What to do with Level 3 - Parramatta Leagues Club

[Suitman]

As has already been said fishy, so the FC can run football, and the LC can run the leagues club, rather than have two mish-mashed entities run by the same people trying to do two very different things, with clear conflicts of interest

And Fishy, I'll ask again. Why was it changed in the first place, honestly?

Suity

 

[parra pete]

Has the new Football Club regime been able to attract the swarm of sponsors that were waiting to come on board, pending changes to the old structure?
There were plenty out there apparently..or has the down turn in the economy scared them away.
With the down turn in the economy and the Leagues Club looking to be struggling to keep propping up the Eels, financially, maybe the much maligned Denis Fitzgerald was close to the mark when he was quoted as say he couldn't guarantee the Club still existing in 5 Years time..
Who could, with all honesty, provide an absolutely iron clad guarantee?

 

[mickdo]

maybe the much maligned Denis Fitzgerald was close to the mark when he was quoted as say he couldn't guarantee the Club still existing in 5 Years time..
Who could, with all honesty, provide an absolutely iron clad guarantee?

But if no one can provide a guarantee, why say it???

 

[Suitman]

Has the new Football Club regime been able to attract the swarm of sponsors that were waiting to come on board, pending changes to the old structure?
There were plenty out there apparently..or has the down turn in the economy scared them away.
With the down turn in the economy and the Leagues Club looking to be struggling to keep propping up the Eels, financially, maybe the much maligned Denis Fitzgerald was close to the mark when he was quoted as say he couldn't guarantee the Club still existing in 5 Years time..
Who could, with all honesty, provide an absolutely iron clad guarantee?

No, because major sponsors will sponsor the NRL team, mate, which the Football club don't control.
They are still on board.

Suity

 

[fish eel]

As has already been said fishy, so the FC can run football, and the LC can run the leagues club, rather than have two mish-mashed entities run by the same people trying to do two very different things, with clear conflicts of interest

and I come back to my key point on changing back.

How does it better secure the long term future?

Nobody has really said how, which is fine, because none of you are standing for the board on that platform

And Fishy, I'll ask again. Why was it changed in the first place, honestly?

Suity

Why? Honestly, I can only go by what was said.

I also think it is logical if the leagues club spend significant money on football, they have a say in how it is spent. A big say.

But really, my point is not why was it changed. Because it was, and thats history. The point is 3P now need to argue why another change is benefitial to the long term future of the football team, because that is really what we all care about, isnt it?

At this point in time, IMO nobody from 3P has addressed that question.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

OK, sorry if this is bloody long. I'll try to break it up into separate posts for different topics where possible

Certainly needs to be a happy medium focused on rather than alienating anyone from within the club..... that said at the moment, the rugby league side is rather an afterthought outside of the name.

I totally agree with this and will touch on it more later.

why 2nd class citizens? ... no one is suggesting they put the pokies in the dunnies or anything? - more that they just provide something other than pokies and chinese food

Once again, I will touch on this a bit more later, but wanted to highlight this post.

No one has ever suggested that.

Poor choice of words, HJ.

Suity

Just putting some posts together so I can make my point. It's coming, I swear!

..... we have no intention of shafting them out of there.

OK, here's my point:

Everyone is giving the "Oh, we're not going to shaft the pokies players, just bring back the football side of things" line.

Bringing back the football side of things, as referenced by the first post I have quoted, is a much needed change. I support the move heavily.

However:

Heres a thought for all. I am not saying this is 3P either. Just a crazy thought while late at night. What do you reckon people would think if you got all the machines and through them over to Vikings in Dundas Valley and built that up to be the casino that everyone talks about. Then keep the Leagues Club and turn into something more community and footy friendly to try to please all other demographics.

OK, before going on, I'd like to reference some replies made to this:

Sorry mate, but that is a recipe for disaster. Don't even consider it.

Suity

Taking all the pokies out to another club is signing a death warrant for the leagues IMO.

You see, the thing is that this "random" suggestion from Col is not the first time I have heard it from a 3P member. Last Friday at the LC, once the whole meeting approach broke down into smaller groups, a 3P member sat down with myself, Flatch and Jezza and the very first question out of his mouth was, "So what do you guys reckon about moving all the pokies out to another premises?"

I am of the opinion that this is not a random idea but instead something that has been discussed previously. Something that might actually be on the cards with 3P.

I am also of the opinion that it would be absolutely disastrous for the Club if this was done.

In addition, the general feeling that I got last Friday night is that the pokies are something that is not wanted but which will barely be tolerated and only to the minimum level. There is talk of "pushing" them to a smaller section of the LC and removing them as much as possible.

