Tinkler pulls plug

[bomberman]

Tinkler would be spending more on a happy meal at Maccas than he would on the Knights.

Are the Knights worth more than a happy meal?

hmmm.. knights or a happy meal.. Thats a tough one.. might have to see what toy i would get with the happy meal before i decide.. :lol:

 

[perverse]

also, according to a forum member who was there last night, the motion & document being signed was actually just requesting members be able to see for themselves the Tinkler offer, not an actual vote of no-confidence like the wowsers in the paper reported.

this is absolutely, 100% what happened. i think i am said forum member, and i will reiterate in this thread that the impromptu meeting at the Mark Hotel in Lambton, and petition that was signed, was a request for information on the proposals. it was worded pretty vaguely, but in spirit it was a plea for the members to be brought into the loop on this so we can make an educated decision. there were a lot of people that were anti-board there, no doubt. it was disgusting and ignorant. there were also some sharp brains that could read between the lines and had a fairly good grip on what was going on. i was there primarily to observe and to talk to a few punters and see if i could change their minds. lets just say it was much easier to bring people to a common sense approach to this in person than it has been to convicne the muppets online that Tinkler isn't all rainbows and puppies at this stage.

no, an uprising or coup did not begin at the Mark Hotel, and any paper reporting as such or neglecting to mention this fact is reporting manipulative, untrue information. everything will depend on how satisfactory the Knights answer is next Monday.

 

[DJShaksta]

a gurantee of 10 mil is good.

Not when they are already making $12 Million.

 

[cleary89]

a gurantee of 10 mil is good.

Maybe for a team in the NSL or what ever the netball comp is, in the NRL doesn't mean much (unless for the sharks).

 

[PJ]

[QUOTEIn todays paper it said the memberships and gate takings were not included in the 10mil that the Knights generate,so it is basically sposorship only,so that would mean Tinkler would be putting in more than people are saying.
read the last answer given in the interview][/QUOTE]

OK so it is he said she said at the moment.

One side says that gate isn't there and never has been, the other that it is included in the latest offer. Hopefully the members can get a look at the offers and see who is telling the truth.

 

[perverse]

One side says that gate isn't there and never has been, the other that it is included in the latest offer. Hopefully the members can get a look at the offers and see who is telling the truth.

exactly, this must be the the way forward. i see a lot of knee-jerking, but we MUST be clear on what that proposal contains before we pursue a path like a vote of no confidence. anything short of that would be absurd in the extreme. Knights Members are really being tested through this ordeal, we need to hold strong, get the facts, and make an educated decision.

 

[Lambretta]

Tinkler would be spending more on a happy meal at Maccas than he would on the Knights.

Are the Knights worth more than a happy meal?

That would depend on the toy you get with the Happy Meal.

If you get a working replica of Andrew Johns aged 28 with your meal then I reckon the Happy Meal wins.

If your meal comes with a replica of a runny rhino turd complete with authentic smells, then it probably just shades it again. Only kidding, the Knights are worth at least that and a single serve whippy ice cream.

 

[Medievalknight]

Not when they are already making $12 Million.

That $12 million includes season ticket revenue, which now I am not sure whether it is or isnt included in Tinklers deal..................(if that makes sense) :crazy::crazy:

 

[Dummy Spit Johns]

Are the Knights worth more than a happy meal?

No.

 

[Raider_69]

no way in the world that the knights are worth more than a happy meal.
FTR i think the knights did the right but this whole thing smells, Tinkler and his offer smells funny and Tew and Burro and their magical Patrons group smells
and if it smells, im not eating it

i dont for a second doubt that Tinkler altered key componets of the deal but im not entirely sure the knights hq havent got the outcome they were after, which may not be the outcome thats best for the knights...

is this the best thing for the knights, or the best thing for Burro and Tew?
is tinkler playing silly buggers, or is the knights management really making it impossible to deal?

we wont get the answers from either of those two, i think the best option is for Tew and Burro to stand down and appoint a professional and unbiased mediator to get to the table with tinkler and nut out what the deal he's proposing is exactly and then take it to the members, along with the Patron's deal... let the members decide what direction their club is to go in

I will say this, if Tinkler does get involved in the knights, the NRL needs to make sure he doesnt think he's bigger than the game. Their interactions with players and managers need to be heavily scruitinised, as does all and every players income that comes through that club. Tinkler does not seem all that willing to play by the same rules as the rest of us. He's already talked big about Idris, Bennett, Snowden, TLL and Ennis... to make those moves you know something sus is happneing outside the legalities of the SC. The last thing this code and the knights need, is a repeat of the storm saga.

 

[badav]

I understand Tinkler's a rich fat f**k with sh*tloads of money but to think he was coach, recruitment officer and salary cap manager for the knights before he even took the reigns of the club.

Its quite obvious his considerable ego has been damaged by the fact that the Knights rejected his proposal.

 

[Loudstrat]

its all a game... he isnt going to walk away. he'll just orchestrate a member mutiny against the board and come through the side door.

smart politics when you're dealing with such egos i wouldve thought.

