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!

Tinkler proposal back on (take 3)

Alex28

Coach
Messages
11,929
Slotmachine - you might like to check out page 5 of today's Herald. Makes pretty clear where Mac stands on the vote...
 

cram

Bench
Messages
3,396
Looks as if Jim Thornton has sofetned his stance a little, whilst not endorsing it he is not ruling it out either.
 
Messages
16,034
Try reading some of his comments and you will then comprehend yourself that he has met with Tinkler and is in favour of his offer.

How is:



a shot at Burro at all? It doesn't mention him at all. It is a shot at Mac for having an opinion which differs from the norm however was at least educated on what he was in favour of, yet has the balls to change his opinion and come out and say so.

Maybe you should become more educated on what you are talking about rather than shooting your mouth off.

Macavity does have a history of Burro love Alex, I dont see the issue.
 

cram

Bench
Messages
3,396
Does anyone else think the Knights' current good form may swing votes against Tinkler?

Mate, I have no idea how this will go. It is very difficult to get a feel for it. With the voting membership being relatively small in numbers you really don't know which way it will go.
 
Messages
16,034
On another note good to see us not in the telegraph every day except talking up our form :) I am sure most people were like me and sick to death of hearing about it.
 

Serc

First Grade
Messages
6,902
Private word: Knights supporters group meet with Tinkler reps
BY ROBERT DILLON
22 Mar, 2011 04:00 AM

VOCAL Knights member Jim Thornton said he felt appeased after a meeting with the Tinkler Sports Group yesterday but would reserve judgment on whether to vote for or against privatisation.
Thornton was responsible for a series of full-page advertisements in the Newcastle Herald last week advising Knights members to consider the so-called Patron’s Trust and status quo as an alternative to a Nathan Tinkler takeover at a historic privatisation ballot on March 31.
Thornton is the secretary of the Newcastle Knights Supporters Club, an organisation he estimates once contained 600 members but is now down to about 10.
He and supporters club colleagues Marilyn Edwards, David Turrell and Bill Gray were invited to meet yesterday with TSG executive chairman Ken Edwards and chief executive Troy Palmer.
Knights skipper Kurt Gidley and former players Steve Simpson and Bill Peden also attended.
Thornton said Edwards and Palmer had ‘‘presented themselves very, very well’’ and allayed at least some of his concerns.
‘‘I wouldn’t say I’m in favour but they’ve convinced me on quite a few things that troubled me, put it that way,’’ Thornton said.
Thornton said he felt it was important that somebody provided some ‘‘opposition’’ to Tinkler’s privatisation bid.
‘‘You can’t let people just walk in and take over,’’ he said. ‘‘There’s pros and cons for both sides . . . but on paper it looks very attractive.
‘‘Once they put it on paper you can only hope, if they’re successful of course, they go through with everything they say.’’
Asked whether he would vote for or against Tinkler, Thornton was non-committal.
‘‘Like us all, I’ve got until the 31st to think which way I’m going to go,’’ he said. ‘‘We don’t know what’s going to come out in the next eight or nine days.’’
He did not expect the supporters club would run any more advertisements, which he said last week had been partially funded by the Patron’s Trust – a claim denied by Patron’s Trust figurehead Andrew Poole.
‘‘As far as we’re concerned, they’re done,’’ Thornton said.
The TSG has already met with the Once a Knights Old Boys group and Knights Nannas and plans to address the Carlson Club and Excalibur Club this week, before a members information night on March 28.
‘‘It went well,’’ Edwards said of yesterday’s meeting. ‘‘We had a chance to listen to each of the issues they wanted to discuss and give them a good, honest view of what our proposal is really about, rather than what they had been it was about.
‘‘We think they received that information in a really positive manner.’’
Edwards said if Tinkler was to gain control of the Knights, the club would retain an advisory board of at least five people, all of whom, potentially, could be members.
He urged all members to make their vote count on March 31.
‘‘It’s very important that members don’t just assume it’s a fait accompli because it’s such a good deal,’’ he said.
‘‘Our message to members is to make sure you vote, either by being at the meeting on March 31 or by proxy.
‘‘Be part of the vote and be a part of history.’’
Tinkler will need a 75 majority at the ballot to assume ownership of the club.
http://www.theherald.com.au/news/lo...ers-group-meet-with-tinkler-reps/2109564.aspx
 