I mentioned that any changes relating to the gaming areas should be preceded by engaging this demographic and entering into dialogue with them in order to try to minimise the negative impact it would have on them and minimise the alienation they might feel as a consequence of any changes. My suggestion received pretty much no response, despite the fact that it is a totally kick arse idea. Just like all my ideas.

I believe we should be looking at adding to our income base, rather than making changes that reduce one pie and simply replace it with another....

The happy medium is what needs to be stressed because if the club is more open to all demographics rather than a select few it would bring a better financial outlook into place, particularly if care is taken not to alienate any of the various groups who use the club.

These two quotes are pertinent.

Believing that you can just shaft the pokies and replace it with football related revenue is dreaming in its extreme. Instead, there should be an aim to minimise the impact one has on gaming and the gaming community whilst maximising the impact of football related revenue and activities.

The best of both worlds, not one at the expense of the other.

I'd like to re-quote a section from above:

The happy medium is what needs to be stressed because if the club is more open to all demographics rather than a select few it would bring a better financial outlook into place, particularly if care is taken not to alienate any of the various groups who use the club.

I wasn't going to mention this but it has begun to bug me more and more since Friday.

One of the first things said at the meeting was relating to "changes" coming to the LC and in reference to the "gaming community". Almost as soon as the meeting had started, one of the 3P members started going on about how it was a disgrace that they had to walk through Chinese New Year celebrations downstairs in order to get up to Sterlos Bar. Especially, they said, considerig it was Australia Day weekend!

:shock:

In no way, shape or form does this illustrate even the slightest acceptance of the diversity that is not just characteristic of Parramatta, but our country at large. It shows no respect for other cultures, nor specifically for those whose gaming revenue underpins the Club.

I hate to say it, but the general undertone when addressing this area seems to be one of disdain. I have even had other posters here use the word xenophobic when discussing the issue via PM.

I must say that I do not like it and I'm not entirely convinced by posts stating that it does not exist and that there is no agenda to remove the gaming areas from the LC.

I will leave the last word to the ever-omniscient-except-when-discussing-politics, fishy-poo:

When I read suggestions like moving the pokies to Dundas, it really does concern me that the choice will be between the failed and the well intentioned but poorly thought out.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

But, what do you have if you don't have an NRL side?

Suity

Local kids playing football, purely for the benefits of being involved in sport. This is a great asset to the community irrespective of whether there is an NRL Club or not.

As such, "fostering football" can be implemented without an NRL whilst maintaining excellent benefits. As such, if the consitution does not specifically state funding for the NRL team then it is a dangerous grey area.

 

[Suitman]

Local kids playing football,

But will local kids still want to if they don't have an NRL team to aspire to be a part of?
They might start playing AFL, to be a part of the new Western Sydney team, or Football, to be a part of an A League team.
We have to foster the product, and the Leagues Club is there to do that. They'd be cutting their own throat if they didn't.

Maybe it's a grey area, but this is just playing fiddle sticks imo.

Suity

 

[bartman]

So why change back



No, I think it unless there can be a case put that future stability is improved by shifting under the FC, then why change?

Goodness me, I guess you just don't get it I suppose...

I think I mentioned logic, and the ability to attract football/sports administrators to sit on one board with specified responsibilities, and licenced club administrators to sit on a different board with its specified responsibilities. If there's a limited amount of cross-over, but the skills are for the greater good, then fantastic.

That structure - which served the club(s) well for up to about 50 years - has to be better in essence and practicality that the structure we have now with an NRL pseudo board not directly accountable to any members at all, and which results in people putting forward arguments that neither Board elections are relevent to the fan relations policies...

As you say, it is Leagues Club money. It currently sits with the Leagues Club. You could argue that is just as logical and efficient as having a second board that receives a grant, could you not?

You could argue anything you like, that fact alone it doesn't disprove a case for an alternate solution to the status quo.

But nothing guaranteed either, is there?

Is your point simply why change something if it is broken? I don't quite get what guarantee you are seeking before you would consider alternatives to the status quo. You haven't actually come out and said anything against sitting the NRL back with the FC the FC-LC structure to me, it seems to be just pedantically skirting around the edges of attempting making an unknown point.

I dont know about over extending themselves, TBH, I think that comes down to the quality of people, both on board and paid staff.

Based on that definition, I would definitely say the club/s have over extended themselves :lol: Wouldn't you?

More people doesnt necessarily mean better. Duplication, more personalities involved etc.

Again, when we agree the truism that nothing necessarily can be guaranteed in life, the points in this post come across as a very status-quo-at-all-costs point of view - one of the type I swear I've seen you mow into on here when the same sentiments were presented by certain others. But you're perfectly entitled to do that I guess...

