.

You just want the club to be privatised so badly you were prepared to accept their first offer. Glad you aren't running the show!

The first offer was so bad that we could have possibly been better off staying as we were. Obviously Nathan agrees.

 

[Rusty]

You just can't bring yourself to say "Yep...the board did the right thing by rejecting the original offer" can you.

You just want the club to be privatised so badly you were prepared to accept their first offer. Glad you aren't running the show!

The first offer was so bad that we could have possibly been better off staying as we were. Obviously Nathan agrees.

It was never about what he was offering...??? My posts were in reference to whether the club would actually ever agree to privatise and the benefits. You're the one raving on about how money isn't the solution to all our problems yet he throws 100 million at us and it is, like money isn't an issue for us. We have a thread currently discussing what we can achieve with the money. I want the club to be privatised, yes, providing our financial future can be secure. I can't see how our club in future could ever be successful without privatisation for reasons already stated.

Oh and...

The board has made the right decision by not accepting the first offer, lets hope they make the right decision by accepting his latest offer. There you go Alex. Mind you if past and present management committee's had known how to make the right decisions, we wouldn't need to privatise now would we?

 

[roopy]

From where Tinkler stands, it would look like the new deal is not going to cost a cent more than the original deal.
He thinks he can run the club at the higher profit level he is factoring in, and if he does, it costs him nothing more after he pays off the debt.
If he makes a complete dogs breakfast of running the club it could cost him a cool 100 mill, but he will be thinking that isn't going to happen, and if he can generate the income he is forecasting, good luck to him if it costs him not a zac.

 

[Alex28]

Come on Rusty...the business model has never been one where any board or management could make millions from it and have a sure future about it. The board has also never had to make a decision on an offer of being underwritten to the tune of $100 Million before either.

The board and management have done well with the situation they have had to deal with. If you want to blame anybody - blame the people who started the club with the awful business model. Mind you if they didn't start it that way there may never have been a Newcastle Knights...

 

[Alex28]

From where Tinkler stands, it would look like the new deal is not going to cost a cent more than the original deal.
He thinks he can run the club at the higher profit level he is factoring in, and if he does, it costs him nothing more after he pays off the debt.
If he makes a complete dogs breakfast of running the club it could cost him a cool 100 mill, but he will be thinking that isn't going to happen, and if he can generate the income he is forecasting, good luck to him if it costs him not a zac.

He's going to struggle to generate $10 Million in sponsorship a year. Not many clubs in League or AFL are getting that sort of sponsorship (maybe Brisbane and Collingwood), we will not get the $1 Million from Coal & Allied.

The last set of financials has sponsorship at $6.5 Million. If Coal & Allied walk that means he needs to come up with $4.5 Million to not have to put any cash in himself - plus more if he wants to get third party payments for the players outside of the cap.

Plus the $10 Million is tied to CPI - so that is likely to be $12 Million + by the end of the 10 years...

Has he even got any new sponsorship for the Jets? He gave HMRI the shirt frontage for the year. I mean the current sponsors don't even get any credit on the website at all!

And if you think the basics such as the website will get better under Tinkler, go check out the Jets website. Under sponsorship there is nothing but an opportunity to be a corporate partner in the Jets match against the Galaxy...

He's going to have to pay a fair bit out of his pocket - which isn't a criticism at all. Good on him for committing to a funding program that will guarantee the ability to become a powerhouse in the comp.

 

[Belly07]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...-his-final-offer/story-e6frexnr-1225965680196

Interesting...maybe Tinkler did want to start hurrying things up a month ago when he first went to the media with this new angle...and is he actually back in the country now to take part in the negotiations this time? (if anyone knows)

Personally, I'd love to see the Knights take the offer from Tinkler. Since taking over the Jets, he has put money and resources into the club and done the one thing that Constantine didnt....stayed out of the way.

This deal for the Knights guarantees that for the next 10 years, the current sponsorship income will be met...either by new and current sponsors, or by Tinkler himself....this is a win / win situation for the club....a guaranteed revenue!!!

I'd hate to see the club turn their back on this deal just because we have a few self centered board members looking after their own position at the club

 

[Whats Doing]

It will be interesting to see whether self preservation by the board will be in action tonight.

Success on the footy field breeds success off the footy field with increased income resulting. Here is a chance that will allow the knights to be a powerhouse and attract the right players and be a perennial semi finalist being competitive each year for the title.

The opportunity for the knights to be a leader in the NRL and have a successful business model and not operating on the smell of an oily can as they have been for 22 years is there for the taking.

Lets hope the board puts the future of the knights first and not themselves.

 

[cram]

Good morning people, well I have awoken this morning to the smell and tast of dirty politics in this proposal.

The Herald has an article suggesting that yesterday the Knights received bills for 1.2million. These came from the Hunter Venues and also The Tinkler Group. Tinkler is asking for his 500k loan to be repayed and there is a bill for compensation for moving the game to Port.

The usual suspect, Jodie McKay is quoted.

Someone might like to post the articles, I am on my iPhone so it's a bit hard for me to do.

This development and the motivation behind it makes me feel sick and I actually believe that Tinkler may have just done his chances more harm then good because the 'older' members will not like this blatant manipulation to try and force the boards hand.

http://www.theherald.com.au/news/lo...tra-12m-debt-in-just-a-few-hours/2050861.aspx

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

I honestly dont see why this is even a question of accepting, for the supporters its just a matter of cutting a lot of deadwood from our admin and getting 30-40% increase in revenue!

 

[Spot On]

Good morning people, well I have awoken this morning to the smell and tast of dirty politics in this proposal.

The Herald has an article suggesting that yesterday the Knights received bills for 1.2million. These came from the Hunter Venues and also The Tinkler Group. Tinkler is asking for his 500k loan to be repayed and there is a bill for compensation for moving the game to Port.

The usual suspect, Jodie McKay is quoted.

Someone might like to post the articles, I am on my iPhone so it's a bit hard for me to do.

This development and the motivation behind it makes me feel sick and I actually believe that Tinkler may have just done his chances more harm then good because the 'older' members will not like this blatant manipulation to try and force the boards hand.

So, are we to assume that the clubs debt is now $4 million instead of nearly $3 mill?

 

[Alex28]

The timing stinks, and appears indicative of how we are going to do business in the future...

 

[cram]

So, are we to assume that the clubs debt is now $4 million instead of nearly $3 mill?

Yes, the article states the Hunter venues bills are not unexpected, however there are also bills for returning the stadium, losses that the Jets incurred as a result of returfing and Tinkler calling in his loan.