aqua_duck

Coach
Messages
18,509
In my opinion all those opposed to the bid are either misinformed about the offer or have their own interests at heart. I think alot of it comes back to fear, people are fearful Tinkler will uproot the team and change everything, but its written in the agreement that this won't happen. I cannot understand why people are so scared of change, I mean:

a.People forget Tinkler is just as big a knights fan as the rest of us, this is not a man who's just come out of the woodwork, this is a bloke who's loaned the club alot of money and has been a sponsor
b.The guy is the richest man under 40 in this country, and has shown he's not a Con Constantine style tightarse
c.On the field the possibilities are endless, imagine this team but with upgraded training equipment, access to fulltime sports psychologists, nutritionists, the best supplements and extra funds outside the cap from 3rd party deals
d.We finally rid ourselves of the supposed bad reputation that seems to lurk in player's minds about the place. We can pretend it doesn't exist, but there is clearly a negative connotation associated with us, guys like Leesan Ah Mau, Willie Mason, Jeremy Smith have just recently rejected us to sign with the cowboys and cronulla respectively. I think its very similar to Souths before the Crowe takeover. Players know who Tinkler is, they know what he's worth, just the associattion with Tinkler will turn the knights into a perceived glamour club. Even if we take the charity on offer the patrons trust model, we'll still have the same reputation and a chook raffle club
 
Messages
2,729
In my opinion all those opposed to the bid are either misinformed about the offer or have their own interests at heart. I think alot of it comes back to fear, people are fearful Tinkler will uproot the team and change everything, but its written in the agreement that this won't happen. I cannot understand why people are so scared of change

It's only protected for 10 years, Duckie. After that, the supporters club is wound up and the constitution is disolved as TSG will own it all. The only obstruction for moving us at that point would be the NRL lobbying against it, and they'll go wherever the grass is greener anyway.

That's why it'd be pointless to be a member after this year. If he wants to do something, there's very little point in stopping it after 1, 3, 8 years when it can just be done after 11 years anyway.

Not saying he would do it, but it'd go a long way to appeasing everyone if he made the constitution perpetual so members can protect it. So why won't he?
 

perverse

Referee
Messages
26,502
It's only protected for 10 years, Duckie. After that, the supporters club is wound up and the constitution is disolved as TSG will own it all. The only obstruction for moving us at that point would be the NRL lobbying against it, and they'll go wherever the grass is greener anyway.

That's why it'd be pointless to be a member after this year. If he wants to do something, there's very little point in stopping it after 1, 3, 8 years when it can just be done after 11 years anyway.

Not saying he would do it, but it'd go a long way to appeasing everyone if he made the constitution perpetual so members can protect it. So why won't he?
incorrect. The Members Club persists after 10 years. condition of any sale is that the Members Club, and the heritage share in the Knights Newco (which is the new organisation that will be set up to manage the football club, the new legal entity if you will) which is controlled by the Members Club remain in place. neither the Members Club, nor the Heritage Share in Knights Newco disappear after 10 years.

The Members Club controls the right to move the team, to change the colours, etc. these safeguards persist, always, unless the Members Club itself decides to dissolve it i assume.

it is this sort of misinformation and scaremongering that may well sink the deal.
 
Messages
2,862
It's only protected for 10 years, Duckie. After that, the supporters club is wound up and the constitution is disolved as TSG will own it all.


That was my original understanding from the meeting a few weeks ago, but I thought I read somewhere that he said AFTER that meeting that all would remain even after the ten yrs.
 

Latest posts

Top