Tinkler is as smart as a bloke lighting a cigarette in a fuel spill. He obviously can't f*cking read a calorie counter.

If he was so smart how come he's buying a coach and a heap of players before he even has a f*cking club??????

Think about the money here that Tinkler is putting up.. 100 millions dollars..
Its not like a takeover and a 8 mil investment over 5 years.. its 100 Million Dollars.

Wrong dipsh*t. It's a guarantee to supply funds that others are already supplying through sponsorship. It's like me going to the bank and guaranteeing the mortgage of your house that you are paying!

Why would Tinkler expect resisitence from a club when he is willing to throw that sort of money into it?
If he is unhappy with the negotiation with the club, than maybe the Knights failed in keeping there HUGE investor happy.

Now they have to keep every fat millionaire happy? Quick, lets blow James Packer!

F*ck him! I want to see the sour spoilt brat have a very public tanty and make a complete dick of himself.

Anyone who attempts to buy big name players and coaches so they can bully a club into doing a deal is a prize f*ckwit. Just like Super League.

I cannot wait for the fat f*ck to spectacularly fail. I might do some drugs tonight, so I can have a dream about Paul Keating becoming PM again and imposing a 90% mining tax on the fat twat!

a gurantee of 10 mil is good.

You are Tinkler aren't you. Do they have to surgically remove exercise bikes from your arse every time you hit the gym?

 

[SoftSydney]

This is what it all about folks, this is the sort of man to be respected. Not the rich arse wanks that want to buy clubs for their egos. Lets see what sort of man Tinker is!
White knights keen to recruit Tinkler

Brett Keeble

February 23, 2011



KNIGHTS benefactor Andrew Poole has invited would-be owner Nathan Tinkler to join him and two other multimillionaire businessmen on the patrons' trust.
Donating between $6 million and $10m to the NRL club in the next four years, the trust has been convened in the past two days as a funding alternative after Tinkler, frustrated that Knights management had queried details of his reported 10-year, $100-million privatisation proposal, withdrew his offer on Monday morning.
Knights chief executive Steve Burraston said a patrons' trust model was initially investigated more than a year ago, was explained to members at the club's annual meeting in May last year and was considered by the board on January 19 when it agreed Tinkler's proposal was the preferred model to present to members.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Poole said the trust funds had to be spent in areas such as junior development, community programs, special projects, capital expenditure and improving resources.
''That would release money already being spent in those areas to be spent in other areas,'' he said. ''Our money goes over and above anything that the Knights have now.''
Poole explained he and the other two patrons had committed to donating $2m each in the next four years - a minimum of $6m - and there was scope for two more to join them and extend the total to $10m. He said the other two patrons were

maintaining their anonymity for now ''but I can absolutely vouch for the integrity and worth of these people''.
The trust was structured to facilitate five ''units'' worth $500,000 annually, and Poole and the other two had each taken up one unit and guaranteed their contributions for four years.
''That money is paid up front, every year, into a trust account,'' Poole said. ''We decided the minimum position was three patrons before we had something to take forward, so ideally we'd like to get five, but three are ironclad.
''The money is in, ready to go, and now that it's become public, I'd like to think there will be another like-minded soul or two out there prepared to join us.
''I'm happy it might even be someone who has been in the press a lot about the Knights in the last day or so, who may like to stand beside the patrons. It would be nice if he did. Or perhaps a group of like-minded people might like to band together a unit of half a million per annum.''
Burraston and Poole insisted the three patrons were making donations, not loans, and therefore they expected no return on their outlays.
Burraston said the guaranteed donation of at least $1.5m a year for the next four years meant the patrons' trust had surpassed Tinkler's now withdrawn offer as the preferred choice. ''As we've progressed, we think that the patrons' trust is the superior model,'' he said.
Tinkler's withdrawn offer, the patrons' trust and a members' information session next Monday will be discussed at a Knights board meeting tonight.

 

[DJShaksta]

That $12 million includes season ticket revenue, which now I am not sure whether it is or isnt included in Tinklers deal..................(if that makes sense) :crazy::crazy:

And that's the crux of the problem Medieval, no one knows the exact details.
And the meeting that was meant to nut out these details was canned when Tinks threw his toys out of the pram lol.

 

[Timmah]

Frustrated that Knights management queried his deal?

Seriously?

And the media is on his side?

How dare the board act in the best interests of the club by daring to QUESTION something that could change the whole course of the clubs history!

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Legend Joey backs Tinkler and hits out at directors


NATHAN Tinkler last night gained a powerful ally in his push to take over the Knights when the club's greatest player, Andrew Johns, took aim at Newcastle's directors.

Having missed this week's dramatic showdown in Newcastle while on a surfing holiday in Fiji, Johns said he could not believe passionate Knights fan Tinkler was not already on board as club owner given what his financial clout would mean to the cash-strapped club.

"I'm stunned the deal hasn't already been done," Johns said.