 

[bartman]

The point is 3P now need to argue why another change is benefitial to the long term future of the football team, because that is really what we all care about, isnt it?

At this point in time, IMO nobody from 3P has addressed that question.

I think they have done that, to my satisfaction anyway.

This isn't really a bottom line question imo, so to require a bottom line answer to that question is probably a recipe for not being satisfied with whatever you hear on the issue.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

Maybe it's a grey area, but this is just playing fiddle sticks imo.

Suity

A dangerous game to play, under certain circumstances. Especially when a bad financial situation could see a certain Leagues Club wriggle out of some obligation to pay for a certain NRL team if it would mean keeping this certain Leagues Club afloat.

 

[The Colonel]

OK, sorry if this is bloody long. I'll try to break it up into separate posts for different topics where possible



I totally agree with this and will touch on it more later.



Once again, I will touch on this a bit more later, but wanted to highlight this post.



Just putting some posts together so I can make my point. It's coming, I swear!



OK, here's my point:

Everyone is giving the "Oh, we're not going to shaft the pokies players, just bring back the football side of things" line.

Bringing back the football side of things, as referenced by the first post I have quoted, is a much needed change. I support the move heavily.

However:



OK, before going on, I'd like to reference some replies made to this:





You see, the thing is that this "random" suggestion from Col is not the first time I have heard it from a 3P member. Last Friday at the LC, once the whole meeting approach broke down into smaller groups, a 3P member sat down with myself, Flatch and Jezza and the very first question out of his mouth was, "So what do you guys reckon about moving all the pokies out to another premises?"

I am of the opinion that this is not a random idea but instead something that has been discussed previously. Something that might actually be on the cards with 3P.

I am also of the opinion that it would be absolutely disastrous for the Club if this was done.

In addition, the general feeling that I got last Friday night is that the pokies are something that is not wanted but which will barely be tolerated and only to the minimum level. There is talk of "pushing" them to a smaller section of the LC and removing them as much as possible.

I mentioned that any changes relating to the gaming areas should be preceded by engaging this demographic and entering into dialogue with them in order to try to minimise the negative impact it would have on them and minimise the alienation they might feel as a consequence of any changes. My suggestion received pretty much no response, despite the fact that it is a totally kick arse idea. Just like all my ideas.





These two quotes are pertinent.

Believing that you can just shaft the pokies and replace it with football related revenue is dreaming in its extreme. Instead, there should be an aim to minimise the impact one has on gaming and the gaming community whilst maximising the impact of football related revenue and activities.

The best of both worlds, not one at the expense of the other.

I'd like to re-quote a section from above:



I wasn't going to mention this but it has begun to bug me more and more since Friday.

One of the first things said at the meeting was relating to "changes" coming to the LC and in reference to the "gaming community". Almost as soon as the meeting had started, one of the 3P members started going on about how it was a disgrace that they had to walk through Chinese New Year celebrations downstairs in order to get up to Sterlos Bar. Especially, they said, considerig it was Australia Day weekend!

:shock:

In no way, shape or form does this illustrate even the slightest acceptance of the diversity that is not just characteristic of Parramatta, but our country at large. It shows no respect for other cultures, nor specifically for those whose gaming revenue underpins the Club.

I hate to say it, but the general undertone when addressing this area seems to be one of disdain. I have even had other posters here use the word xenophobic when discussing the issue via PM.

I must say that I do not like it and I'm not entirely convinced by posts stating that it does not exist and that there is no agenda to remove the gaming areas from the LC.

I will leave the last word to the ever-omniscient-except-when-discussing-politics, fishy-poo:

In the end we all need to co-exist and that will in the end make it much more financially viable. Sure, the Leagues Club was there to benefit the Football Club but in today's day and age you cannot discount the area that the Club is in and its change.

In the eighteen months I have been gone from Parramatta the change in demographic is becoming easily more evident. It has changed and the new demographic is as much a part of the community as the old.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

In the end we all need to co-exist and that will in the end make it much more financially viable. Sure, the Leagues Club was there to benefit the Football Club but in today's day and age you cannot discount the area that the Club is in and its change.

In the eighteen months I have been gone from Parramatta the change in demographic is becoming easily more evident. It has changed and the new demographic is as much a part of the community as the old.

I most certainly hope it can be seen that way, both in terms of culture and revenue.

 

[mickdo]

and I come back to my key point on changing back.

How does it better secure the long term future?

