Privatisation

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by Matabele, Sep 18, 2005.



Share This Page

  1. Matabele

    By:MatabeleSep 18, 2005
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    23,081
    Likes Received:
    457
    Likes Given:
    63
    Ratings:
    +516 /14
    So Crowe will pay $10m for 80% of Souths.

    I need a refresher. What percentage does Delmege have (60% I think) and what did he pay for it ($4m)????

    Then you have to ask if he's paid market rates for the sponsorship.

    Seems we got dudded (and stuck with Monaghan).
     
  2. c_eagle

    By:c_eagleSep 18, 2005
    Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    855
    Likes Received:
    0
    Likes Given:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 /0
    Hey Mata, shut up.
     
  3. Dan

    By:DanSep 18, 2005
    Kim Jong Dan
    Staff Member Administrator 2018 Tipping Competitor

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    34,393
    Likes Received:
    4,449
    Likes Given:
    1,465
    Ratings:
    +8,625 /137
    why its relevant! at least add content not sarcasm!
     
  4. Matabele

    By:MatabeleSep 18, 2005
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    23,081
    Likes Received:
    457
    Likes Given:
    63
    Ratings:
    +516 /14
    I think the maths was too hard for him.
     
  5. c_eagle

    By:c_eagleSep 18, 2005
    Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    855
    Likes Received:
    0
    Likes Given:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 /0
    We all know that the club would be down the gurgler without Max's donations, your vendetta is insipid.

    The buy out was really just an interest free loan.

    The "sponsorship" fee he paid was very competitive, I think it was quoted at the time to be the second best deal in the league. (Behind the Roosters.)

    I know that you begrudge the man for forcing the club to re-sign Monaghan but the good well outweighs the bad.
     
  6. Matabele

    By:MatabeleSep 18, 2005
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    23,081
    Likes Received:
    457
    Likes Given:
    63
    Ratings:
    +516 /14
    How do you know it would have gone down the gurgler? Because you were told?

    Seems to me there may have been some merit in holding out for more, particularly as there was more than one bidder.
     
  7. c_eagle

    By:c_eagleSep 18, 2005
    Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    855
    Likes Received:
    0
    Likes Given:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 /0
    Mata, back in early 2002, I was in the year 10 and needed a place to go for work experience. The people at Manly were more than willing to accommodate.

    I organised it fairly early on but about 2 weeks before the designated week we had to ring to confirm. This happened to be round 1 of the season. Basically I was told, in no uncertain terms, that the club was in serious strife. I even remember the lady on the phone suggesting that, "we may not even be here that long," in a half joking manner.

    It may not be definitive proof but if it looks, quacks and acts like a duck...
     
  8. Matabele

    By:MatabeleSep 18, 2005
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    23,081
    Likes Received:
    457
    Likes Given:
    63
    Ratings:
    +516 /14
    2002 was the closing days of the joint venture?

    I'm not saying we didn't need the money. It's just interesting that we seem to have gone fairly cheap.

    I do know we have the lowest turnover of any NRL club, but Souths are not that much higher. I doubt the Rabbitohs brand is worth much more than ours.

    I've heard plenty of quacks in recent months - they go along following lines:

    Not professional enough
    No bang for buck
    Poor media management etc etc etc
     
  9. c_eagle

    By:c_eagleSep 18, 2005
    Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    855
    Likes Received:
    0
    Likes Given:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 /0
    2002 was after the joint venture. It was about 6 months after Manly had taken full control.

    Newcastle's turnover is well less than ours aswell. BK has stated in many interviews that the high amount of matches he's played this year has been down to the rehabilitation procedure and the comparitively extended specialised coaching staff.
     
  10. Matabele

    By:MatabeleSep 18, 2005
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    23,081
    Likes Received:
    457
    Likes Given:
    63
    Ratings:
    +516 /14
    BRW did a story on NRL/AFL clubs and we came stone motherless in terms of turnover.

    Newcastle had nearly double our turnover but they obviously have much higher overheads.
     
  11. c_eagle

    By:c_eagleSep 18, 2005
    Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    855
    Likes Received:
    0
    Likes Given:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 /0
    I think you'll find that this year would be quite a healthy turnover in comparison to the other NRL clubs. Up until this year, we've been unable to spend to the full salary cap and the payment from the Delmege sale only flowed through the infrastructre for this season. The fact that some of the adminstration resembles an old boys club isn't due to lack of funds.
     
  12. Matabele

    By:MatabeleSep 19, 2005
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Messages:
    23,081
    Likes Received:
    457
    Likes Given:
    63
    Ratings:
    +516 /14
    I wonder why the club is so desperate to get everyone to pay for their 2006 season tickets by the end of this month then?

    When you start forward selling "stock", you know what that means...............
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
Top