"What the hell are they doing? We don't want Greg Bird playing for Gold Coast. We don't want Kade Snowden at Cronulla. We don't want Dane Tilse playing for Canberra.

"They're our boys and they should be playing for the Knights.

"As far as I can tell, that's what Nathan Tinkler wants to do. Bring as many locals home as he can.

"He's doing this for the community, for Newcastle and the Hunter. Why is it so hard to believe?"

Johns' comments came as former Newcastle premiership-winning coach Michael Hagan said he feared for the club's future unless Tinkler's bid was accepted. It appears a group of angry Knights members could have enough signatures by tonight to force an extraordinary general meeting, which could overthrow the current board.

The Daily Telegraph also understands several more former Newcastle stars will come forward to publicly support Tinkler. Mining magnate Tinkler has told friends he is "hurt" that his honesty has been questioned by Newcastle management.

Former Knights coach Hagan said he hoped members would be given an opportunity to make up their own minds about Tinkler's offer, saying the Newcastle board had an obligation to take the deal to a members meeting.

"I don't think the process has been handled particularly well and to allow someone like Nathan Tinkler to walk away without giving the members an opportunity to hear what he has to say is pretty disappointing," Hagan said.

"To pass up the size and nature of the offer that's been talked about and continue with a model that we've had for 22 years and which is not going to sustain the club into the future is not the right path.

"If the board is concerned about the shortcomings in the deal, they should be pointing them out to the members at a meeting."

High-profile Newcastle fan Jack Newton weighed into the debate again last night, saying: "It's not the Steve Burraston and Robbie Tew show. This has dragged on and on.

"It's about time they went to the members and they make the decision, not them [the two officials]."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...out-at-directors/story-e6frexnr-1226010361767

 

[Raider_69]

Johns might do well to remember that snowden would be one of your boys if he wasnt treated like crap. And tilse would too if he wasn't scapegoated for higher profile players...

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Gravity of it all lost on Knights, says Newton


Greg Prichard
February 23, 2011

NEWCASTLE sporting legend Jack Newton has attacked the Knights for not accepting Nathan Tinkler's money, saying chief executive Steve Burraston and the board are responsible for the club being in a downward spiral.

Newton said that if the club's members eventually got the chance to vote Tinkler into ownership they would be mad if they didn't, and urged them to put pressure on the board to stand down with a no-confidence vote at an extraordinary meeting if one was called.

''I don't get what is happening here,'' the former champion golfer told the Herald. ''I don't know Nathan very well, I've only met him once, but, personally, I think if the members don't go for this they've got rocks in their heads.

''I don't see anything else that compares with what Tinkler is offering, and the club is heavily in debt, so I can't see any negatives. The other option that they're talking about now, the patrons' trust, isn't remotely in the same league as the Tinkler offer financially.''

Newton said that before Tinkler began showing interest in the Knights the club had been guilty of wasting an opportunity to build a long-term association with multi-millionaire John Singleton, and Burraston had managed to get offside with high-powered people in Newcastle.

He also remains adamant the club made a big mistake employing Brian Smith as coach from 2007-09, saying the Knights lost their way during that time and were yet to find it back.

''Burraston is a mate of mine, but he's got no PR sense,'' Newton said. ''He's not doing the joint any favours, and he's offside with [Minister for the Hunter] Jodi McKay and [general manager of Newcastle newspapers] Julie Ainsworth, among others.

''I introduced John Singleton to the club, but they didn't know how to make that work. He put money into the club through his Bluetongue beer, but the association broke down. There were issues on both sides with that, but at the end of the day the guy is a multi-millionaire, and money attracts money.

''Burraston couldn't see that, and he [also] felt he had Tinkler in his pocket. How the tide has turned. The current board has been there for two terms, apart from a couple of changes, and they are seeing the club go to rack and ruin. They let [Brian] Smith take over and he totally disregarded our market, which is local juniors.

''Josh Perry went to Manly and won a comp. My son, Clint, went to Melbourne and won a comp. Kade Snowden left and went on to play Origin, for Cronulla.

''We've still got a foot in the old chook raffle days, where politics on the board has reigned supreme since year dot. In league, I can't understand how some of the people who get on boards manage to do so. The club doesn't look after its sponsors and fans as well as it should.''

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...st-on-knights-says-newton-20110222-1b44k.html

 

[Jobdog]

It's Jack! I wondered where he'd disappeared to! :crazy:

 

[Ulysseus]

Oh great, everyones favourite closet drug addict now has an opinion on the matter.
For f**ks sake Joey, just do what you do best, say stupid sh*t in front of a camera and live under "I was the best the game has ever seen mantra" but for f**ks sake stay away from the financial elements on the game.

I also agree with Raider 69, Barry Toohey and Dean Ritchie maybe should have cast their minds back a few years and maybe researched the circumstances surrounding Tilse's exit from the Knights.
He didn't walk away, they sacrificed him on the altar to appease opinion.

f**k, in retrospect he should have just said he was doing it to stop her harming herself, although from what I heard nothing actually f**king happened, which makes you scratch your head.