Nobody has really said how, which is fine, because none of you are standing for the board on that platform

And I'll come back to my point... it better secures the long term future by allowing the FC to run football and LC to run the leagues club, so there are two separate boards running the two distinct entities and there aren't any conflicts of interest

 

[The Colonel]

I'm not going to say much more on it outside of the fact it may pay for a few people to have alook at the faces of the children at last years Gala Day at Ollie Webb.

http://www.sportingpulse.com/assoc_page.cgi?c=0-724-0-71157-0&sID=59136

 

[Twizzle]

And I'll come back to my point... it better secures the long term future by allowing the FC to run football and LC to run the leagues club, so there are two separate boards running the two distinct entities and there aren't any conflicts of interest

I tend to agree with this in principal but they really need to work together to have a common goal, and that is the Eels NRL team.

I'm not suggesting they dont, but one is basically a fund raiser for the other.

 

[Suitman]

A dangerous game to play, under certain circumstances. Especially when a bad financial situation could see a certain Leagues Club wriggle out of some obligation to pay for a certain NRL team if it would mean keeping this certain Leagues Club afloat.

My fiddle sticks comment was more about this discussion, than actual reality of this ever coming into play.

Suity

 

[bartman]

I tend to agree with this in principal but they really need to work together to have a common goal, and that is the Eels NRL team.

I'm not suggesting they dont, but one is basically a fund raiser for the other.

Hear, hear.

To me it's got nothing to do with the perceived race of people who play pokies at the club. We're all Australians if we are living in this country to me, end of.

It has more to do with the club choosing a course of action to support itself (and the footy team it's meant to exist to support), and then getting lost along the way. The pokie players - of whatever culture, plenty of anglos throw away their money on them too - and the poker revenue instead seeming to supercede the original aims of the club, and become a goal or a vision statement for the club in itself, instead of a means to an end?

 

[fish eel]

Goodness me, I guess you just don't get it I suppose...

You really do get nospam29 reading some of my posts, dont you? ;-)

I think I mentioned logic, and the ability to attract football/sports administrators to sit on one board with specified responsibilities, and licenced club administrators to sit on a different board with its specified responsibilities. If there's a limited amount of cross-over, but the skills are for the greater good, then fantastic.

That structure - which served the club(s) well for up to about 50 years - has to be better in essence and practicality that the structure we have now with an NRL pseudo board not directly accountable to any members at all, and which results in people putting forward arguments that neither Board elections are relevent to the fan relations policies...

Not directly accountable?

I could have sworn, last year, at the football club elections, people were held to account. They are also being held to account now.

You could argue anything you like, that fact alone it doesn't disprove a case for an alternate solution to the status quo.

Wow. Completely ignore the point and fail to engage it.

Is your point simply why change something if it is broken? I don't quite get what guarantee you are seeking before you would consider alternatives to the status quo. You haven't actually come out and said anything against sitting the NRL back with the FC the FC-LC structure to me, it seems to be just pedantically skirting around the edges of attempting making an unknown point.

The point is, we have a status quo, 3P should demonstrate why a change to that status quo is better for the long term future of the club.

There is nothing pedantic or skirting around any issue.

It was a direct question I asked when raised this issue.

Based on that definition, I would definitely say the club/s have over extended themselves :lol: Wouldn't you?

Only because of their competance, not because if the structure.

Again, when we agree the truism that nothing necessarily can be guaranteed in life, the points in this post come across as a very status-quo-at-all-costs point of view - one of the type I swear I've seen you mow into on here when the same sentiments were presented by certain others. But you're perfectly entitled to do that I guess...

LOL.

Status Quo at all costs? Good one.

I've asked a question to 3P as to how their proposal to change where the NRL club sits is better for the clubs future. In essence, I've asked them to convince me I can be comfortable with trusting the future of the club with them. I thought such a position would be right up your alley.......

I think they have done that, to my satisfaction anyway.

Well, knock me over with a feather.

This isn't really a bottom line question imo, so to require a bottom line answer to that question is probably a recipe for not being satisfied with whatever you hear on the issue.

Maybe I wont be satisfied. But I'll be the judge of that

Oh, HJ, some quality posts there.

 

[fish eel]

In the end we all need to co-exist and that will in the end make it much more financially viable. Sure, the Leagues Club was there to benefit the Football Club but in today's day and age you cannot discount the area that the Club is in and its change.

In the eighteen months I have been gone from Parramatta the change in demographic is becoming easily more evident. It has changed and the new demographic is as much a part of the community as the old.

To see the change, one only needs to see the money council spend on promoting chinese new year.

The change is something that should be embraced. It makes for a vibrant, diverse community and opens up new opportunities.

I believe what HJ said to be very well put.

There are many things you cant fight against, but one thing you can't is demographics. If you try and swim against that tide, you'll drown.